A new, powerful Citizen Portal experience is ready. Switch now

Planning board recommends commercial zoning at US‑70/NC‑43 despite Greenbryer objections

September 17, 2026 | New Bern, Craven County, North Carolina


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Planning board recommends commercial zoning at US‑70/NC‑43 despite Greenbryer objections
The New Bern Planning and Zoning Board on Sept. 17 voted to recommend a map amendment moving a 315‑acre parcel at the US‑70/NC‑43 interchange from Agricultural A‑5F to C3 commercial, forwarding the matter to the Board of Aldermen for a public hearing.

Applicant counsel Eric Remington told the board the proposal reflects the 2022 land‑use plan’s Martin Luther King Boulevard focus area and the city’s growth corridors. “We would request that the board recommend to reszone this parcel to C3,” Remington said during the applicant presentation. He and Warehouser representatives said the site will be served by an accompanying development agreement that can restrict uses, set infrastructure responsibilities and be recorded with the deed.

The Craven County Metropolitan Planning Organization provided context for the NC‑43 connector, describing the project’s long timeline and purpose: “The purpose and need of this project is based on economic development of Craven County and on projected traffic volumes,” MPO planner Abby Mccclelay said, noting the connector is expected to reduce truck traffic through established streets and to support job growth.

More than a dozen public speakers, principally from the adjacent Greenbryer subdivision, opposed broad commercial zoning and urged the city and developer to guarantee protections. Perry Clemens, representing the Greenbryer Homeowners Association, asked the board to require vegetated berms and larger setbacks, saying the neighborhood’s large lots and tree canopy must be preserved. “We also know that in C3 there is a 200 foot setback,” Clemens said as he urged further buffering and lot‑size protections.

Board members voted 4–1 to recommend approval. Member Michael Duffy cast the lone no vote, citing concerns about whether unconditional commercial zoning is the best fit next to established residential parcels. Several board members said the development agreement and later Board of Aldermen public hearings are the appropriate places to secure binding buffers and infrastructure commitments.

Next steps: the Board of Aldermen will consider the rezoning and the related development agreement at a future public hearing; staff said the development agreement would be a public, recorded contract that could limit permissible uses and memorialize buffering and infrastructure plans.

View the Full Meeting & All Its Details

This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.

✓
Watch full, unedited meeting videos
✓
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
✓
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
✓
Permanent access to expanding government content
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee