Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Rezoning Neuse topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Planning board finds 3328 Neuse Boulevard rezoning inconsistent, votes 6–0 to recommend denial

New Bern Planning and Zoning Board · October 17, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The board voted 6–0 to recommend denial of a request to rezone 3328 Neuse Boulevard from C-4 to C-3, concluding the change would be inconsistent with the existing zoning pattern on that side of Neuse Boulevard; the decision will be sent to the Board of Aldermen.

The New Bern Planning and Zoning Board voted unanimously (6–0) to recommend denial of a rezoning request for 3328 Neuse Boulevard, which sought to change the parcel’s zoning from Commercial-4 (C-4) to Commercial-3 (C-3).

Kendrick presented the application (applicant PB and J Property Group LLC; parcel ID 8Dash242117; approx. 0.52 acres) and outlined the differences between C-4 and C-3. Several members of the public spoke: Barbara Husk, a neighbor, said she owns adjoining property and expressed concern about traffic and the scale of permissible uses; an unnamed property owner said he had been renovating buildings on the site and planned small offices and occasional classes and maintained the current parking supply (15–18 spaces).

A central point of debate was whether the change would be appropriate given that the zoned properties along that side of Neuse Boulevard are predominantly C-4. Board members also discussed how the city’s legacy code treats animal-related uses: staff said kennel and boarding uses are treated differently in C-4 and that training-only activities are allowed in C-3 but not in C-4; the applicant and neighbors disagreed about whether the owner’s proposed dog training would amount to kenneling. After deliberation a board member moved to recommend denial on the grounds that the application is inconsistent with the comprehensive plan and the existing pattern of zoning on the street; a roll-call vote recorded six yes votes to deny (the Board of Aldermen will make the final legislative decision).