Get AI Briefings, Transcripts & Alerts on Local & National Government Meetings — Forever.
Pender County planning board approves Point South master development plan revision 3–2
Summary
The Pender County Planning Board approved a revision to the Point South master development plan by a 3–2 vote, adopting changes that shift some townhome allotments into increased single-family detached and multifamily units and retain required conditions such as a multiuse path. Board members debated consistency with the Imagine Pender 2050 regional center designation and raised traffic and school-capacity concerns; a nearby resident urged action on dust and erosion control.
The Pender County Planning Board voted 3–2 to approve a revision to the Point South master development plan that slightly increases the project’s residential total while modifying the mix of housing and reducing the designated commercial acreage.
Staff planner Madeline Spencer told the board the revised master development plan would total 433 residential units, comprising 181 single-family detached units and 252 multifamily units, with commercial land reduced from 20 acres to 15.09 acres and open space provided totaling 15.26 acres, exceeding the UDO requirement. Spencer said staff found the revision consistent with the Unified Development Ordinance and the Imagine Pender 2050 future land use map and recommended approval.
The applicant’s team, represented by Jim Cirillo of Paramount Engineering and applicant Grady Gordon, said the changes respond to market conditions and prior approvals. Gordon told the board that during design the team “developed our building plans and know exactly what building, and then, you know, the math works out to where that comes to 252 units,” explaining the increase in apartment units and the shift in acreage between commercial and residential uses.
Board members pressed staff and the applicant on consistency with the Imagine Pender 2050 designation for the site, which identifies the area as a regional center and generally encourages townhomes and high-density residential over detached single-family housing. Brett Keeler and others questioned whether the proposed 181 detached units—created in part by replacing 60 townhomes—fit the regional-center character. Planning staff and the assistant planning director, Justin Brantley, said the project is reviewed under the new comprehensive plan but noted that the development retained vesting from prior approvals for certain elements and that the overall change includes an increase in multifamily units that aligns with plan goals.
Traffic and school-capacity concerns were raised during questioning. Staff and the applicant said the Wilmington Metropolitan Planning Organization (WMPO) reviewed trip generation and determined a full new traffic-impact analysis was not required; staff indicated required improvements from the prior vested project remain in place. Board members requested clearer information on net student-generation differences and acknowledged regional infrastructure constraints when weighing the application.
During public comment, nearby resident Tina Best said dust from clearing at the adjacent construction site has made outdoor life difficult for her family, including members with health conditions, and that water trucks and seeding have not adequately controlled airborne sand. “My whole family’s dealing with it. … We almost have to wear masks to go out there,” Best said, offering photos and video. Planning staff (Tim Owens) and the applicant said they are addressing erosion-control permits, that a water truck is on site and that staff would meet onsite with the resident and the developer to seek remedies.
After closing the public hearing, board member John Coleman moved to approve the MDP revision as presented; Ron Satterfield seconded. The motion carried 3–2, and the approval carries forward the conditions from the original master development plan, including a 10-foot multiuse path along U.S. Highway 17, prohibition on on-street parking, and the planning director’s authority for certain modifications. Board members directed staff to arrange a meeting with the resident and developer to discuss dust and erosion concerns.
Next steps: staff will finalize the administrative records for the revised master development plan and work with the developer on required conditions and any outstanding technical items. The board indicated it expects follow-up on erosion-control enforcement and that implementation will proceed in phased construction spanning 2026–2028.
