2024-02-05 Regular Meeting
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36
FEBRUARY 5, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 115
ASSEMBLY
The New Hanover County Board of Commissioners met February 5, 2024, at 4:00 p.m. in Regular Session in
the Assembly Room of the New Hanover County Courthouse, 24 North Third Street, Wilmington, North Carolina.
Members present: Chair Bill Rivenbark; Vice-Chair LeAnn Pierce; Commissioner Jonathan Barfield, Jr.;
Commissioner Dane Scalise; and Commissioner Rob Zapple.
Staff present: County Manager Chris Coudriet; Clerk to the Board Kymberleigh G. Crowell; and County
Attorney K. Jordan Smith.
INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Father Steven Klund, St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church, provided the invocation and Commissioner
Barfield led the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA
Chair Rivenbark requested a motion to approve the Consent Agenda as presented.
Motion: Commissioner Scalise MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Zapple to approve the items on the Consent
Agenda as presented. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
CONSENT AGENDA
Approval of Minutes – Governing Body
The Commissioners approved the minutes of the January 17, 2024 Special Meeting and the January 22,
2024 Regular Meeting.
Adoption of Budget Amendment – Budget
The Commissioners adopted budget amendment 24-042 amending the annual budget ordinance for the
fiscal year ending June 30, 2024.
A copy of the budget amendment is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and contained in Exhibit
Book XLV, Page 3.1.
Approval to Request Grant Funds from N.C. Governor's Highway Safety Program Regional Forensic Laboratory –
Sheriff
The Commissioners adopted the resolution and authorized the Sheriff's Office to submit a grant application
for the Governors Highway Safety Program, a four-year grant that will continue funding the salary and fringe of the
Forensic Chemist position, supplies, and training from October 1, 2024 to September 30, 2025. The total application
for the fiscal year (FY) 24-25 grant cycle is $114,218. No match is required.
A copy of the resolution is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and contained in Exhibit Book XLV,
Page 3.2.
Approval of Order for Advertisement of 2023 Unpaid Tax Liens on Real Property – Tax
The Commissioners approved the Order for Advertisement of 2023 Unpaid Tax Liens on Real Property for
New Hanover County, City of Wilmington, Town of Kure Beach, Town of Wrightsville Beach, Town of Carolina Beach,
and the New Hanover County Fire District.
A copy of the order is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and contained in Exhibit Book XLV, Page
3.3.
Approval of December 2023 Tax Collection Reports – Tax
The Commissioners accepted the tax collection reports of New Hanover County, New Hanover County Fire
District, and New Hanover County Debt Service as of December 2023.
Copies of the tax collection reports are hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and contained in Exhibit
Book XLV, Page 3.4.
REGULAR ITEMS OF BUSINESS
CONSIDERATION AND ADOPTION OF THE AMERICAN HEART MONTH PROCLAMATION
Public Health Director Jon Campbell reported that every 33 seconds, someone in the United States dies
from cardiovascular disease, and in the County one in five deaths is related to heart disease. Heart disease costs the
economy billions of dollars on an annual basis and February is when all come together recognizing the importance
the disease has on society. The focus can be on educating individuals to seek medical care and treatment needed to
reduce the significant burden on the community.
Commissioner Barfield stressed the importance for everyone to recognize the need to take care of
themselves, obtain annual physicals, and monitor blood pressure. He read the proclamation into the record.
Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark requested direction from the Board.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36
FEBRUARY 5, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 116
Motion: Commissioner Barfield MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Scalise to adopt the proclamation recognizing
February 2024 as American Heart Month in New Hanover County. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
A copy of the proclamation is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and contained in Exhibit Book
XLV, Page 3.5.
CONSIDERATION AND DENIAL OF TEMPORARY WAIVER OF HOURLY FEES IN THE NEW HANOVER COUNTY
PARKING DECK
Chief Financial Officer Eric Credle stated that during the last Board meeting, Commissioner Scalise proposed
nd
waiving the hourly fees at the County deck, located at 214 North 2 Street, as an accommodation to mitigate the
impact of the closure of the Cape Fear Memorial Bridge (CFMB). He reported that on average, the County collects
about $5,000 in fees at that deck, and when scheduled out over the CFMB closure until May 23, 2024, the full amount
of fees waived will be approximately $70,000. The deck has a specific allotment for spots for monthly parkers and a
specific allotment for hourly parkers, so if the deck becomes popular because of this and has a lot more hourly
parkers than normal, it will hit the allotment and potentially mitigate the impact on monthly parkers with their
allotted spots. Staff suggest if the matter were to be approved, the free parking be for a period of 12 hours at a time
on any one given day. The waiver is to end May 23, 2024, but in the event of potential delays, the waiver shall remain
in effect with no further action required by the Board until July 23, 2024. He further reported that no objections
have been received from any business with long-term parking arrangements.
Discussion ensued on the matter. Commissioner Scalise commented that offering the concession serves as
a positive gesture for the downtown businesses, patrons, and residents. Commissioner Zapple expressed concerns
over the potential confusion amongst monthly parking passholders when others are parking for free. Mr. Credle
responded that the number of monthly spaces will not be decreased, ensuring reliability for passholders compared
to those seeking hourly parking. Commissioner Scalise noted that in speaking with numerous downtown businesses,
he has heard support for the measure and appreciation for the creativity to bring people downtown to support local
businesses.
Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark requested direction from the Board.
Motion: Commissioner Scalise MOVED, SECONDED by Chair Rivenbark to approve a waiver of hourly parking deck
fees at the County’s parking deck during the days that lanes of the Cape Fear Memorial Bridge are closed. This waiver
begins on February 7, 2024 and is expected to end with the scheduled completion of the work on May 23, 2024, but
in the case of any delays in completion, the waiver shall remain in effect with no further action required by the Board
of Commissioners until July 23, 2024. Upon vote, the MOTION FAILED 3 TO 2; Vice-Chair Pierce, Commissioner
Barfield, and Commissioner Zapple dissented.
CONSIDERATION AND ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION REGARDING THE PLANNED CLOSURE OF THE CAREER
READINESS ACADEMY AT MOSLEY SCHOOL AND THE POTENTIAL FORMATION OF A NEWCOMER SCHOOL
Commissioner Scalise stated his position on presenting the resolution for Board consideration, referencing
his previous comments and his recent op-ed on the matter. He read the resolution into the record and moved to
adopt the resolution as presented.
Discussion ensued about the resolution. Vice-Chair Pierce seconded the motion, noting her personal
experience as a parent of an autistic child who is now an adult and went through the local school system. She fully
understands that there are students with special needs who need ongoing support, and their future success is often
measured by what they learned in a school system. Commissioner Zapple stated the Career Readiness Academy at
Mosley School has been beneficial, but its future is a decision for the New Hanover County Board of Education (BOE).
He reported on a discussion he had with the former Guilford County Schools Superintendent Maurice Greene about
the two newcomer schools in that county. Mr. Greene explained how the two schools were established to address
an issue that was already present in their school system to assist students with language barriers and help move
them into mainstream classrooms. Chair Rivenbark noted that a newcomer school will result in an increase in taxes.
Commissioner Barfield stated there is no direct correlation between adding classrooms and the tax rate. It is a BOE
decision on what its priorities are, and those priorities have not yet been determined. The BOE has stated it is not
moving forward with the newcomer school, and he is fine with the resolution because it is a moot point. The BOE
members are elected to make decisions that best fit the school system, not the Board of County Commissioners.
Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark requested direction from the Board.
Motion: Commissioner Scalise MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chair Pierce to adopt the resolution appealing to the
New Hanover County Board of Education to continue to offer the Career Readiness Academy at Mosley and not to
establish a newcomer school. Upon vote, the MOTION PASSED 4 TO 1; Commissioner Zapple dissenting.
PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL OF A REZONING REQUEST BY CINDEE WOLF WITH DESIGN SOLUTIONS,
APPLICANT, TO REZONE NINE (9) PARCELS TOTALING APPROXIMATELY 7.28 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT THE 7600
BLOCK OF CAROLINA BEACH ROAD BETWEEN NORTH AND SOUTH SEABREEZE ROADS FROM R-15, RESIDENTIAL
TO (CZD) CB, COMMUNITY BUSINESS FOR A COMMERCIAL BUSINESS PARK CONSISTING OF 28,300 MAXIMUM
SQUARE FEET OF GENERAL RETAIL, RESTAURANT, CONVENIENCE STORE WITH FUEL PUMPS, AND OTHER LIMITED
USES (Z23-23)
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36
FEBRUARY 5, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 117
Senior Planner Zach Dickerson presented the rezoning request for the site located at 7611 Carolina Beach
Road, initially zoned R-15 in 1971 to ensure that housing with private wells and septic was developed at low
densities. Since then, private water and sewer services are now available through Aqua NC, and one recommended
condition is for the site to connect to said system. The site is in the historic Seabreeze neighborhood which was
established in the mid-1920s and was a prime vacation resort area for African Americans within southeastern North
Carolina from the 1930s through the 1950s. The site is bordered by residential areas and buffered by North and
South Seabreeze Roads. He then provided examples an R-15 district uses, other residential developments in the
Seabreeze area, and mixed-use commercial centers. The proposed concept plan reflects a mixed-use commercial
center on the site, a development that could include a convenience store with fuel stations, a drive-thru restaurant,
retail and medical offices, and a fast-casual dining establishment. While these uses are indicated on the concept plan
as the primary traffic generators outlined in the traffic impact analysis (TIA), the applicant is seeking approval for all
uses permissible in the Community Business (CB) District, barring specific exclusions. The proposal includes a
stormwater management pond and public infrastructure enhancements such as a public access easement along
Carolina Beach Road and sidewalks along North and South Seabreeze Roads and throughout the development. The
plan also suggests extending sidewalks and adding a five-foot buffer zone, integrated as part of the conditions for
development. Site access will be primarily via South Seabreeze Road at its signalized intersection with Carolina Beach
Road, with an additional exit point on North Seabreeze Road facilitating northbound traffic on Carolina Beach Road.
There are four projects under development in the vicinity. The estimated trip generation for the site with
the proposed development will be approximately 389 AM and 284 PM peak hour trips. This is an approximate
increase of 376 AM trips and 267 PM trips as compared to the current zoning. The estimated traffic generated from
the site is over the 100 peak hour threshold that triggers the ordinance requirement for a TIA. The TIA requires
several improvements of this development, which analyzed the following maximum square footages:
6,100 square feet of convenience store with fuel stations
5,000 square feet of fast food restaurant with drive-thru
5,000 square feet of small office building
7,200 square feet of strip retail plaza
And 5,000 square feet of medical-dental office building
Construct an exclusive westbound left turn lane with 100 feet of full width storage and optimize the
signal timings at the intersection of Carolina Beach Road and South Seabreeze Road
Construct an exclusive eastbound left turn lane on South Seabreeze Road with 50 feet of full width
storage
Provide stop controls for exiting traffic at the site access on South and North Seabreeze Roads
Construct both site accesses with 100 feet of internal protected stems.
The subject area has not experienced the same interest in higher density growth as the northern and central
portions of the Carolina Beach Road corridor. It was the focus of the Seabreeze Small Area Plan, created in 1989
which included recommendations for a business revitalization and a redevelopment of the waterfront. Much of the
surrounding area is low-density residential with planned higher-density townhomes to the south. Its location near
Snow’s Cut Bridge along a busy corridor makes it suitable for commercial development. The application includes a
proposed condition to restrict certain CB district-permitted uses, ensuring compatibility with the surrounding area.
The proposed commercial project aims to serve the local community by introducing businesses into a primarily
residential zone along a major thoroughfare. Given its position near Carolina Beach Road, the site is less likely to
attract low-density housing developments. Aligning with the County's strategic plan, the CB rezoning is designed to
foster new businesses catering to local needs. The 2016 Comprehensive Land Use Plan (Comprehensive Plan)
designates this area as Community Mixed Use, and the project aligns well with its vision for properties in this
category, adhering to the type of uses the plan endorses.
The Planning Board considered this item at its January 4, 2024 meeting and voted (6-0) to recommend
approval of the application. Several members of the public spoke in opposition, citing concerns with traffic and
commercial development in a largely residential area. The application was found to be consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan because the proposed uses are in line with the recommendations of the Community Mixed Use
place type. It was also found recommending approval of the project was reasonable and in the public interest
because the development would function as a community service business node to serve both the Seabreeze
community and the surrounding area. The applicant originally proposed excluding several uses. During the Planning
Board public hearing, an agreement was reached to exclude several more uses in the conditional district as well as
conditions regarding building height, sidewalks, and additional buffering behind the proposed stormwater pond in
the southeastern portion of the site. The staff’s recommendation is based on the policy guidance of the
Comprehensive Plan, zoning considerations, and technical review and agrees with the Planning Board’s
recommendation of approval.
Mr. Dickerson concluded the staff presentation stating if approved, development would be subject to the
Technical Review Committee (TRC) and to zoning compliance review to ensure full compliance with all ordinance
requirements. He responded to questions stating that the project is proposed to connect to the Aqua NC system so
it would not be on septic. Aqua NC has issued a letter of intent to connect, and it is one of the conditions of approval
for development to connect to said system.
Chair Rivenbark thanked Mr. Dickerson for the presentation and invited the applicant to make remarks.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36
FEBRUARY 5, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 118
Cindee Wolf with Design Solutions, applicant on behalf of the various owners of the nine properties that
encompass the site, stated the location is just north of the Snows’ Cut bridge at a signalized intersection of South
Seabreeze Road, Carolina Beach Road, and River Road. The North Seabreeze Road along the northern border will
provide a combination of tracts with entries to both accesses into the Seabreeze community. Under the
Comprehensive Plan, the entire quarter was determined to be a Community Mixed Use place type that promotes
the type of development residential communities that are increasing in this part of the community need for retail
services and business uses. The application is to rezone the current residential zone tract for business uses to provide
convenience, variety, and free enterprise. She provided a brief historical overview of the site noting that the 1989
Seabreeze Small Area Plan showed the existing use of a convenience store on the maps. It also included a statement
that exploring the possibility of developing a shopping center somewhere in the community was a strategy to
address concerns over the diminishing historical focus of services in the area. Her client began purchasing various
parcels in 2017 and is being proactive in preparing for the future. The two 4,000 gallon underground fuel tanks on
the site from the former mini mart were removed, and any environmental concerns were actively addressed. Her
client has been cooperating with Aqua NC to provide an additional easement area for expansion of the adjacent well
area, which will benefit water service in the surrounding community. Asbestos was removed from one of the original
Freeman family residences, and it has been offered for preservation as a possible future heritage museum on
another site. A full TIA, marketing research, and trees and topographic surveys have all been completed, along with
alternative layout sketches, of which the best is what is being presented to the Board. The concept plan includes not
only the possibility of a convenience store but also space for additional retail service and medical/dental office
opportunities. The central drive will connect both South and North Seabreeze Roads and provide interconnectivity
as well as serve to keep the more active circulation within the center and off the public roads. As currently zoned,
the multiple properties along the frontage of Carolina Beach Road will almost have to be allowed a driveway by the
North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) if each were to be individually developed by the individual
owners. The rezoning will provide a path to avoid more conflicts on Carolina Beach Road and provide mitigation for
traffic improvements. The scope of the project required a TIA that was accepted, reviewed, and approved by the
Wilmington Metropolitan Planning Organization (WMPO) and NCDOT. The results of the analysis indicate that with
the recommended improvements in place, the proposed site is not expected to have a detrimental effect on
transportation capacity and mobility in the study area. At full build out, the level of service at the South Seabreeze
Road signal is impacted by an additional 10 to 15 seconds of delay during the peak travel periods in any travel
direction. As noted by staff, the plans are somewhat conceptual, with a release for project construction and ultimate
approval for occupancy dependent on oversight by the TRC and permitting by a variety of county and state agencies.
