Commission tables proposed Cape Fear Boulevard upzoning after stormwater and process concerns

Planning staff presented a proposal on July 9 to rezone parcels in the 200 block of Cape Fear Boulevard into a new Commercial Transition (CT) zoning district intended as a midpoint between the Central Business District and adjacent residential areas. Staff said the district would carry a 5-foot front setback in some places, a proposed 60 percent maximum lot coverage and guidance around a 29-units-per-acre density, and that the town would carry forward uses from the existing mixed-use district while adding eating-and-drinking establishments (excluding bars).

Staff (introduced as Hardison) said the goal was to encourage redevelopment and provide more predictable standards for the corridor; he told commissioners that about 10 parcels are included in the proposal and that the proposal was intended to start a public discussion. Hardison said the Technical Review Committee had not raised issues that would stop the project but noted that exceeding 65 percent impervious coverage would trigger engineered, on-site stormwater controls.

Several commissioners said the change felt rushed and asked for more analysis. One commissioner summarized the numeric effects: “That’s a 70% density increase,” noting the change from 17 units per acre in some existing districts to a proposed 29 units per acre. Commissioners repeatedly asked whether a traffic or stormwater capacity study had been done; staff said one had not and that additional engineering would be required if developments exceeded specific impervious thresholds.

Resident Crystal Lee told commissioners she appreciated their attention to neighborhood impacts and urged caution: “I came to this meeting just to see how… I wanna first of all, I would like to thank you for your time and dedication to our community,” she said, and added that most constituents would want careful consideration of sewage and stormwater impacts.

Commissioners raised several policy options—conditional zoning, workshops for wider community input, or retaining current mixed-use zoning—rather than approving a district by right with limited guardrails. Citing a fast timeline and lack of a development plan, the commission voted to table the proposal for further consideration. The motion to table passed by voice vote recorded as four ayes and one nay.

With the item tabled, staff said it would return with further analysis, public outreach and possible modifications; commissioners suggested workshops and additional studies to address stormwater, traffic, design standards and community character before any eventual vote to rezone.