Oak Island Planning Board declines CB rezoning, directs conditional zoning for pier and 801 Ocean; approves event-center use

The Oak Island Planning Board voted to move away from a broad rezoning to Commercial Business (CB) for two town-owned waterfront parcels and directed staff to pursue a conditional, parcel-specific zoning approach to protect public access and restrict incompatible uses.

Taylor, the planning staff member who presented the rezoning request, said the two parcels total about 1.96 acres and include the commercial pier (the pier house and retail/food service, about 5,214 square feet) and 801 Ocean (an event space just under 6,000 square feet). Taylor told the board that changing the parcels from Commercial Recreation (CR) to CB would permit the range of uses listed in the CB district — including many commercial and mixed-use activities — but could also allow uses the board considered undesirable on those sites.

Why it matters: board members repeatedly flagged the pier’s conservation easement, proximity to homes and beach access, and the parcels’ strategic value to residents and visitors. Members said they feared a general CB rezoning could permit future uses such as gas stations or large-scale residential development that would be inconsistent with community expectations for the waterfront.

Town counsel Lydia, who joined the meeting remotely, reviewed the easement language on the record and described it as a property right granted to the Oak Island Land Conservancy that “runs with the land.” On the question of whether the easement could be extinguished, Lydia said the termination provisions contemplate an "unexpected change in conditions" and that extinguishment would likely require judicial proceedings. "Off the cuff, it would seem to me like there would be a lot of hoops to have to jump through in order to extinguish this conservation easement," she said, and offered to produce a follow-up memo after further research. Lydia also noted that, as written, routine upkeep and maintenance obligations appear to rest with the property owner (the grantor), while the grantee (the conservancy) generally has enforcement rights but not an obligation to maintain the structure.

Board members discussed alternatives. Multiple members recommended using conditional zoning — a parcel-specific district that would require a conceptual master development plan and a specified list of permitted uses — rather than changing the broader CB table of uses island-wide. Supporters said conditional zoning would let the town keep desirable commercial options (for example, cafes, specialty retail, event uses and smaller food-service operations) while prohibiting incompatible uses such as standalone gas stations or large-scale single-family residential conversions.

The board also parsed specific uses to include or exclude in a conditional zone. Items discussed or tentatively retained included: coffee shops, restaurants without drive-throughs, bars, commercial pier uses, retail (including bait/tackle and beach-oriented retail), food trucks, rental of recreational equipment, and small-scale artisan spaces. Members debated allowances for offices above ground-floor commercial space, movie/theater concepts, microbreweries versus distilleries, and whether to permit vessel/boat-for-hire operations in the conditional zone; several members said those could be added later if a specific proposal warranted an amendment.

Separately, the board approved a staff-proposed text amendment to add an "event center" definition (a commercial facility to accommodate banquets, weddings, meetings or other group events, with or without food service) and voted to add the use to the CR, CB and CLLD districts. Taylor said the master development plan required for conditional zoning could be a simple conceptual site plan reflecting existing structures and uses.

What happens next: the board rejected the staff’s CB rezoning request in favor of pursuing a conditional zoning approach and instructed staff to return with recommended conditional zoning language (a list of permitted/prohibited uses and a conceptual master development plan) and a legal memorandum on the easement’s practical protections and limits. The board also approved the event-center definition and its insertion into the specified zoning districts; council review and formal UDO amendment steps remain.

Board procedure and context: the record shows the board opened the rezoning request for discussion and later passed a motion to pursue alternatives to CB; when legal questions arose about the easement and post-transfer obligations, Lydia agreed to research whether maintenance or rebuilding obligations can be required via deed or transaction terms. Members repeatedly emphasized preserving the pier’s public function and town control over long-term outcomes.

The Planning Board concluded its discussion and took up routine board and staff reports, including a staff update that public input on the town’s resiliency plan recently increased to more than 400 responses and that permitting software upgrades are in progress. The board adjourned after routine procedural items.