Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-07-21 Regular Meeting NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 JULY 21, 2025 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 592 ASSEMBLY The New Hanover County Board of Commissioners met on July 21, 2025, 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 Dane Scalise; Commissioner Stephanie A.C. Walker; 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 D. Evan Grizzle, Apostolic Tabernacle Wilmington, provided the invocation, and Chair Rivenbark 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 Walker to approve the Consent Agenda items as presented. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. CONSENT AGENDA Approval of Minutes – Governing Body The Board approved the minutes of the June 12, 2025 Budget Work Session and Agenda Review and the June 16, 2025 Regular Meeting. Adoption of Budget Amendments – Budget The Board adopted budget amendment 26-001 for various departments, which amended the annual budget ordinance for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2026. A copy of the budget amendment is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and contained in Exhibit Book XLVI, Page 14.1. Adoption of a Resolution Appointing Map Review Officers – Planning and Land Use The Board adopted the resolution appointing Map Review Officers for the City of Wilmington, Town of Carolina Beach, Town of Kure Beach, Town of Wrightsville Beach, and New Hanover County. A copy of the resolution is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and contained in Exhibit Book XLVI, Page 14.2. Approval of May 2025 Tax Collection Reports – Tax The Board approved the May 2025 tax collection reports for New Hanover County, New Hanover County Debt Service, and the New Hanover County Fire District. Copies of the tax collection reports are hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and contained in Exhibit Book XLVI, Page 14.3. Approval of the Charge of 2025 Levy – Tax The Board approved the 2025 Charge of Levy and directed the Tax Collector to collect the taxes charged in the tax records and receipts for 2025. A copy of the 2025 Charge of Levy is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and contained in Exhibit Book XLVI, Page 14.4. Approval of Offer to Purchase 0.07 Acres of Surplus Property at 1015 State Avenue and Associated Upset Bid Process – Finance The Board accepted a $35,000 offer for a 2,880-square-foot (0.07-acre) surplus parcel located at 1015 State Avenue, Wilmington, NC. The Board directed staff to initiate the upset bid process and authorized the county manager to finalize the sale to the highest qualified bidder. Approval of the Parks and Gardens Department’s application for a grant from the North Carolina Public Beach and Waterfront Access Grant Program to improve access at Trails End Park – Parks and Gardens The Board approved the staff's application for a grant through the North Carolina Public Beach and Waterfront Access Program to improve access at Trails End Park. The grant requires a 20% match of $265,000, which the FY25–26 Capital Improvements budget already includes. If awarded, the grant will increase the overall project budget without requiring additional County funds. The County will complete access improvements concurrently with the planned bulkhead replacement. Officials expect to receive grant award notifications in late fall 2025. REGULAR ITEMS OF BUSINESS NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 JULY 21, 2025 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 593 CONSIDERATION OF A LANDFILL TIPPING FEE WAIVER FOR CAPE FEAR PUBLIC UTILITY AUTHORITY (CFPUA) At CFPUA’s request, following the Board’s Agenda Review meeting on July 17, 2025, the landfill tipping fee waiver item was withdrawn from the meeting agenda. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE 2024 ANNUAL TAX SETTLEMENT Tax Administrator Allison Snell presented the statutorily required annual tax settlement report, highlighting the following:  New Hanover County Tax Administration 2023 Annual Tax Settlement:  Per North Carolina General Statute (NCGS) 105-373, the Tax Collector must make a report of settlement for the FY 2024-2025 and prior years  New Hanover County 2024 Levy:  Five-year comparison:  Fire District 2024 levy:  Fire District five-year comparison: The Board commended Ms. Snell and her staff for their work and efforts to help the citizens pay their taxes and make them feel respected in their interactions with the Tax Department. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark asked for Board direction. MOTION: Commissioner Scalise MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Walker to approve the 2024 annual tax settlement. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. A copy of the report is available for review in the Tax Department. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL FOR THE SCOTTS HILL WATER MAIN EXTENSION PROJECT Planning and Land Use Manager Theo McClammy presented the following information:  Scotts Hill Water Main Extension:  Background:  July 22 and September 3, 2024: Board of Commissioners held two public hearings  September 3, 2024: Board of Commissioners approved budget and grant application  February 19, 2025: State Water Infrastructure Authority (SWIA) selected County’s application  February 28, 2025: Award letter received  April 29, 2025: Letter of Intent to Fund received along with the funding contract  Project overview: NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 JULY 21, 2025 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 594  Bring public water service to residents in the Old Scotts Hill/Kirkland area  Impact 120 residents across 57 parcels  Project scope includes 3,200 feet of 2-inch water lines, 3,800 feet of 8-inch water lines, and seven fire hydrants to enhance public safety  Major partners: Scotts Hill residents, North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ) for funding, CFPUA for environmental, design, engineering and construction, and Ardurra Group NC (recommended to provide compliance and administrative services)  Project funding:  Total Estimated Cost: $4,748,792:  CDBG-I Grant - NC DEQ: $2,997,703  County Match: $1,751,089  Delivering long-term public health and safety benefits to residents while reducing reliance on local dollars  Key milestones:  Board approval requested:  Contract with NCDEQ to accept funds for the project  Interlocal Agreement with CFPUA  Contract with an administrative consultant to assist with grant compliance and preparation of required documentation  Capital Project Ordinance 26-002 that budgets the revenue and expenditures associated with the project A brief discussion ensued. The Board thanked staff and CFPUA for their efforts in securing the state grant. In response to questions, Mr. McCalmmy acknowledged the timeline may feel frustrating but explained that state- level processes limit acceleration. He emphasized the need to balance efficiency with compliance, as any misstep could jeopardize funding. Staff continue to communicate with residents and have shared the projected 36- to 40- month timeline. Planning and Land Use Director Rebekah Roth added that the County previously partnered with the Scotts Hill community to install a water station at the community center. While staff have not explored a bottled water program, they are open to pursuing it if the Board directs them. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark asked for Board direction. MOTION: Commissioner Zapple MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Scalise to approve the contract with NCDEQ for funding, approve the interlocal agreement with CFPUA for the Scotts Hill Water Main Extension, approve the contract with Ardurra Group North Carolina for grant administration services, and to adopt the Capital Project Ordinance 26-002 to establish a Capital Project Fund and budget the revenue and expenditures associated with the project. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. A copy of the Capital Project Ordinance is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and contained in Exhibit Book XLVI, Page 14.5. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL TO CONCLUDE COUNTY PARTICIPATION IN THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF WILMINGTON FOR THE WORKFORCE HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE (WHAC) County Manager Coudriet stated that the recommendation aligns with the Board’s adopted policy to shift away from direct funding of the $3 million annual workforce housing program. The County has invested $9 million to-date, and that work will continue, but the Board now emphasizes market-based approaches and policy tools, primarily through the Planning Board and planning staff. He noted that although WHAC has offered some policy NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 JULY 21, 2025 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 595 input, such as on accessory dwelling units, it has focused largely on funding and public-sector cost interventions. With the policy shift, two staff positions were eliminated, including one dedicated to the housing fund. Given the committee’s original funding-driven purpose, the staff reduction, and the withdrawal of financial support, though not policy goals, he believes the County should withdraw from the committee. This action does not preclude the City of Wilmington (City) from continuing the work or investing capital, nor does it diminish the County’s ongoing commitment to supporting a range of housing options. The Board discussed the matter. Commissioner Scalise noted the County has invested $9 million in workforce housing over three years, with the New Hanover Community Endowment (NHCE) contributing nearly $20 million more. While all Commissioners support affordability, he believes the private sector should lead and the County should focus on policy. He cited resident concerns about density and quality of life, adding that continuing subsidies without outcome review is unsustainable. He supported withdrawing from WHAC, citing misaligned City and County priorities, limited staff capacity, and the need to pause and evaluate projects before further investment. Commissioner Zapple countered that the County’s $9 million investment has leveraged $150 million in private funds, which was the goal. He emphasized that WHAC operates at low cost with dedicated volunteers who offer policy ideas and best practices, especially for essential workers. He warned that disbanding WHAC sends the wrong message and urged the Board not to abandon a successful public-private initiative. He also asked that the NHCE consider renewed support. Commissioner Walker opposed ending WHAC solely due to budget changes. She said the County values community input and affordable housing policy, and that dissolving the committee risks undermining momentum. Instead, she suggested restructuring while preserving community engagement. Vice-Chair Pierce thanked WHAC volunteers and said they fulfilled their advisory role. With no funds budgeted, she believes the committee’s core function no longer applies. She noted the Board increased the budget by $11 million while keeping the tax rate below 35 cents in response to public concern. She reaffirmed support for affordable housing but prefers private sector solutions and backed the County Manager’s recommendation to withdraw from WHAC. In further discussion, Chair Rivenbark said he did not believe the committee was being discarded, noting that the City may continue its efforts independently. Commissioner Zapple questioned that, asking who the City would work with if the County withdraws, and emphasized that disbanding the joint committee eliminates a shared platform. Vice-Chair Pierce responded that, as discussed during agenda review, the County can still require workforce housing conditions when reviewing development proposals and expressed confidence in planning staff to support those goals. Commissioner Scalise added that the $3 million annual allocation created pressure to approve projects, even when some may not have served the community’s best interests. While some were well-intentioned, he said the County must evaluate its investments before proceeding. He praised staff and said the shift reflects current realities. He then moved to end the County’s participation in the interlocal agreement. MOTION: Commissioner Scalise MOVED, SECONDED by Chair Rivenbark to approve the conclusion of New Hanover County’s participation in the Interlocal Agreement for the Workforce Housing Advisory Committee, including