2024-03-18 Regular Meeting
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36
MARCH 18, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 153
ASSEMBLY
The New Hanover County Board of Commissioners met March 18, 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
Pastor Wes Hunter, Masonboro Baptist Church, provided the invocation and Commissioner Zapple 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 to Authorize the New Hanover County Alcohol Beverage Control (ABC) Board to Increase the
Compensation of ABC General Manager – County Manager
The Board approved the request to increase the compensation of ABC General Manager Charles Hill to an
amount not to exceed 10 percent above the salary of the clerk of superior court.
Approval of January 2024 Tax Collection Reports – Tax
The Board approved the January 2024 tax collection reports for New Hanover County, New Hanover County
Debt Service, and New Hanover County Fire District.
Copies of the tax collection reports are hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and contained in Exhibit
Book XLV, Page 5.1.
Adoption of Budget Amendments – Budget
The Board adopted the following budget amendments amending the annual budget ordinance for the fiscal
year ending June 30, 2024:
24-061: 911 Communications
24-062: Project Grace
Copies of the budget amendments are hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and contained in Exhibit
Book XLV, Page 5.2.
Approval of Letter of Support for Cape Fear Public Utility Authority State Funding Request – County Manager
The Board approved the issuance of letter of support to the County’s legislative delegation for Cape Fear
Public Utility Authority’s effort to secure state funding of approximately $20 million to address budget impacts of
capital project budget increases and an expected loss of operating revenues caused by Session Law 2023-137.
Copies of the letters are hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and contained in Exhibit Book XLV,
Page 5.3.
Approval to Accept of an Offer for the County to Sell Property Located at 6102 Gordon Road and Associated Upset
Bid Process – Fire Rescue
The Board accepted the offer from Michael R. Baker, Jr., or an entity owned solely by him, to purchase the
County’s parcel of land located at 6102 Gordon Road for $131,050 and authorizes staff to initiate and complete the
upset bid process in accordance with state statutes. The Board also authorized the county manager and the county
attorney to prepare and execute all necessary documents to transfer the parcel of said land.
Adoption of Resolution to Establish the New Hanover County America 250 Committee – Museum
The Board adopted a resolution for Cape Fear Museum to establish a New Hanover County America 250
Committee.
A copy of the resolution is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and contained in Exhibit Book XLV,
Page 5.4.
Approval of Minutes – Governing Body
The Board approved the minutes of the February 7, 2024 Special Meeting, the February 15, 2024 Agenda
Review, the February 19, 2024 Regular Meeting, and the February 19, 2024 Budget Work Session.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36
MARCH 18, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 154
REGULAR ITEMS OF BUSINESS
CONSIDERATION AND ADOPTION OF DELTA SIGMA THETA SORORITY INC. HISTORIC ACCOMPLISHMENTS
RESOLUTION
Commissioner Barfield recognized members of the Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, INC. in attendance and read
the proclamation into the record. Chief Diversity and Equity Officer Linda Thompson introduced Wilmington (NC)
Alumnae Chapter Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Inc. South Atlantic Region representative Krista Holland. Ms. Holland
expressed appreciation to the Board for consideration of the requested resolution.
Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark requested direction from the Board.
Motion: Commissioner Barfield MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Scalise to adopt the resolution honoring the
historic achievements of the Wilmington (NC) Alumnae Chapter Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Inc. Upon vote, the
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
A copy of the resolution is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and contained in Exhibit Book XLV,
Page 5.5.
CONSIDERATION AND ADOPTION OF NATIONAL NUTRITION MONTH PROCLAMATION
Commissioner Scalise read the proclamation into the record recognizing March 2024 as National Nutrition
Month in New Hanover County. Health and Human Services (HHS) Nutrition Services Supervisor Lili Valdiri expressed
appreciation to the Board for adopting the proclamation.
Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark requested direction from the Board.
Motion: Commissioner Scalise MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Zapple to adopt the proclamation recognizing
March 2024 as National Nutrition 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 5.6.
RECOGNITION AND PRESENTATION OF GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION AWARD
Chief Financial Officer Eric Credle stated that County staff wishes to inform the public and the Board of
Commissioners about a finance document award received from the Government Finance Officers Association
(GFOA). In February 2024, the County became aware that a panel of independent reviewers had completed their
examination of the Annual Budget document for the period beginning July 1, 2023, and it was awarded the
Distinguished Budget Presentation Award. The award represents a significant accomplishment for the County,
showcasing the dedication of the governing body and staff to uphold the highest principles of governmental
budgeting. To receive the budget award, the County had to adhere to nationally recognized guidelines for effective
budget presentation. These guidelines assess how well the budget functions as a policy document, a financial plan,
an operations guide, and a communications device.
The Board presented the award to the staff. Chair Rivenbark thanked Mr. Credle, Budget Officer Michelle
Daniels, and the budget staff for their work.
NEW HANOVER COMMUNITY ENDOWMENT ORGANIZATIONAL OPERATIONS UPDATE
Chair Rivenbark recognized New Hanover Community Endowment (NHCE) Chair Bill Cameron for the NHCE
update and to respond to any Board questions.
The discussion on NHCE operations began with Mr. Cameron responding to questions. He reported that the
NHCE Board formed a search committee to find a new chief executive officer (CEO). This committee includes NHCE
Vice-Chair Shannon Winslow as the Chair, alongside Woody White, David Sprunt, and himself. The committee has
convened several times and is currently conducting interviews to hire a third-party independent consultant for the
search. Mr. Cameron estimated that finding a new CEO would realistically take about six months. However, NHCE is
not pausing its operations or grant disbursements while waiting for the new CEO. Under the interim CEO's
leadership, operations are progressing, the organization remains operational, and there are no changes to the
strategic plan, mission, vision, or values. The NHCE Board hopes to issue grants throughout the year instead of at
year-end. Mr. Cameron assured the Board that the funds are as safe and secure as any investment funds could be.
He highlighted that NHCE's foundation allows for investments that the County cannot make, affirming that it was
established for valid and positive reasons. He expressed confidence in the prudent investment of funds and praised
BlackRock as an exceptional investment management team. Mr. Cameron also encouraged any organization
interested in applying for a grant to discuss their eligibility with NHCE staff to ensure alignment with NHCE's goals.
Discussion ensued about NHCE working with small nonprofits in the community as well as on community
issues such as affordable housing. Mr. Cameron explained that the Board’s message has been heard, and the NHCE
understands the need to meet the many organizations to have people and boots on the ground. He acknowledged
that the NHCE needs to have implementing organizations/people to assist with the grassroots funding work. He
thinks NHCE will be able to do it and noted that last year there was approximately $30 million to disburse, but there
is a ceiling on what NHCE can give based on what is mandated and its organizing documents. Last year’s decline to
fund some grassroots organizations was simply due to hitting said ceiling. He thinks the NHCE can get back into
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36
MARCH 18, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 155
funding some of those organizations this year, and as it grows and provides a bit of increased capacity, it will help to
be able to address the issue as well. Affordable housing is a complicated issue that the NHCE has been discussing in-
depth over the past year, and it is high on the list of matters to work on. While it is understood to be a critical issue,
the NHCE Board and staff are working to put together the right plan to move the needle in a responsible way, and
that takes time. As to concerns about NHCE asking nonprofits to collaborate, he understands the Board’s comments
about the need for NHCE to understand that while multiple groups focus on an overall area, such as the youth in the
community, each nonprofit’s specific focus is quite different. He would like to see nonprofits collaborate where
possible and make sense and will take the Board’s comments back to the NHCE Board and staff.
Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark thanked Mr. Cameron for providing the update.
CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN NEW HANOVER COUNTY
AND NORTHSIDE FOOD COOPERATIVE VIA GROWING RESILIENCE, WITH POTENTIAL FISCAL SPONSORSHIP BY NEW
HANOVER COUNTY FOR THE COOPERATIVE'S GRANT FROM NEW HANOVER COMMUNITY ENDOWMENT, INC.
Chief Facilities Officer Sara Warmuth, Chief Financial Officer Eric Credle, Parks and Gardens Director Tara
Duckworth, and Northside Food Co-op Project Manager Cierra Washington presented the following update:
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Northside Food Coop (NFC)/Growing Resilience:
Background:
Concept adopted as a part of the Community Building Plan
Total County budget of $2.45 million adopted in capital improvement plan (CIP)
Feasibility study conducted; pro-forma updated
Land donation at northwest corner of 10th Street and Post Street
Visioning sessions held with NFC Board and community
NHCE grant award to NFC in the amount of $6,792,000
MOU summary:
County and NFC will design and construct the grocery store
County owns the store:
Provides up to $2,450,000 in funding for project
Serves as fiscal agent for endowment grant
Lease of $1 annually includes maintenance and repairs of building systems and utility
costs
County subsidizes cash flow deficits in first five (5) years up to maximum amount
$1,550,000
NFC – MOU responsibilities:
NFC/Growing Resilience operates the store:
Responsible for operating costs of grocery store (payroll, inventory, etc.)
