The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutZ23-06 Second Community Meeting Report REPORT OF COMMUNITY MEETING REQUIRED BY NEW HANOVER COUNTY ZONING ORIDINANCE FOR CONDITIONAL DISTRICT REZONINGS Project Name: Palm Grove Apartments – Carolina (6634 Carolina Beach Road) Proposed Zoning: R-15 to CZD/RMF-M The undersigned hereby certifies that written notice of a project proposal and intent of a rezoning petition was given to the adjacent property owners set forth on the attached list by first class mail, and provided to the Planning Department for notice of the Sunshine List on March 3, 2023. A copy of that written notice and site layout are also attached. A meeting was held at the following time and place: Tuesday, March 14th, 6:00 p.m.; at the Best Western Plus – Wilmington, 5600 Carolina Beach Road. The persons in attendance at the meeting were: Reference attached sign-in list The following issues were discussed at the original meeting: Attendees were primarily from the Lords Creek community and the communities to the West. The consistent concern was the density of the development and impact to current traffic on Carolina Beach Road. The proposed buffering was explained, along with stormwater management requirements. Some of the attendees asked what “Plan C” would be if the petition failed, and that I would ask the Owner if he would consider a less dense project with townhomes instead of garden-style apartments. As a result of the meeting, the following changes were made to the petition: The Owner continues to believe that this style of housing is what is needed in this location and that the petition, as submitted, is consistent with the strategies and recommendations of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. However, he proposed to reduce the maximum height of the outdoor light standards to twelve (12) feet. Also, tree protection fencing will be installed prior to the onset of clearing & grading along a minimum fifteen-foot (15’) offset from the edge of the outer drive. No disturbance of existing vegetation or grading will be permitted. Prior to certificate of occupancy, an 8’ high solid wood screening fence will be installed along a 3’ offset from the driveway pavement. Date: March 14, 2023 Applicant: Design Solutions By: Cindee Wolf From:cwolf@lobodemar.biz To:"Joseph Leiteritz"; "Bob Leiteritz"; "Denise Mehrtens Arriaga" Subject:RE: Palm Grove Apartments Date:Tuesday, March 7, 2023 2:20:00 PM Attachments:2022 Fair Market Rents.JPG My apologies for the email delivery error. I have received your questions. The intention is for the other 90% of the units to be at a market-rate for rental. However, this is not proposed for government subsidized rent. The “work-force” provision has been developed by both the City and County in accordance with HUD standards. It states that: Housing, workforce Housing provided solely for the residential use of one a residential use of a household with income at or below 80 percent of the WIlmington area median income (AMI) as determined annually by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, adjusted for household size. For the purpose of increasing density in certain districts with the provision of workforce housing, HUD’s high HOME rents at 65% AMI shall be used. For 2022 those rates are shown on the attached file. They will be adjusted for 2023 – probably around May. There is no age designation associated with this project. Not sure where you picked that up? A project of this size generally does not support an on-site manager, but there will absolutely be a management entity – probably with daily office hours, and available on-call 24-hours. That management would definitely include maintenance of buildings and site. Similar development is occurring throughout the City & County to address the housing deficit that has been well-published over the past couple years. Over 5000 units – of all housing types will be needed locally over the next 5-8 years. 15.8 units per acre is not considered particularly dense – when located along very busy road corridors. The RMF-M zoning district, with up to 17 units per acre, is defined as “medium density” for multi-family development and you can find similar complexes along most of the major arterial streets in our community. They act as a logical transition. Please do not hesitate to reach out if you have additional questions. Thank you. Cindee From: Joseph Leiteritz <leiteritzj@yahoo.