that the terms of office for County appointees will conclude on July 21, 2025, and authorize the chair to issue the required written notice to the City of Wilmington. Chair Rivenbark asked if there was further discussion. Commissioner Walker noted that the committee was not created solely for the five-year funding plan and stressed that affordable housing remains urgent. She argued that input from those immersed in the issue continues to benefit the County and questioned why one budget decision should dissolve the structure. Ending the committee, she said, would weaken dialogue and dismiss residents’ contributions. Commissioner Zapple highlighted that the County’s $9 million investment leveraged $150 million in private funds and generated over 400 housing units. He credited staff and WHAC for strategies such as prioritizing repairs over new construction and promoting regional collaboration. He urged continued support, especially to address the housing needs of essential workers, such as the County’s public safety employees. Vice- Chair Pierce stated that many residents oppose using tax dollars to close developers’ profit gaps. She noted that the Board prioritized salary increases for public safety employees and believes better compensation, not subsidies, helps essential workers afford to live locally. She questioned whether current efforts truly serve those groups, noting that the term “workforce housing” now lacks accountability. Commissioner Zapple argued that small County contributions often close funding gaps and unlock major projects by leveraging tax credits and private capital. Vice-Chair Pierce responded that government-funded housing uses a different model and noted that in some cases the gaps have been significantly larger. Commissioner Zapple maintained that even modest local investments can attract substantial outside funding and deliver strong returns. Commissioner Walker noted that the committee’s bylaws focus on studying, advising, and raising awareness, not managing funding. She emphasized that its mission remains relevant and urged the Board not to overlook its value based on a budget decision. While affirming support for staff, she cautioned against dissolving the committee solely because of funding shifts. County Manager Coudriet said he could not provide specific metrics on how many teachers, law enforcement officers, or firefighters currently live in housing developments supported by County funding, as most projects remain under construction. He noted that the one completed project in Castle Hayne serves older adults and does not apply. He added that, to his knowledge, the County was the only local entity to give direct housing assistance to teachers through a stipend program in partnership with the Board of Education, separate from the now-discontinued $3 million workforce housing program. Commissioner Scalise called the question. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 JULY 21, 2025 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 596 Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark asked for Board direction on the motion on the floor. Upon vote, the MOTION PASSED 3 to 2, Commissioners Walker and Zapple dissenting. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL TO CONCLUDE COUNTY PARTICIPATION IN THE JOINTLY ADOPTED BYLAWS WITH THE CITY OF WILMINGTON FOR THE COMMUNITY RELATIONS ADVISORY COMMITTEE (C-RAC) County Manager Chris Coudriet recommended that the Board conclude the County’s participation in C-RAC, established in 2016 through jointly adopted bylaws with the City of Wilmington. He explained that the recommendation followed an extensive internal review of the committee’s evolving role, alignment with County priorities, and impact on staff resources. While C-RAC was originally intended to foster dialogue on issues such as prejudice and discrimination, the County has since created three advisory bodies, the Hispanic/Latino Commission, the Commission for Women, and the Commission on African American History, Heritage, and Culture, that now fulfill many of C-RAC’s original objectives. Over time, however, C-RAC increasingly explored roles beyond its charter, including fair housing complaints, private-sector employment issues, and recommending a civilian oversight board for the Sheriff’s Office, areas never within its intended scope and which raised policy and legal concerns. County Manager Coudriet emphasized that the sheriff did not request or initiate the recommendation. He explained that County staff, particularly in the Office of Civic Engagement, have spent significant time redirecting the committee to its intended mission, often at the expense of other priorities. While commending the dedication of committee members, he expressed concern over the disproportionate staff resources required to support the group. He emphasized the County’s continued commitment to civic engagement and addressing community disparities through existing committees and internal efforts. He concluded by stating that the recommendation aligns with Board policy, supports efficient use of staff time, and ensures County committees serve in an advisory, not regulatory, role. The Board discussed the matter. Commissioner Scalise supported the recommendation, expressing concern that C-RAC repeatedly exceeded its advisory role, particularly by proposing civilian oversight of the Sheriff’s Office, which he said was inappropriate since the sheriff is accountable to voters. He also cited the committee’s discussions on private sector hiring practices and discrimination complaints as overreach that created liability risks. He noted the sheriff opposed a review board and said the withdrawal was appropriate, measured, and overdue. Commissioner Zapple opposed the recommendation, arguing that while some proposals may have been outside scope, no improper action occurred, and staff redirected the group when needed. He emphasized the committee’s value as a structured forum for residents with complex concerns and warned that dissolving it could appear punitive and deter civic participation. Commissioner Walker agreed, reading from the committee’s stated purpose and asserting that its mission, to advise on prejudice and discrimination, remains relevant. She argued that disagreement with recommendations should not justify dissolving a committee and stressed the importance of hearing diverse views. Vice-Chair Pierce supported the recommendation, emphasizing that advisory boards serve at the Board’s discretion and must stay within their charter. She found past committee actions, particularly the oversight proposal, deeply concerning and said staff time should focus on aligned efforts. She praised the Office of Civic Engagement and noted that the newer commissions are meeting the County’s engagement goals. Chair Rivenbark agreed with the county manager that the decision reflects policy alignment and resource management, not a rejection of public input. County Manager Coudriet added that staff remain committed to public engagement, but C-RAC has become difficult to manage within its original framework and no longer serves as the most effective vehicle for input. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark asked for Board direction. MOTION: Commissioner Scalise MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chair Pierce to approve concluding New Hanover County’s participation in the jointly adopted bylaws with the City of Wilmington that established the Community Relations Advisory Committee (C-RAC), including that the terms of office for County appointees will conclude on July 21, 2025, and authorize the chair to issue the required written notice to the City of Wilmington. In further discussion, Commissioner Zapple reiterated his opposition, warning that dissolving the committee sends a message that the Board may dismiss volunteers for offering perspectives with which it disagrees. He argued that staff redirection should suffice when committees deviate from their charter and that eliminating the group was unnecessary and damaging to public trust. Commissioner Walker agreed, reading from the committee’s stated purpose, to address prejudice and discrimination, and asserted that its mission remains relevant. She said dissolving the committee over disagreement undermines civic engagement and sets a troubling precedent. Vice- Chair Pierce maintained that advisory boards serve at the Board’s discretion and must stay within their purpose. She reiterated concerns over the committee’s attempt to weigh in on law enforcement oversight and supported redirecting staff resources to more aligned efforts. Commissioner Zapple responded that C-RAC had not acted outside its scope and that staff appropriately redirected discussions when needed. He emphasized that controversial ideas alone do not justify disbandment and that C-RAC continues to serve a vital public forum role. Vice-Chair Pierce called the question. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark asked for a vote on the motion on the floor. Upon vote, the MOTION PASSED 3 to 2, Commissioners Walker and Zapple dissenting. PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL OF A REZONING REQUEST BY CRAIG JOHNSON WITH HERON COVE DEVELOPMENT, LLC, APPLICANT, ON BEHALF OF CANH NGUYEN AND NGOC NGUYEN, PROPERTY OWNERS, TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 10.8 ACRES LOCATED AT 6425 AND 6437 GORDON ROAD AND 1927 GORDON ACRES DRIVE FROM R-15, RESIDENTIAL TO A (CZD) R-5, RESIDENTIAL MODERATE HIGH DISTRICT FOR A 67-LOT RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION (Z25-06) NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 JULY 21, 2025 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 597 Senior Planner Zach Dickerson presented the request to rezone approximately 10.8 acres from R-15, Residential District, to a conditional R-5, Residential Moderate-High Density District. The request would allow for the development of a 67-lot single-family residential subdivision. The property is currently zoned R-15 and is largely surrounded by similar zoning. Some nearby areas are zoned R-10, and the Ellington Farms apartment complex to the east lies within the City of Wilmington. Aerial photography illustrated that the site is wooded and surrounded by single-family housing. He shared aerial and ground-level images, including a view of the stub road connection to Daniel Boone Trail located to the northwest. To provide development context, he displayed a photo of Blendin Meadows, an existing R-15 neighborhood nearby, and an image representing the housing style typically seen in denser single-family neighborhoods. Mr. Dickerson then presented the applicant’s proposed concept plan, which includes 67 single-family lots. The presentation divided the plan into two parts for clarity:  The portion closer to Gordon Road includes designated stormwater management areas and open space.  The portion farther back includes a proposed recreation area and stormwater features. The road was reconfigured to preserve a significant oak tree, and the applicant also included a gated emergency access connection to Daniel Boone Trail. The concept plan proposes two bike and pedestrian connections: one to Gordon Acres Drive and one to Daniel Boone Trail. The applicant committed to planting two trees on each residential lot, which staff included as a condition of approval. Mr. Dickerson reviewed site access details. The primary access would be from Gordon Road, with emergency-only access via Daniel Boone Trail. The plan also includes bike and pedestrian easements. Staff noted that while interconnectivity is typically preferred, in this case it would not alleviate traffic concerns due to the layout of the surrounding neighborhood. He noted that the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) is working on a project to widen Gordon Road, with expected completion in 2029. Traffic projections estimate approximately 52 AM and 68 PM peak-hour trips generated by the proposed development. The project would also yield approximately eight more school-aged children than the current zoning would generate. Mr. Dickerson explained that the site is located along Gordon Road, between Market Street and I-40. The area is primarily residential, with a mix of densities. He noted two nearby developments that obtained special use permits to exceed R-15 density limits. While the proposed development is denser than its immediate surroundings, it maintains a single-family character consistent with nearby neighborhoods. This would be the fourth cul-de-sac neighborhood within a quarter mile of the site; however, this proposal includes a gated emergency connection to Daniel Boone Trail and non-vehicular access to both Daniel Boone Trail and Gordon Acres Road. The project supports the County’s Strategic Plan by providing additional housing options. While a portion of the property lies within the Northeastern Flood Advisory study area, that portion of the site is largely reserved for open space. The 2016 Comprehensive Land Use Plan (Comprehensive Plan) classifies this area as General Residential. The proposal is generally consistent with the goals and recommendations for this place type. The Planning Board considered the application at its June 5, 2025 meeting. During the hearing, the applicant agreed to two additional conditions related to a CFPUA utility easement and preservation of existing trees. Members of the public spoke both in support of and in opposition to the request. The Planning Board voted 4-0 to recommend approval, finding the proposal consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, as it falls within a predominantly residential area and fits within the recommended density range for the General Residential place type. The request was also found to be reasonable and in the public interest, citing the residential character of the surrounding area despite the variation in density. Staff concur with the Planning Board’s recommendation. The recommended conditions are as follows: 1. The project will include emergency only access to Daniel Boone Trail. 