The Sea Glass Harbor project is a major subdivision with 69 single-family residential lots on about 28 acres of land. Sunset Cove Enterprise LLC, a developer based in the Charlotte area, is assembling multiple parcels along Bozeman Road, between Carolina Beach Road and the intracoastal, near the southern end of the New Hanover County mainland.
The plans for the subdivision, designed by McKim and Creed, were approved by the county’s Technical Review Committee in May 2025. A tree removal permit was issued in December 2025.
According to the county, the standards for tree removal are set by its Unified Development Ordinance. In an email, Planning Director Rebekah Roth confirmed that “the number of trees removed from the Sea Glass site was allowed because it is largely comprised of individual single-family lots less than an acre.”
The UDO has different standards for single-family lots under an acre, where trees are not required to be preserved, than it does for other development types, like multifamily residential projects such as townhouses or apartment complexes, where tree removal regulations apply across the entire site.
Some concerned neighbors have criticized the UDO's provision, noting that it could seemingly allow a developer to clear-cut any property, regardless of size, provided it was being subdivided into individual lots each smaller than an acre.
During Thursday's Board of Commissioners agenda meeting, Democratic Commissioner Rob Zapple called the county's rules a "loophole," although he acknowledged county staff don't see it that way.
"I know you wouldn't call it a loophole, but there are conditions where, under residential development, clear-cutting is still allowed," Zapple said. "I think it's the policy of this board that we certainly want to discourage clear-cutting [...] I'm trying to find a way to close what again I would call a loophole, I think most of the public would consider [it] a loophole."
Roth addressed the issue with WHQR, saying this was the UDO's intent, not a mistake.
“When the county's ordinance standards were adopted, single-family lots of this size were specifically excluded from tree retention standards, so while this may result in tree removal greater than what some code readers might expect, especially as site construction and grading practices have evolved, it is not a loophole or an inadvertent application of the standards,” she wrote.
Roth noted that UDO tree retention and mitigation requirements for significant-sized trees do apply to common areas. The county confirmed that no trees had been removed that weren’t allowed under the project permit.
After work began earlier this year, neighbors started voicing concerns, including about the wide swath of trees that had been removed, and potential stormwater and flooding concerns.
Email records indicate the county has had considerable communication with neighbors to explain the citation, including a detailed response to a series of questions. Roth confirmed those efforts to WHQR.
“Since site work began, county staff from several departments have met with Bozeman Road residents on site and, on July 31, at the Government Center with Chair [LeAnn] Pierce and Commissioner [Rob] Zapple,” Roth wrote.
She added that “concerns raised on this project have identified opportunities to evaluate whether additional communication, coordination or monitoring practices should be part of future process improvements.”
Roth also noted that the draft 2026 Comprehensive Plan scheduled to be considered by the Board of Commissioners at its Monday, October 5 meeting, “outlines sustaining a healthy and diverse tree canopy as a key objective for the county, and several implementation actions, both plans as well as potential ordinance changes, have been identified.”
Specifically, that includes “a review of the processes and guidelines for tree retention and other standards as well as the development of a canopy-based tree retention ordinance or options are anticipated to take place in the short term, which the draft defines as actions commencing within one to two years of plan adoption.”
During Thursday's meeting, Roth said a tree-canopy-based ordinance was one of the most viable options for new regulations, noting that there was "some traction both from tree advocates as well as the development community that seems to think that might make sense."
Disclosure notice: Rob Zapple is a member of the WHQR Board of Directors, which has no say in editorial or reporting decisions.
