Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Neighbors, yacht club and experts press council over 200‑unit dry‑stack marina proposal; council finds key criteria unmet
Summary
After an hours‑long quasi‑judicial hearing, Surf City council concluded the applicant did not meet all required special‑use findings for a proposed mixed‑use redevelopment at 412 Roland Avenue that would add two enclosed dry‑stack buildings (200 boat units) and commercial space. Coastal, traffic and yacht‑club witnesses raised safety and congestion concerns; staff will draft a formal order reflecting the council’s findings.
The Town of Surf City heard nearly eight hours of sworn testimony and public comment before concluding the record did not establish all findings required for a special‑use permit modification at 412 Roland Avenue. The project, proposed by Zimmer Development (represented by attorney Matt Nichols), would add two enclosed dry‑stack storage buildings totaling 200 units and about 19,000 square feet of retail/office and restaurant space, and includes a voluntary one‑time maintenance dredge of a navigation channel.
Hunter Taylor, manager of the adjacent Topsail Island Yacht Club, testified about navigation risks, traffic and local boat counts, telling the council that between January 1 and July 31 the yacht club recorded 2,860 boat launches — “an average of 13 a day” — and described repeated instances of vessels disregarding no‑wake restrictions and close calls in the channel. Alex Dale, attorney for the Yacht Club, and other club members argued that the combined vessel movements, rental operators and transient traffic create special damages and safety risks that a 50‑foot, one‑time dredge would not eliminate.
Applicant witnesses emphasized design changes since a 2024 submittal and stressed mitigation: civil engineer Jimmy Fentress said the proposal meets ordinance setbacks and stormwater will be contained on site, and developer Adam Tucker said the team added significant retail and a public fuel dock based on community feedback. Traffic consultant Ronald Stevenson said his traffic impact analysis focused on peak‑hour vehicle trips and concluded the development would not materially worsen roadway intersections; he said his team used conservative ITE trip assumptions and ran sensitivity tests with higher seasonal factors.
But council members, confronted with a mix of technical reports and lay testimony, voted through the ordinance findings individually and did not find several key elements satisfied, notably the tests tied to traffic congestion and public safety in the narrow shared channel. Coastal engineering testimony (survey and navigation analysis presented by Jamie Pratt and marine permitting comments from former CAMA staff Jason Dale) emphasized constrained low‑tide widths and the operational complexity of mixed users (commercial boats, restaurant side‑ties, jet‑ski rentals and home‑ported slips), which council members said undermined confidence that the project would not create a safety hazard.
The council did not approve all required findings and directed staff to prepare a written order reflecting the decision. The applicant stressed that additional permitting (CAMA, NCDOT driveway, state stormwater and others) would be required if the council had granted the special use; opponents said the council’s role is to resolve the threshold land‑use findings now, not defer to future permit reviews. The council recorded votes on each finding; several safety‑ and traffic‑related findings failed to carry a majority.
The mayor recused from the vote on this item and several parties who established standing were allowed cross‑examination and full participation in the hearing. The written order will formalize the council’s action and the findings for the public record.