2. The project will include a minimum one-car garage with each home and ability to park two cars in the driveway of each home. 3. The project will provide a six-foot fence at the rear of each lot of the development. 4. Two trees at least 2 inches in diameter at breast height will be planted on each lot, to be maintained by the HOA through a landscaping easement on each lot. Tree maintenance and preservation will be included in the covenants which are subject to county review before recording of final plat. 5. The 18-inch oak tree in the middle of the internal road, around which the road has been reconfigured, will be preserved on the site. 6. There will be two 10-foot in width bicycle and pedestrian access easements in this development, connecting to Daniel Boone Trail and Gordon Acres Drive. 7. A public utility easement meeting the minimum standards of CFPUA for water and sewer infrastructure shall be dedicated along the bicycle and pedestrian easement connection to Gordon Acres Drive at the time the final plat is recorded with the Register of Deeds. 8. Existing trees in the site’s open space that do not impact required land grading or other improvements, and future amenities as identified in the required Tree Removal Permit will be preserved. Mr. Dickerson concluded the staff presentation, confirming that additional public comments were submitted and provided to the Board earlier in the day. If approved, the project would be subject to the Technical Review Committee (TRC) and Zoning Compliance review to ensure full compliance with ordinance requirements. Chair Rivenbark thanked Mr. Dickerson for the presentation and invited the applicant to make remarks. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 JULY 21, 2025 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 598 Attorney Amy Schaefer with Lee Kaess, PLLC, representing Heron Cove Development, LLC, presented the request to rezone approximately 10.8 acres on Gordon Road to R-5 CZD for a 67-lot single-family residential subdivision. She introduced the development team, including applicant Craig Johnson, civil engineer Charlie Cazier, and traffic engineer Don Bennett. Although a traffic impact analysis (TIA) was not required, the applicant hired a traffic engineer to proactively assess the project. Ms. Schaefer referenced the staff report, noting the area’s evolving density and surrounding residential patterns, including nearby subdivisions such as Sun Coast Drive and Ellington Farms. She explained that while Gordon Road appears sparsely developed, the surrounding area includes higher- density residential uses, and the proposal is consistent with that context. The site plan preserves a stream and wetland area with buffers and avoids placing lots in that section. In response to Planning Board feedback, the applicant reduced the proposed number of homes from 86 to 81, and then ultimately to 67. The revised plan includes:  An emergency-only connection to Daniel Boone Trail  A bicycle/pedestrian connection to Gordon Acres Drive  A six-foot fence along each lot  Additional driveway space for two vehicles and an optional two-car garage  Tree preservation in both the front and back yards, with homeowners’ association (HOA) restrictions preventing removal by homeowners  Overfill/guest parking and new tree-save conditions Ms. Schaefer emphasized the need for affordable, single-family detached housing in this part of the County, noting only 15 such homes were currently available. Proposed homes range from 1,300 to 1,600 square feet, with sample elevations and floor plans provided. She acknowledged ongoing stormwater issues on Gordon Road and explained the civil engineer had coordinated with County staff on a parallel County project. She expressed confidence that collaboration among NCDOT, the County, and the private development team would address stormwater concerns. Regarding traffic, she clarified that while nearby improvements are underway, the project would not be built immediately, as additional TRC, stormwater, and permitting reviews remain. She addressed neighborhood concerns about U-turn conflicts, stating that current roadway taper designs would prevent residents from immediately accessing a U-turn lane, reducing traffic conflicts. Ms. Schaefer concluded by stating that the project aligns with the Comprehensive Plan’s general residential designation (up to eight \[8\] units per acre), offers strategic infill, provides affordable housing, extends water/sewer infrastructure to adjacent properties, and preserves significant open space and wetland buffers. Charles Cazier, a civil engineer with Intracoastal Engineering, responded to questions about utility access. He explained that CFPUA maintains a gravity sewer line that runs through the large drainage channel on the property, allowing the development to connect to sewer within the roadway. He confirmed that public water is available on Gordon Road and along Daniel Boone Trail, providing flexibility for connection. When asked whether adjacent neighbors could access water and sewer, he confirmed that the infrastructure already allows for such connections. Ms. Schaefer clarified that the proposed emergency access to Daniel Boone Trail will be secured with a Knox Box gate, accessible only to emergency personnel. She confirmed that Daniel Boone Trail has a paved surface, while Gordon Acres Drive remains unpaved; both are private roads. She noted that a major storm could impact all access points due to a shared stream crossing but said the project meets fire code by providing two emergency routes. She added that no viable options exist for additional connections because the area is fully built out. In coordination with a County initiative, the project’s engineering aims to improve regional stormwater management, though it cannot fully prevent extreme weather impacts. On tree preservation, Ms. Schaefer said trees in open space and stormwater areas will remain unless essential improvements require removal. The team completed a tree survey and included it in the materials, showing about 1,100 trees on site, with far fewer slated for removal. She offered to provide a more precise removal count before the hearing concluded. Regarding the price point, Ms. Schaefer said the current estimate is about $375,000, an increase caused by reducing the number of units during the review process. Addressing concerns about storms, she stated that “100- year storms are the new 25,” meaning intense storms are becoming more frequent. Mr. Cazier explained the stormwater chart referenced in the presentation, noting that the County’s design standards have changed; what previously qualified as a 25-year storm event (eight \[8\] inches of rainfall) is now modeled as a 10.3-inch storm under the updated 25-year standard. In response to questions about flooding, Mr. Dickerson said the County’s recent Northeast New Hanover Flood Advisory Study identified portions of the property within an advisory flood area. He explained that this study does not serve as a regulatory tool like FEMA’s floodplain maps but informs residents of potential flood risks that may not appear on federal maps. Planning and Land Use Director Rebekah Roth added that the County funded this detailed modeling to address gaps where FEMA had not completed sufficient analysis. The study found greater flood risk in some areas than previously documented, and staff notified property owners accordingly. She clarified that although the site lies within an advisory flood risk area, it is not part of a FEMA-designated floodplain. Federal lending guidelines do not require flood insurance for mortgage approval. She reiterated that the study aims to raise awareness and recommend that property owners consider obtaining coverage. County Manager Coudriet further stated that said staff initiated the study after observing inconsistencies NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 JULY 21, 2025 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 599 in FEMA flood maps, particularly abrupt cutoffs in flood panels in northern areas of the County. The County funded additional modeling to better reflect localized flood risks. While the study confirmed flood risk in the area, it does not carry federal regulatory weight, meaning the Board cannot require flood insurance under the National Flood Insurance Program. However, the Board may consider this information when deliberating on conditional rezoning requests and may apply related standards, such as base flood elevation requirements from the local ordinance. In response to questions, Ms. Roth said the County created a dedicated webpage outlining the flood study findings and held a public open house for affected property owners. Staff are available to answer questions and help residents understand the advisory data. She said she could not speak definitively for the real estate profession, but agents who know about the information may have an obligation to disclose it. At the Board’s direction, staff could recommend applicant conditions to ensure future homeowners are made aware of the advisory flood risk. She also noted that the applicant submitted the application as the study was being finalized, so the applicant may not have known the new data at the time. In response to follow-up questions, Ms. Schaefer confirmed that only lots 7 and 59 might fall within the flood advisory area, but the applicant's engineer believes the slab elevations will be outside the hazard zone, pending TRC review. Comparing the lots to those on Sun Coast Drive, she noted that those homes appear larger, but many buyers now prefer patio-style homes with less yard space. She highlighted the inclusion of internal open space and nearby park access via sidewalks. To meet block length requirements, the plan adds two traffic-calming breaks, each roughly the size of a parcel lot and providing overflow parking. She said homeowners will be responsible for maintaining backyard fences, with the HOA ensuring compliance. In response to concerns about investor ownership and long-term upkeep, she said the applicant is open to adding fence maintenance to the HOA covenants if the Board sets that as a condition. Chair Rivenbark noted that six minutes remained for the applicant’s presentation and asked Ms. Schaefer to continue. Ms. Schaefer said her presentation was complete but remained available to answer questions. She added that she was still searching for the complete tree survey but confirmed plans to remove 34 significant trees. In response to questions, Mr. Dickerson said he does not know the number of trees to be removed. He explained the definition of significant trees, noting that the designation varies by species and diameter, for example, a magnolia qualifies as significant at eight (8) inches in diameter, while a longleaf pine qualifies at 18 inches. He added that trees on site fall into both “documented” and “significant” categories. Documented trees require a removal permit, while significant trees require both a permit and mitigation. Chair Rivenbark stated that one person signed up to speak in favor and asked the speaker to make their remarks. Jerod