WILMINGTON – Cape Fear Memorial Bridge costs, height, potential tolls, and overall impact on businesses and homes continued to be discussed at city council this week. Wilmington council agreed to a resolution Tuesday exploring all practical alternatives that would mitigate negative impacts to residences, businesses and historic structures with the bridge replacement, but skirted putting support fully behind a 100-foot bridge clearance only, as proposed in an earlier resolution.
READ MORE: NCDOT says $242 CFMB grant ‘paused’ as Wilmington council set to vote on 100-foot resolution
ALSO: New CF Memorial Bridge height to be determined in March, cost increases possible
Council member Salette Andrews presented the first resolution during Monday’s agenda briefing suggesting council commit to preferring a 100-foot fixed-span Cape Fear Memorial Bridge. She sided with those who had voiced concerns that a 135-foot bridge would adversely impact historic properties.
The North Carolina Department of Transportation put forth three options in building a new bridge that connects Brunswick to New Hanover counties: a 65-foot movable span, which can open to 135 feet, a 100-foot fixed span or a 135-foot fixed span.
To date, discussions have mostly centered on the 135-foot fixed span, which was expected to cost roughly $450 million last fall when a grant was announced for the bridge — $252 million, as awarded by the Biden administration. However, as first reported Tuesday by PCD, that grant has been paused for now, according to the NCDOT.
While the grant was expected to cover half the cost of the 135-foot span, when and if resumed it now seems to be only a fraction of the price tag. At last week’s Wilmington Urban Area Metropolitan Planning Organization meeting, new estimates were discussed on the bridge project, with the 135-foot fixed span escalating to $1.1 billion, due to inflation; this does not include right-of-way acquisitions.
A 135-foot replacement bridge includes building a longer off-ramp to extend to Fifth Avenue, plus an overpass along south Third and Fourth streets. This would also require potential razing of homes in the historic district and affecting the district’s historic integrity.
Members of the public spoke out during Tuesday’s city council meeting, including Elizabeth O’Donnell, who became emotional over the idea of losing her house. She lives in a single-family historic home on Second Street, in the path of 135-foot bridge right-of-ways. She was in favor of improved infrastructure and a new bridge but not at the cost of her home.
“I cannot understand having to make the bridge so much higher for a few boats, which can be relocated, versus homes which cannot,” she said.
O’Donnell compelled the council to take up Andrews’ resolution. She said she loved being a steward of her historic home, researching its history, upkeeping many of its fixtures original to its construction, and overall giving it all of her “heart.” It was built in 1891 by a Prussian immigrant and merchant tailor who also owned a business downtown.
“I’ve owned several homes in my lifetime,” O’Donnell said, her voice cracking and pushing back tears. “But I’ve never loved one like this one.”
While council member Luke Waddell — also an historic home owner downtown — sympathized with the residents and praised their passion, he didn’t support the 100-foot resolution due some factual inaccuracies, such as suggesting the 100-foot vertical clearance not requiring a toll. No toll has been determined one way or another on a bridge replacement.
Andrews updated the resolution since Monday’s meeting, wherein council heard from NCDOT officials, including Landon Zimmer and Trevor Carroll, but still included the 100-foot preference. The NCDOT representatives alluded to council locking in on a particular height could put the $242 million in peril. The grant application listed the 135-foot bridge, Carroll confirmed to the WMPO last week when he updated them on new pricing estimates.
“What happened to $500 million?” Bill Rivenbark, chairman of the New Hanover County commission and WMPO member, asked about the new $1 billion price.
Waddell also serves on the WMPO — made up of Cape Fear leaders from Brunswick, Pender and New Hanover counties and area municipalities — and asked for estimates on other bridge options at the Feb. 26 meeting.
Carroll told him it would come at “the appropriate time,” to which Waddell queried when that would be. The NCDOT wants to work through the information, Carroll said, and formulate questions and answers.
“There’s a lot of what I would say is misinformation floating around,” Waddell said. “So that would be helpful to me to know what other bridges are coming in at.”
A letter from the Historic Wilmington Foundation, advocating for a 100-foot bridge, estimated it would cost $250 million. Its representatives explained Monday to council they came up with the figure based on other bridge calculations.
Chamber of Commerce CEO Natalie English said at WMPO’s meeting she spoke with area senators Michael Lee (R-7) and Bill Rabon (R-8), who shared with her concerns about the escalating price of the CFMB replacement. English said Rabon suggested a third party take a look at the new costs.
English also thought the 100-foot option would have a deterrent effect on business. Saffo said around 1,000 acres of land for industrial use are north of the bridge, some vacant, others not. The main appeal in going with the higher vertical clearance is to allow ships to reach those areas and potential businesses. Yet, the bridge’s opening has declined by around 63% since 2019, as businesses have moved from that region.
“Remain focused on finding creative ways to fund that replacement,” English told WMPO members last week during public comment, “and what we will need for a forward-thinking vibrant economy and not just what some people may think we need today.”