Maintain/repair furniture, fixtures, and equipment (FF&E)
Goal to become breakeven and self-sustaining by year five of operations
Provide employment training and opportunities for neighborhood
Financial model:
New Hanover County financial commitment: $ 2,450,000 (26.5%)
NHCE financial commitment: $ 6,792,000 (73.5%) __
Total Financial Commitment: $ 9,242,000 (100.0%)
County funds of $2,450,000 previously budgeted and are available
NHCE funding schedule – based on timing of expenditures at 73.5%:
March 31, 2024 = $ 2,039,364
March 31, 2025 = $ 3,404,084
March 31, 2026 = $ 1,348,552
Total = $ 6,792,000
Operational funding support:
Applicable for first five years
Five-year total up to $1,550,000 (subject to annual appropriations)
To occur when working capital falls below three months of operating expenses ($500,000)
Three sets of modeled projections:
Five-year negative cash flow ranges from $1.05 million to $1.64 million
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36
MARCH 18, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 156
NFC timeline:
MOU approval – March 2024
Award of design contract – June 2024
Design completion – December 2024
Award construction contract – March 2025
Expected building completion – April 2026
Detailed use of funds:
Ms. Washington reported on the efforts made since the early 2000s to introduce a grocery store to the
Northside community. She highlighted how the collaboration between local government and the community's vision
resulted in the Northside Food Co-op winning the Emerging Co-op of the Year award in 2023. She thanked the Board,
County staff, and the Northside community for their collective efforts in working towards improving food access and
transforming the food system. The Northside Food Co-op is set to create numerous jobs, support local producers
and the economy, and may serve as a model for other communities to replicate. She noted that cities like Raleigh
and Winston-Salem have already shown interest in learning from this project to enhance food access in their areas.
She expressed her gratitude towards the Board for playing a significant role in promoting food justice and fostering
collaboration between the community and government.
Chief Financial Officer Eric Credle, in response to questions, confirmed that the County has allocated up to
$2,450,000 for the project funding. The County will function as the fiscal agent for the NHCE grant and will work with
Growing Resilience on the grocery store's design and construction. NHCE has granted $6,792,000 to the cooperative,
and the County has committed an additional amount of up to $1,550,000 over the next five years to support the
cooperative financially and help cover cash flow deficits during its first five years of operation. He explained that the
cooperative is expected to face a negative cash flow initially to purchase inventory and will need to maintain
$500,000 to cover three months' worth of expenses. The food co-op will have a separate operational account, will
produce monthly financial statements, will provide access to records upon request, and will conduct an annual audit.
He also confirmed that the County will be protected through general liability insurance, despite owning the building.
Commissioner Barfield shared his views on the evolution and expansion of grocery store options in the
County and highlighted the Northside Food Co-op as a major enhancement for the entire downtown area, benefiting
residents from all walks of life. He thanked all involved for their efforts in making the co-op a reality.
An extensive discussion and question and answer period ensued about the MOU. Ms. Washington stated
that the Growing Resilience Board of Directors includes Frankie Roberts, Joseph Finley, Scott Whisnant, and Cedric
Harrison. Ms. Warmuth reported on plans to equip the refrigerators and freezers with backup generator power and
confirmed that the request for qualifications for the architect will be issued on March 19, 2024, pending approval.
Addressing the store's ownership in the event of failure after five years, Mr. Credle reported that the City of
Wilmington (City) donated the land with a stipulation in the MOU for the store to operate as such; otherwise, the
land would revert to the City. The intent is for the store to run indefinitely as a grocery store, and if not, discussions
will be held with the City to determine a resolution. County Manager Coudriet further clarified that the County would
keep the facility and store's title, but the land would return to the City. The consensus is a strong belief in the grocery
operation's long-term success. He confirmed that the County never planned to enter the grocery business. The
decision, based on a 2022 staff recommendation, was that the Board had sufficient operational capacity through its
directors and community support. Ms. Washington explained how the startup funds from community memberships
are utilized for staffing and engagement activities, such as a weekly farmers market at Portia Hines Park and bi-
monthly free community dinners with other organizations, as part of the grocery project's initial efforts. She added
that members pay a one-time fee and receive updates on the project and their membership at an annual meeting.
County Manager Coudriet confirmed the plan for the Northside Food Co-op to provide annual updates to the Board.
Mr. Credle addressed the broad language of the MOU's item five, noting it as a standard clause for nonprofits to
affirm they have no outstanding taxes.
Further discussion ensued about the MOU terms concerning the facility's future if it ceases to operate as a
grocery store. County Manager Coudriet clarified that the City had transferred the land title to the County, making
the County the landowner. The transfer included a commitment that the land would revert to the City if the facility
stopped functioning as a grocery store, without setting a specific duration for the commitment. He expressed
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36
MARCH 18, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 157
confidence in the project's success and in maintaining a strong partnership with the City, anchored by a mutual
commitment to serving the community's needs.
Vice-Chair Pierce voiced her concerns about the MOU's terms, specifically the clause that allows the land
to revert to the City and reiterated the need to have it amended for clarity about who owns the building if it stops
being a grocery store. County Manager Coudriet acknowledged her concerns and that based on the Board's directive,
staff could negotiate with City officials to clarify this point. He expressed confidence in the County's strong
relationship with the City, which he believes will facilitate discussions to retain the land for public benefit, even if
the grocery store ceased operations. However, he noted that the County would face restrictions in transferring the
title without a sale, unless it served a direct public benefit. Commissioner Scalise also stated his concerns with the
MOU structure and a desire to resolve the issue with the City before approving the MOU. He wants to ensure that
the City is on the same page as the County about what will happen with the building. County Manager Coudriet
responded that at the Board’s request on partnering, the City agreed to donate the parcel for the grocery store
purpose. The City attached the condition that the parcel be returned if it ceased to operate as such. It is the Board’s
choice to mitigate risk, but the City has donated the parcel, facility funding has been secured and staff operated
based on the Board directives. Commissioner Scalise acknowledged the points made by County Manager Coudriet
and reiterated his desire for the verbiage to be worked out prior to approving the MOU. Vice-Chair Pierce concurred
and stated the need to have further clarity on what can be done with the property should the community's need for
a grocery store change, such as the introduction of another grocery operation into the area.
County Manager Coudriet acknowledged the concerns and responded that the staff has been transparent
and honest with the Board about the land donation for the grocery store and the expectation that it would operate
as same. If the concerns had been raised earlier, staff could have addressed them prior to the meeting. There has
been no indication that how the land was secured and donated was problematic. He reiterated his belief that the
grocery store will be successful and not an issue the County, City, or the Northside Food Co-op will have to address.
Commissioner Scalise noted that he was not on the Board when the funding and land transfer decisions were made
and did not know about any conditions tied to the City's land donation. While he supports the project, he wants
agreement with the City that if the grocery store ceases to function as such, the land and building will not
automatically revert, especially considering the approximate $9 million investment from the County and NHCE.
Commissioner Barfield, responding to Vice-Chair Pierce's reference to his previous comments, clarified that
he did not suggest competition would undermine the grocery store's success. He expressed strong confidence in its
success, highlighting the NHCE's investment as evidence of its potential. He called for a more positive perspective
on the project and voiced his support for the MOU. Despite changes in the Board's composition since the original
decisions, he believes that he, Chair Rivenbark, and Commissioner Zapple still support the decisions made two years
ago. Commissioner Zapple acknowledged concerns about the possibility of the land and improvements reverting to
the City. He disagrees with the current language as it is not in alignment with the Board's initial intentions as agreed
upon with the City. He suggested modifying the language to ensure the property serves the community's benefit.
County Manager Coudriet stated his understanding of the requests and will discuss them with the city manager but
thinks it will ultimately go back to the City Council for consideration. He noted that the information has been before
the Board for almost a week, and while the prerogative of the Board, nothing in the MOU is new information. Vice-
Chair Pierce stated her support for the food co-op but feels she cannot proceed with an MOU that risks the County
and NHCE's substantial financial contributions potentially transferring to another party in the future. Commissioner
Scalise stated his support for the project but prefers to postpone the matter until April to resolve the reversion
clause with the City, a matter of which he was previously unaware. Chair Rivenbark stated he does not foresee any
issues but desired more clarity in the MOU language. County Manager Coudriet stated in response to questions that
he does not know the City’s process for reconsidering an action but committed to following the Board’s direction to
discuss the matter if instructed.
Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark asked for Board direction.
Motion: Commissioner Scalise MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chair Pierce to direct the county manager to approach
the City to amend the Memorandum of Understanding language that “…if the Property is not used for the purpose
of a grocery store, the parcel and any permanent improvements upon it may revert to the City of Wilmington.” and
bring it back in April 2024 for consideration by the Board.
Substitute Motion: Commissioner Barfield MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Zapple to approve the
Memorandum of Understanding between New Hanover County and Northside Food Cooperative, facilitated through
their non-profit corporation, Growing Resilience, and to authorize New Hanover County to act as the fiscal agent for
Northside Food Cooperative's grant from New Hanover Community Endowment, Inc. contingent upon the County’s
management team working out the details with the City of Wilmington.
Chair Rivenbark opened the floor to Board discussion on the substitute motion. Commissioner Scalise stated
he is not opposed to the substitute motion but wants clarification on the “working out the details” portion as he
does not want the building use restricted exclusively to the use of a grocery store. Commissioner Barfield responded
that it means working out the details of getting the City to agree to language that if it were not to be a grocery store,
the City would agree the land would not revert to it but remain the County’s property. Commissioner Scalise stated
he agreed to the substitute motion.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36
MARCH 18, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 158
Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark called for a vote on the substitute motion. Upon vote, the
MOTION PASSED 4 TO 1, Vice-Chair Pierce dissenting.
PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL OF A REZONING REQUEST BY CINDEE WOLF WITH DESIGN SOLUTIONS,
APPLICANT, ON BEHALF OF JOHN PENNINGTON WITH SIXTHREE DEVELOPMENT, PROPERTY OWNER, TO REZONE
APPROXIMATELY 2.81 ACRES ZONED R-20, RESIDENTIAL LOCATED AT 1540 ROCKHILL ROAD TO (CZD) R-10,
RESIDENTIAL FOR A MAXIMUM NINE (9) DWELLING UNITS (Z24-02)
Associate Planner Amy Doss presented the rezoning request stating the subject site located at 1540 Rockhill
Road at the corner of Rockhill Road and Ervin’s Place Drive, was originally zoned R-20 in 1974 and is undeveloped.
Aside from the undeveloped parcel to the west, the site is surrounded by single-family residential. Nearby
neighborhoods such as Walnut Hills zoned R-10, Oakley Circle zoned R-15, and Bountiful Village zoned Conditional
R-10 also have single family detached homes. The concept plan includes nine single-family lots with open space
designated along the parcel's northern and southern edges, including a planned stormwater pond. A 45-foot
easement along the western boundary is part of a larger easement network providing potential access to
Cottonwood Lane. The site has direct access to Rockhill Road, whereas Ervin’s Place Drive, although a public right-
of-way, is not currently maintained by the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT). There is one
approved traffic impact analysis (TIA) and several residential developments in the area, along with one State
Transportation Improvement Project (STIP) nearby, the details of which are in the staff report. The proposed
development would generate approximately 6 AM and 8 PM peak hour trips, which is under the 100 peak hour
threshold requiring a TIA. The student generation rate from the development is projected to be negligible, with an
estimated increase of only one student. The development aims to align with the County's 2016 Comprehensive Land
Use Plan (Comprehensive Plan) by offering workforce housing units and maintaining 48% of the site as open space.
The proposed density of 3.2 dwelling units per acre fits within the General Residential designation of the
Comprehensive Plan, emphasizing lower-density housing along with civic and commercial services, typically not
exceeding eight units per acre.
While in general support for workforce housing, the Planning Board, during its February 1, 2024 meeting,
voted (5-2) to recommend denial of the petition, citing concerns over the enforceability of the affordability
component, the project's density relative to the existing neighborhood, and the suitability of the layout given the
parcel's shape. It was also found that recommending denial of the request was reasonable and in the public interest
because Ervin’s Place Drive is not state maintained. The dissenting members acknowledged the challenges to
developing the site but emphasized the County's need for housing. While staff prefer Ervin’s Place Drive to be
adopted by NCDOT prior to additional development, its approval recommendation is based on the Comprehensive
Plan’s guidance, zoning considerations, and technical review. The project is reasonable and in the public interest
because it provides additional housing diversity. Staff propose conditions regarding density, housing types, accessory
dwelling units (ADUs), dedicated open space, and affordable housing provisions. While affordable housing may be
monitored if the development is for rent, the application lacks monitoring mechanisms if the development is for
sale. Should the rezoning be approved, development of the site will be subject to additional development review.
Ms. Doss stated in response to questions that there is an existing road on the site now but there is no
maintenance agreement in place. She understands that discussions will be held with the developer and/or the owner
to bring the roads up to NCDOT standards. She confirmed that a similar project was denied by the Board in 2018.
Chair Rivenbark thanked Ms. Doss for the presentation and invited the applicant to make remarks.
Cindee Wolf with Design Solutions, on behalf of the property owner, John Pennington with Sixthree
Development, discussed the developmental challenges and opportunities for a narrow, almost three-acre lot on
Ervin’s Place Drive. She highlighted the lot's 75-foot depth constraint and the mix of manufactured and stick-built
homes in the adjacent Ervin’s Place subdivision, established in 1999. Despite Ervin’s Place Drive functioning as a
public road, it is not part of the NCDOT system, and she has reached out to neighbors about road maintenance and
potential NCDOT acceptance. She then provided an overview of possible development plans under the current R-20
zoning, which would limit the property to five large lots, each able to accommodate an accessory dwelling unit (ADU).
She believes the conventional development model is inefficient, leading to narrow living areas limited by zoning
setbacks. The request is to rezone the site to R-10, like the nearby Walnut Hills, to permit nine detached single-family
homes without ADUs. This plan includes a 15-year commitment to workforce housing and substantial open space
conservation. She explained the design's focus to provide an effective runoff management through a centralized
stormwater system, with existing access to public sewer and water services. She noted the project's alignment with
sustainable growth through sensible infill, smaller, more affordable housing units, and a 100% rental commitment.
She confirmed her client's agreement to the proposed conditions, particularly the clarification of the development
as a rental project for workforce housing.
Ms. Wolf, in response to questions, explained that the public road allows access and, in 1999, the NCDOT
district engineer at the time approved its design as acceptable. However, the developer never transferred the road
to NCDOT for maintenance acceptance. NCDOT denied accepting it two years post-construction due to incomplete
information submission. The road meets the standard rural NCDOT specifications with a 50-foot public right of way.
Runoff occurs on the left side and behind the vegetation, with a swale on the side of the subject property. The
developer will manage runoff from new driveways and rooftops. The agenda packet includes a sample of 900 square-
foot homes featuring three bedrooms and two bathrooms, which is the type of housing her developer aims to
construct in Castle Hayne's family-oriented area and will not be like college housing. With R-10 zoning and
performance development, zoning setbacks restrict house sizes to 35-feet by 60-feet on the lots as laid out, although
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36
MARCH 18, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 159
larger homes are an option. The design of these homes will include front porches and face the street. Traditionally,
the Board has not mandated specific architectural designs for single-family homes. The application seeks approval
for nine R-5 lots, each with a 35-feet by 60-feet buildable area, committed to single-family detached homes without
ADUs, alongside a permanent dedication to common open space, ensuring a 100% workforce affordability rental
community.
Commissioner Zapple expressed concerns about the narrowness of the site. Commissioner Barfield stated
he did not support the prior development proposed for the site but feels the current proposal fits the area.
Chair Rivenbark stated that no one signed up to speak in favor, and one person signed up to speak in
opposition to the request and invited the speaker to make remarks.
Helena Kamil, resident of Cottonwood Lane, Castle Hayne, NC, spoke in opposition stating she initially felt
drawn to the area for its natural beauty and the possibility of building a small home. She raised concerns about how
the rental properties might alter the neighborhood's character, especially since they would be next to her property.
This situation clashes with her desire for a neighborhood of diverse, individually styled homes on spacious plots. She
noted the challenges of development in the area, such as drainage and infrastructure issues, and expressed her
disapproval of the aesthetic mismatch between the existing homes and the proposed development. She advocated
keeping the current zoning to maintain the area's unique characteristics and to realize her dream of constructing a
small home in Wilmington.
Chair Rivenbark stated that the applicant and opposition would each have five minutes for rebuttal
comments.
In applicant rebuttal, Ms. Wolf stated that the opposition speaker’s property is south of the proposed
project’s common area, not adjacent to it. The intent is to develop the site with homes that offer a creative housing
solution that fits within the context of the existing neighborhood. She reiterated the inclusion of natural common
areas within the development and how the project is a balanced plan of housing and green space that will be
beneficial for the community.
Planning and Land Use Director Rebekah Roth responded to questions under performance subdivision
standards that the setbacks are not traditional and there must be at least 10 feet between structures. Ms. Wolf
added that performance residential has a 20-foot perimeter setback of the entire tract which equates to 20-feet
against right of way and against adjacent properties.
In opposition rebuttal, Ms. Kamil reiterated her objections to the project and thanked the Board for the
opportunity to voice her concerns.
Planning Board member Clark Hipp responded to questions that the split vote to deny the application
stemmed from concerns like those discussed during this meeting, including the road's condition, limited open space
between proposed buildings, and challenges presented by the property's layout. Although a plan was included in
the application package, it was unclear whether it represented the final development proposal, leading to some
Planning Board members reacting to it based on available information. There was also ambiguity around whether
the homes would be sold or rented during the Planning Board meeting, which added to concerns, particularly
regarding affordability. Since that meeting, clarification has been given that the homes are to be rental properties,
which possibly addresses the affordability concerns. Other issues included density and the lack of a transitional
buffer between different zoning areas. Connectivity is not a major focus of the application, and questions about
access between neighboring properties and easements were noted but not extensively discussed. He expressed
concerns about the architectural compatibility of the proposed development with the surrounding community. The
economical construction materials and techniques necessary for affordability may not align with the character of
existing neighborhoods, which feature larger, open lots and different materials.
A brief discussion ensued about the subject site. Commissioner Barfield stated the compatibility concerns
are only on the subject street. He noted the diversity of home sizes in the Walnut Hills subdivision and surrounding
communities, including Habitat for Humanity homes. A diversity of housing types is common in the subject area.
Two-story homes in the area are uncommon, and most homes are one-story. The Board’s role is not to assess a
developer’s profit margin but to consider the suitability of a proposed plan for a subject site. Chair Rivenbark
acknowledged Ms. Kamil’s concerns but stated the need for more housing in the County. Commissioner Zapple
stated his empathy for the affordability of the homes but thinks there is room for improvement and more creativity.
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.
Motion: Commissioner Scalise 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 the proposed
density and housing type is within the recommendations of the General Residential place type. The Board also finds
recommending approval of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the project provides
additional housing diversity to the area. The following conditions are included as part of the proposal:
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36
MARCH 18, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 160
1. The permitted density range is 0 dwelling units per acre to a maximum of 3.2 dwelling units per acre.
Planning staff is authorized to administratively approve reductions in density within the permitted
range.
2. The housing type in the development shall be limited to detached single-family dwellings as defined in
Section 2.3 of the Unified Development Ordinance.
3. Accessory dwelling units shall be prohibited.
4. Open space above the minimum required by the Unified Development Ordinance shall be permanently
retained as open space.