Effort was made to review and address any potential detailed design and permitting issues in preparation for a good
concept plan. The primary emphasis in locating commercial services is to provide proximity and ease of accessibility,
which is the strategy within the Community Mixed Use place type. The proposed establishments, including the
possibility of vehicle fueling, will provide services to a mixed population of customers in this part of the County. The
proposal will improve the form and function of currently underutilized tracts along a busy highway corridor, thereby
maximizing land use efficiency and good economic development. She then introduced Cameron Zurbruegg of
Hendon Properties, stating he would provide a brief statement.
Cameron Zurbruegg with Hendon Properties stated he is the development partner for the project in
conjunction with the owner, Richard Yang whose entity is Socol, LLC. He noted that Mr. Yang committed to
purchasing the property long before seeing it as a commercial development, believing it was an attractive investment
opportunity in the area. He provided his opinion about the general opposition, insights from public comments,
current traffic conditions, and the positive aspects of the proposed development. He provided a brief overview of
his experience in property development and noted the importance of effective communication, problem-solving
skills, and a professional approach to handling opposition. He reported on the community meeting which had 40
attendees, many opposed to the project, and the constructive discussions over several hours. He acknowledged the
public comments and disagreed with the comments that the development will decrease property values, contending
instead that undeveloped properties in the area might increase in value if the project proceeds. The site is suitable
for commercial development, given its location on a major arterial highway and the community's expressed desire
for local services to avoid travel over the bridge. The traffic issues referenced in the public comments are pre-existing
and not a direct result of the proposed development. The site has merit to accommodate potential services like a
convenience store and fast food service. He noted that the site is not suited for residential unless it is high density
which he believes could be more detrimental to the community. He then provided an overview of the potential
improvements and efforts aimed at mitigating traffic issues. A well-planned commercial development could benefit
the existing traffic situation by providing necessary improvements and enhancing connectivity in the area.
Chair Rivenbark stated that no one signed up to speak in favor, and two people signed up to speak in
opposition to the request and invited the speakers to make remarks.
Brian Gordon, a resident of Tarpon Drive, Wilmington, NC, spoke in opposition, stating he is representing
community members and that the proposed development is less than 500 feet from his home. As the Planning Board
hearing on this matter was around the holidays, he and others were not able to attend in person but did submit
comments. He was surprised to learn the Planning Board recommended approval of the project. He provided an
overview of community areas from where public comments were submitted noting that many of the submissions
came from citizens in the vicinity of the proposed development. On January 28, 2024, he launched an online petition,
which has gathered over 80 signatures and received more than 55 public comments. He urged the Board to review
the comments, which reflect his community's concerns, including the current challenges of increased traffic and
noise in the area, particularly near the bridge. When he attempted to sell his house in 2022, the primary deterrents
for potential buyers were the traffic and noise from U.S. Highway 421. He reported on a correlation between
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36
FEBRUARY 5, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 119
convenience stores and a five percent increase in violent crimes, which raises concerns about safety. The proposed
development, with fast food restaurants and a gas station, could negatively impact surrounding property values, as
no homeowner desires such establishments directly across from their residence. He expressed concerns about the
environmental damage being done due to the pollution potential from impervious surface runoff, vehicle fluid leaks,
and emissions, especially near wetlands and residential areas with private wells. The community meeting that was
held was seen as purely procedural by the developer, with unanimous opposition from attendees against the
introduction of a gas station and fast food outlet. It is felt the proposed development is regressive and possibly
endangers the safety of residents, including families and children who enjoy walking in the area. The project could
also strain local infrastructure during emergencies and evacuations and create disadvantages for local businesses
during off-seasons. He urged the Board to deny the rezoning request.
