NORTH CAROLINA — Lawmakers introduced several bills to rescind a newly enacted law placing broad restrictions on municipalities’ ability to regulate development density, land uses, and flood ordinances.
READ MORE: New bill casts doubt on local governments’ ability to implement flood ordinance changes
On the first day of the 2025-2026 legislative session, Reps. Jay Adams (R-Catawba), Howard Penny (R-Johnston), Warren (R-Rowan), and Jeffrey McNeely (R-Iredell) introduced HB 24 — “Restore Down-Zoning Authority” — to repeal Senate Bill 382’s downzoning provision.
S.B. 382 is a 131-page bill that was dubbed as disaster relief for Hurricane Helene-devastated areas but also encompassed broad changes to the state government, with impacts funneling down to county government and municipalities.
For instance, the last page of the law removes local governments’ abilities to initiate downzoning amendments — reducing development density or permitted uses for a property. Previously, municipalities may have chosen to downzone properties for environmental preservation or limit impervious surfaces in flood prone areas.
“The precise interpretation and breadth of impact of this law are not perfectly clear,” UNC public law and government professor Adam Lovelady wrote in a December blog post. “There are many questions. One thing is clear: the law dramatically alters the authority for local governments to amend local zoning ordinances.”
The House bill is only three lines and reads simply: “Section 3K.1 of SL-2024-57 is repealed. This act is effective when it becomes law and applies retroactively to Dec. 11, 2024. Any adopted ordinance affected by Section 3k.1 of SL-2024-57 shall be in effect as it was on or before Dec. 11, 2024.”
PCD reached out to Adams, the bill’s primary sponsor, to ask more questions but didn’t hear back by press.
As well, the Senate also introduced a bill Thursday to amend the downzoning from S.B. 382. Sen. Bobby Hanig (R-Dare) filed the provision, although it only applies to ten counties and their municipalities, whereas the House bill would repeal S.B. 382’s downzoning provision across the state. The tri-county region is not included in Hanig’s bill.
“I have already had language drafted to have it repealed,” Hanig told Outer Banks Voice in December, days after the SB 382 veto override. “We will submit when [the new] session starts. I do not see any headwinds at all. It does have overwhelming support in both chambers.”
The House and Senate bill passed first readings Friday and were referred to each chambers’ rules and operations committees.
Local officials Rep. Frank Iler and Rep. Ted Davis — who voted in support of S.B. 382 — both expressed concerns to Port City Daily about the impact of the provision on local governments. Iler said he was interested in revising the downzoning law in the 2025 session.
PCD reached out to the lawmakers regarding their position on the House bill but did not hear back by press.
“There are a lot of bad provisions in 382,” Rep. Deb Butler told Port City Daily Thursday. “That’s what happens when you rush to govern — when you don’t give the public the opportunity to review things and to weigh in so you can make good law. You have to go in and fix the error of your way.”
S.B. 382 was unveiled an hour before the House held a contentious debate and voted to pass it in November. It came in the final months Republicans still held a supermajority before losing it in the New Year. The bill contains dozens of provisions unrelated to Helene recovery but was not vetted in the normal committee process.
Local governments have spoken out about the downzoning changes, citing confusion over statutory language and the breadth of potential interpretations in the law.
S.B. 382 expands the definition of downzoning to include ordinances that create any type of nonconformity for land that is not in a residential zoning district. Nonconformities refer to land uses — such as structures or lots — that were present before the current zoning of the property, yet don’t match contemporary standards. The bill would apply to ordinances enacted 180 days before it becomes law, which would become void and unenforceable.
New Hanover County planning director Rebecca Roth sent commissioners an overview of S.B. 382’s zoning changes in December. She provided examples of commission actions the new law prohibits, including planning staff’s recommendation to rezone Western Bank parcels to remove the possibility for residential or high intensity development.
“Any modification of an existing zoning district that would reduce the potential uses possible would technically be a down-zoning,” Roth wrote.
Roth and Lovelady noted the law presents unanswered questions regarding density in flood zone hazard areas. To participate in the National Flood Insurance Program, communities must meet minimum requirements to protect new buildings from flood damage. FEMA’s Community Rating System incentivizes stricter floodplain regulations — including low density zoning in flood zones — with discounted insurance rates.
“If a local government failed to maintain an adequate ordinance or adopt current maps, residents may lose access to federal flood insurance,” Lovelady noted.
Brunswick Commissioner Randy Thompson told Port City Daily last week the county is concerned about S.B. 382’s impact on the county’s new unified development ordinance.
“Planning staff are closely monitoring any updates or changes to Senate Bill 382, Subpart III-K, to determine the extent of implications the bill may have on the updated UDO,” Brunswick spokesperson Amber Merklinger told Port City Daily Friday.
Several Leland council members noted S.B. 382 could impede recent consideration of ordinance changes in flood-prone areas. The town is looking into the legality and feasibility of a range of options — including limiting development density in flood zones and prohibiting new residences in flood hazard areas — after severe flooding in September caused damage to at least 19 properties in Leland’s Stoney Creek neighborhood; the area also flooded after Hurricane Florence in 2018.
“The Chapter is deeply concerned about the process by which this legislation was advanced, particularly the lack of transparency and meaningful engagement with local governments and community stakeholders throughout our state,” the North Carolina Planning Association wrote in a statement. “Provisions such as this result in benefits to a few, while undermining the ability of municipalities to adapt zoning and land use regulations to meet the evolving needs of their communities.”
Comments or tips? Email info@portcitydaily.com
Want to read more from PCD? Subscribe now and then sign up for our morning newsletter, Wilmington Wire, and get the headlines delivered to your inbox every morning.