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 7, 2023 11:50 AM To: cwolf@lobodemar.biz; Bob Leiteritz <bleiteritz1@yahoo.com>; Denise Mehrtens Arriaga <joeys.girl.denise@gmail.com>; Joseph Leiteritz <leiteritzj@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: Palm Grove Apartments On Tuesday, March 7, 2023 at 08:47:35 AM PST, Joseph Leiteritz <leiteritzj@yahoo.com> wrote: Ms. Wolf, While you state that you will set aside 10% for Low Income Housing, you seem to have stated no maximum for Low Income Housing allowed ? - Is it your intention to have the other 90% apartments rent at Wilmington Market Rate ? Additionally, you state that low income housing over 55 years old will be set aside. Will that be part of the 10% ?- very commendable, if so - some clarification is definitely needed on what percentage of rents outside of this 10% will be fully paid by the renters and/or funded by some other government entities/HUD ? Will you have a live-in Manager onsite ? - will you have custodial on-site full time that is responsible for grounds/parking/maintenance ? That you can do so much intense development adjacent to residential neighborhoods is irresponsible, and if they were to be successful in doing it, there’s not a neighborhood in the entire City of Wilmington that will be stable anymore, thank you - Joseph Leiteritz - Lords Creek Resident From:Denise Mehrtens Leiteritz To:cwolf@lobodemar.biz Subject:Issues for Lords Creek Community meeting Date:Tuesday, March 14, 2023 5:31:51 PM Attachments:Submit to NHC Board.pdf Untitled attachment 00003.htm Only500informed.pdf Untitled attachment 00006.htm Ms. Wolf, I intended to be at the community meeting this evening; however, we have workmen still here at my home trying to fix an urgent water problem and it does not look like I will make it. I am also aware that out yearly Lords creek HOA meeting is also tonight at 6:00 pm and was afraid many issues may go unasked. So, I am attaching some of my questions/issues that I would like to hear addressed. As an overall, I am not opposed to multi-family residential housing in the area, but the density is too much for that small a plot of land , R7 zoning may be more sensible for a 4.6 acre plot, but then, there is still the issue of the additional entrance/exit on Carolina Beach Road, which is dangerously too close to GlenArthur on that stretch of road. See attached for more detailed thoughts. I would like to express my my great disappointment that the rules of proposals have the loophole of allowing this revised renamed and re-numbered proposal to move forward to the March 2nd meeting without holding a community meeting. I have thanked Mr. Farrell for his explanation as to why Ms Wolf could do this, (Thank you for your explanation as to why the applicant did not need to hold a community meeting because she has sent actual letters by mail to those people within 500 feet of the property. ) Not only am I disappointed, but I feel completely overlooked and discounted by the County that is supposed to be protecting my interests as a citizen, a land owner, a constituent……it just feels wrong. MANY of us who will be effected by this proposed apartment do no live within 500 ft of the proposed apartment compound, but we drive the same strip of Carolina Beach Road, and traverse the same trafﬁc chaos of turning into and out of Lords Creek from GlenArther; however, we live a bit farther back into Lords Creek. We who live further than 500 ft from the proposed apartments also live within the same Lords Creek Watershed and share in the run off from rain and heavy showers within and beyond our subdivision. So maybe there would have been many people further than 500 ft that would have responded to an informative letter to ask for a community meeting besides the very small group that was informed. It would have only cost Ms. Ward less than $500 to go to Kinko’s and have another 1500+ letters copied, stuffed in envelopes and she could have blanketed the whole area. And I’m quite sure in the big picture $500 is a rounding error I her budget, so there must be another obstacle to informing all. Informing ALL residents that may be effected by your proposal might go a long way in building “good will” within the community of which you wish to be a part. As a process comment: I am not sure where the 500 ft rule came from. It feels like a copy and paste from another type of project proposal. It seems that a 500 ft standard may work when looking at putting up one retail building in a retail zoned area. It surely misses the mark when you are proposing anything that will effect a larger population of residential area. That’s just my opinion, I was a Marketing Research Director for many Fortune 100 Companies in my Career, and I am very aware of “forcing of the statistic that is wanted” rather than correctly sampling to get the true answer to a question……as one of many unsound practices. Sampling the wrong population, Sampling only a small portion of a population, even making it