5. If this property is a rental development, then a minimum of 100% of the units must be maintained as
workforce housing units within the range of 80% to 120% AMI. An agreement between the developer
and county will be required. The agreement shall be established before the issuance of any Certificate
of Occupancy for the project and specify:
Affordability will be made available for a period of no less than 15 years with rental limits based
upon the range of 80% to 120% AMI; the number of affordable units provided; the income limits;
rent limits subject to annual change; the period of time workforce housing units must remain
affordable; any other criteria necessary for compliance and monitoring; and
An established timeframe for annual reporting from the developer or owner of the development
to New Hanover County. Annual reports shall provide the following minimum information: unit
number, bedroom number, household size, tenant income, and rent rate; and
The developer or owner of the development shall report any mid-year lease changes to workforce
housing units to New Hanover County to ensure lease changes remain compliant with the
agreement; and
If the total number of workforce housing units falls below the minimum of 100% before the
expiration of the minimum 15-year period of affordability the development shall be subject to
enforcement measures found in Article 12 Violations and Enforcement of the Unified Development
Ordinance.
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 Zapple dissenting.
A copy of AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY OF NEW HANOVER AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF AREA 10A
OF NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA, ADOPTED July 1, 1974 is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes
and is contained in Zoning Book II, Section 10A, Page 55.
PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL OF A REZONING REQUEST BY CINDEE WOLF WITH DESIGN SOLUTIONS,
APPLICANT, ON BEHALF OF NEW BEGINNING CHRISTIAN CHURCH, PROPERTY OWNER, TO REZONE
APPROXIMATELY 10.95 ACRES ZONED R-20, RESIDENTIAL AND (CZD) R-5, RESIDENTIAL MODERATE-HIGH DENSITY
LOCATED AT THE 3100 BLOCK OF BLUE CLAY ROAD TO (CZD) RMF-M, RESIDENTIAL MULTI-FAMILY MODERATE
DENSITY FOR A MAXIMUM OF 128 DWELLING UNITS (Z23-25)
Development Review Planner Love Ott presented the rezoning request stating the property is in the 3100
block of Blue Clay Road. Originally zoned R-20 in 1974, the property was rezoned to Conditional R-5 in 2022 for a
proposed 68-unit development. Currently undeveloped, the site is bordered by single-family residential to the north
and south and New Beginning Christian Church and the Covenant I Senior Housing Development to the west. The
currently approved concept plan for the Conditional R-5 district proposes 17 quadruplex buildings with 68 multi-
family dwelling units, a community center, stormwater management, and parking. The new concept plan proposes
14 proposed multi-family dwelling units, with buildings 1-7 and 10-12 being two stories and buildings 8, 9, 13, and
14 being three stories. The lot includes an existing stormwater infiltration basin and a pond to be expanded along
the western boundary, an existing pond on the southern boundary, open space on the northern boundary, and a 30-
foot wide drainage easement along the northern boundary. The community clubhouse is located on the eastern
boundary, close to the southern boundary along the proposed (private) New Beginning Drive. Access to the property
is facilitated via Blue Clay Road and New Beginning Drive, with a zoning condition mandating gated access to Rachel’s
Place, a condition that will remain in place if the request is approved. There are two approved TIAs, several
residential developments in the area, and one STIP. The proposed development would generate approximately 64
AM and 59 PM peak hour trips, which is under the 100 peak hour threshold that would require a TIA. The absence
of public transportation in the vicinity raises concerns, especially given the development's affordable housing
component. This concern is somewhat mitigated by WAVE’s introduction of a micro-transit program, offering flexible
transit solutions across the County. The current student generation rate of the potential increase would result in
approximately 13 additional students than would be generated under the current zoning. The proposed density
exceeds the adjacent residential R-10 zoned areas but the building heights will be limited to two and three stories.
At its January 4, 2024 meeting, the Planning Board considered the request and while supporting the
affordability aspect, expressed concerns about the project's density and the departure from quadraplexes to a
denser multi-family housing model. The Planning Board unanimously voted (7 – 0) to recommend denial of the
rezoning request. While acknowledging the proposal's consistency with the Comprehensive Plan's density
recommendations for Community Mixed Use place types, the Planning Board found recommending denial
reasonable and in the public interest because the project had an unsuitable pattern of development adjacent to the
site. Staff acknowledges the Planning Board's concerns, but recommends approval based on the Comprehensive
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36
MARCH 18, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 161
Plan policy guidance, zoning considerations, and thorough technical review. Staff has proposed conditions to address
community integration, including stipulations on dwelling units per acre, housing types, and a commitment to
maintain 100% of the units as workforce housing for at least 15 years. An additional condition guarantees the
building heights of two to three stories. Should the rezoning be approved, the development of the site will be subject
to additional development review.
Chair Rivenbark thanked Ms. Ott for the presentation and invited the applicant to make remarks.
Cindee Wolf with Design Solutions, on behalf of property owner, New Beginning Christian Church, stated
that the church is working with East Carolina Community Development and other partners to build inclusive housing
accessible to people from various economic backgrounds. This initiative aims to tackle the critical affordable housing
shortage in the County, a problem that the updated Bowen report has shown to be worsening, with current
development not keeping up with the increasing demand. This project is the final phase of the church's master plan,
with the senior neighborhood component already in progress. The design features include a main entrance from
Blue Clay Road leading to a well-planned intersection that combines aesthetic appeal with safety for entering
vehicles. Even though a TIA was not required, the team prepared an executive traffic summary and planned for a
left-turn lane to improve traffic flow and safety. The community's internal layout is easy to navigate, with the main
road extension providing thorough access. Residential buildings are arranged around the parking areas to hide them
from view and include a central amenity center to enhance residents' quality of life. She provided examples of similar
projects by East Carolina Community Development, which typically feature two-story buildings with eight units each,
reflecting the design approach of this development. She advocated for a diverse housing approach, arguing that a
mix of housing types serves a broader demographic, creating a vibrant, sustainable community. This diversity helps
alleviate the financial strain of housing costs and availability. The project's compact development model aims for
efficient public service and utility delivery, in line with the County's identified need for 100% affordable housing. The
careful planning and design iterations seek to align the project with community needs and the Comprehensive Plan's
goals. She urged the Board to approve the project, highlighting its potential to significantly alleviate housing
challenges and serve the public interest.
Chair Rivenbark stated that six speakers signed up to speak in favor of the request and five people signed
up to speak in opposition to it and invited the speakers to make remarks.
Speakers in Favor:
Cheryl Schumacker, resident of Kure Dunes Lane, Kure Beach, NC, spoke in favor, highlighting her 45 years
in education. She shared that she moved to North Carolina for its esteemed universities and discussed her initial
teaching challenges, which included juggling multiple jobs due to low pay. She related her story to Pastor Campbell's
efforts to support individuals in their careers without the need for extra jobs and to have affordable housing.
rd
John Hinnant, resident of North 23 Street, Wilmington, NC spoke in favor, and encouraged the Board to
support the project as it will provide workforce housing for essential community members like first responders,
teachers, and nurses. He highlighted the potential of churches and nonprofits in similar ventures and noted that a
study showing that reducing commutes for 28% of workers traveling from outside the area could significantly ease
traffic congestion.
Kevin Powell, resident of Puerta Real, Mission Viejo, CA, spoke in favor recounting his visits to low-income
housing developments in cities like Chicago and Philadelphia, labeling the living conditions as a widespread disaster.
He stressed the critical necessity for new, dignified housing options, especially in economically challenging times, to
support individuals facing hardships through no fault of their own. Due to the County’s high cost of living, he
advocated for the rezoning request as a step toward addressing the acute need for more accessible and affordable
housing in the area.
Jon Vincent, resident of Caddy Court, Wilmington, NC, spoke in favor stating he is a church member and
supports Pastor Campbell's affordable housing initiative. As a financial expert and real estate professional, he
provided a brief overview of the reality that to afford a $1,400 monthly rent, one must earn $67,000 annually and
highlighted the critical need for affordable workforce housing that this project addresses.
Tom Gale, resident of New Forest Drive, Wilmington, NC spoke in favor stating that he is a local realtor and
Vice Chair of the Joint City and County Workforce Housing Advisory Committee. He expressed his support for a
project that aligns with County objectives to efficiently utilize diminishing developable land and alleviate housing
cost burdens. Highlighting a 51% rent increase over five years and a shortfall of nearly 3,000 housing units annually,
he emphasized the project's potential to provide 128 workforce housing units, aiding residents who struggle to
afford living where they work. He urged support for community partners tackling the housing affordability crisis and
thanked the Board for considering the rezoning request.
Clayton Hamerski, resident of Yorktown Drive, Wilmington, NC spoke in favor, stating he is chair of the Cape
Fear Housing Coalition and expressed the importance of the proposed apartment community's role in providing safe,
affordable housing for those often priced out of the County. The creation of 128 affordable units is a vital addition
to the local housing stock, has the potential for improving residents' well-being and meets the North Carolina
Housing Finance Agency's goal of ensuring long-term affordability. He thanked the Board for its efforts to develop
below-market-rate housing and its dedication to aiding residents in crisis.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36
MARCH 18, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 162
Speakers in opposition:
Ronald Sparks, resident of Holland Drive, Castle Hayne, NC, spoke in opposition, stating that his comments
are the same as when the site was proposed for 68-units, citing increased traffic and the impact on his neighborhood.
Despite his involvement in affordable housing development elsewhere, he expressed concerns about the project's
proximity to his home and its potential to exacerbate local traffic and stormwater issues. He noted a difference
between understanding the need for affordable housing and dealing with the direct effects of such a development
in one's own backyard.
