Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-04-2025 Planning Board Minutes Minutes of the New Hanover County Planning Board  December 4, 2025 A regular meeting of the New Hanover County Planning Board was held on December 4, 2025, at 6:00 PM in the New Hanover County Historic Courthouse, 24 North Third Street, Room 301 in Wilmington, North Carolina.    Members Present      Cameron Moore, Chair    Andy Hewitt Kevin Hine Clark Hipp   Kaitlyn Rhonehouse   Members Absent  Pete Avery, Vice Chair Staff Present   Rebekah Roth, Director of Planning & Land Use       Karen Richards, Deputy County Attorney    Robert Farrell, Development Review Supervisor   Zachary Dickerson, Senior Development Planner Amy Doss, Development Review Planner Lisa Maes, Administrative Specialist  Mr. Moore called the meeting to order at 6 P.M. and welcomed the audience. Approval of Minutes The minutes from the Planning Board’s Regular meeting on September 4th and October 2nd of 2025 were presented for consideration and approval. With no discussion, Vice Chair Avery MOTIONED to approve the meeting minutes. Mr. Hewitt SECONDED the motion, and the minutes were approved unanimously, 6-0. Chair Moore announced that the items discussed during the meeting would advance to the Count Commissioners’ meeting tentatively scheduled for Monday, January 20, 2026. Chair Moore reminded the Board of the Code of Ethics as adopted on January 4, 2016, emphasizing that board members must avoid confiicts of interests maintaining integrity and independence in their roles and asked if any member had any known confiicts of interest regarding the matters on the agenda. No confiicts were reported. Preliminary Forum Special Use Permit S25-05 – Big Apple RV Park- Request by Jonathan Washburn, applicant, on behalf of Joseph Burke “burke: Freedland with HBD Partners and Dorthy ‘Dotty” Freedland with market Street Partners, LLC property owners, for the use of Campground/ Recreational Vehicle (RV) Park in a R-15, Residential district on approximately 27.32 acres located at 8600 Block of Stephens Church Road. Chair Moore noted that under state law the Planning Board would not issue a recommendation; instead, comments made during this forum were intended to guide both the applicant and the public in advance of the quasi-judicial hearing before the Board of Commissioners. Ms. Doss presented the staff report for Special Use Permit S25-05, a request to establish an RV campground on a vacant property off Stephens Church Road. She explained that this meeting served as a preliminary forum, allowing the Board and the public to ask questions and provide feedback before the application proceeds to a quasi-judicial hearing before the Board of Commissioners. No recommendation would be made at this stage. She noted that the site consisted of several parcels zoned R-15 since 1972 and was surrounded by R- 15, Office and Institutional, Community Commercial District, and NCDOT conservation land. Reviewing aerial images and site photographs, Ms. Doss highlighted the property’s wooded condition, existing wetlands, and a pond along the southern boundary. She summarized the concept plan, which included a one-way entrance, a manager’s office, parking, and a pool near the front of the site, with internal circulation leading to an amenity area, designated open space, and a stormwater facility utilizing the existing pond. Wetlands would remain protected, and a sewage dumping station would be located near the exit. She conflrmed that the proposal met all UDO standards for RV parks, including spacing, setbacks, required open space, and amenities. A Type A 20-foot transitional buffer would be required along residential boundaries, and the applicant had voluntarily proposed a 50-foot tree-retention buffer around the perimeter. Ms. Doss reported that the project was not expected to generate enough traffic to require a Traffic Impact Analysis and would likely produce fewer trips than development permitted by right. She noted that the 2016 Comprehensive Plan identifled the area as Community Mixed Use, which supports recreational and outdoor commercial uses. She reviewed the four required flndings the Board of Commissioners must evaluate—public safety, compliance with UDO standards, impacts on adjoining properties, and harmony with the surrounding area—before noting that staff had received two written comments in opposition. She concluded by stating that the applicant was present to provide additional information, and Chair Moore invited the applicant to speak. Jonathan Washburn, a member of Big Apple RV Resort LLC, introduced himself and described the history of the property and its ownership. He explained his long professional relationship with the Freedland family and noted that the LLC consisted of flve equal members. The family began assembling the land approximately flfteen years ago, and after considering several ideas, determined that an RV resort was the most appropriate and beneflcial use. Mr. Washburn stated that the resort’s design centered on two key factors—location and quality. He explained that RV travelers could access the site via major highways without passing through residential neighborhoods and that the property was close to beaches, recreation, and retail services. He described the resort’s planned family-oriented amenities, including a playground, pirate-themed structures, kayaks and canoes for the pond, remote-control boats, sandcastle areas, picnic shelters, a store and snack bar, a game room, rentals, hiking trails, overfiow parking, a pool, hot tub, sauna, and indoor and outdoor gathering spaces for community events. He emphasized the project’s efforts to preserve natural features by retaining trees, using the existing pond for stormwater management, and avoiding disturbance to wetlands. He