hard for populations to be aware of a question being asked……these are just some ways to bend results to ﬁt a predetermined narrative. Now the Trafﬁc Evaluation Sampling at a non-representative time or place is another (like the DOT data) is collected. Any study looking to ensure maximum safety would sample trafﬁc volume and ﬂow patterns at peak vacation/tourist season while school is still in session. A robust study would seek to evaluate at the worst case scenario. Because, if you can work to mitigate worst case scenario, then at any time that the trafﬁc may be slightly lower, the safety of the community, and the decreased collisions should be covered. FYI- It should never be done the opposite (evaluating at low trafﬁc and mitigating to cover low trafﬁc times only ensures that any time the trafﬁc is higher there will be issues with safety and backup and collisions) And statistically, if you evaluate at an average time……34-50% of the time the trafﬁc will be higher volume than your evaluated point, so 34-50% of the time that roadway will be less safe, more crowded, and have mor collisions than your model will have predicted. Same for Water management, it should be evaluated at a peak rainfall evens timing. If mitigation works when the rainfall is 20 inches in 3 days, then there will be no problems when there is 12 inches in 3 days. I think you get the idea. This type of evaluation is different than just checking temperatures for Wilmington NC. But to Illustrate; Just imagine if in our “Tourism brochures” and our “Move to Wilmington” brochures we advertised the great weather here all year round. And in our brochure we say that the average temperature in Wilmington is 75 daytime and 60 evening. And that’s all we say. Why? Because we sampled the temperatures…..for the month around the Azalea festival. So that’s our temp. Now imagine the people who come to vacation in January, with their shorts and swimsuits because evening temps are 60 degrees……we know that is not tru. We who live here know that we must show low and high temps by months to have an accurate picture. In Conclusion The same is true for trafﬁc and water management and school overcrowding and infrastructure gaps. The people who live in the area know what it is like all year round. Taking a few readings that don’t represent the true picture would only be distorting the true picture. I seems you would want the evaluations to reﬂect the true living environment of the Southern Carolina Beach Road Communities. And these things should be known and addressed BEFORE building anything that has the potential to Effect the current real life situation, positively OR negatively. Z33-06 Opposition to Proposed Apartment Compound at Entrance to Lords Creek Subdivision ( and annoyance that we were not afforded the courtesy of a community meeting before they put this back in front of the County Planning Board) It appears as if Ms. Cynthia Wolf, the representative of the land owner, is trying to slide this by under the radar by just doing a quick little note and saying it went from 4 story to 3 story, and 78 to 72 units. Those appear to be what she thinks are the only barriers based on the 2016 County Comprehensive Plan for Carolina Beach Road Corridor (I.e. no more than 3 stories and density no more than 15 units per acre). She just blew off all of the other issues that were voiced by the community as items that would be regulated by agencies and laws……However; in her submission, on the checklist the Planning Committee required her to ﬁll out, she did not initial, but marked the need for a trafﬁc study to be done as N/A??? She also initialed many things on the checklist that were required to be submitted, that should be carefully scrutinized, as there are several places within her narrative that she makes statements contradictory to the initialed checklist items. With that said, here is a list of items that might be taken into consideration as you review this proposal. ( this is not intended to be an exhaustive list, but will cover many that are top of mind) TRAFFIC……trafﬁc safety, trafﬁc congestion? there is so much more to it than just safety and congestion, and more weight that should be put on this concern. Trafﬁc should fairly be evaluated in a May-June timeframe and on a Thursday-Friday timing to get an honest look at what really happens in this part of the county. This is something that ONLY a resident of the community (Lords Creek, Sago Bay, Woodlake) would know, as the day and season effect not only the quantity of trafﬁc, but the speed, the back-up, the huge volume increase thru the “subdivisions shortcut”, the number of accidents in south of the county; as well as the safety of all of the residents, school