Margaret Hinrichs, resident of Blue Bonnet Circle, Castle Hayne, NC declined to speak.
Linda Shaw, resident of Leona Court, Castle Hayne, NC spoke in opposition and expressed her ongoing
concerns about the proposed housing unit increase from 68 to 128, emphasizing the area's poor drainage, potential
school overcrowding, and traffic safety issues. She highlighted the lack of public transportation and the risks of
increased traffic from multiple developments, stressing that while she supports growth, it should not adversely affect
the existing community. She urged the Board to deny the proposal, citing the direct impact on her neighborhood,
Rachel’s Place, where she has lived for three years.
Scott Galligher, resident of Blue Bonnet Circle, Castle Hayne, NC, spoke in opposition stating he lives in
Rachel’s Place and voiced his frustration over recurring proposals to develop land behind his home, to now going
from 68 units to 128 units despite strong neighborhood opposition and a unanimous Planning Board denial. He
acknowledged the need for affordable housing but argued that the proposed development's scale is inappropriate
for the small, single-family home-dominated area, citing safety, compatibility, and infrastructure concerns.
Christina Stephens, resident of Sky Court, Castle Hayne, NC, spoke in opposition, stating that she has lived
in the area for about 27 years near the proposed development site. She cited concerns about the loss of green space,
increased traffic on already dangerous roads without shoulders, and the incongruity of a large apartment complex
amidst single-family homes. She highlighted issues with emergency vehicle access, potential flooding, and the impact
on local infrastructure and aesthetics. She articulated her preference for a few affordable single-family homes
instead of a large-scale development, emphasizing the community's inability to absorb such drastic changes.
Chair Rivenbark stated that the applicant and opposition would each have five minutes for rebuttal
comments.
In applicant rebuttal, Pastor Robert Campbell with New Beginning Christian Church explained the necessity
of the proposed affordable housing project, noting it is being proposed as a response to a community and nationwide
crisis rather than a personal need. While acknowledging neighbors' concerns as fear for their community rather than
opposition to him personally, Pastor Campbell provided an overview of the project's compliance with environmental,
traffic, and green space concerns, and highlighted the strategic planning to manage water runoff. He emphasized
the development is aimed at essential workers, like teachers and police officers, underscoring the alignment of the
project with County priorities for workforce housing and economic development, and asked the Board to approve
the application in affirmation of the County’s commitments.
In opposition rebuttal, Mr. Sparks reiterated his concerns about the proposed density, feeling overwhelmed
by the initially approved 68 units and even more so with the increase to 128 units. He commented on the impact of
construction noise and potential long-term issues like inadequate pedestrian safety and traffic management
infrastructure. He urged the Board to consider the community's capacity to support such a dense development.
While not opposing the developers personally, he stressed the importance of considering the neighborhood's
existing character and infrastructure in decision-making.
Chair Rivenbark closed the public hearing and opened the floor to Board discussion.
A question and answer period ensued about the rezoning request. Ms. Wolf, responding to questions,
stated that the vacant property behind the parking lot will be used for the expansion as it is not necessary for church
operations. The existing stormwater pond will be increased, and she reiterated where it is located on the site.
Drainage from the site is at the northwest corner of the property towards the river, while Rachel’s Place subdivision
drains to a variety of ponds and outlets down at the southeast corner of said subdivision, which then goes under
Blue Clay Road and over into the railroad right of way. Pastor Campbell confirmed that the church is collaborating
with East Carolina Community Development, Inc. who have been in business for 30 years and an outside manager
will be hired for the property. Planning Board member Clark Hipp stated the Planning Board’s denial was primarily
about density as compared to when the site was approved for 68 units. He noted that this project was originally
proposed at 180 units and then was brought back with 128 units. The other concern was the massing issue, as the
buildings will be quite massive compared to other housing in the area.
Ms. Wolf responded to questions stating that the existing senior complex on the site will be one-story. The
senior housing and the new project are primarily accessed via New Beginning Drive, which will extend from Blue Clay
Road through to Alex Trask, ensuring interconnectivity. The new development will have three access points, with
sidewalk installation planned on the north side. An emergency access gate with a knox box will connect to Rachel's
Place, with agreements in place to restrict the road access to emergency use only. Funding for the project will be
anything that can be worked out, and certainly, tax credit housing is one of the options. Pastor Campbell added that
funding cannot be applied for until the rezoning approval is obtained. There is funding available and if it can be
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36
MARCH 18, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 163
obtained within three years that is considered quick. He provided a brief overview of the length of time it took, eight
years, to obtain funding for the senior housing project. The environment and the location of services is paramount
to meet the funding regulations. As to traffic, workforce housing residents typically do not take a bus but use their
own private vehicle. Ms. Wolf noted that if the project is approved for the low-income housing tax credit (LIHTC),
the federal government will manage the reporting, numbers, etc. If it is not LIHTC, the team is still committed to
100% workforce housing, which will be done through an agreement with the County.
Discussion ensued about the rezoning request. Vice-Chair Pierce expressed concerns about the building
heights at two and three stories when the senior housing is one story. Ms. Wolf responded that buildings 1 – 7 and
10 – 12 were reduced to two stories, with only buildings 8, 9, 13, and 14 left as three stories as they are not adjacent
to other properties. Commissioner Barfield provided a brief overview of his personal experience watching the growth
of New Beginning Christian Church and the subject area in general. The issue of housing affordability is a challenge
that has become increasingly acute over time. There is a critical need for affordable housing options for essential
workers, such as teachers and county employees, whose modest salaries are often insufficient to cope with the
significant rise in property prices over the years in the area. He stated the necessity for the proposed project, as it is
a pivotal solution to reducing the deficit in affordable housing within the community. He encouraged strategic
development initiatives, particularly in less developed areas like Castle Hayne, to facilitate sustainable community
expansion and to accommodate the demand for affordable living spaces. There need to be collaborative and
forward-thinking approaches to address these issues. He also expressed support for the project as there is alignment
between the proposal and the community’s long-term needs and development objectives.
Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark asked Mr. Campbell if, based on the Board discussion and
items presented during the public hearing, whether he would like to withdraw the petition or proceed with the vote.
Mr. Campbell responded that he wanted to proceed with the vote. Chair Rivenbark asked for Boad direction.
Motion: Commissioner Barfield MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Zapple, to approve the proposed rezoning
because the proposed project would serve as a transition between lower intensity and higher intensity development
in the area and provide needed affordable housing stock. The Board finds it to be consistent with the purposes and
intent of the Comprehensive Plan because the proposed density of the development is within the range
recommended for the Community Mixed Use place type. The Board also finds approval of the rezoning request is
reasonable and in the public interest because the proposed project provides a variety of housing options and
additional housing units in the county. The following conditions are included as part of the proposal:
1. Street trees shall be provided along the boundary with the Rachel’s Place Subdivision.
2. The connection to Rachel’s Place shall be gated and limited to emergency vehicle access.
3. Existing trees along the drainage ditch to the north shall be retained outside of clearing necessary for
stormwater conveyance and maintenance.
4. The permitted density is 0 dwelling units per acre to a maximum of 11.7 dwelling units per acre.
Planning staff is authorized to administratively approve reductions in density within the permitted
range.
5. The housing type in the development shall be limited to multi-family as defined in Section 2.3 of the
Unified Development Ordinance.
6. The project will include a minimum of 100% of the units as workforce housing units that have either
been approved for Low Income Tax Credit funding or an agreement between the developer and county
will be required. If required, the agreement shall be established before the issuance of any Certificate
of Occupancy for the project and specify:
Affordability will be made available for a period of no less than 15 years with rental limits based
upon HUD income limits of 80% AMI; and
The number of affordable units provided; and
The income limits; and
Rent limits subject to annual change; and
The period of time workforce housing units must remain affordable; and
Any other criteria necessary for compliance and monitoring; and
An established timeframe for annual reporting from the developer or owner of the development
to New Hanover County. Annual reports shall provide the minimum information: unit number,
bedroom number, household size, tenant income, and rent rate; and
The developer or owner of the development shall report any mid-year lease changes to workforce
housing units to New Hanover County to ensure lease changes remain compliant with the
agreement; and
If the total number of workforce housing units falls below the minimum of 100% before the
expiration of the minimum 15-year period of affordability the development shall be subject to
enforcement measures found in Article 12 Violations and Enforcement of the Unified Development
Ordinance.
7. Buildings 1-7 and 10-12 as shown on the approved concept plan shall have a maximum height of two
stories. Buildings 8, 9, 13, and 14 may have a maximum building height of three stories
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.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36
MARCH 18, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 164
Commissioner Barfield further stated he wants to ensure that Planning staff and the Planning Board
understand that the question of where the funding will come from is not germane to their jobs. It is, in fact, off limits
to being asked of an applicant.
Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark called for a vote on the motion on the floor. Upon vote, the
MOTION PASSED 4 to 1, Vice-Chair Piece dissenting.
A copy of AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY OF NEW HANOVER AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF AREA 10A OF NEW
HANOVER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA, ADOPTED July 1, 1974 is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and is
contained in Zoning Book II, Section 10A, Page 56.
BREAK: Chair Rivenbark called for a break from 6:56 p.m.to 7:18 p.m.
PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL OF A REZONING REQUEST BY CINDEE WOLF WITH DESIGN SOLUTIONS,
APPLICANT, ON BEHALF OF HABITAT FOR HUMANITY, LATEISHA DARDEN, ERIK DIAZ, AND KARI REDDICK,
PROPERTY OWNERS, TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 7.95 ACRES ZONED (CZD) R-10, RESIDENTIAL AND R-20,
RESIDENTIAL LOCATED AT 1728 ROCKHILL ROAD TO (CZD) R-10, RESIDENTIAL FOR A MAXIMUM 24 DWELLING
UNITS (Z24-01)
Development Review Supervisor Robert Farrell presented the rezoning request which is the same
application considered and approved by the Board during its December 11, 2023 meeting. The approval included
one condition related to fencing along a portion of the site. Subsequently, the applicant communicated a
misunderstanding regarding the fence condition as interpreted by the Board. In response to this discrepancy, the
applicant chose to let the initial approval lapse and resubmitted the application without any modifications to the
original plan. Staff has included the recommended condition for a fence in line with the Board’s December 2023
approval. The site is bordered on all sides by single family residential. The southern portion of the site was rezoned
Conditional R-10 in 2021 for Phase 1 of Legacy Landing, which is a 10-lot conventional subdivision on a cul-de-sac,
with areas for stormwater and a road stub to the north for future development. The proposed Legacy Landing Phase
2 has an extension of Dorsey Lane to Rockhill Road for 14 additional dwelling units in the form of seven pairs of
single-family dual unit attached dwellings along with stormwater, and open space. The area has several subdivisions,
and the site has full access onto Reminisce and Rockhill Roads, with further access to Castle Hayne Road. The project
does not require a TIA and there is an estimate that five (5) students would be generated by the project. With the
extension of public utilities, additional future residential growth is anticipated in the area.
The proposed rezoning meets two of the objectives of the strategic plan. The property is in the General
Residential place type, which focuses on lower-density housing and associated civic and commercial services.
Typically, housing is single-family or duplexes. The proposed density is below the maximum allowed in the R-10
district and within the range recommended for the General Residential place type. During its meeting on February
1, 2024, the Planning Board deliberated on the fence condition and ultimately resolved to endorse the application,
mirroring its earlier recommendation from November 2023. The Planning Board voted unanimously (7 – 0) to
recommend approval was predicated on the inclusion of two staff-recommended conditions focusing on density and
housing type. It was found the application is consistent with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan as
the proposed density and housing type are within the recommendations of the General Residential place type.
Furthermore, the Planning Board deemed the approval of the rezoning request as reasonable and in the public
interest, citing the project's contribution to housing diversity within the area. Based on the Comprehensive Plan
policy guidance, zoning considerations, and technical review staff concurs with the Planning Board recommendation
with staff recommending the fence condition in addition to the two conditions pertaining to density and housing
type. Staff received some comments on this request which were provided earlier today to the Board. Should the
rezoning be approved, the development of the site will be subject to additional review to ensure all land use
regulations are met.
Chair Rivenbark thanked Mr. Farrell for the presentation and invited the applicant to make remarks.
Cindee Wolf with Design Solutions, on behalf of property owner, Cape Fear Habitat for Humanity, Inc.
(Habitat), stated the circumstances that necessitated a rehearing of the application, expressing regret for the
confusion about the fence condition that was added during the December 11, 2023 hearing. She takes full
responsibility for the misunderstanding, emphasizing that Habitat, known for its mission to provide housing for all,
should not suffer due to her oversight. She explained that the confusion stemmed from a last-minute fence condition
introduced at the prior hearing, which she misinterpreted and failed to clarify with the Habitat representative,
leading to the acceptance of the approval nullification and the need for this hearing. She outlined Habitat's ongoing
commitment to the community, noting the completion of the first phase of their project, which comprised 10 single-
family homes, and introduced the next phase that aims to add 14 dual unit attached homes. The homes are destined
for families who have diligently worked through Habitat's program. The specific issue at hand was the condition for
a fence along the boundary of 1716 Rock Hill Road, prompted by a neighboring homeowner's concerns for privacy
and safety due to the proximity of the new development to their backyard and pool. She admitted to not fully
grasping the neighbor's request, which led to the previous miscommunication. In seeking to address the concerns,
she proposed a solution that aligns with Habitat's values of affordability and community care. Instead of a standalone
fence, which could pose future maintenance challenges and financial burdens, Habitat proposes to maintain the
existing dense tree line along the property boundary, enhancing it with additional evergreen plantings to ensure
privacy and safety effectively and naturally. Ms. Wolf reiterated her apology for the oversight and expressed hope
that the Board will approve the revised petition, recognizing its alignment with both staff and Planning Board
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36
MARCH 18, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 165
recommendations. She underscored the proposal's adherence to zoning ordinances and its sensitivity to community
needs, offering a solution that respects the concerns of neighboring properties while fulfilling Habitat's mission to
provide affordable, safe, and decent housing.
Cape Fear Habitat for Humanity, Inc. Executive Director Lauren McKenze stated that what is being proposed
is compatible and consistent with the subject area. Habitat’s goal is to provide aging-in-place units. Affordable
housing is very costly for Habitat as it will also bring in water and sewer service and roads. The additional aspect not
only of the fence, but also long term effects on homeowners who will be part of a homeowner’s association to make
sure elements such as stormwater drains and roads are maintained just add an additional cost to families which
affects who can live in the homes. Originally, because of the wooded area, it was thought that the property was
suitable because it creates a natural barrier. Habitat’s request is for the buffer to be something that Habitat can have
just like other proposals before the Board tonight. Habitat can preserve the vegetation, and donors have already
offered to provide additional vegetative buffers in this community.
Chair Rivenbark announced that no one signed up to speak in support or opposition to the request, closed
the public hearing, and opened the floor to Board discussion.
Commissioner Scalise stated he will not oppose the matter but reiterated the concerns he raised during the
March 14, 2024 agenda review meeting. The issue involves the addition of new conditions to proposals without
comprehensive examination by both staff and the Planning Board, particularly when these conditions are introduced
late in the process. While sometimes necessary, this practice can lead to unforeseen complications and should be
cautiously approached. He commended Ms. Wolf for taking responsibility in acknowledging the misunderstanding
regarding the fence condition discussed during the previous meeting. However, this incident raises a larger concern
about the potential for future misuse of the approval process. Specifically, if new conditions are added or existing
ones are later contested due to unforeseen challenges, it could lead to a problematic precedent where approved
projects are reevaluated, undermining the finality of Board decisions. To address this concern, he proposed that the
county attorney evaluate and propose revised language for the Board’s consideration regarding approvals being null
and void if the applicant does not sign the consent form acknowledging all conditions within seven (7) business days.
He proposed that those instances be treated as denials, thereby imposing a one-year wait period before
reapplication. The change could discourage applicants from seeking to renegotiate conditions post-approval. While
he understands this situation was not intentional and perhaps could have been avoided with more caution, it is
imperative to establish procedures to prevent similar situations in the future. There is a need to implement
safeguards to maintain the integrity of the Board approval process and ensure that it cannot be easily circumvented.
County Manager Coudriet responded that based on the understanding of the Board’s discussion during agenda
review, Ms. Roth will be moving forward with an update to the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) to effectively
state that not signing the agreement within the defined time is tantamount to a denial and the applicant could not
come back for one year.
Discussion ensued about the fence condition. Ms. Wolf confirmed in response to questions that the depth
of the 1716 Rockhill Road property is 203 feet. The lots are 40 feet wide, so the fence would be about 80 feet, which
was her original understanding during the prior hearing. However, that would not solve the issue of running the
fence further to include the pool on the referenced property, which is not Habitat’s issue to solve. As to whether she
would be agreeable to a 90-foot long fence, Ms. Wolf stated that it would not be acceptable to her client due to the
cost, current in construction, and future maintenance when there is a more cost efficient alternative buffer that can
serve the same purpose. The proposed buildings are setback 25 feet off the required setback of 20 feet. She further
explained that fencing now costs approximately $20 per linear foot, which when talking about 203 feet of fence and
is how the condition came across, is more than $8,000. It costs less to supplement and maintain the existing
vegetation.
Ms. Wolf, in response to further questions, confirmed that her and her client’s request is to have the staff
proposed condition of a six-foot tall solid wood privacy fence removed and not included as part of the approval. She
confirmed that she and her client agree with all conditions that are written down except for the fence. Her
understanding from the residents of 1716 Rockhill Road is that they are fine with a vegetative buffer and/or a fence.
The choice being made is to opt for the vegetative buffer because it will serve the same purpose for visual opacity
between the competing uses.
Commissioner Barfield stated that he is agreeable with removing the fence condition.
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. Chair Rivenbark asked for direction from the Board.
Motion: Commissioner Scalise 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 the proposed
density and housing type is within the recommendations of the General Residential place type. The Board also finds
approval of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the project provides additional
housing diversity to the area. Furthermore, the staff proposed condition approved by the Board of Commissioners
December 11, 2023 for a six (6) foot tall solid wood privacy fence shall be installed along the eastern boundary of
1716 Rockhill Road also identified as New Hanover County Tax Parcel ID R02500-003-102-000 is hereby removed
and the following conditions are included as part of the proposal:
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36
MARCH 18, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 166
1. The permitted density range is 0 dwelling units per acre to a maximum of 3.1 dwelling units per acre.
Planning staff is authorized to administratively approve reductions in density within the permitted
range.
2. The housing types in the development shall be limited to detached single-family dwellings and dual
unit attached dwellings as defined in Section 2.3 of the Unified Development Ordinance.
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 10A
OF NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA, ADOPTED July 1, 1974 is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes
and is contained in Zoning Book II, Section 10A, Page 57.
PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT (SUP) REQUEST BY JOSEPH TAYLOR, JR. WITH
MURCHISON, TAYLOR, & GIBSON, PLLC, APPLICANT, ON BEHALF OF 421 SAND MINE, LLC, PROPERTY OWNER FOR
THE USE OF HIGH INTENSITY MINING AND QUARRYING ON APPROXIMATELY 144 ACRES OF AN APPROXIMATELY
586-ACRE PARCEL LOCATED AT THE 5700 BLOCK OF HIGHWAY 421 N, ZONED I-2, HEAVY INDUSTRIAL (S23-05)
Chair Rivenbark stated that this is a quasi-judicial hearing and that before the hearing is opened, the deputy
county attorney will provide an overview of the hearing procedures.
Deputy County Attorney Karen Richards stated that the request is for a SUP, which is a quasi-judicial
hearing, and if called for a quasi-judicial hearing, the Board must find four elements as finding of facts, and they
must be clearly stated on the record. Those four findings must include that the use will not materially endanger the
public health or safety, the use does meet all required conditions and specifications of the UDO, the use will not
substantially injure the value of adjoining or abutting property, and the use will be in harmony with the area in which
it located and in general conformity with the Comprehensive Plan for New Hanover County. If the Board of
Commissioners determines that any of the elements cannot be made on the evidence, that alone may be the basis
for denial. The Board of Commissioners only needs to find that the evidence does not support one element, not all
four, to deny the application and may add conditions as deemed appropriate that are in accordance with the UDO.
Chair Rivenbark opened the public hearing and announced that the special use process requires a quasi-
judicial hearing and any person wishing to testify must be sworn in by the clerk to the board. He requested all persons
who signed up to speak and wish to present competent and material testimony to step forward to be sworn in.
Robert Farrell Annemarie Crumrine Jeff Earp Matt Nichols
Rebekah Roth Joseph Taylor Greg Wayne Tim Holloman
Jamar Johnson Scott Holmes Adam Grady
Clark Hipp Tim Lowe Nicolette Fulton
Chair Rivenbark further stated that a presentation will be heard from staff, then the applicant group and
the opponent’s group will each be allowed fifteen minutes for presentations and an additional five minutes, if
necessary, for rebuttal. He asked Mr. Farrell to start the presentation.
Mr. Farrell presented the SUP request stating that it is for an Intensive Industry SUP request for a proposed
sand mine in an I-2 zoning district. The site is in the 5700 block of Highway 421, with a limited project area of
approximately 144 acres. The site is currently wooded and bordered by an existing sand mine to the south, a mix of
industrial development to the east, including the County landfill, and to the north is the Pender Commerce Park,
currently under development. The area to the west is the Cape Fear River and Brunswick County. The parcel does
not have direct access onto Highway 421 due to an existing NCDOT access control easement along the highway. The
project proposes to use an internal road to access the existing driveway of the sand mine to the south. The internal
road will need to cross an existing utility easement. The applicant has proposed a condition to design and construct
the easement crossing in conjunction with both Cape Fear Public Utility Authority (CFPUA) and the Lower Cape Fear
Water and Sewer Authority (LCFWASA). The parcels were originally zoned I-2 in the 1970s. At the time, the purpose
of the district was to provide an area for commercial and industrial development. Since then, the Highway 421
corridor has seen additional infrastructure investment from the County and the area has seen continued industrial
growth. High intensity mines are permitted with an Intensive Industry SUP to ensure they are appropriately
evaluated for the specific site and surrounding uses. Unlike typical SUP, Intensive Industry SUPs require the applicant
hold a community information meeting before applying. The UDO contains supplementary standards for High
Intensity Mines regarding lot size, operational provisions, and CAMA land classification restrictions.
The proposed concept plan is for an approximately 144-acre sand mine that is accessed again from the
south from the existing sand mine to the excavation area. The site is bordered by wetlands with a 50-foot-wide
project buffer around the perimeter of the project site, and an additional 25-foot wide vegetative buffer along
Highway 421 and the northern property boundary with the Pender Commerce Park. No structures are proposed on
site. The project is located along a state-maintained highway that has available capacity. As currently zoned, the site
could support approximately 350,000 square feet of general industrial development consistent with other
development along the corridor, which could generate over 100 AM and PM peak hour trips. While specific
engineering metrics do not exist to estimate traffic generation at a sand mine, the applicant has provided estimates
of the daily traffic generation from the existing sand mine site. The applicant’s estimates are below the requirement
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36
MARCH 18, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 167
for a TIA and below estimates for other potential industrial development for the site. In coordination with CFPUA
and the LCFWASA, the applicants have proposed additional conditions to protect public utilities on the site. The
conditions include provisions for the internal site access crossing, spatial buffers, coordination and reporting,
requirements for the necessary information for engineering analysis, easement protection, conditions for access and
notification requirements, and continued cooperation between the parties and guarantees for the buffers shown on
the concept plan.
The Comprehensive Plan designates the property as a commerce zone but does not provide specific policy
direction for the proposed use. The commerce zone place type is intended to encourage light and heavy industrial
uses and is identified as suitable along the Highway 421 corridor, the General Electric (GE) campus, and the airport.
As a reminder, when the Board evaluates the request for approval during quasi-judicial hearing, it must determine
that the following four conditions are met:
1. That the use will not materially endanger the public health or safety if located where proposed and
approved. Condition met: the preliminary findings generally address utilities, fire protection, access,
and environmental features.
2. The use meets all required conditions and specifications of the Unified Development Ordinance.
Condition met: the preliminary findings address compliance with the various ordinance requirements
for mining which includes requirements for the project area, material removal, on-site processing,
operations: compliance with the 2006 CAMA Land Use Plan, floodplain requirements, mechanical
requirements, sanitary sewer requirements, subdivision requirements, sedimentation and erosion
control, requirements if located in multiple flood zones, floodproofing requirements, and conservation
and stormwater requirements.
3. The use will not substantially injure the value of adjoining or abutting property, or the use is a public
necessity. Condition met: the preliminary findings address the applicant’s statement of public
necessity, existing conditions of the site and surrounding area, and buffers.
4. The location and character of the use if developed according to the plan as submitted and approved
will be in harmony with the area in which it is to be located and in general conformity with the
Comprehensive Land Use Plan for New Hanover County. Condition met.
Chair Rivenbark thanked Mr. Farrell for the presentation and invited the applicant to make remarks.
Joseph Taylor, Jr. with Murchison, Taylor, and Gibson, PLLC, applicant, on behalf of 421 Sand Mine, LLC,
property owner, stated that with he is his partner Scott Holmes, Jeff Earp, 421 Sand Mine, LLC Manager, Greg Wayne
and Adam Grady of Hanover Design Services, and Annemarie Crumrine, ECS Technical and Geotechnical Engineers.
The applicant, 421 Sand Mine LLC, currently operates through Funston Company on a parcel adjacent to this site.
This operation is significant as it is not just a sand mine but also a wash plant, playing a crucial role in the community's
development and maintenance. The mine has been operational for over 20 years, with New Hanover County among
its current customers. On an average day, the mine sends 30 tandem axle trucks to the landfill for fill, cover, and
maintenance purposes, marking it as one of the company's key functions, especially given its proximity to the site.
The company also supplies sand for beach renourishment projects in Pender and some parts of Brunswick County.
Thanks to the wash plant's capability to grade sand through a computer-driven process, the sand is tailored to meet
various governmental requirements. However, the mine faces a significant challenge as the sand from its primary
site is nearing depletion and is expected to run out by the end of this year, which could compromise the supply of
graded sand for numerous agencies, counties, municipalities, and other infrastructure needs in the area. In
anticipation of this, the subject site was acquired four years ago, with plans to operate both sites in conjunction. The
proposed operation will not increase traffic, utilizing the same driveway and internal roads currently in use,
maintaining the traffic levels with approximately 40 semis in the morning and seven in the afternoon. The mining
process involves a hydraulic dredge that pumps sand and slurry into the wash plant, a sophisticated piece of
equipment that grades the sand for various uses. The proposed mine extension site intersects a water line easement
held by LCFWASA. There has been extensive collaboration with both LCFWASA and CFPUA engineers and staff to
ensure the water line's protection, including additional easements and buffers to safeguard the line during mining
operations. Engineering studies have confirmed the stability of the slopes near the water line, indicating no risk to
its integrity from mining activities. All plans comply with New Hanover County's requirements, particularly those
related to development in special flood hazard zones. Operational conditions agreed upon with local utilities aim to
protect community and infrastructure, emphasizing a collective effort to meet community needs while ensuring
safety and environmental protection.
Chair Rivenbark announced that no one signed up to speak in favor or in opposition to the request, closed
the public hearing, and opened the floor to Board discussion.
Mr. Taylor, in response to questions, stated that the mine’s lifespan is dependent on demand, but at this
point probably about 10 years are left for the extended part. For future expansion, the company can go across the
street, but the immediate issue is that the current sand site will run out in a few months. It is imperative to tackle
the subject tract first as that will allow time to explore many opportunities to extend to other areas.
Commissioner Barfield noted that when a sand mind is decommissioned it can have other uses. Smith Creek
Park is the most prominent former sand mine he knows of in the community.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36
MARCH 18, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 168
Chair Rivenbark stated that an economist once stated that if the Sahara Desert were turned over to the
United States it would run out of sand in two years. Mr. Taylor confirmed that this is a correct statement. Nationwide
studies have shown that one of the most valuable commodities for the United States in years to come is sand,
especially in the southeastern United States. It is key to everything that is done.
