Wilmington Board of Adjustment Meeting – September 17, 2026

The Wilmington Board of Adjustment met in a quasi-judicial public hearing at 1:00 p.m. on Thursday, September 17, 2026, in City Council Chambers at 929 N. Front St., Wilmington, NC, and adjourned at 2:54 p.m. Members present were Chair Jeff Hovis, Vice Chair Patrick Moore, Alain Norman, and Troy Demers; alternates Jim Downey and Greg Thompson participated; Graham Mitchell was absent. Vice Chair Moore recused himself from the first evidentiary hearing, and Alternate Thompson served in his place. The Board approved the prior meeting’s minutes, denied a variance for 1110 Windsor Drive, upheld the Historic Preservation Commission’s approval for 814 Macumber Alley, and received the FY 2026 Annual Report.

Consent Calendar

• The Board voted 5–0 to approve the meeting minutes. The agenda and oral proceeding identified the minutes as those of August 20, 2026, while the written minutes describe them as the July 16, 2026 minutes; the record does not resolve that discrepancy.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Matt Nichols, attorney for neighboring property owners at 1103, 1109, and 1117 Windsor Drive, opposed the variance, arguing the cabana’s location was a design preference rather than an unnecessary hardship, that the recent subdivision contributed to the claimed limitations, and that no renderings or landscape plan had been provided. He also objected to the applicant’s non-attorney agent representing the owner in a quasi-judicial proceeding and submitted a letter from Rodney Turner into the record.
• Mike Nichols, 1109 Windsor Drive and a licensed landscape architect, opposed the variance, presenting conceptual alternatives with a smaller or relocated cabana that would not require a variance, and argued the 38-inch tree was not a specimen tree with special protections.
• Eric Rylander, 1203 Windsor Drive, opposed the variance, raising concerns about the structure’s location, size, and potential future uses.
• Louise Hicks, 1130 Windsor Drive, expressed concern about whether the structure could be separately occupied or used for short-term lodging.
• Noel Tyrpak, project manager, addressed the design questions, describing the cabana, the attached pergola, and explaining that it was not an accessory dwelling unit.
• Anthony Demings, 812 Macumber Alley, appealed the HPC approval, arguing the proposed residence was too large and incompatible, too close to the 12-foot alley, and effectively a two-story house despite being described as one-and-a-half stories. He also argued the HPC’s continuation procedure was improper and that revised plans were not posted until about six days before the July hearing.

Discussion Items

• 1110 Windsor Drive – Variance (BADV-BOA-2026-0006): Planner Todd Rademacher presented the request for a variance from City Code Section 18-199 to permit an accessory cabana in front of the principal residence on a 0.9991-acre R-15 lot. Staff originally identified an 8.9-foot encroachment measured from the front porch, then clarified that the correct measurement was from the residence’s front exterior wall, excluding the porch, making the corrected encroachment 18.7 feet. Applicant representative David DesChamps said the 1940 home is set farther from Windsor Drive than neighboring homes, already encroaches about 6.3 feet into the rear setback, and that relocating the cabana would affect a 38-inch chestnut oak with an arborist-recommended 16-foot tree protection zone. Staff clarified the tree is classified as a significant tree, not a specimen tree. The applicant said the design had been evaluated over about 18 months and that alternatives would change the desired relationship among residence, pool, and cabana. The Board questioned whether the hardship was self-created or the result of design preference, and the variance was denied.
• 814 Macumber Alley – HPC Appeal (BAHPC-BOA-2026-0007): The Board reviewed whether the Historic Preservation Commission complied with the five review factors when it approved the new home construction. The city received a major works application April 6, 2026; HPC hearings were held May 14, June 11, and July 9, 2026, with the July proposal approved 6–0; the appeal was received July 21, 2026. Assistant City Attorney Whitley Stavich noted exhibits A and E were outside the HPC record and could not be considered. HPC advising attorney Gina Essey responded that continuances were determined by commission vote, that the July proposal was a completely new design, and that revised materials were published online about two weeks before the July hearing; Demings disputed the timing. The Board deliberated on whether the July hearing was properly handled as a continued item, whether the revised plans were available sufficiently in advance, and whether the appellant had adequate procedural opportunity; one member expressed concern about notice and plan availability. A motion to uphold the HPC decision was made by Mr. Demers, seconded by Vice Chair Moore, and passed 4–1.
• FY 2026 Board of Adjustment Annual Report: Brian Chambers noted the annual report was included in the meeting packet; no formal presentation was made, and members were invited to identify corrections.

Key Outcomes

• Approved the prior meeting’s minutes 5–0, subject to the date discrepancy noted above.
• Denied the 1110 Windsor Drive variance 5–0.
• Upheld the Historic Preservation Commission’s decision for 814 Macumber Alley by a 4–1 vote; Jim Downey voted no.
• Received the FY 2026 Annual Report for informational purposes.
• The next regular Board of Adjustment meeting is scheduled for Thursday, October 15, 2026.