children, snow birds and tourists that we welcome and make our living and reputations from. WOW!, How terrible would it be, for one person’s little 4.65 acre project to negatively affect the tourism industry of the entire southern part of the County and lead to negative reviews in travel guides for years to come? What a shame that would be. Related……And I haven’t begun to mention the additional wear and tear on our roadways and infrastructure that is already in need of upgrades……… Related……And there is a HUGE Safety Issue with Adding that Entrance/Exit to the Proposed apartment compound. It is a logistical issue with the Roadway and Entrance to this proposed project. Currently, It is extremely difﬁcult and dangerous to turn into the entrance to Lords Creek ( GlenArthur) off of Southbound Carolina Beach Road at almost any time of the day. The trafﬁc on Carolina Beach Road runs very fast even when it is at speed limit of 55mph (which in reality are cars and trucks going 55, 65, even 75)……and the very small right turn lane does not allow for much slowing down at all to turn. The proposal includes adding yet ANOTHER entrance for the apartments right on top of the area that is already congested with cars trying to turn into Lords creek……as well as your proposed apartment entrance being right smack in the middle of the Northbound Carolina Beach Road turnaround to be able to enter Lords Creek on GlenArthur. There is already a sufﬁciently dangerous 600 foot stretch of S. Carolina Beach Road between the turnaround and the right turn lane to enter Lords Creek……..adding another entrance/exit within that small area where those who drive Carolina Beach Road excessively fast, not paying attention, dreaming of the beach, or getting home …… adding an additional entrance/exit would not only increase the danger of that part of the roadway exponentially, but would be negligent in protecting the community and commuters in this area. There is News Press Following this Proposal Now, I’ve seem articles both in print and in several electronic distributions. I don’t know New Hanover politics well enough to know whether that press will shine a positive or negative light on the side of the money motivated developers who will attract an unknown 70+ units group of possible voter or NON-voters to that 4.65 acres..??..OR…. will that press shine a positive or negative light on the current constituents in the 3+ subdivisions group of current VOTER$/non- voters who are motivated by having their current, tax paying, voting, continued lives for themselves and their families …… and although they may not be currently perfectly peaceful and free of trafﬁc or completely safe driving on the Speedway that Carolina Beach Road south of Monkey Junction has become; there is deﬁnitely no need for more turn lanes and turnarounds that will decrease safety for them. And I cannot stress this enough: Vacation/tourist trafﬁc time, while school is still in session, that is when this proposal should be evaluated by the NC Department of Transportation to get a true picture of what chaos that may await, and NOT the N/A response from Ms. Wolf who I am sure will not be living in those apartments or having to dodge the trafﬁc chaos created by them. NATURE…..Water and natural wetland and tree management? All the issues about water, water management, the proposed encroaching on water control area for subdivision, ﬂooding and run off overload, etc, etc…. and…. ALL the other valid issues brought up that would effect not just one subdivision, but 3+ subdivisions as water runs south and doesn’t just stop at the edge of Lords Creek because the name changes to Sago Bay or Woodlake. We have many homes in Lords creek that have 10-30 foot easements in their yards for the water management district. I saw absolutely no easements anywhere on the plat map for this proposal…..and I ﬁnd it hard to believe that there is a street of 6 single family homes in Lords Creek, that back up to a protected stand of Pines trees and those 18-20 people , share a 30’x600’ water management easement as well as 10’x100’ easement for other utilities……..and yet on this proposed site, 72 apartments, housing approximately 172 people in 4.65 acres do not have any easements for water management, not to mention additional easement for utilities. And has the water management assessed the effect that clearing most all of that 4.65 acres of trees and natural vegetation that provide a natural water management effect, what will that do to the 3 subdivisions south of this property? As it stands now, when there is a drenching rain, which happens periodically thru the Spring and thru the Hurricane Season. If the rain total in one event is signiﬁcant, there is already spillage of the runoff from that part of the landscape that runs down toward the pump station on the South side of GlenArthur and and there are many times that pump cannot handle all the water already,. The Entrance of Lords Creek, onto Glendale, is ﬂooded and water continues to run south and west ﬂooding many streets in Lords Creek already, then the water moves into the Creek and into Sago Bay and Woodlake and depending on how much rain, they also back up…..and so it is currently a very delicate balancing act that the Water Management Department already struggles with within our area. There is so much more to be considered than those two issues. Some of which address outright misinformation posed by Ms. Wolf. She says the closest multi family housing to this site is up on Sanders Road. However, there is already very large apartment community less than 1 mile from this site on Halliburton Parkway built in 2003, Veteran’s Parkway Commons, which has many apartments, much open space for residents, is quite walkable to many businesses and park areas. It has a park like setting with large acreage of picnic sites for residents, as well as a dog park, and electric car charging stations. It has a ﬁshing pond, river ﬁshing, a swimming pool, playgrounds, and tv/boat parking. Is she really unaware of the Veteran’s Commons Apartments, or was she afraid the comparison of the 4.65 acre, crowded compound she is proposing would start to hint at the true purpose of her proposed compound. She says a minimum of 10% would be committed to “work force” housing as per HUD standards. That minimum of 10% does not indicate a maximum, and the HUD is subsidized housing. So it seems that while the very desirable 20+ acre Veteran’s Parkway Commons Apartment complex, just 1 mile away, is ﬁlled with space and amenities and sidewalks and access to public transportation sources, THIS PROPOSED Palm Grove Apartments, with 72 apartments crowded into 4.65 acres with a tiny pool, no space, no way to walk outside the compound( Carolina Beach Road has no sidewalks and is quite dangerous even if you have a car)….. This Proposed Palm Groves would be ﬁlled with the HUD applicants, not by their want, but because it will accommodate their need by HUD income standards. They will be crammed/housed in such a small area, with nowhere to stretch, only able to leave if they happen to have a car…..it will become a very sad HUD Palm Grove……probably without a palm. Also…speaking of trees…. PROTECTED TREES: Are any of the trees on the 4.65 acres protected? Lord’s Creek has several stands of Longleaf Pine Trees which are on the protected trees species in Wilmington, New Hanover County, and North Carolina. Those of us who are home owners in Lords Creek or any of the subdivisions must protect them and are not allowed to clear or cut any of them. I would assume this would apply to the 4.65 acres in this proposal also, but saw nothing about it anywhere. Next: Schools and Services The current capacity and coverage of our currently stretched school district. Current class size is already bursting. Has this increase been discussed with the school district. Elementary, Middle and High school are all on Halliburton. I believe they had to move the 5th grade out of Elementary into Middle school because of current overcrowding. How much more can our Fire and Police Services cover. Again, there has already been discussion about need to expand both to cover current population, has anyone enquirer about what effect this will have on those services? QUESTION: Would some of these decisions be regulated by North Carolina Department of Transportation, New Hanover County School District, New Hanover County Fire District, New Hanover County Police District? Or should they at least be consulted? In Summary Besides the TRAFFIC SAFETY ISSUES, WATER MANAGEMENT FLOODING ISSUES, INFRASTRUCTURE LAGGING BEHIND GROWTH OF AREA, SCHOOL CROWDING, FIRE AND POLICE AVAILABILITY……….. And besides the obvious aesthetic mismatch of the beautifully open winding roads of the single family homes of Lords Creek with the Austere feel of the blocky compound crammed into a very small footprint right on top of welcoming entrance to Lords Creek……….will this Palm Grove be destines by its lack of amenities, lack of walkability, lack of space, lack of access to stores and businesses, lack of well……just about everything…… Will Palm Grove become a neglected, HUD complex, destined to just check off a HUD box for someone? PROPERTIES WITHIN A 500' PERIMETER OF 6634 CAROLINA BEACH ROAD: ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER MAILING ADDRESS CITY / STATE / ZIP PROPERTY ADDRESS BARTLEY STEVE W PAMELA B 6703 CHELWOOD CT WILMINGTON, NC 28412 6703 CHELWOOD CT WILMINGTON BROWN