Alice Hsu, resident of Scout Camp Hatila Road, Wilmington, NC, spoke in opposition to the request stating
she is representing the Seabreeze community and that she emailed comments directly to the Board due to issues
with the submission site. Despite not attending the initial Planning Board meeting due to the holidays, she is
remaining open about the rezoning request, as she and her family believe that development is positive. However,
they are concerned about the lack of solid communication between the developer and the community to ensure
beneficial outcomes. This is a chance for change that benefits everyone, and she urged the Board to enforce strict
guidelines to ensure the developments benefit both the Seabreeze community and the image and reputation of the
entire County, including its municipalities, as a forward-thinking, socially conscious community. The proposed
rezoning does pose significant negative impacts on Seabreeze and its natural resources. She referenced her email,
which details issues such as traffic congestion, environmental hazards from fuel tanks, lack of community protection,
and drainage problems. She explained observing standing water in the area even without recent rainfall, indicating
potential drainage issues. Approving the rezoning could reduce the Seabreeze community's leverage in ensuring
necessary infrastructure developments for water and sewer are extended to the area. She asked that the Board
consider the proposal's content and impact, focusing on mitigating potential harms, such as providing water and
sewer infrastructure to all Seabreeze homes and addressing traffic congestion. Approving the rezoning could limit
community oversight and awareness, which in this case was hampered by scheduling and communication issues.
Also, the TIA is based on March traffic counts, which may not accurately reflect peak conditions, and she feels
approval at this stage might be premature. While rezoning should be an opportunity for meaningful change for all
stakeholders, she urged the Board to delay its decision until residents’ concerns are thoroughly addressed and
ensure the community's needs for infrastructure are met.
Chair Rivenbark stated that the applicant and opposition would each have five minutes for rebuttal
comments.
In applicant rebuttal, Ms. Wolf noted that although exact uses cannot be identified at this stage, concept
plans are not purely speculative. The concept plan identifies stormwater management locations based on
topography, surveying, and downstream review and identifies the roadway system, which is a result of the TIA
identifying improvements to mitigate any impacts. The Aqua NC system has both water and sewer mains on South
Seabreeze Road and has given its commitment to serve the site, with services being provided only onto those mains.
That is an asset as there are no wells or septic systems proposed for what could be nine individual developments
with individual septic systems and wells. The residents across the highway do not face the highway as the design of
that community specifically orients the lots inward. The TIA standards and requirements are established by the
WMPO and the NCDOT. When the traffic studies are completed, they are specific to the process. The Planning Board
meeting was held the first Thursday in December 2023 and well publicized, and the members, no matter where they
live in the County are consistently fair and thoughtful in their decisions. She believes it must be acknowledged that
this stretch of highway corridor will continue to be identified by the Comprehensive Plan, whether current or future,
as appropriate for transitional density, both residential and commercial. As to the concerns expressed about new
residential in the subject area, she believes that partly is because the existing residents are using the highways to
either go across the bridge or go north to obtain services and commercial needs.
In applicant rebuttal, Mr. Zurbruegg stated that NCDOT controls Carolina Beach Road, North and South
Seabreeze Road, and the service roads. What is required in the TIA must be done and he has been lobbying NCDOT
for additional improvements he feels his team could provide to help improve the U-turns, widen the road, and create
additional service road widths to reduce the bottlenecks on South Seabreeze Road. The best time for the
neighborhoods west of the site and the Dolphin Bay community to lobby NCDOT is during the permitting period. He
feels this can be done in a collaborative effort between his team and the residents. Also, having the aquifer well off
North and South Seabreeze Roads is better than in the middle of the site. He reiterated that he is open to
communication with those in opposition to the project.
In opposition rebuttal, Courtney Gordon, resident of Tarpon Drive and spouse of Brian Gordon, reported
on the efforts to sell their house and that the chief complaint they received was the roadway noise. Their daughter
cannot sleep because of the noise issues and this project will amplify them. She urged the Board to deny the rezoning
request.
In opposition rebuttal, Jean Graff, resident of Cobia Lane, stated she is opposed to the project. While the
developer has been buying parcels over several years, the residents have also bought property with the
understanding that the area would remain residential. She hopes the Board will not approve the project.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36
FEBRUARY 5, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 120
Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark closed the public hearing and opened the floor to Board
discussion.
Discussion ensued about various aspects of the subject site. Ms. Wolf, in response to questions, confirmed
that there are no storage uses, including boat and mini storage, on the proposed list of uses. The U-turn change will
be the timing differences based on traffic and create improvements and nothing will be taken away. There is the
possibility of expanding the U-turn bubble which may take a bit off the subject site if necessary. She is not prepared
to address public comments about the underground tanks. Everything has been done that could mitigate issues
through the process of identifying, removing, and mitigating. She reiterated there is no request for wells or septic
systems and improvements will be made to the Aqua NC well system which will make the water flow better, and
one of the conditions requires connection to said system. As to site uses, the convenience store as an anchor makes
the most sense and will be a positive use as proposed on the concept plan. The other quadrants of the site are open
to the market but will be defined by what uses have been agreed to and exempted. There is no proposed residential
or commercial district mixed use. She confirmed there are easements in place for the protection of the Aqua NC
wellhead and there will be dedication of an additional easement area behind the northeast quadrant use. The
drainage will be directed away from the wellhead as the flow has to be maintained/directed to the site’s retention
pond. As to the southeast quadrant, it has yet to be determined if the opaque buffer will include a fence. There are
different transitional buffers and there will be five feet added to whatever type of buffer is agreed upon. She is
willing to discuss addressing the potential trespass issues if there is further Board deliberation. The plan does include
a note for the easement across the front of the site for the multi-use trail and will be dedicated as part of any plans
or plats that are recorded with individual lots. Also, the sidewalks are being brought down the flanking Seabreeze
roads to that point.
Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark asked Ms. Wolf if, based on the Board discussion and items
presented during the public hearing, whether she would like to withdraw the petition or proceed with the vote. Ms.
Wolf responded that she wanted to proceed with the vote.
Commissioner Zapple expressed concerns with the lack of assessing projects that the Board has already
approved and the resulting aggregate traffic impacts with future potential development. None of the issues result
from the proposed project but he desires to have the ability to take into consideration the impacts of prior approved
projects.
Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark asked for Board direction.
Motion: Vice-Chair Pierce MOVED, SECONDED by Chair Rivenbark, to approve the proposed rezoning. The Board
finds it to be consistent with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because the proposed uses are in
line with the recommendations of the Community Mixed Use place type. The Board also finds approval of the
rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the development would act as a community service
business node to serve both the Seabreeze Community and the surrounding area. The following proposed conditions
are included as part of the approval:
1. Specified excluded uses will include electronic gaming, outdoor recreation, commercial parking lot, car
wash, vehicle rentals, minor vehicle service station, artisan manufacturing, commercial recycling
facility, animal shelter, kennel, hotel / motel, event center, indoor recreation, funeral services, micro-
brewery, and micro-distillery.
2. Exterior lighting, including luminaries, including security lighting, for nonresidential, multi-family, and
mixed-use developments adjacent to single family residential subdivisions shall be full cut-off fixtures
that are directed downward in compliance with Figure 5.5.4.C Full Cut-off Fixtures of the Unified
Development Ordinance. In no case shall lighting be directed at or above a horizontal plane through
the lighting fixture.
3. A connection to a public or private water and sewer utility provider is required. Private wells and septic
systems are not permitted.
4. If a convenience store with fuel stations is developed on this site, it must be developed adjacent to
Carolina Beach Road. Other uses in the Conditional District not specifically excluded in Condition #1
may be permitted adjacent to Carolina Beach Road or to the rear of the project.
5. Buildings on the east side of the internal drive shown on the concept plan shall be limited to two (2)
stories or 35-feet.
6. Sidewalks will be extended along the entire frontage of North and South Seabreeze Road.
7. An additional five feet of vegetative buffer width will be added to the applicant selected Type A opaque
buffer option along the southeastern property line.
Approval is subject to the applicant signing an agreement acknowledging the applicant’s consent to all listed
conditions. If the applicant does not provide a signed agreement within seven (7) business days from the date of
approval, then the rezoning application approval is null and void. Upon vote, the MOTION PASSED 4 TO 1,
Commissioner Scalise dissenting.
A copy of AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY OF NEW HANOVER AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF AREA 4 OF
NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA, ADOPTED April 7, 1971 is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes
and is contained in Zoning Book I, Section 4, Page 129.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36
FEBRUARY 5, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 121
PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL OF A REZONING REQUEST BY CINDEE WOLF WITH DESIGN SOLUTIONS,
APPLICANT, TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 0.44 ACRES ZONED B-2, REGIONAL BUSINESS LOCATED AT 1132
SEABREEZE ROAD TO (CZD) R-7, RESIDENTIAL FOR A MAXIMUM OF TWO SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED RESIDENTIAL
DWELLING UNITS (Z23-24)
Senior Planner Zach Dickerson presented the rezoning request for the site located at 1132 South Seabreeze
Road, initially zoned B-2 in 1971 to encourage business development in the historic Seabreeze area. Since that time,
private water and sewer services have become available to the surrounding area through Aqua NC, but the service
line does not extend to the subject property. The parcel is located within the historic Seabreeze neighborhood,
established in the mid-1920s. It was a prime vacation resort area for African Americans within southeastern North
Carolina from the 1930s through the 1950s. The site is bordered to the south by an existing bed and breakfast facility
and is on the banks of the Intracoastal Waterway. He provided examples of small-scale commercial development,
development in the R-7 district, and other residential development along South Seabreeze Road.
The proposed concept plan includes a maximum of two residential units arranged on two lots on the
property. The two large live oak trees on the site are to be preserved via a recommended condition on the site.
Access to the site is along South Seabreeze Road and if approved, will include a conditioned requirement for a shared
driveway cut across the lots. There are four projects under development in the vicinity. The estimated traffic
generation for this site is low and would result in a reduction of traffic counts from the current zoning designation.
