Remarks by Thomas (Ace) Cofer
27 remarks on the record, newest first · Page 1 of 2
- Play at 17:39
Not quoted here: it may name a member of the public. Hear it at the meeting.
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 18:28
“And are you and the applicant, I mean, I think at the end in our conditions, it mentioned acceptance of the site plan, of course, but then the elevations, is that accurate?”
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 19:02
“Okay. And I'm assuming, I think I probably know the answer, but just for the public good, all lighting ordinances and things that would apply by right to R20 would apply to your site as well.”
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 31:25
“Commissioner Cofer. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yes, this one hits close to home for me from personal anecdote, personal living experience. I'm actually in that. neighborhood node to the south of these, the high impact zone and then the enter But nevertheless, I mean, I drive past that intersection several times a day, and I think that the design, as I will echo my colleagues up here's sentiments on the design and taking careful attention to tree production, the stormwater plan, of course, that's gonna come with this type of project, and just paying careful, discerning attention to the sensitivity…”
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 32:59
Not quoted here: it may name a member of the public. Hear it at the meeting.
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 42:53
Not quoted here: it may name a member of the public. Hear it at the meeting.
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 43:28
“OK. Thank you. That was what I was curious about. And this TIA update that would be required I mean, it's a procedural question. Is that something that just comes down the road? When does that all occur?”
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 43:54
Not quoted here: it may name a member of the public. Hear it at the meeting.
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 55:05
Not quoted here: it may name a member of the public. Hear it at the meeting.
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 57:32
Not quoted here: it may name a member of the public. Hear it at the meeting.
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 58:38
“I guess, and this may just be a staff question, would be because the numbers are so specific, 208, would that be what's allowed today under the non-2013 code, the updated 2021 LDC and comp plan, would 208 be suitable to this particular site? Again, it just seems specific, and then it's just curious that this recommendation that all residential density for the whole project, it sounds like, would be eliminated. You'd have no ceiling, as many residential units as you want if you did the 10% for the 15 years designated as workforce. Those two things are just kind of juxtaposing, at least in my…”
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 1:00:30
Not quoted here: it may name a member of the public. Hear it at the meeting.
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 1:47:53
“Commissioner Cofer? Sorry, I apologize. Not trying to belabor anything, but you made a few comments that I'm just curious to get some clarity on. Yes, sir. The CDMU has come up several times. So how does that fit into this discussion of rezoning to O&I for this parcel?”
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 1:48:32
“And this would have to just jump over to staff. So how does that change the complexion of what we're talking about? When we go from O and I with 208 units based on your acreage calculations, no site plan for the structure, but conditions that the applicant self-imposed, how does CDMUM fit into this? What does that look like?”
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 1:49:08
“Is there anything else significant or salient that we would need to know about CDMU at that point to evaluate this properly?”
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 1:49:29
“Okay. Thank you, Brian. Yes, sir. We've talked a little bit about the 1375 from 2013, and maybe it was arbitrary. I'm sure it had some kind of purpose. But if you do the math on 302 acres, it looks like it's about 4.5 units per acre. And this 208 addition would make you at around 5.5 units per acre, which kind of lends itself into somewhere between R7 and R10. If we were to rezone the whole site today, 302 acres, between R7 and R10 it would be this calculation if we applied it to the whole project. I just wanted to make that little comment and see if you, I guess part of why this feels a…”
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 1:50:59
“So the opportunity exists for your client to sell this property once it goes through entitlement, but you wouldn't build the product, just like Wilmington Health is not building that. I mean, just like your client's not building the Wilmington Health building. That fair to say?”
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 1:51:33
“Well, I think you made a couple points, and I understand to advocate for the client and the family and the company. I get that. But I think in fairness, and to be candid and frank, it could be sold, and they aren't the ones who built it.”
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 1:53:44
“And those conditions will follow the property.”
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 1:54:00
“Yeah. I think that was all my questions or comments. I mean, beyond just echoing, I think Commissioner Pollack had mentioned, I mean, this is very similar to a general rezoning, but it's also similar to you kind of having to do your own infill development within your master plan. So thank you.”
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 1:57:28
“I think the... I mean, it's... It's just the approach and it's the procedure and it's having these come up before us in different cases outside of a bubble plan, outside of a master plan. How do you inject it inside the master plan but still evaluate it the same way you would others? I think the applicant asked several times or the counselor asked, what is your concern about putting this much density on that site? Well, I don't think you've heard, not a whole lot, but it's procedural, it's process. not to say that you're establishing some sort of odd precedent, but 208 in this site within…”
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 1:59:53
Not quoted here: it may name a member of the public. Hear it at the meeting.
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 2:00:11
“Rezoned from ONICD Office and Institutional Conditional District to a new ONICD Office and Institutional Conditional District. The Planning Commission finds this request to be consistent with the objectives and policies of the following plans adopted by the City of Wilmington.”
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 2:01:00
“I just wanted to correct that. Do I need to read that address? Are you okay with the right? Sir?”
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 2:01:10
“Okay, can somebody write that down for me? I couldn't hear.”
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026