Wilmington Historic Preservation Commission Special Meeting – Cape Fear Memorial Bridge Programmatic Agreement – July 7, 2026

The Wilmington Historic Preservation Commission met in special session on July 7, 2026, to review the proposed Programmatic Agreement for the Cape Fear Memorial Bridge Replacement Project and discuss its potential impacts on historic resources. Planning Director Linda Painter and staff presented the project alternatives, timeline, and draft agreement issues. Commissioners and public speakers raised concerns about the fixed-span alternative, the limited study area, tolling, and the HPC's role. No formal vote was taken; the commission agreed to develop a written recommendation for City Council.

Staff Presentation

• NCDOT and Federal Highway Administration anticipate completing the environmental assessment sometime between June and July, after which there will be a public comment period and a public hearing before a preferred alternative is selected.
• Alternative A is a movable span with 135 feet of vertical clearance when raised. Alternative B is a fixed span with 135 feet of vertical clearance. Both alternatives would be south of the existing bridge, with six 12-foot-wide travel lanes, a median, and a multi-use path on the north side of the bridge.
• The fixed-span alternative would require longer ramps, shifting the Dawson and Wooster on/off ramps from Third Street to Fifth Avenue.
• The existing bridge handles about 69,000 trips per day, and future demand is anticipated to be about 95,000 trips per day.
• On June 16, the City Council adopted the Greater Downtown Plan, which identifies four bridge advocacy priorities: avoiding destruction of historic homes and blocks to the maximum extent possible; considering design characteristics that would maintain current intersections with South Third Street; incorporating aesthetics that preserve the bridge's iconic status; and ensuring walking, biking, and safe connections to the Battleship North Carolina and Brunswick County.
• The Federal Highway Administration study area is limited to roughly one block around Dawson and Wooster and extends to Fifth Street, but staff argued it should be expanded to include the broader areas of potential impact from the fixed-span alternative.
• The draft Programmatic Agreement lists FHWA, NCDOT, the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office, and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation as signatories. The Army Corps of Engineers and the Coast Guard declined to become signatories, and the National Park Service may be asked because the Battleship North Carolina is a National Historic Landmark. Comments on the draft agreement are due August 7.
• Staff flagged a discrepancy: the notice to the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation describes the city as a consulting party, while the draft Programmatic Agreement describes it as a concurring party. Staff requested clarification. Staff also emphasized that the HPC cannot sign the agreement or speak on behalf of the city, and that the agreement should name the City of Wilmington rather than the HPC.
• Staff recommendations include: stronger acknowledgment that the fixed-span alternative would have greater adverse impacts; a clear definition of what constitutes an emergency for reducing the comment period from 30 days to 7 days; requiring structural and aesthetic elements that would replace the iconic bridge if the fixed span is selected; funding and support for corridor plans for impacted streets; including vibration monitoring for both the movable and fixed spans; and expanding the study area to cover the fixed span's actual area of impact.

Commission Discussion

• Commissioners questioned whether the Programmatic Agreement process allows NCDOT and FHWA to obtain federal funding before fully analyzing historic impacts. Staff responded that the Programmatic Agreement defers full Section 106 review to later stages and that SHPO will monitor the process.
• Staff stated that the HPC may make recommendations to City Council but cannot adopt an official resolution to SHPO or speak on behalf of the city. Staff also noted that an adverse effect has already been determined; the agreement addresses the degree of that adverse effect.
• Commissioners raised concerns about the fixed-span renderings, noting the roadbed would be far higher than shown, would create steep ramps, truck braking noise, and potential wind and hurricane evacuation concerns. One commissioner noted that Fifth Avenue terminates at the Taylor Homes public housing project and Greenfield Lake, making it a very different traffic and evacuation corridor than Third Street.
• A commissioner cited the Charleston, South Carolina Highway 41 corridor project as an example of public comments changing a highway decision. Staff cited the Independence Boulevard extension, where city council opposition helped lead NCDOT and WMPO to drop the project.
• Tolling was discussed extensively. City Council has been on record opposing tolling. Staff noted that the draft Programmatic Agreement acknowledges that tolling decisions may affect traffic patterns in the historic district. Speakers discussed possible toll rates, toll avoidance through other bridges, the difference between public and private tolling arrangements, and the possibility that enabling tolling legislation may be needed.
• The commission agreed on points to include in its recommendation: support for the lift bridge, opposition to tolling, expansion of the historic study area, and attention to Fifth Avenue traffic, noise, evacuation, and impacts on historic resources and downtown economic activity.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Sylvia, representing a local historic foundation and accompanied by its executive director Carol, said the foundation is also a consulting party deciding whether to sign the Programmatic Agreement and has prepared detailed comments to submit that week. She urged the HPC to ask the city to support the lift bridge because it preserves historic districts and wetlands, carries the same traffic, and costs about the same to build as the fixed span. She said the fixed span would have severe visual and traffic impacts, including the loss of the Third Street and Dawson/Wooster intersection and a bridge approach roughly 60 feet above the street. She also noted that the city has two seats on the Wilmington Metropolitan Planning Organization and that WMPO is part of the merger team that will help decide between the lift bridge and the fixed bridge.
• Dennis McGarry, a resident, said the toll decision must happen before February of next year and urged the HPC to also address the WMPO. He added that truck braking noise on the bridge grade would be significant in downtown Wilmington and in Leland.

Key Outcomes

• No formal motion or vote was taken at the special meeting.
• Staff will bring a resolution with recommended comments on the Programmatic Agreement to City Council on August 4, 2026. City Council meetings on July 21 and August 4 occur before the August 7 comment deadline.
• Commissioner Joan volunteered to draft the HPC's recommendation. The draft will be discussed publicly at the commission's Thursday meeting under items from commission, with a possible additional special meeting if needed.
• HPC members were reminded that discussion must occur in public meetings and that the commission's role is to make a recommendation to City Council, not to sign the Programmatic Agreement or bind the city.
• Final written comments on the draft Programmatic Agreement are due August 7, 2026.