Based on the current general student generation rate, the potential increase would be negligible for this
development. The generation rate is updated on an annual basis using actual student numbers provided by the
school system. The generation rate provides a countywide picture of the number of students each new residential
unit is likely to yield, considering that most new residential units in the county do not provide homes for large
numbers of school age children. The subject area was the focus of the 1989 Seabreeze Small Area Plan, which
included recommendations for business revitalization and redevelopment of the waterfront. The revitalization has
not been accomplished since the adoption of the plan. There is a proposed commercial development at the entrance
of Seabreeze. Due to the size and shape of parcels in the area, and B-2 regulations, development of the site and
surrounding parcels is challenging. Also, due to the need for private wells and septic systems and the lack of the
extension of the Aqua NC mainline, the area has not experienced the anticipated commercial growth intended by
the B-2 zoning. Additionally, the property is wholly within the VE Coastal High Hazard flood zone area. While the
proposal will increase the County’s housing supply, the new homes would be in the flood zone, which the County’s
strategic plan aims to reduce. The Comprehensive Plan classifies the area as Community Mixed Use. The project is
generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan’s recommendations for properties that are said place type.
The Planning Board considered the matter at its January 4, 2024 meeting, and members expressed concerns
that the rezoning could restrict the ability of adjacent properties to develop without requiring a variance. While
there was consensus that the lot was suited for residential uses, members concurred with staff that the specifics of
the lot make it challenging to develop. The Planning Board voted (5-1) to recommend approval of the petition, finding
it generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan because it provides housing in line with the purposes and intent
of the Community Mixed Use place type. It was also found recommending approval of the project was reasonable
and in the public interest because the proposal would benefit the community by providing more housing options.
The four conditions as part of the approval relate to tree preservation, restrictions on additional dwelling units,
driveway access, and a deed disclosure for future owners regarding the surrounding B-2 zoned properties. Staff’s
recommendation is based on the policy guidance of the Comprehensive Plan, zoning considerations, and technical
review. Staff found the proposed conditional R-7 district generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan because
the district is in line with the densities that are appropriate for properties located in the Community Mixed Use place
type. However, based on the earlier stated issues with the site, the staff does not concur with the Planning Board’s
recommendation and recommends denial of the proposed development. However, if the Board finds approval
appropriate, staff agrees with the recommended conditions to protect some features of the site. Also, if approved,
the development would be subject to zoning compliance review to ensure full compliance with all ordinance
requirements.
Mr. Dickerson, in response to questions, confirmed he did walk the site and the two live oaks closer to the
Intracoastal Waterway that were measured would be considered documented trees under the ordinance. There
would not be a mitigation requirement to remove them, but a tree removal permit would be required if the site
were to remain under the B-2 zoning designation. If the site went to residential, there would not be a permit
requirement to remove, but the other two trees would require mitigation. He confirmed that there is one tree in the
middle that straddles the property line.
Chair Rivenbark thanked Mr. Dickerson for the presentation and invited the applicant to make remarks.
Cindee Wolf with Design Solutions, applicant on behalf of property owner Sandra McKeithan, stated the
eastern end of Seabreeze and the odd shape of the overlaying B-2 zoning district predates the 1989 Seabreeze Small
Area Plan for future land use planning. Its intent was to promote the renewal of the community heritage. There is
currently a mix of nonconforming residential uses, by-right businesses, and vacant parcels on portions of the original
overlay. Along the southern boundary, based on a 2023 aerial view, the existing businesses are not necessarily
conforming to current regulations for aesthetics, such as street yards which would be part of the requirements if
developed today. However, the existing businesses do not promote neighborhood services or commerce. Business
placement here is at the end of the community, and unless it were a specific destination use, it would be difficult to
establish a business in this part of Seabreeze. She has no doubt that the community would not embrace many
commercial ventures. The subject tract has been vacant as a waterfront property for the enjoyment of the
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36
FEBRUARY 5, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 122
McKeithan family with their home on the nearby Scout Camp Hatila Road, with aspirations for any business user to
purchase it. However, nothing that would enhance the community if the family were interested in selling has come
forward. The greater interest is to have a much more neighborhood friendly use, which would be residential. The
requested rezoning will allow the lot to be built with either one or two single family homes. The attendees of the
community information meeting were supportive of the residential zoning but conveyed their desire for the existing
trees to be preserved, which is an agreed upon condition of approval. For the two homes scenario, the trees will be
preserved, and there is still more than adequate building envelope area on each of them for creative architecture to
meet the required setbacks and still provide for a nice home. She provided an overview of the site with a shared
driveway, tree preservation, and how the footprint of a home could be set. As to the staff position concerning limiting
residential development in front of flood prone areas and the development challenges of this specific lot would be
applicable if discussions were about a project with greater density or multiple units. However, the request is for two
conventional home lots for modest homes. Most businesses may try to utilize the property, by-right will still be in
the floodplain, with the right to remove the trees with mitigation, and potentially have even more surface coverage
than the two homes due to the tree preservation and the shared driveway. She asked the Board to agree with the
Planning Board and the neighbor's support which has been submitted. She thinks the opposition comments were
for the commercial project out front, not for this project. With the agreed upon conditions, she believes this is a
positive way to improve the neighborhood.