reiterated the applicant’s willingness to accept reasonable conditions, including a limit on the length of stay to ensure the use remains recreational, suggesting that a 30-day maximum stay aligns with industry standards. He also conflrmed that the resort would provide on-site management, meet all technical requirements including emergency access, and would be buffered by surrounding undeveloped and conservation lands. Members of the Freedland family then spoke. Burke Freedland of 801 Lassiter Place, Raleigh NC, described the family’s long history in Wilmington and their commitment to high-quality rental properties. He explained that his brother’s extensive RV travel during COVID offered valuable insight into the design of successful RV resorts and reinforced the family’s interest in creating a premier destination in New Hanover County. Harrison Freedland of 1813 Barkley Ave, Wilmington NC, a Wilmington attorney and member of the LLC, expressed his support for the project and noted that it was low-impact, compatible with community values, and well-suited for the location. Mr. Washburn concluded by referencing the wetlands maps provided to the Board and reaffirmed that the project would not seek mitigation credits or clear wetlands except where necessary for internal road crossings. Chair Moore then opened the fioor for Board discussion. Board members conflrmed that on-site management would always be available and clarifled that the sewage dump station would be connected to a public sewer system. They discussed the importance of establishing a clear limit on the length of stay to ensure the resort remained a short-term recreational use. While the applicant proposed a 30-day maximum, some members suggested a two- week limit as more appropriate for the community. Mr. Washburn noted that most guests typically stay fewer than two weeks and reiterated his willingness to consider a condition. Board members requested additional information regarding anticipated traffic patterns, RV circulation, and coordination with NCDOT. They also emphasized the need for detailed explanations of stormwater design, the engineering of the existing pond, and any required wetland crossings, recommending that a stormwater or civil engineer be present at the Commissioners’ hearing. Members encouraged the applicant to clearly describe any wetland impacts and to demonstrate how the project aligns with regional recreational needs, including comparisons to similar campgrounds such as KOA and Carolina Beach State Park. They also acknowledged the low-impact nature of the proposed use and the beneflt of not routing RV traffic through residential neighborhoods. In closing, Chair Moore summarized the key issues the applicant should be prepared to address at the Board of Commissioners’ hearing, including stormwater engineering, wetland crossings and required approvals, recreation and tourism data, comparisons to similar facilities, and a clear explanation of proposed limits on the length of stay. He reiterated that no vote would be taken during the preliminary forum and encouraged the applicant to consider the Board’s comments when preparing for the hearing. Presentation- Text Amendment Public Comment Draft Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) Amendment – Comprehensive Plan Implementation and Maintenance Ms. Roth presented components of the public comment draft of the proposed text amendments and explained that the amendments were intended to align the UDO with the updated Comprehensive Plan while also incorporating recent statutory changes. She stated that the amendments updated place-type references tied to density and use allowances to ensure compliance with new state laws that restricted down-zoning. She further explained that place-type limitations for additional dwelling units and mobile home parks were removed because these uses already required discretionary approval, and eliminating the references would prevent potential confiicts with state law. Ms. Roth described the introduction of an optional Transportation Network Plan for large, planned developments of 25 acres or more. She explained that this tool would replace the requirement for a Traffic Impact Analysis at the rezoning stage, although a formal TIA would still be required during site plan review. She noted that the Transportation Network Plan was intended to provide clearer information earlier in the process, improve transparency, and offer more opportunities for public engagement regarding transportation impacts. She also stated that the Riverfront Mixed-Use District would be converted into a legacy district to refiect updated policy direction for the Western Bank. In addition, she noted that the amendments included updates required by 2023 legislation that removed mandatory waiting periods for repeat rezoning applications, as well as corrections to the billboard conversion language that had been adopted in a recent sign amendment. Ms. Roth informed the Board that the draft amendments would be released for public review no later than early the following week, with comments requested by December 29 so staff could consider feedback prior to the Board’s January meeting. Board members asked clarifying questions about the preparation of Transportation Network Plans and the overall structure of the amendment package. Staff conflrmed that the amendments would be presented as a single item but could be adopted in parts if necessary. Staff Updates Ms. Roth reminded the Board that public comments on the Destination 2050 Comprehensive Plan draft would remain open through December 19, after which staff would prepare the public hearing draft for January. Mr. Hewitt MOTIONED to adjourn, and Ms. Rhonehouse SECONDED the motion. The motion carried unanimously, 5-0. Meeting adjourned at 7:05pm