RONALD P 568 BROADWATER RD ARNOLD, MD 21012 806 TANLAW CT WILMINGTON BUOL CLARENCE J BEVERLY C 1046 MARSHSIDE WAY LELAND, NC 28451 6707 CHELWOOD CT WILMINGTON CENATIEMPO RICHARD EILEEN 1123 PARK VIEW DR COVINA, CA 91724 900 GLENARTHUR DR WILMINGTON COLLINS EUGENE JR 314 TOULON DR WILMINGTON, NC 28405 6681 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON CONNER CASSANDRA S 812 MACKAY CT WILMINGTON, NC 28412 812 MACKAY CT WILMINGTON CRAIG TRUST 814 MACKAY CT WILMINGTON, NC 28412 814 MACKAY CT WILMINGTON DERRICK CHARLES A MARGUERITE R 6701 OLIVER CT WILMINGTON, NC 28412 6701 OLIVER CT WILMINGTON DEWEY MICHAEL L 807 GLENARTHUR DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 807 GLENARTHUR DR WILMINGTON DIGBY CHARLES B RHEA M TRUSTEES 820 GLENARTHUR DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 820 GLENARTHUR DR WILMINGTON DRYE CLARENCE L ABIGAIL G 815 GLENARTHUR DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 815 GLENARTHUR DR WILMINGTON ESTABROOKS MARILYN M LIFE ESTATE ETAL 901 GLENARTHUR DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 901 GLENARTHUR DR WILMINGTON FENDER DOROTHY 821 GLENARTHUR DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 821 GLENARTHUR DR WILMINGTON HANKS CHAPEL AME CHURCH 6562 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON, NC 28403 6562 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON HESSE ARTHUR H KATHLEEN 6709 CHELWOOD CT WILMINGTON, NC 28412 6709 CHELWOOD CT WILMINGTON IMMACULATE CONCEPTION CATHOLIC PARISH 6650 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON, NC 28412 6650 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON IPPOLITO GIOVANNI ET UX 15430 POWELLS COVE BLVD FLUSHING, NY 11357 6634 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON KOURY MARVEL E 6706 CHELWOOD CT WILMINGTON, NC 28412 6706 CHELWOOD CT WILMINGTON LASALLA THEODORE PATRICIA REV TRUST 114 WATERSFIELD RD LELAND, NC 28451 6600 OLIVER CT WILMINGTON LORDS CREEK HOA INC PO BOX 2298 CAROLINA BEACH, NC 28428 6626 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON LORDS CREEK HOMEOWNERS ASSN PO BOX 2298 CAROLINA BEACH, NC 28428 908 GLENARTHUR DR WILMINGTON MCCLUNEY YOLANDA R TONY M 606 RYE RIDGE RD CARY, NC 27519 6621 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON MCIRNEY KIMBERLY ROBERT 802 TANLAW CT WILMINGTON, NC 28412 802 TANLAW CT WILMINGTON MCNEIL HENRY PORTER JR 6647 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON, NC 28412 6647 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON MCQUILLAN WILLIAM SR CAROLYN 6402 BOYER ST PHILADELPHIA, PA 19119 7130 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON METERKO TIMOTHY A KAREN J 809 GLENARTHUR DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 809 GLENARTHUR DR WILMINGTON MEYERSON KATHLEEN C ETAL 6702 CHELWOOD CT WILMINGTON, NC 28412 6702 CHELWOOD CT WILMINGTON MITCHELL AMOS DWIGHT ETAL 4014 TROTTER RIDGE RD DURHAM, NC 27707 6673 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON MURCH STEVEN GEORGE DIANNA MARIE 810 MACKAY CT WILMINGTON, NC 28412 810 MACKAY CT WILMINGTON MYRTLE GROVE COMMUNITY CENTER 6608 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON, NC 28403 6608 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON MYRTLE GROVE COMMUNITY CENTER 6608 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON, NC 28403 6604 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON MYRTLE GROVE HOLINESS 6601 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON, NC 28403 6601 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON NEW HANOVER COUNTY WATER /SEWER AUTH 320 CHESTNUT ST WILMINGTON, NC 28401 914 GLENARTHUR DR WILMINGTON OAK GROVE CEMETERY INC 6602 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON, NC 28403 6602 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON PACE MONICA B 904 GLENARTHUR DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 904 GLENARTHUR DR WILMINGTON PALADINO MARISSA J GLENN C TRANCHON ETAL 6704 CHELWOOD CT WILMINGTON, NC 28412 6704 CHELWOOD CT WILMINGTON POPPE MICHELE H HEIRS 805 GLENARTHUR DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 805 GLENARTHUR DR WILMINGTON QUARLES SANDRA S 803 GLENARTHUR DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 803 GLENARTHUR DR WILMINGTON RESTRICTED 123 ANYROAD DR WILMINGTON, NC 28409 6708 CHELWOOD CT WILMINGTON RHOADS PETE D E MALLERNEE III TRUSTEES 808 TANLAW CT WILMINGTON, NC 28412 808 TANLAW CT WILMINGTON RICK LEO J 819 GLENARTHUR DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 819 GLENARTHUR DR WILMINGTON SANCTUARY CHURCH OF WILM PO BOX 2374 CAROLINA BEACH, NC 28428 6685 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON SANCTUARY CHURCH OF WILMINGTON THE PO BOX 2374 CAROLINA BEACH, NC 