Mr. Taylor, in response to questions, confirmed that if approved, the SUP would allow for the continuation
of the wet mining process in the new area. A hydraulic drainage is run, and water is critical for that drainage
operation. There must be high levels of water in the site’s basins which protect the adjoining wetlands. Water is not
pumped out and levels are kept high for the equipment to work and that is how the wash plant must work.
Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark closed the public hearing and opened the floor to Board
discussion.
LCFWASA Executive Director Tim Holloman, responded to questions, confirming that he is satisfied that the
LCFWASA pipe is well protected and confident in that with the proposed conditions.
Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark asked the Mr. Taylor applicant whether he agrees with the
staff findings. He stated that he agrees with the staff findings. Chair Rivenbark asked for the Board’s direction on the
request.
Motion: Commissioner Barfield MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Scalise to approve the permit as the Board
finds that this application for a Special Use Permit meets the four required conclusions based on the findings of fact
included in the Staff Report and additional evidence presented at the public hearing and subject to the following
additional conditions agreed to by the applicant/ Property Owner, upon further discussion with the Cape Fear Public
Utility Authority ("CFPUA") and the Lower Cape Fear Water and Sewer Authority ("LCFWASA"):
1. Haul Road / Crossing. The haul road and crossing that is to traverse over the LCFWASA Easement shall
comply with the crossing design initially reviewed and approved on December 20, 2023 by engineers
for CFPUA and the LCFWASA, subject to further revisions and further mutually agreed changes
(including adjusting such plan to include the Buffer Zone as described below).
2. Buffer Zone. The Property Owner has volunteered to provide an additional buffer easement of 150 feet
(the "Buffer Zone") on the subject property beyond the existing 75 foot LCFWASA easement as it runs
west to east, from the eastern edge of the 150' CP&L / Duke easement over to U.S. Hwy 421, to
maintain the safety and stability of the LCFWASA easement during both normal operations and major
weather events.
3. Geotechnical Report and Coordination. Based on conversations with CFPUA and LCFWASA and their
engineers, the Property Owner has already commissioned a geotechnical report from Engineering
Consulting Services (ECS) regarding the side slope stability of the proposed mining basins and requested
a subsurface utility engineering survey of the existing water line. The geotechnical report will be sealed
by a licensed NC Professional Engineer. The engineer performing the geotechnical report will be
provided to both the CFPUA and LCFWASA for their review. No excavation activity may proceed at the
site until the geotechnical report and its subsequent recommendations have been received, reviewed,
and accepted by all parties. The reports will take into account the Buffer Zone set forth above, placing
the slope of any future mining basins an estimated 205 feet away from the existing water line.
However, if these reports indicate more study is necessary, the Property Owner will expand the reports
as reasonably necessary to further address the following:
a. Expand the review of the side slope stability of the proposed mining excavation basins, with a focus
on how the LCFWASA easements and buffer areas can be protected and maintained during and
following major weather events.
b. Provide additional detail regarding how the excavated slopes will be sufficiently stabilized to be
protected from erosion or washouts that, during and following major weather events, could
migrate towards the LCFWASA easement and current and future infrastructure within the
easement. If stabilization requires any additional setback(s) to protect the LCFWASA easements
beyond the Buffer Zone discussed above, the report shall include a designation of such additional
setback, and the Property Owner will provide such additional setback if other proposed changes
are not mutually agreed by LCFWASA and CFPUA.
4. Easement Protection. Property Owner will keep its employees informed about the water line and take
reasonable action to protect the easement area from errant construction access except at the
approved crossing discussed above. To achieve this purpose, the Property Owner will visibly mark the
easement area. The Property Owner will maintain temporary protective construction fencing and / or
barriers on both sides of the haul road where the haul road traverses the easement and within 50 feet
from where the haul road crosses the easement. In addition, the Property Owner will provide signage
at a regular interval. All fencing, barriers, markings, and signage shall be maintained by the Property
Owner.
5. Infrastructure Access. Property Owner shall allow CFPUA and LCFWASA access to the LCFWASA
Easement area, including any additional Buffer Zone(s). Subject to all applicable regulations and
guidelines (including all State regulations and mining permit requirements) and also subject to Property
Owner's reasonable safety requirements, the Property Owner shall allow CFPUA and LCFWASA
unrestricted access to the current 48" and future 54" water infrastructure for maintenance, repair, and
installation of future infrastructure. In times of an emergency, such access shall also be permitted via
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36
MARCH 18, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 169
the mine site access road if necessary, and Property Owner shall cooperate with CFPUA and LCFWASA
in regard to reasonable steps requested to minimize or prevent any destabilization of the
infrastructure.
6. Changed Conditions. The Property Owner shall give notice to the Executive Directors of the Cape Fear
Public Utility Authority and the Lower Cape Fear Water & Sewer Authority of their designee of any
planned significant change to the Property Owner's mining operations if the change alters the
excavation plans for areas adjacent to the easement area or Buffer Area, at least 180 days before the
change, so they can discuss any potential impacts.
7. Future Cooperation. The Property Owner, CFPUA and LCFWASA all acknowledge that protection of
both the easement and its infrastructure and protection of landowner's rights to use and enjoy their
land are important for all parties involved and the community at large. As such, they will each
reasonably cooperate with each other in regard to future changes to the infrastructure within the
LCFWASA easement and also the Property Owner's industrial activities, both of which are important to
the overall development of the Cape Fear region.
8. The 50-foot perimeter buffer and 25-foot vegetative buffer shall be provided as shown in the approved
concept plan.
Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
A copy of an order granting a Special Use Permit and listing the findings of facts is contained in SUP Book
IV, Page 98.
COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS
Appointment to the New Hanover County African American Commission on History, Heritage, and Culture
Chair Rivenbark reported that a vacancy exists on the New Hanover County African American Commission
on History, Heritage, and Culture in the At-Large category, with one application available for consideration.
Commissioner Scalise nominated Daniel Jones for appointment in the At-Large category. Commissioner
Zapple seconded the nomination.
Hearing no further nominations, Chair Rivenbark asked for a vote on the nomination on the floor.
Vote Results: The Board voted UNANIMOUSLY to appoint Daniel Jones to the New Hanover County Commission on
History, Heritage, and Culture in the At-Large category to fill an unexpired term, with the term to expire August 31,
2024.
Appointment to the New Hanover County Juvenile Crime Prevention Council
Chair Rivenbark reported that a vacancy exists on the New Hanover County Juvenile Crime Prevention
Council in the Faith Community category, with two applications available for consideration.
Commissioner Zapple nominated Eric Flore for appointment in the Faith Community category.
Commissioner Barfield seconded the nomination.
Hearing no further nominations, Chair Rivenbark asked for a vote on the nomination on the floor.
Vote Results: The Board voted UNANIMOUSLY to appoint Eric Flore to the New Hanover County Juvenile Crime
Prevention Council in the Faith Community category to fill an unexpired term, with the term to expire September
30, 2025.
Appointment to the New Hanover County Non-County Agency Funding Committee
Chair Rivenbark reported that a vacancy exists on the New Hanover County Non-County Agency Funding
Committee in the Educational (pre-k through 12) category, with one application available for consideration.
Commissioner Zapple nominated Teresa Lambe for appointment in the Faith Community category. Vice-
Chair Pierce seconded the nomination.
Hearing no further nominations, Chair Rivenbark asked for a vote on the nomination on the floor.
Vote Results: The Board voted UNANIMOUSLY to appoint Teresa Lambe to the New Hanover County Non-County
Agency Funding Committee in the Educational (pre-k through 12) category to fill an unexpired term, with the term
to expire September 30, 2024.
Appointment to the New Hanover County Special Board of Equalization and Review
Chair Rivenbark reported that eight vacancies exist on the New Hanover County Special Board of
Equalization and Review with twelve applications available for consideration.
Commissioner Scalise nominated Clayton Hamerski, Hector Ingram, Mike Musselwhite, Christopher G.
Stewart, and Brad White for reappointment as regular members.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36
MARCH 18, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 170
Commissioner Zapple nominated Fred Gainey for reappointment and Jason Colclough and Ida R. Smith for
appointment as alternate members.
Hearing no further nominations, Chair Rivenbark asked for a vote on the nominations on the floor.
Vote Results: The Board voted UNANIMOUSLY to reappoint Clayton Hamerski, Hector Ingram, Mike Musselwhite,
Christopher G. Stewart, and Brad White as regular members and reappoint Fred Gainey, and appoint Jason Colclough
and Ida R. Smith as alternate members on the 2024 Special Board of Equalization and Review to serve one-year
terms with terms, with terms expiring March 31, 2025.
Chair Rivenbark asked for nominations to appoint a chairman of the Special Board of Equalization and
Review for the ensuing year.
Commissioner Scalise nominated Hector Ingram as chairman of the Special Board of Equalization and
Review for the ensuing year. Commissioner Zapple seconded the nomination.
Hearing no further nominations, Chair Rivenbark called for a vote on the nomination on the floor.
Vote Results: The Board voted UNANIMOUSLY to appoint Hector Ingram as chairman of the Special Board of
Equalization and Review for the ensuing year.
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
Chair Rivenbark stated that no one signed up to speak under public comment.
ADDITIONAL AGENDA ITEMS OF BUSINESS
The Board expressed appreciation for the opening of Hanover Pines Park. County Manager Coudriet
confirmed, in response to questions, that as of today with the opening of said park, the County has 17 parks, totaling
1,800 acres, which separates the County in the amount of acreage with the County only being 199 square land miles.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Chair Rivenbark adjourned the meeting at 8:20 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.