Resident O’Donnell, also on the board of the Downtown Business Alliance, employed at Momentum Properties and a member of the Historic Wilmington Foundation and Resident of Old Wilmington, told council: “I thought the chamber was an advocate for small businesses as well, but apparently they are not.”
She added the depth of water and lack of turn-arounds are more restrictive in accommodating ships than the height. Waters under the bridge are around 39 feet and become more shallow northward; large ships often require a depth of 50 feet or so. Dredging would bear more costs.
WMPO was clear at its recent meeting it would not take a position on the height of the bridge. The ultimate decision on the minimum clearance is decided by the United States Army Corps of Engineers and U.S. Coast Guard.
Carroll told WMPO that NCDOT’s design will match whatever clearances are decided upon, to come later in the spring.
While Mayor Saffo’s resolution did not state city council supported a 100-foot clearance, he put into the record the Historic Wilmington Foundation’s preference for it.
The 100-foot option came into play from the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office, according to the mayor.
“They are the entity of the state of North Carolina that evaluates what the impacts are going to be to our historic community,” Saffo said. “They’re our eyes and ears.”
The office provided comments last year and asked for a 100-foot bridge inclusion for a study comparison with final vertical clearance determined by the USACE and Coast Guard. It indicated the 100-foot span could fluctuate by around 35 feet, plus or minus, but the 135-foot option could “pose significant threats” to historic buildings. It, too, was mentioned in Saffo’s resolution.
According to Carroll and Zimmer, state representatives have favored the 135-foot bridge.
Waddell saw support for a 100-foot bridge resolution as potentially negating a different resolution council passed in 2024 to support NCDOT’s application for the $242-million grant. NCDOT didn’t answer Port City Daily directly when asked if the money would be pulled if the grant wasn’t used for the 135-foot option, since that’s what was listed on the application.
“We do not know at this time from USDOT under the new administration if any amount of this grant might be changed,” spokesperson Andrew Barksdale said.
According to WECT, Sen. Thom Tillis told the outlet the grant is not in danger of being removed but only under review. It was paused due to a Feb. 26 executive order from the Trump administration, which noted all grants, loans and contracts be assessed by the United States DOGE Service.
Council member Andrews pointed out council has put forth resolutions before that haven’t impacted the process, such as not agreeing with a toll. City council voted last year against the idea of tolling the bridge, with Waddell essentially calling it another tax, as residents already pay car and fuel taxes.
Funding for the bridge replacement has been a point of contention for many years now. Construction of a new Cape Fear Memorial Bridge never ranked high on the NCODT’s data-driven state funding program until last year when the 135-foot bridge was put forth with a potential toll. It ranked tenth, with the state agreeing to dedicate $85 million toward it.
Saffo said tolls remained a high concern of his, still.
“They cannot share with us what that tolling price will be,” Saffo said, supposing one ever passed. “It could be $5, it could $7, it could be $2.”
If the grant were reversed, it would all but assure a toll, leaders indicated. Saffo wondered how that would affect traffic on Third Street and Fifth Avenue, worried a toll would divert drivers to Isabel Holmes instead.
The mayor read off the substitute resolution, which he said he spoke with Andrews about prior to Tuesday’s meeting; she motioned for it to move forward after her resolution failed to gain traction. The mayor’s resolution requested NCDOT, USACE, and the U.S. Coast Guard “to fully utilize minimization efforts in decision-making and funding allocations” as it relates to area homes and businesses affected in the path of the bridge’s build-out.
“This is politics at its finest being played here, right in front of our faces,” council member Kevin Spears said Tuesday, also telling Andrews: “I hate that we have funding potentially in limbo because you’re voicing your concerns. When we serve in these positions of public service, most people intend to do a great job for the public — not to oppress or take away from the general public.”
Council member David Joyner agreed, noting he submitted comments to the USACE in support of the 100-foot clearance. Yet, he was amenable to supporting the second resolution presented by the mayor.
“My frustration is with what Mr. Spears accurately described as politics being played with this,” Joyner said. “We’re called to advocate for people who live in our our city and whose homes are in jeopardy and somehow a game is going to be played with funds that have already been allocated. Democrats and Republicans have worked together to get those funds.”
He also wanted to know why the process was so convoluted and who is the decision maker when it comes to people commenting on what they desire to see done.
Saffo pointed out the particulars of the bridge project are still being weighed and it could be at least a five-year process working through necessary details. NCDOT has funded preliminary engineering and design, as well as historical and environmental impact studies, the latter of which still need to be completed.
“I don’t want to put us in a position where our hands are tied,” Mayor Pro Tem Clifford Barnett said, telling the public he also hears their cries and is listening. “But there is still a lot of studying to do.”
Council member Charlie Rivenbark — brother to NHC commissioner chair and WMPO member Bill Rivenbark — called Saffo’s resolution a “good compromise.”
The resolution passed 7-0.
Tips or comments? Email info@portcitydaily.com
Want to read more from PCD? Subscribe now and then sign up for our morning newsletter, Wilmington Wire, and get the headlines delivered to your inbox every morning.
