BRUNSWICK COUNTY — When a home under construction near Winnabow was found in violation of county zoning regulations, its owner sought to bring it into compliance, though his request has triggered months of review, multiple public hearings, and an appeal from a neighbor.
County commissioners unanimously approved Rick Linton’s rezoning request on Jan. 20 from Rural Residential to R-6000. RR zoning is intended for low-density rural development, while R-6000 permits tighter setbacks and a broader range of residential uses, including denser housing types like townhomes.
READ MORE: Brunswick adopts 100-year storm standard to curb flooding from future developments
ALSO: Brunswick explores virtual academy to attract homeschool, charter, other students back to district
Linton’s home was not in compliance under RR zoning, since homes must be built at least 10 feet from the property line. A survey of the home’s foundation — as required by the county for structures built within 50 feet of the property line — showed Linton’s home was constructed 6.8 feet away and in violation of the setback requirement.
According to county staff, the property line was not properly confirmed before construction began and the error was only discovered by staff after the survey was completed. Permits had already been issued and construction was underway when the violation was identified, which county staff described as rare.
“Due to mistakes made, you find out when I had the survey done that the back left corner of the building was 18 inches into the setback,” Linton told commissioners. “After exhausting the options that I had, we decided that I would apply for this R-6000.”
The property owner began building his retirement home on 0.95 acres on Southern Boulevard in Winnabow in 2024. In Brunswick County, zoning and building permits must be issued before construction begins. The county later requires a setback certification — typically a foundation survey — to verify a structure meets zoning requirements. When a structure does not comply with setback rules, inspections cannot proceed and construction is effectively paused until the issue is resolved.
Because the home did not meet setback requirements under RR zoning, R-6000 was suggested to bring the setback requirement to 5 feet and in county compliance. This also would avoid requiring major structural changes.
Outside of rezoning, county staff said Linton could have sought a variance from the Board of Adjustment, which requires applicants to show they did not create the zoning problem themselves. Staff noted in similar cases the BOA has required homeowners to move structures into compliance, which is why rezoning was ultimately pursued in this case.
County staff said enforcement actions were not needed, such as fines, since the property owner took immediate steps to address the issue. Under county policy, citations and fines — $50 for a first offense, $100 for a second offense, and $200 for subsequent violations — are typically issued only when an owner fails to work toward compliance. When corrective action is underway, enforcement is placed on hold.
The rezoning request was first reviewed by the Brunswick County Planning Board in November. Board members voted 5–1 to recommend approval of the change, with Vice Chair Jason Gaver casting the lone dissenting vote.
“I just want to make sure we’re not setting a bad precedent here,” Gaver said at the November meeting.
He was concerned changing zoning to fix a single property’s setback issue could encourage similar requests in the future.
However, the planning board’s decision was later appealed by neighboring property owners Ryan and Sara Godfrey. Ryan Godfrey told the planning board during public comment he opposed the rezoning, arguing changing it to fix one homeowner’s setback problem shifts the consequences onto neighbors and opens the door for other property owners to seek similar zoning changes.
“This is a potential compliance issue where we feel like it sounds as if the neighbor did not do his due diligence to take the proper course of having a land survey done,” Godfrey told the planning board members. “That now affects our property, the value of our property, and how we can develop our property in the future as well.”
Despite his concerns, county planning staff recommended approval of the rezoning, even though the change conflicts with the county’s future land use plan. The Brunswick 2040 Comprehensive Plan — the county’s guide for future growth and land designation — classifies the property as Rural/Agricultural, not higher density residential like R-6000. Staff ultimately concluded the rezoning request was reasonable, since the property is mostly surrounded by R-6000 zoned parcels.
In their appeal letter from Nov. 19, the Godfreys wrote the area already experiences flooding and warned higher-density zoning could allow more development on the property in the future, potentially worsening conditions during major storms. They noted their home sits along a privately maintained gravel road serving as the primary access point for the neighborhood and is already prone to erosion.
Under county procedure, commissioners review appealed planning board recommendations and make the final decision after a public hearing. The rezoning request moved on to the county commissioners at its public hearing last week, though the Godfreys didn’t appear before the board. Chair Mike Forte asked if they were in attendance but received no reply.
The vote took around 10 minutes at most after staff and Linton addressed the board. Forte attempted to expedite the process, as 11 people had signed up to speak and are normally allotted 3 minutes.
“I’m going to break from the norm of how we would ordinarily do this,” Forte said. “I think this is a no-brainer. Anybody disagree with how I’m doing this?”
He asked the 11 people who signed up to speak on the rezoning to indicate support or opposition by standing on either side of the podium; all indicated support. While unusual, the abbreviated public hearing was allowed because county rules give the board flexibility in how public comment is conducted. A scattering of meeting attendees applauded Forte’s decision to move things along before the commissioners voted unanimously to approve Linton’s request.
Have tips or suggestions for Charlie Fossen? Email [email protected]
At Port City Daily, we aim to keep locals informed on top-of-mind news facing the tri-county region. To support our work and help us reach more people in 2026, please, consider helping one of two ways: Subscribe here or make a one-time contribution here.
We appreciate your ongoing support.