Discussion ensued about the rezoning request. Ms. Wolf, in response to questions, confirmed that septic
tanks have not been approved. If the decision is made to utilize a septic and well system, it will limit the site to a
single home. However, at the curve of South Seabreeze Road, there are Aqua NC water and sewer mains. She
understands from her team that it is viable to make the connection, and conversations have been held about
extending the lines. If the desire is to create two lots and have two homes built, the lines would have to be extended,
and it is a cost factor in whatever decision is made. Aqua NC does not have the desire nor the initiative to extend
water and sewer in the area, so any extension would be at the cost of her clients and any cooperation that they have
with other owners along the same strip of land. Due to the flood zone the homes would be raised with parking
underneath. She cannot report on what the price point would be for the homes, and the process to obtain dock
rights will be the responsibility of the owners who would apply for Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) permits.
She confirmed that a neighbor does have a pier. As to affordable housing, the homes will not help that, but the
housing study has shown a deficit of homes in all value ranges. She reiterated that it would be impossible to get two
septic systems and wells with the required separations on the site.
Chair Rivenbark stated that no one signed up to speak in favor nor in opposition to the request, closed the
public hearing, and opened the floor to Board discussion.
Discussion ensued about the conditions for approval. Ms. Wolf, in response to questions about the variance
condition, stated there are homes on both sides of the site and those residents have not argued in opposition to the
request. A few years ago, in the southeastern portion of the old red B-2 section, as shown on the map in the agenda
packet, the owners continued the zoning five-feet into the new residential lot, which could be an option but will not
affect the subject site if that were the way to go. The site has seven-foot setbacks, and while there are a variety of
paths, it is believed that most of the properties will either continue to be residential or will turn residential formally.
The difference between the two residences is that one is technically a bed and breakfast and meets the criteria for
a business while the other is a home that is nonconforming in the business zone. If there were not already homes
there, she believes there would be more of an issue.
Further discussion ensued about the variance language for the fourth condition. Planning and Land Use
Director Rebekah Roth stated that the condition does not put the variance requirements on the adjacent properties.
The variance requirement is placed on the adjacent properties because of what is in the zoning ordinance, so the
variance would be required from the Board of Adjustment. The condition places the future residential property
owners on notice if this were to be rezoned, the next door neighbors are still zoned commercial and if they want to
develop their property, they may have to request a variance. It is more for the sake of their information. There have
been some situations in the past where homes have been taken down and the sites developed as businesses. In
those cases, the person(s) would have to request a variance from the setback from the residential lots be granted
by the Board of Adjustment before obtaining any TRC approvals. It would not apply to the features of the commercial
property. She further acknowledged that there are many non-conformities in the subject area. Vice-Chair Pierce
acknowledged the same and stated she feels some of the items heard tonight will be good to help the Seabreeze
area redevelop and provide the community with positive options.
Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark asked Ms. Wolf if, based on the Board discussion and items
presented during the public hearing, whether she would like to withdraw the petition or proceed with the vote. Ms.
Wolf responded that she wanted to proceed with the vote. He then asked for Board direction.
Motion: Vice-Chair Pierce MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Barfield, to approve the proposed rezoning. The
Board finds it to be consistent with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because it provides housing
densities in line with the Community Mixed Use Place Type, and the Board finds recommending approval of the
rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the proposal would benefit the community by
providing more housing options. The following proposed conditions are included as part of the approval:
1. Both live oak trees on the property will be preserved as part of this development.
2. No accessory dwelling units will be permitted on these lots.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36
FEBRUARY 5, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 123
3. There will be one driveway cut across both lots.
4. Due to the setback requirements for commercial uses adjacent to residentially zoned property, future
development of adjacent commercially zoned parcels may require variances. A disclosure shall be
included in any future deed for the parcel(s) subject to this rezoning stating adjacent parcels may seek
variances to reduce setbacks or other development requirements to allow for future commercial
development.
Approval is subject to the applicant signing an agreement acknowledging the applicant’s consent to all listed
conditions. If the applicant does not provide a signed agreement within seven (7) business days from the date of
approval, then the rezoning application approval is null and void. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
A copy of AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY OF NEW HANOVER AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF AREA 4 OF
NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA, ADOPTED April 7, 1971 is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes
and is contained in Zoning Book I, Section 4, Page 130.
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
Chair Rivenbark stated that no one signed up to speak under public comment.
ADDITIONAL AGENDA ITEMS OF BUSINESS
There were no additional items of business.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Chair Rivenbark adjourned the meeting at 5:59 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Kymberleigh G. Crowell
Clerk to the Board
Please note that the above minutes are not a verbatim record of the New Hanover County Board of Commissioners meeting. The entire proceedings
are available online at www.nhcgov.com.