28428 6687 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON STEELE NANCY S 816 MACKAY CT WILMINGTON, NC 28412 816 MACKAY CT WILMINGTON STEWART WILLIAM M MARTHA J 813 GLENARTHUR DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 813 GLENARTHUR DR WILMINGTON SUNDERLAND PRESTON J 804 TANLAW CT WILMINGTON, NC 28412 804 TANLAW CT WILMINGTON SURFSIDE PROPERTIES LLC PO BOX 16470 WILMINGTON, NC 28409 6600 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON TAYLOR DANNIE LEE DORETHA L 227 GABRIEL ST WILMINGTON, NC 28412 6556 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON TICE JAMES N ETAL 817 GLENARTHUR DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 817 GLENARTHUR DR WILMINGTON TOBY THOMAS MARI K 6605 OLIVER CT WILMINGTON, NC 28412 6605 OLIVER CT WILMINGTON TRACEY EILEEN 6705 CHELWOOD CT WILMINGTON, NC 28412 6705 CHELWOOD CT WILMINGTON TRIPP CHRIS D 905 GLENARTHUR DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 905 GLENARTHUR DR WILMINGTON UNDENOMINATIONAL PENTECOSTAL 6622 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON, NC 28403 6622 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON WALKER J DOUGLAS SUSAN J 6602 OLIVER CT WILMINGTON, NC 28412 6602 OLIVER CT WILMINGTON WHISPERING PINES BAPTIST CHURCH 6547 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON, NC 28412 6547 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON WRIGHT ARMOND ETAL 1220 6TH ST S WILMINGTON, NC 28401 6646 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON ADDITIONAL CONTACTS FROM APPEAL LETTER: BURGIN BETH 821 GLENARTHUR DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 MEYERS MICHELLE 6701 OLIVER CT WILMINGTON, NC 28412 COX HARLAN 709 BURROUGHS DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 GAVIN ERIN 707 BURROUGHS DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 ELLER JEREMY 128 MCQUILLAN DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 RAYNOR CHAD 604 BURROUGHS DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 DAVIDSON JOANN 6622 DORRINGTON DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 GEORGE CAROLYN 505 BURROUGHS DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 COTE CHRISTINE 612 BURROUGHS DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 STUBBS DEAN SHEILA 707 GLENARTHUR DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 VINES TOBY 715 GLENARTHUR DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 BELL STEPHANIE 6702 DORRINTON DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 CALLAHAN ALISSA 711 GLENARTHUR DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 KINITIGH JACKIE 613 GLENARTHUR DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 ECHEVARRIA ANGEL 603 BURROUGHS DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 YOUNG ROBERT 608 BURROUGHS DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 JEFFERY EMILY 606 BURROUGHS DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 ROSELAND CHERYL 700 BURROUGHS DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 HOLLERMAN CHRISTIANA 702 BURROUGHS DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 TRACEY EILEEN 6705 CHELWOOD CT WILMINGTON, NC 28412 DOWNEY BETTY 712 GLENARTHUR DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 CRUMBLY TYLER 6713 DORRINGTON DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 REYNOLDS JAMES 6810 HAILSHAM DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 LANE CLAIRE 6707 CHELWOOD CT WILMINGTON, NC 28412 P.O. Box 7221, Wilmington, NC 28406 * Telephone: 910-620-2374 * Email: cwolf@lobodemar.biz Community Information March 3, 2023 To: Adjacent Property Owners & Other Interested Parties From: Cindee Wolf Re: Palm Grove Apartments / 6634 Carolina Beach Road The attached plan has been submitted to the County for approval of a Conditional District, a zoning designation that allows only a particular use, density, layout, etc. to be established pertaining to each individual development. The plan is for a multi-family residential complex. There are twelve (12) units within each 3-story structure, for a total of seventy-two (72) rental homes. An exhibit of the project layout is attached. A mix of housing types in a community helps create a broader range of residents to support our vibrant County. A meeting will be held on Tuesday, March 14th, 6:00 p.m., at the Best Western Plus – Wilmington, 5600 Carolina Beach Road. If you cannot attend, I welcome you to contact me at telephone # 910-620-2374, or email cwolf@lobodemar.biz with comments and/or questions. We appreciate your interest in the project and continue to believe that this new community will provide a housing alternative missing in the southern portion of the County, be good neighbor and be an asset to the community.