Patterson, representing the Business Alliance for a Sound Economy (BASE) and a resident of Nicholas Creek Circle, spoke in favor of the request. He said the project addresses the urgent need for single-family homes under $400,000, a segment currently in short supply. Citing housing gap data, he noted that population and job growth outpace housing development, driving up home and rent prices. He urged the Board to consider the needs of essential workers and young families who often cannot afford to live where they work. He described the proposal as a well-planned, appropriately located development with 67 homes near existing neighborhoods, amenities, and services. Chair Rivenbark then stated that five people signed up in opposition to the request and asked the speakers to make their remarks. Kim Turner, resident of Gordon Acres Drive, Wilmington, NC, spoke in opposition on behalf of the Gordon Acres community. She raised concerns about flooding, noting that her property lies partially in a floodplain near planned stormwater ponds, and questioned long-term maintenance and enforcement. Referring to Hurricane Florence and previous drainage issues, she also opposed removing mature trees and habitat, citing the 2025 County Tree Canopy Report and the ecological value of existing woodlands. She expressed broader concerns about climate impacts and unsustainable growth. Pointing to the Planning Board’s concerns, she said reducing the number of homes from 81 to 67 does not address the core issues and urged the Board to deny the rezoning and pursue a more compatible plan. Sarah DeVries, resident of Gordon Acres Drive, Wilmington, NC, spoke in opposition on behalf of the Gordon Acres neighborhood. While acknowledging improvements from the original 81-home plan, she noted that the revised layout removes interconnectivity that could have benefited both neighborhoods. She stated the developer abandoned that option when financial participation was needed to improve Gordon Acres Drive, a private gravel road. Without interconnectivity or infrastructure improvements, she argued, the neighborhood will face impacts without receiving any benefits. She requested that the utility easement through 1927 Gordon Acres Drive be clearly defined to allow direct water and sewer tie-in from Gordon Acres Drive and asked for the installation of a fire hydrant at that location to improve emergency access. She urged the Board to consider these minimal, reasonable improvements to offset the project’s impact. Bill Jayne, resident of Rosewood Landing Drive, Castle Hayne, NC, and representing the Alliance for Cape nd Fear Trees, spoke in opposition, stating that the organization submitted its official position to the Board on July 2. Mr. Jayne described the request as premature, citing the ongoing County flood study and a tree inventory that NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 JULY 21, 2025 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 600 remains unavailable to the public. He urged the Board to delay action until the studies are complete and available for review. James Gregory, resident of Midland Drive, Wilmington, NC, spoke in opposition on behalf of himself, the Alliance for Cape Fear Trees, and concerned citizens. He urged the Board to deny the request and require a revised plan that accounts for key environmental features. He noted that a high-value mixed forest covers 70% of the site, which the application and staff report did not address. Clearing the forest, he said, will increase runoff and flood risk due to evapotranspiration loss and added impervious surface. He also cited the presence of perennial streams and old, likely ineffective drainage ditches, further raising flood concerns. He recommended a cluster design to preserve more of the existing forest. Helen Hollingsworth, resident of Daniel Boone Trail, Wilmington, NC, was not present when called forward to speak. Chair Rivenbark stated that the applicant and opponents will each be allowed five minutes of rebuttal. In rebuttal, Ms. Schaefer stated that the project is not premature, as it follows the County’s rezoning process and will undergo full stormwater review under County and state regulations. She noted that the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ) can enforce stormwater system maintenance and that the project will upgrade outdated infrastructure to current code. She noted that the applicant submitted a tree survey on the canopy and that current R-15 zoning requires fewer protections or plantings. Regarding connectivity, she explained that both Gordon Acres Drive and Daniel Boone Trail are private, and full access would require unanimous consent from property owners, making emergency access the only viable option. She confirmed that the utility easement remains a condition of approval and that placing a fire hydrant there would require removing additional nd trees. While her client had not received the July 2 report from the Alliance for Cape Fear Trees, she affirmed that the project complies with County tree and mitigation standards. She concluded by referencing letters of support from the Chamber of Commerce to the Planning Board. In response to questions, Craig Johnson, representing Harrington Homes, confirmed that the project meets the County’s updated 25-year storm standard, which reflects higher rainfall intensity, and said the site and downstream improvements should manage runoff effectively. He acknowledged that two lots lie within an advisory flood area and committed to notifying future buyers. He noted that the project aligns with the Comprehensive Plan and that the plan was reduced from 86 to 67 homes in response to concerns. He explained that legal constraints prevent the development from connecting to adjacent private roads and that the site’s shape limits layout options. He added that the project provides three off-street parking spaces per home, with a fourth available if the buyer selects a two-car garage and confirmed that fence and tree maintenance will be included in the HOA covenants. In opposition rebuttal, Mr. Jayne urged the Board to change its approach to tree preservation. He criticized evaluating individual trees and suggested adopting a canopy coverage-based model to better protect forest ecosystems. Citing the County’s canopy study, he noted a 4% loss, about 3,000 acres, between 2014 and 2022 and warned that continued loss will worsen flooding, raise temperatures, and degrade quality of life. He advocated for low-impact, green infrastructure over traditional stormwater ponds and pipes, citing long-term maintenance and public health concerns. He urged the Board to slow the process, stating that premature rezonings lead to clear- cutting and overly dense development, and encouraged alternative approaches that preserve more natural features. In opposition rebuttal, Ms. DeVries stated that the proposed fire hydrant location is within the designated pedestrian and bike path area. Since that portion of the site will already be cleared, installing the hydrant would not require any additional tree removal beyond what is already planned for the path. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark closed the public hearing and asked if there was any further Board discussion. In response to questions, County Engineer Tim Lowe confirmed that the County has performed ditch maintenance in the vicinity three times over the past five years, including work under the EWP program in 2020 following Hurricane Florence, and again in 2022 and 2023 in segments near Gordon Acres and Farrington Farms. He noted that another work order is currently in place to address additional maintenance needs identified in recent observations. He added that while the channel has some constraints due to past deepening and vegetation growth, drainage flow has improved because of ongoing maintenance efforts. In response to questions, Ms. Schaefer stated that information about when the lot was last cleared or reforested was not part of her research, and she did not conduct the title work. She noted that Mr. Johnson identified most of the trees as younger loblolly pines. Chair Rivenbark asked Ms. Schaefer whether, 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. Schaefer responded that she wanted to proceed with the vote. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark asked for Board direction. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 JULY 21, 2025 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 601 The Board discussed the matter. Commissioner Zapple acknowledged the difficulty of the decision, citing concerns about tree loss and flooding while also emphasizing the urgent need for workforce and starter homes. He expressed confidence in the builder and supported the project as a feasible response to housing needs on a challenging site. Chair Rivenbark agreed, noting that if the Board judged every development solely by tree loss or flood risk, few would move forward. He emphasized limited land availability and supported the rezoning. Commissioner Walker voiced concerns about density, flood risk, wildlife displacement, and traffic, especially with delayed improvements to Gordon Road. Vice-Chair Pierce highlighted the need for attainable single-family housing, noting that the project’s estimated $375,000 price point and approximate $2,000 monthly cost offer more accessible homeownership compared to the County’s $581,000 average. While reaffirming her support for affordable housing, Commissioner Walker reiterated concerns about safety and long-term flood risk, cautioning against burdening homeowners in pursuit of affordability. Chair Rivenbark reiterated his request for Board direction. Commissioner Scalise noted that while several Commissioners had expressed support for the project, no motion had been made. He moved to approve the rezoning request. MOTION: Commissioner Scalise MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chair Pierce, to approve the proposed rezoning to a (CZD) R-5 District. The Board finds it to be consistent with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because it fits into a largely residential area and is within the recommended density 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 is consistent with the character of the surrounding area, which varies in density but remains residential. The following proposed conditions are included as part of the approval: 1. The project will include emergency only access to Daniel Boone Trail. 2. The project will include a minimum one-car garage with each home and ability to park two cars in the driveway of each home. 3. The project will provide a six-foot fence at the rear of each lot of the development. 4. Two trees at least 2 inches in diameter at breast height will be planted on each lot, to be maintained by the HOA through a landscaping easement on each lot. Tree maintenance and preservation will be included in the covenants which are subject to county review before recording of final plat. 5. The 18-inch oak tree in the middle of the internal road, around which the road has been reconfigured, will be preserved on the site. 6. There will be two 10-foot in width bicycle and pedestrian access easements in this development, connecting to Daniel Boone Trail and Gordon Acres Drive. 7. A public utility easement meeting the minimum standards of CFPUA for water and sewer infrastructure shall be dedicated along the bicycle and pedestrian easement connection to Gordon Acres Drive at the time the final plat is recorded with the Register of Deeds. 8. Existing trees in the site’s open space that do not impact required land grading or other improvements, and future amenities as identified in the required Tree Removal Permit will be preserved. Commissioner Zapple asked if Commissioner Scalise would amend his motion to include conditions about the fence and lots 7 and 59. Commissioner Scalise declined the amendment, stating he made the original motion after others expressed support but did not move forward. He stood by his motion as stated. Commissioner Zapple stated he would make a substitute motion. SUBSTITUTE MOTION: Commissioner Zapple MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chair Pierce, to approve the proposed rezoning to a (CZD) R-5 District. The Board finds it to be consistent with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because it fits into a largely residential area and is within the recommended density 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 is consistent with the character of the surrounding area, which varies in density but remains residential. The following proposed conditions are included as part of the approval: 1. The project will include emergency only access to Daniel Boone Trail. 