The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About12-02-2025 Agenda Review Minutes Minutes of the New Hanover County Planning Board Agenda Review        December 2, 2025           An agenda review of the New Hanover County Planning Board was held on December 2, 2025, at 3:00 PM in the New Hanover County Government Center, 230 Government Center Dr., Conference Room 138 in Wilmington, North Carolina         Members’ Present      Cameron Moore, Chair     Pete Avery , Vice Chair Andy Hewitt Clark Hipp       Members Absent      Kevin Hine  Kaitlyn Rhonehouse              Staff Present          Rebekah Roth, Director of Planning & Land Use  Karen Richards, County Attorney Ken Vafler, Operations Supervisor Robert Farrell, Development Review Supervisor  Lisa Maes, Administrative Supervisor  Zach Dickerson, Senior Planner Amy Doss, Development Review Planner  Ryan Beil, Development Review Planner  Katherine May, Development Review Planner                  Meeting called to order by Vice Chair Moore Confiict of Interest: None Stated Review of Regular Meeting Agenda 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” Freeland 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. Ms. Doss presented a summary of the proposed RV campground development and summarized the applicable ordinance standards, environmental features, and site design components. The Board held a discussion following her overview. Staff explained that the property contained extensive wetlands, and that the vast majority would be preserved, with only approximately 0.10 acre of impacts anticipated. An existing pond would remain as part of the flnal design, and staff noted that a 52-foot natural buffer would be maintained around the perimeter to preserve the character of the area. Ms. Doss stated that all RV pads would be constructed of concrete and that most sites would require flll material. A centrally located dump station was included, and she conflrmed that the applicant was not requesting any deviations from the ordinance’s RV campground standards, including requirements for paved internal roads, minimum pad and parking sizes, open space, and dumpster facilities. Staff reported that one written public comment had been received expressing general opposition to additional development in the area. The Board had questions about the visual impact of an RV park at a gateway location and emphasized the need for adequate screening. Staff reviewed prior RV-related applications and clarifled distinctions between those cases and the current request. The Board also inquired about maximum stay limits; staff explained that the ordinance did not establish a maximum stay and that although a 14-day limit had been proposed during a previous text amendment process, it had not been adopted. Staff noted that most RV parks imposed their own stay limitations and conflrmed that public water and sewer service was available to the site. Ms. Doss further explained that the current Comprehensive Plan designated the area as a Community Mixed Use Place Type, which could support recreational uses such as RV campgrounds. The proposed Destination 2050 designation of Corridor Commercial would similarly support recreational lodging. Staff acknowledged the challenges of evaluating proposals during the transition between the existing plan and the updated comprehensive plan. Text Amendment Public Comment Draft – Unifled Development Ordinance (UDO) Amendment- Comprehensive Plan Implementation and Maintenance. Ms. Roth presented the proposed text amendments associated with the Comprehensive Plan update. She also reviewed a series of ordinance updates required to align the County’s regulations with recent state legislation. A. Density Regulation Amendments Ms. Roth explained that the proposed amendments would remove place-type-based density restrictions for Additional Dwelling Allowances and mobile home parks. These changes were intended to avoid confiicts with state down-zoning laws but the Board of Commissioners retained discretion over density decisions as impacted uses would require Commissioner approval. B. Master Plan Development Process Improvements Ms. Roth stated that the draft Comprehensive Plan encouraged more frequent use of Planned Development (PD) rezonings for large or phased projects. Feedback from PD focus groups indicated the need for expanded review periods and greater fiexibility in crafting terms and conditions. Staff have already extended PD review timelines to support these improvements. C. Transportation Analysis for Large Developments Ms. Roth discussed the limitations of traditional Traffic Impact Analyses (TIAs), especially for projects with long buildout periods or fiuctuating market conditions. She proposed requiring a transportation network analysis for PDs of 25 acres or more. This analysis would evaluate the internal street network, anticipated trip generation, and connectivity to surrounding infrastructure. She noted that a full TIA would still be required by the ordinance during the TRC portion of the review process, and that the amendment would require the timing of those TIAs be outlined in the PD Terms & Conditions. The Board discussed bonding challenges associated with large projects. Mr. Farrell and Mr. Dickerson explained that the County’s bonding cap was approximately $7.5 million and that developers could bond most improvements except stormwater. They emphasized that right-of-way could be reserved for future collector streets and that the timing of full street construction could be tied to development triggers. D. Legacy Zoning District Recommendation Ms. Roth recommended designating the Riverfront Mixed Use (RFMU) district as a legacy district, which would prevent new rezonings into RFMU while preserving existing zoning. This recommendation aligned with County policy for the Western Bank area, which did not support new residential or high-intensity commercial uses. E. Down-Zoning Deflnition Update Ms. Roth explained that the ordinance’s deflnition of down-zoning would be updated to refiect state law, clarifying when such changes were prohibited. F. Resubmission of Denied Applications Ms. Roth noted that the state had removed restrictions on resubmitting previously denied applications. As a result, the ordinance’s resubmittal waiting period would be removed. She acknowledged that this change could lead to repeated applications but emphasized that staff would continue to make appropriate recommendations. G. Digital Billboard Standards Correction Ms. Roth reported that a confiicting statement in the recently adopted sign ordinance would be removed to ensure consistency. The correction would clarify that digital billboard components were permitted under County regulations. Destination 2025 – Public Comment Period and Schedule Ms. Roth stated that the Destination 2050 Comprehensive Plan draft was currently open for public review. Approximately ten public comments had been received, along with several internal comments requesting clariflcations or adjustments. She reported that in-person comment opportunities were currently being held but encouraged public use of the online portal for tracking purposes. She stated that the Public Hearing Draft would be prepared before the January 8 meeting and that staff intended to release materials before December 31 to allow adequate time for review. Staff Updates Ms. Roth reported that the vacant Planning Board seat might be fllled at the December 15 Board of Commissioners meeting. Updates to the Rules of Procedure were still pending with the Commissioners’ adoption of their own revisions. Ms. Roth also noted the following upcoming meetings: • Agenda Brieflng: January 6, 2026 • Regular Planning Board Meeting: January 8, 2026 The meeting was adjourned at 3:48pm