2. The project will include a minimum one-car garage with each home and ability to park two cars in the driveway of each home. 3. The project will provide a six-foot fence at the rear of each lot of the development. 4. Two trees at least 2 inches in diameter at breast height will be planted on each lot, to be maintained by the HOA through a landscaping easement on each lot. Tree maintenance and preservation will be included in the covenants which are subject to county review before recording of final plat. 5. The 18-inch oak tree in the middle of the internal road, around which the road has been reconfigured, will be preserved on the site. 6. There will be two 10-foot in width bicycle and pedestrian access easements in this development, connecting to Daniel Boone Trail and Gordon Acres Drive. 7. A public utility easement meeting the minimum standards of CFPUA for water and sewer infrastructure shall be dedicated along the bicycle and pedestrian easement connection to Gordon Acres Drive at the time the final plat is recorded with the Register of Deeds. 8. Existing trees in the site’s open space that do not impact required land grading or other improvements, and future amenities as identified in the required Tree Removal Permit will be preserved. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 JULY 21, 2025 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 602 9. Maintenance of the fence required in condition #3 above will be the responsibility of the property owner and included in the Homeowner’s Association Covenants, to be recorded with the final plat with the New Hanover County Register of Deeds. 10. The 2025 New Hanover County Floodplain Advisory Study shall be shown on the final plat for this development, noting on lots 7 and 59 the flood risk as part of that study, and shall be recorded with the final plat with the New Hanover County Register of Deeds. In response to questions, Ms. Schaefer confirmed her agreement with the two added conditions. A brief discussion ensued on the additional conditions. County Attorney Smith requested clarification on the proposed buyer notification condition, asking whether it would appear in the deed or another document. Ms. Schaefer suggested allowing the applicant, county attorney, and planning director to work together to draft appropriate language, with the condition left to their discretion. Vice-Chair Pierce supported the approach, emphasizing that the goal is to notify buyers of potential flood risk. Ms. Schaefer agreed but noted the need to consult the title attorney before committing to deed language. County Attorney Smith confirmed this collaboration is permitted and helps avoid confusion when conditions are added during the hearing. Commissioner Scalise noted a similar issue in the past, which required a second hearing, and hoped to avoid that. Ms. Schaefer expressed confidence that the parties could reach an agreement. There being no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark asked for a vote on the substitute motion on the floor. Upon vote, the MOTION PASSED 4 to 1. Commissioner Walker dissenting. A copy of AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY OF NEW HANOVER AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF AREA 8B OF NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA, ADOPTED July 7, 1972, is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and is contained in Zoning Book II, Section 8B, Page 91. PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL OF A REZONING REQUEST BY CORRIE FAITH LEE WITH EQUITAS LAW PARTNERS LLP, APPLICANT, ON BEHALF OF RIVER ROAD CONSTRUCTION, LLC, PROPERTY OWNER, TO MODIFY AN EXISTING APPROXIMATELY 13.94 ACRES (CZD) RMF-L, RESIDENTIAL MULTI-FAMILY LOW-DENSITY, AND (CZD) B-2, REGIONAL BUSINESS DISTRICT LOCATED AT 6900 AND 6904 CAROLINA BEACH ROAD TO REDUCE THE MAXIMUM UNIT COUNT AND DENSITY, AND TO MODIFY THE APPROVED HOUSING TYPE FROM MULTI-FAMILY TO SINGLE- FAMILY ATTACHED DWELLING UNITS (Z23-04M) Development Review Planner Ryan Beil presented the request to modify an existing conditional zoning district (CZD) for approximately 13.94 acres located near 6900 Carolina Beach Road. The proposed modification would reduce residential density by revising the current (CZD) Residential Multi-Family Low Density and (CZD) B-2 zoning. The property is bordered on all sides by R-15 zoning. In 2023, the site was rezoned to allow 126 multi-family apartment units and a 36,000-square-foot mini storage facility. The applicant now proposes replacing the approved 126 multi-family units with 85 single-family attached homes, resulting in a net reduction of 41 residential units. Aerial photography illustrated that site work has begun, including the construction of a retaining wall along the northern and western property lines. He presented photos showing the current site conditions and provided visual examples of a two-story storage facility and a row-style single-family attached development to illustrate the proposed building types. Mr. Beil then reviewed the previously approved 2023 concept plan and presented the applicant’s revised site plan. The updated proposal includes 85 single-family attached homes, a 36,000-square-foot mini storage facility, and several key site features:  A stormwater pond;  An undeveloped open space area extending west of the developed portion;  A 20-foot-wide public access easement along Carolina Beach Road to accommodate future bicycle and pedestrian facilities; and  Driveway access onto Southern Charm Drive. Mr. Beil stated that no current State Transportation Improvement Projects (STIPs) are planned for this portion of Carolina Beach Road. The site includes right-in/right-out access on Carolina Beach Road and secondary access on Southern Charm Drive, a state-maintained road. Staff recommend keeping the original rezoning condition that prohibits a gate at the Southern Charm access. The proposed reduction in residential units does not trigger the threshold for a TIA and is expected to generate less traffic than the previously approved plan. He explained that the proposal aligns with surrounding development patterns along Carolina Beach Road, where a transition from R-15 to more intense commercial and residential zoning is already occurring. The plan also diversifies housing options in the area by introducing single-family attached units. Mr. Beil reported that the project supports two goals of the County’s Strategic Plan: (1) enhancing and protecting natural areas and environmental features, and (2) ensuring access to basic needs through planned growth and development. The Comprehensive Plan designates the rear portion of the property as General Residential and the front portion as Community Mixed Use. Staff stated the revised concept plan appropriately places the single- family attached units in the General Residential area and the commercial mini storage use in the Community Mixed Use area. The Planning Board considered the application during its June 5, 2025 meeting and recommended 4-0 approval with seven conditions. These included previously adopted conditions and new recommendations addressing parking, access easements, and square footage limitations for the storage facility. During the meeting, NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 JULY 21, 2025 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 603 the developer requested that Southern Charm Drive access be gated. After a brief discussion and one public comment expressing concern about traffic impacts to Southern Charm and Southern Exposure, the Planning Board voted to approve the request with a modified condition allowing the gate. Staff concurred with the overall recommendation to approve the application but recommended retaining the original condition prohibiting a gate across Southern Charm Drive access. Staff cited consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, zoning compatibility, and results of the technical review in support of this recommendation. Staff also noted that the proposed changes would reduce housing density and preserve approximately 6.41 acres of naturally vegetated open space. The conditions are as follows: 1. Any RV and Boat storage must be located on the interior of the mini storage and may not be visible from a public right-of-way. 2. The access easement from Southern Charm to Carolina Beach Road shall be public. 3. The access easements from both Southern Charm Drive and Carolina Beach Road shall not be gated. 4. Single-family attached structures shall be limited to three stories. The mini storage height will be limited to 3 stories or 50 feet. 5. The buffer yard between the new residential structures and the adjacent residential structures shall be no less than 20 feet. 6. The mini storage structure will be limited to a 12,000 square foot maximum building footprint and a 36,000 gross square foot maximum. 7. A minimum 20-foot-wide public access easement shall be provided along the frontage parallel with Carolina Beach Road to accommodate future public bicycle and pedestrian use. Mr. Beil stated that staff has received one public comment in opposition to the request. Chair Rivenbark thanked Mr. Beil for the presentation and invited the applicant to make remarks. Corrie Faith Lee with Equitas Law Partners LLP, applicant, on behalf of River Road Construction, LLC, property owner, presented the request to modify a previously approved 2023 rezoning. The current approval allows for 126 apartment units; the proposed modification would replace this with 85 for-sale townhouse units in response to the community’s and Board’s expressed need for more affordable homeownership options. She explained that the site plan was revised to accommodate townhome-style development, including adjustments for standard townhouse amenities such as front-facing parking. She noted concern raised at the Planning Board hearing regarding potential traffic impacts on Southern Charm Drive, which abuts the development to the north. In response, the applicant proposed a modification to Condition #3 to allow installation of a gated emergency-access-only connection to Southern Charm Drive, subject to County and other jurisdictional approvals. Ms. Lee then shared a visual rendering of the proposed townhomes. She referenced a traffic letter showing the modification would result in 285 fewer daily trips than the originally approved apartment development. The proposal remains consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, placing commercial uses near the main corridor and transitioning to residential toward the western portion of the site. She concluded by emphasizing the public benefit of adding for-sale, entry-level housing in the County. In response to questions, Ms. Lee stated that while no fixed price point has been set, the anticipated range for the townhomes is high $300,000s to low $400,000s. She confirmed that the open space at the rear of the property will remain as designated and span several acres. Regarding access to Southern Charm Drive, she explained that the applicant is requesting a condition change to allow the option of installing a gate, based on concerns about cut- through traffic. She clarified that the gate is not guaranteed and would require approval from the County, TRC, and NCDOT, as Southern Charm Drive is state maintained. Due to those requirements, she could not give a definitive yes or no on whether a gate will be installed. Ms. Lee also confirmed that the applicant was previously approved for 126 multifamily units and is now proposing to build 85 single-family attached (townhouse) units instead. Chair Rivenbark stated that no one signed up to speak in favor, and one person signed up in opposition to the request. He asked the speaker to make their remarks. Adrianne Garber, resident of Red Heart Drive, Wilmington, NC, spoke in opposition to the request, stating that the proposed 85-unit townhouse development remains too dense and incompatible with the surrounding neighborhoods of small, single-story homes. She raised concerns about building height, stormwater runoff, and the use of retaining walls, which she said elevate properties at the expense of neighbors and increase flood risk. She also expressed doubt about long-term intentions, noting the undeveloped rear portion could be built out later. She called for a moratorium on high-density development, a rate-of-growth ordinance, and questioned the validity of a housing shortage, stating that not everyone who wants to live in the County should be accommodated at the cost of environmental degradation and community impact. Chair Rivenbark stated that the applicant and opponents will each be allowed five minutes for rebuttal. In applicant rebuttal, Ms. Lee stated that the proposal reduces the approved density by one-third, which helps address concerns about infrastructure and flooding. She reiterated that the intent is to provide a more compatible development. In response to questions, Ms. Lee asked whether the Board preferred the connection to be gated or not. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 JULY 21, 2025 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 604 She clarified that if a gated connection remains a concern for the Board, the applicant is willing to follow staff’s recommendation and leave the access ungated, despite earlier neighborhood concerns. As to site elevation, she explained that the installation of the retaining wall lowered the overall site grade, so the development is not elevated above adjacent properties as previously suggested. In opposition rebuttal, Ms. Garber questioned whether the reduction in density was meaningful, stating the project still places too many people in a small area and contributes to overdevelopment. She expressed concern that continued growth would lead to vertical construction and a loss of community character. She also commented on what she felt were vague commitments from developers regarding tree planting, setbacks, and site grading, raising doubts about long-term accountability. She warned that increased impervious surfaces and backfilling would worsen runoff for surrounding properties. She urged the Board to deny the rezoning and instead require single-story, single- family homes with yards, better aligned with the existing neighborhood. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark closed the public hearing and asked if there was any further Board discussion. In response to questions, Mr. Biel confirmed that staff support keeping the Southern Charm Drive access point open, consistent with the original rezoning approval. He noted that interconnectivity remains a priority for the County, particularly on state-maintained roads, and aligns with direction from the County Manager’s Office. Ms. Lee stated there is no objection to maintaining the Southern Charm Drive connection. She acknowledged concerns from the adjacent northern subdivision and indicated the applicant is comfortable proceeding with or without the gating condition, depending on the Board’s preference. She also clarified that the wall on site is a true retaining wall, not a sound barrier. Because the site’s overall grade has been lowered, the wall supports internal grading but does not redirect runoff toward neighboring properties. She added that the retaining wall varies in height from approximately 2 feet to 10 feet, depending on location. In response to questions about who would bear the cost of additional students generated by the project, Ms. Lee responded that such costs are generally covered through local tax revenues, though she acknowledged the broader funding challenge. County Manager Coudriet interjected, advising the Board that while school overcrowding may be a valid consideration in evaluating a rezoning, it is not legally permissible for the County to require a developer to fund public school construction or related infrastructure. He cautioned that continued discussion in that direction could exceed the Board’s legislative authority, as funding for public facilities remains a county responsibility. There was a brief discussion on how the proposed development might affect school capacity, noting that reduced density could help mitigate the impact. In response to questions, Ms. Lee commented that while she could not provide specific student projections, townhomes may contribute more to the tax base than apartments, potentially helping offset service demands. She added that the reduced unit count could result in a net-zero student increase compared to the current approval. She also confirmed the 6.4-acre rear portion of the site is designated as open space and, to her knowledge, there are no plans for future development. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark asked Ms. Lee whether, 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. Lee responded that she wanted to proceed with the vote. Chair Rivenbark asked for Board direction. MOTION: Commissioner Scalise MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chair Pierce, proposed rezoning to a CZD RMF-L and CZD B-2. The Board finds it to be consistent with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because it is in an area designated as Community Mixed Use and General Residential and provides for the types of uses recommended by these place types. The Board also finds approval of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the proposed rezoning would provide additional types of housing and greater land efficiency. The following proposed conditions are included as part of the approval: 1. Any RV and Boat storage must be located on the interior of the mini storage and may not be visible from a public right-of-way. 2. The access easement from Southern Charm to Carolina Beach Road shall be public. 3. The access easements from both Southern Charm Drive and Carolina Beach Road shall not be gated. 4. Single-family attached structures shall be limited to three stories. The mini storage height will be limited to three (3) stories or 50 feet. 5. The buffer yard between the new residential structures and the adjacent residential structures shall be no less than 20 feet. 6. The mini storage structure will be limited to a 12,000 square foot maximum building footprint and a 36,000 gross square foot maximum. 7. A minimum 20-foot-wide public access easement shall be provided along the frontage parallel with Carolina Beach Road to accommodate future public bicycle and pedestrian use. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. A copy of AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY OF NEW HANOVER AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF AREA 4 OF NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA, ADOPTED April 7, 1971 is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and is contained in Zoning Book I, Section 4, Page 136. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 JULY 21, 2025 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 605 PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL OF A REZONING REQUEST BY CINDEE WOLF WITH DESIGN SOLUTIONS, APPLICANT, ON BEHALF OF JANECE STONE WITH J STONE INVESTMENTS, LLC, PROPERTY OWNER, TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 4.31 ACRES ZONED R-20, RESIDENTIAL LOCATED AT 3419 CASTLE HAYNE ROAD TO (CZD) B-2, REGIONAL BUSINESS FOR A MARINE CONTRACTOR OFFICE WITH WAREHOUSING (Z25-12) Development Review Planner Katherine May presented the request to rezone approximately 4.31 acres at 3419 Castle Hayne Road from R-20, Residential, to Conditional B-2, Regional Business. The proposed rezoning would support a marine contractor’s office and warehousing operations. The property lies just south of Chair Road on Castle Hayne Road. Ms. May provided an overview of aerial imagery showing the undeveloped site, with Saint James AME Church to the north, Tractor Supply to the east, and residential properties to the west and south. Photos of the site illustrated views looking north and south along Castle Hayne Road, as well as a view of the existing 130-foot- wide Duke Energy easement that runs across the property. She then provided an example of a comparable contractor office for reference and reviewed the proposed site layout. The site plan includes:  A central office and workshop;  A parking lot on the eastern portion of the parcel;  Two warehouses, one north and one west of the main office;  A 20-foot landscape buffer along the eastern and northern property boundaries;  A stormwater management area located north of the development, between the site and Saint James AME Church; and  Septic infrastructure on the northeast corner of the property. Ms. May noted that CFPUA confirmed sewer service is available along Castle Hayne Road; however, the applicant must fund the cost of boring under the roadway to connect to the system. The site will have full access to Castle Hayne Road, with the main driveway directly aligned with the Tractor Supply store access point across the street. An overview of nearby commercial development was provided, including Moore’s Crossing Planned Development, which was rezoned in 2024. Road improvements associated with that rezoning and TIA include Chair Road, Castle Hayne Road, and the I-140 entrance. Trip generation estimates for the proposed use fall below the threshold for a TIA, although peak-hour trips are expected to increase with development. Ms. May further stated that this section of Castle Hayne Road has experienced significant commercial growth in recent years, and the proposed project aligns with this trend. The property lies within the Community Mixed Use place type identified in the Comprehensive Plan, which encourages small-scale, mixed-use development supporting all modes of travel. Ms. May reported that the Planning Board considered the rezoning at its June 5, 2025 meeting. The original application proposed a Conditional CS district, but the concept plan and associated setbacks were consistent with B- 2 standards. At the applicant’s request, the Planning Board proceeded with consideration of the project as a Conditional B-2 rezoning. It was determined that the revised district designation was appropriate, as the project aligned fully with B-2 requirements. The Planning Board found the proposal consistent with the Comprehensive Plan’s purpose and intent, particularly as it supports the Community Mixed Use designation. It also found the request reasonable and in the public interest, citing compatibility with surrounding land uses. The Planning Board voted 6-0 to recommend approval. Staff concurred with the Planning Board’s recommendation, citing policy guidance from the Comprehensive Plan, zoning standards, and technical review outcomes. There are four proposed conditions related to setbacks, fencing, easements, and permitted uses as follows: 1. The setbacks as shown on the concept plan must remain. 2. A 6-foot-high screening fence shall be required along the northern boundary of the gravel service yard as shown on the concept plan. 3. No development or outdoor storage shall occur within the existing utility easement as shown on the concept plan. The easement shall constitute an additional spatial buffer, and the required transitional buffer shall be installed along the northern portion of the easement if the easement-holder does not permit landscaping inside the easement. 4. The permitted uses are limited to Contractor Office for the main building and Warehousing for the two accessory buildings. Ms. May concluded the staff presentation stating that the project would proceed through the TRC for additional development review if approved. Chair Rivenbark thanked Ms. May for the presentation and invited the applicant to make remarks. Cindee Wolf with Design Solutions, applicant, on behalf of Janece Stone with J Stone Investments, LLC, property owner, presented the request. She stated the vacant parcel south of the I-140 interchange was identified as a suitable relocation site for a contracting business due to its size and accessibility. The proposed site layout is simple, with development limited by a large power line easement along the southern edge. The larger building will house limited contractor office space and a workshop, with minimal visitor parking and an attractive façade facing Castle Hayne Road. Behind the security gates, pavement transitions to gravel to access service yards designed for maneuvering pickups with trailers. The business constructs floating docks on site for delivery to job sites, with no heavy machinery other than a small forklift and standard power tools. Noise impacts are expected to be minimal. The business employs 11 to 12 people, most of whom work off site, with hours of operation generally Monday through Friday from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., and occasionally Saturday mornings. The project aligns access with the NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 JULY 21, 2025 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 606 Tractor Supply driveway for safety and turning movements. Ms. Wolf emphasized that no grading is required due to the flat terrain and thanked staff for their recommendation of approval. She noted that Daniel Shirley with J Stone Investments, LLC, was present to answer additional questions. In response to questions, Ms. Wolf explained that while the project team would prefer to connect to the nearby force main across Castle Hayne Road, doing so would require a costly road bore and potentially an easement across private church property. She noted that discussions with the church have been cooperative and ongoing, including the possibility of joint efforts to clear downstream ditches during construction. She clarified that the proposed use includes only 11 to 12 employees and a single unisex restroom, making an on-site septic system a feasible and more cost-effective option at this time. In response to a question about the soil type noted in the staff report, Ms. Wolf confirmed that a suitable septic field has been located. She acknowledged that if the building’s future use were to expand, additional facilities could trigger Health Department requirements, including mandatory connection to the force main. Regarding drainage and flooding, she stated that the stormwater pond will be designed to meet all current County and state standards, with overflow directed to the site’s natural low point. Chair Rivenbark stated that one person signed up to speak in favor and no one signed up to speak in opposition to the request. He invited the speaker to make remarks. Bernard Williams, resident of Rock Hill Road, Castle Hayne, NC, spoke in favor of the request stating he was a member of Saint James AME Church. He stated that he is not opposed to the project and hopes the church and property owners can work together as good neighbors, particularly regarding the septic issue. He shared that the County has proposed a sewer or force main connection for the church and expressed interest in collaborating with the applicants on a shared system, noting both properties currently use septic. He emphasized the area’s ongoing drainage issues and stated that even with a stormwater pond, overflow and runoff remain concerns. Mr. Williams noted he has personally worked to clean out ditches in the Rock Hill community and hopes continued cooperation will lead to mutually beneficial solutions. Chair Rivenbark closed the public hearing and opened the floor to Board discussion. 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 Board direction. MOTION: Commissioner Zapple MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chair Pierce, to approve the proposed rezoning. The Board finds it to be consistent with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because the rezoning provides for the types of uses recommended in the Community Mixed Use place type. The Board also finds approval of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because it is located near compatible land uses. The following proposed conditions are included as part of the approval: 1. The setbacks as shown on the concept plan must remain. 2. A 6-foot-high screening fence shall be required along the northern boundary of the gravel service yard as shown on the concept plan. 3. No development or outdoor storage shall occur within the existing utility easement as shown on the concept plan. The easement shall constitute an additional spatial buffer, and the required transitional buffer shall be installed along the northern portion of the easement if the easement-holder does not permit landscaping inside the easement. 4. The permitted uses are limited to Contactor Office for the main building and Warehousing for the two accessory buildings. 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 62. PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL OF A REZONING REQUEST BY CINDEE WOLF WITH DESIGN SOLUTIONS, APPLICANT, ON BEHALF OF JOSE A C GODINEZ, PROPERTY OWNER, TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 2.00 ACRES ZONED R-20, RESIDENTIAL LOCATED AT 4222 CASTLE HAYNE ROAD TO (CZD) B-2, REGIONAL BUSINESS, FOR THE USES OF CONTRACTOR OFFICE AND OFFICES FOR PRIVATE BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES (Z25-13) Ms. May presented the request to rezone approximately 2.00 acres at 4222 Castle Hayne Road from R-20, Residential, to Conditional B-2, Regional Business. The proposed rezoning would allow uses including a contractor office and offices for private business and professional activities. The property is located just north of the Castle Hayne Road/I-140 interchange and is surrounded by commercial parcels, two of which were rezoned within the past few years. Ms. May provided an overview of aerial imagery showing the site’s existing single-family residence and contractor vehicles parked in the front and rear yards. In March 2025, the Planning and Land Use Department identified a zoning violation involving business operations within a residential district. A zoning technician met with the property owner to address the issue. In response, the owner submitted this rezoning application to bring the business into compliance and continue operations at the current location. Photos of the site showed the existing NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 JULY 21, 2025 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 607 home proposed for adaptive reuse as an office, the gated access to the future storage yard, and vehicles currently parked in the front yard. She clarified that, if the rezoning is approved, the parking area will be relocated behind the home and screened from street view. Ms. May also presented images of representative nearby developments, including a landscaping company adjacent to the site and an example of adaptive reuse of a single-family residence for business use. Ms. May provided an overview of the concept plan noting that it includes:  A proposed sign along Castle Hayne Road;  A 2,000 square foot office building utilizing the existing structure;  A rear parking lot behind the office;  A storage and equipment yard with a 600-square-foot shed to the west;  Fencing on three sides of the storage area;  A 35-foot setback and landscape buffer between the site and the adjacent residential property; and  A stormwater pond proposed at the rear of the site, though staff noted that final engineering may allow for relocation to the front of the property. The site will also have full access to Castle Hayne Road. Ms. May also provided an overview of recent commercial rezonings in the vicinity, including the case presented earlier in the meeting, located approximately one mile away, and a nearby property recently rezoned for a driving range. Traffic estimates for the project fall below the threshold that requires a TIA, but peak-hour trips are expected to increase slightly. Ms. May explained that B-2 zoning is commonly found along the Castle Hayne corridor. Adjacent properties include a landscaping business rezoned in 2024 and a driving range just south of the subject site. The area also includes other examples of adaptive reuse of residential structures for business purposes. The proposal aligns with the County’s Strategic Plan by supporting workforce and economic development goals. According to the Comprehensive Plan, the subject property lies within the Community Mixed Use place type, which supports small- scale, mixed-use development patterns that serve all modes of travel. A small portion of the site is also located within the Employment Center place type. The Planning Board considered the request at its June 5, 2025 meeting and voted 6-0 to recommend approval. The Board found the request consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, noting that the proposed uses align with the Community Mixed Use place type. The Board also determined that the request was reasonable and in the public interest, as the allowed uses would remain appropriate for the size and context of the site. Staff concurred with the Planning Board’s recommendation based on guidance from the Comprehensive Plan, applicable zoning standards, and the results of technical review. Also, four new conditions are proposed as follows: 1. The existing structure will remain and will be renovated for office use. 2. Uses will be limited to Contractor Office and Offices for Private Business and Professional Activities. 3. Parking shall be located behind the primary structure. 4. Existing trees shall be retained at the rear of the property to be used for the landscape buffer requirement. 5. The stormwater pond shown at the rear of the property may be relocated pending full engineering review and permitting. Ms. May concluded the staff presentation by stating that should the rezoning be approved, the project will be subject to additional development review through the TRC. Chair Rivenbark thanked Ms. May for the presentation and invited the applicant to make remarks. Cindee Wolf with Design Solutions, applicant, on behalf of Jose A C Godinez, property owner, presented the rezoning request for the property owner’s business, Brothers Landscaping. She explained that the property owner mistakenly began operating prior to rezoning, assuming it was permitted due to the presence of other landscaping companies nearby. She stated the current request is intended to correct that misunderstanding. Ms. Wolf noted the area includes similar zoning and referenced nearby land uses, including a driving range and another landscape company. She explained that part of the long-term plan is to stop parking in front of the house on the property, which she believes will be an improvement. She added that there is adequate space for a stormwater pond, which will be addressed with County Engineering. Ms. Wolf stated the request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, provides a sensible transition along Castle Hayne Road, and supports adaptive reuse and efficient infill. She concluded by stating the proposal is reasonable and in the public interest and offered to answer questions. In response to questions, Ms. Wolf clarified that the site will not store heavy equipment or large amounts of materials. She explained that while some pine straw or small quantities of mulch may be present, most materials are delivered directly to job sites. The property is intended for overnight truck and trailer storage behind a fenced area, not for activities involving heavier machinery. She confirmed that there are no plans for boat storage and reiterated that the use is strictly for a landscape contracting business. Regarding utilities, she stated an existing septic system serves the property. The interior of the house has been renovated, and the septic permit would be reviewed and updated by the Health Department as part of the TRC process. She noted that sewer is not available in this area. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 JULY 21, 2025 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 608 Chair Rivenbark stated 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. 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 Board direction. MOTION: Commissioner Zapple MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Walker, to approve the proposed rezoning to a (CZD) B-2 district. The Board finds it to be consistent with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because the rezoning provides for the types of uses recommended in both the Community Mixed Use and Employment Center place types. The Board also finds approval of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because application limits uses to those which are appropriate for the site. The following proposed conditions are included as part of the approval: 1. The existing structure will remain and will be renovated for office use. 2. Uses will be limited to Contractor Office and Offices for Private Business and Professional Activities. 3. Parking shall be located behind the primary structure. 4. Existing trees shall be retained at the rear of the property to be used for the landscape buffer requirement. 5. The stormwater pond shown at the rear of the property may be relocated pending full engineering review and permitting Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. A copy of AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY OF NEW HANOVER AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF AREA CASTLE HAYNE OF NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA, ADOPTED July 1, 1985 is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and is contained in Zoning Book II, Section CASTLE HAYNE, Page 41. APPOINTMENT OF VOTING DELEGATE TO THE 2025 NORTH CAROLINA ASSOCIATION OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS (NCACC) ANNUAL CONFERENCE Chair Rivenbark asked for a nomination of a County Commissioner to be designated as the voting delegate for the NCACC Annual Conference, which will be held August 21 – 23, 2025. Commissioner Walker nominated Commissioner Zapple. Hearing no further nominations, Chair Rivenbark asked for a vote on the nomination on the floor. Motion: Commissioner Walker MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Scalise to appoint Commissioner Zapple as the voting delegate for the 2025 NCACC Annual Conference. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS Airlie Gardens Foundation, Inc. Board of Directors Appointment Chair Rivenbark reported that one vacancy exists on the Airlie Gardens Foundation, Inc. Board of Directors, and two applications available for consideration. Commissioner Scalise nominated Josh Rosenberg for appointment. 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 Josh Rosenberg to the Airlie Gardens Foundation, Inc. Board of Directors to serve a three-year term, with the term to expire on June 30, 2028. Cape Fear Museum Advisory Board Appointments Chair Rivenbark reported that three vacancies exist on the Cape Fear Museum Advisory Board, with nine applications available for consideration. Commissioner Scalise nominated Nandy Bullock for appointment. Commissioner Zapple seconded the nomination. Commissioner Scalise nominated Harold Jarvis, II and Laura King for appointment. Chair Rivenbark seconded the nominations. Commissioner Zapple nominated Charles Pennington and Kari Williams for appointment. Commissioner Walker seconded the nominations. Hearing no further nominations, Chair Rivenbark asked for votes on the nominations on the floor. Vote Results: The Board voted UNANIMOUSLY to appoint Nancy Bullock to the Cape Fear Museum Advisory Board to serve a three-year term, with the term to expire on June 30, 2028. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 JULY 21, 2025 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 609 Vote Results: The Board 2 TO 3 to appoint Charles Pennington and Kari Williams to the Cape Fear Museum Advisory Board to serve three-year terms, with the terms to expire on June 30, 2028. The motion failed for lack of a majority, with Chair Rivenbark, Vice-Chair Pierce, and Commissioner Scalise dissenting. Vote Results: The Board voted in the majority to appoint Harold Jarvis, II and Laura King to the Cape Fear Museum Advisory Board to serve three-year terms, with the terms to expire on June 30, 2028; Commissioners Walker and Zapple dissenting. New Hanover County Alcohol Beverage Control Board Appointment Chair Rivenbark reported that one vacancy exists on the New Hanover County Alcohol Beverage Control (ABC) Board, with eight applications available for consideration. Commissioner Scalise nominated George Huffmon for appointment. 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 George Huffmon to the New Hanover County ABC Board to serve a three-year term, with the term expiring June 30, 2028. New Hanover County Airport Authority Appointment Chair Rivenbark reported that one vacancy exists on the New Hanover County Airport Authority with thirteen applications available for consideration. Commissioner Scalise nominated Andrew Jones for appointment. 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 Andrew Jones to the New Hanover County Airport Authority to serve a four-year term, with the term expiring June 30, 2029. New Hanover County Board of Mechanical Examiners Appointment Chair Rivenbark reported that one vacancy exists on the New Hanover County Board of Mechanical Examiners in the NC Registered Mechanical Engineer category, with one application available for consideration. Commissioner Walker nominated Steven Everhart for reappointment in the NC Registered Mechanical Engineer category. Chair Rivenbark 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 reappoint Steven Everhart for reappointment in the NC Registered Mechanical Engineer category to the New Hanover County Board of Mechanical Examiners to fill an unexpired term, with the term to expire August 31, 2026. New Hanover County Cooperative Extension Advisory Council Appointments Chair Rivenbark reported that two vacancies exist on the New Hanover County Cooperative Extension Advisory Council, and three applications are available for consideration. Commissioner Zapple nominated Deborah Judge-Watt and Joy Wiliamson for appointment. Commissioner Scalise seconded the nominations. Hearing no further nominations, Chair Rivenbark asked for a vote on the nominations on the floor. Vote Results: The Board voted UNANIMOUSLY to appoint Deborah Judge-Watt to the New Hanover County Cooperative Extension Advisory Council to fill an unexpired term with the term to expire December 1, 2026, and Joy Williamson to the New Hanover County Cooperative Extension Advisory Council to fill an unexpired term with the term to expire December 1, 2027. New Hanover County Health and Human Services Board Appointments Chair Rivenbark reported that five vacancies exist on the New Hanover County Health and Human Services Board in the categories of At-Large/Consumer of Human Services, Licensed Physician, Licensed Psychologist, and Licensed Veterinarian with two applications eligible for reappointment and five additional applications available for consideration. Commissioner Walker nominated Dr. Emily Baxter and Mariel Leah Mayo for reappointment and Rachel Crouse, Dr. Maurice Locklear, and Dr. Karyn Smith for appointment. Commissioner Scalise seconded the nominations. Hearing no further nominations, Chair Rivenbark asked for a vote on the nominations on the floor. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 JULY 21, 2025 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 610 Vote Results: Upon vote, the Board voted UNANIMOUSLY to reappoint Dr. Emily Baxter in the Licensed Psychologist category and Mariel Leah Mayo in the At-Large/Consumer of Human Services category and appoint Rachel Crouse in the At-Large/Consumer of Humans Services category, Dr. Maruice Locklear in the Licensed Physician category, and Dr. Karyn Smith in the Licensed Veterinarian category to the New Hanover County Health and Human Services Board to serve four-year terms with the terms to expire July 31, 2029. New Hanover County Inspections Department Advisory Council Appointments Chair Rivenbark reported that three vacancies exist on the New Hanover County Inspections Department Advisory Council, with one application eligible for reappointment in the Commercial Builder category, one application available for consideration in the Residential Builder category, and one application eligible for reappointment in the Electrical Contractor category. Commissioner Zapple nominated Greg Uhl for reappointment in the Commercial Builder category, Wesley Daniel for appointment in the Residential Builder category, and Andrew Ward for reappointment in the Electrical Contractor category. Chair Rivenbark seconded the nominations. Hearing no further nominations, Chair Rivenbark asked for a vote on the nominations on the floor. Vote Results: The Board voted UNANIMOUSLY to reappoint Greg Uhl in the Commercial Builder category and Andrew Ward in the Electrical Contractor category, and to appoint Wesley Daniel in the Residential Builder category to the New Hanover County Inspections Department Advisory Council to serve three-year terms with the terms to expire July 31, 2028. New Hanover County Non-County Agency Advisory Committee County Manager Coudriet stated that given the Board’s adopted FY26 budget no longer includes funding for outside agencies, he recommends that the Board formally eliminate both the Non-County Agency Committee and the associated policy, considering the County’s decision to withdraw from non-county agency funding. This action would also clearly communicate to the NHCE that it is not supplanting County dollars. MOTION: Commissioner Scalise MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chair Pierce to disband the New Hanover County Non- County Agency Advisory Committee. As such, the terms of its members will end effectively on July 21, 2025. Upon vote, the MOTION PASSED 3-2; Commissioners Walker and Zapple dissenting. New Hanover County Planning Board Appointments Chair Rivenbark reported that two vacancies exist on the New Hanover County Planning Board with one application eligible for reappointment and eleven additional applications available for consideration. Commissioner Scalise nominated John (Clark) Hipp for reappointment and Andrew Hewitt for appointment. Commissioner Walker seconded the nominations. Hearing no further nominations, Chair Rivenbark asked for a vote on the nominations on the floor. Vote Results: The Board voted UNANIMOUSLY to reappoint John (Clark) Hipp and to appoint Andrew Hewitt to the New Hanover County Planning Board to serve three-year terms with the terms to expire July 31, 2028. PUBLIC COMMENT Chair Rivenbark stated that three people signed up to speak under public comment and asked that the speakers provide comments. James Nebit, resident of Mason Knoll Drive, Wilmington, NC, urged the Board to reconsider the 30.6 tax rate, noting its impact on schools, such as overcrowded classrooms, unfilled positions, and cuts to enrichment programs. He emphasized that the small individual savings come at a high cost to public education, especially following a significant rise in property values. While supportive of the NHCE, he stressed that immediate needs remain unmet. Citing his experience and values of respect, responsibility, and reputation, he encouraged the Board to reinvest in schools and demonstrate leadership by revisiting the tax rate. Bijan Salehi, resident of Orchard Trace, Wilmington, NC, urged the Board to provide affordable transportation options for individuals with disabilities, particularly in areas not served by public transit. He shared a personal account of losing transportation independence on January 5, 2025 and described the resulting isolation and reliance on others for essential and recreational travel. He emphasized the limitations of his current provider and asked the Board to consider solutions that restore independence and fill existing service gaps. A brief discussion followed Mr. Salehi’s comments. Commissioner Scalise explained that Mr. Salehi previously used WAVE Transit’s micro-ride service, which WAVE Transit discontinued in that area due to low demand. County Manager Coudriet confirmed this, stating the service became cost-prohibitive for a single user. He noted that, while an imperfect solution, staff still provide five-day-a-week service and regularly discuss the situation to explore transportation alternatives, including non-medical options through various departments. In response to questions about Uber or Lyft vouchers, County Manager Coudriet clarified that the County does not offer those, as the current policy directs funding to WAVE Transit, which receives $1.6 million annually, more than double from prior years. Regarding why a voucher could not be considered, he explained that WAVE’s board makes those NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 JULY 21, 2025 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 611 decisions and that creating one-off policy exceptions could lead to broader challenges. He emphasized that, although the system is not fully on demand, Mr. Salehi continues to receive some service. In response to questions about other potential resources, County Manager Coudriet said A Caring Heart currently provides limited support to Mr. Salehi and noted that Trillium may also offer services through its provider network, although it does not directly provide them. Chair Rivenbark concluded by stating that staff will further review the matter. Tom Gale, resident of New Forest Drive, Wilmington, NC, expressed disappointment with the Board’s decision to withdraw from the WHAC and requested individual meetings with each commissioner to clarify what he believes the discussion contained as inaccuracies. He highlighted recent committee-led initiatives, including a developer roundtable and a well-attended housing summit, which he said provided value and did not relate to the $3 million fund. Emphasizing the potential for continued collaboration with the City and regional partners, Mr. Gale urged the Board to reconsider and explore additional ways the committee could continue serving the community. ADDITIONAL AGENDA ITEMS OF BUSINESS There were no additional items of business. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Chair Rivenbark adjourned the meeting at 8:11 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.