Local Politics
  1. Home
  2. US
  3. North Carolina
  4. Wilmington
  5. Issues

Living Hope Day Shelter Location

At a glance

  • What: Living Hope Day Shelter proposes to lease/purchase a building at 19 South 10th Street in an urban mixed-use district near four schools (within 500 yards). The facility would serve homeless individuals during daytime hours (drop-in, no barrier to entry). No formal zoning approval required; classified as community center (by-right use).
  • Where it stands: Living Hope has received zoning verification from the City, is under contract on the property with due diligence ending October 5, 2026, and has raised about half of needed funding with the other half pledged. No City Council action required due to by-right classification, though considerable public controversy about neighborhood location.
  • Next: Living Hope proceeding with community meetings to address concerns. City Staff exploring zoning code amendments to better distinguish day shelter uses from traditional community centers. If Living Hope pursues permits, neighborhood can appeal the by-right determination to Board of Adjustment or Superior Court.

Public concerns raised

Neighborhood and school safety concerns:

  • Four schools within 500 yards: School of Wonder (one block away, visible from playground), plus elementary, middle and high school
  • 2,700 students within 500 yards of facility
  • Concerns about foot traffic, outdoor congregation, and safety of students and school staff
  • School of Wonder concerned about facility being day-only with unclear where individuals go at night
  • Potential for people to shelter on school property after hours
  • Superintendent Chris Barnes requested continued communication to balance compassion with student safety

Zoning and planning concerns:

  • Urban mixed-use district designed for compatible infill, pedestrian-oriented development, and increasing neighborhood safety
  • Day shelter not equivalent to traditional community center in operation or impact
  • Questions about parking, pedestrian traffic, congregation, security, capacity, and operating hours
  • Unclear if zoning code accurately captures the use being proposed
  • Some speakers questioned whether community center label appropriately reflects actual operation

Property value and neighborhood impact concerns:

  • Projected 7% negative impact to surrounding property values
  • Concerns about petty theft, vagrancy and disorder
  • Residents expressed desire to help homeless while questioning location appropriateness
  • Residents noted they fought years to clean up their blocks of drug dealing and shootings

Living Hope responses:

  • Already partnering with regional service provider for peer support services (would create 8 jobs)
  • Received zoning use verification from City
  • Met with law enforcement regarding proximity to schools and parks
  • Clarified that 26 registered sex offenders already live within one-mile radius
  • Committed to community meeting to address concerns
  • Emphasized meaningful work and that individuals deserve dignity and compassion

City Staff responses

City Manager Hawke clarification (September 22):

  • Living Hope pursuing this on their own; not a City-funded or actively-planned initiative
  • Different from separate City initiative for low-barrier shelter (no location, funding, or partner identified yet)
  • City has no involvement in Living Hope's property acquisition

Director Painter (September 22):

  • Living Hope classified as community center because City code lacks specific day shelter use
  • By-right classification means no public hearing required
  • No permits yet filed by Living Hope
  • Public hearing only available if someone appeals the by-right determination to Board of Adjustment or Superior Court
  • City Staff exploring code amendments to address day facilities vs. traditional community centers

Motion history

No formal Council action taken on Living Hope directly - Public information only (procedural clarification).

  • Councilmember Joyner requested staff clarification on process since Council has no formal decision required
  • City Manager and Director confirmed it is by-right use, not requiring Council approval

Sources

Log

2026-09-22 - City Council

Extensive public comment period with approximately 15 speakers addressing both concerns and support for Living Hope's proposed location. Major concerns centered on proximity to schools, public safety, neighborhood impact, and zoning appropriateness. Councilmember Joyner requested clarification on process, confirming Living Hope's by-right use status and lack of Council authority over the decision. City Manager and Director Painter explained code classification and process for potential code amendments.

2026-09-01 - City Council

Initial public comment on Living Hope location with speakers expressing both support for homeless services and concerns about location appropriateness. Tony Perez (Living Hope representative) clarified project timeline and partnerships. Dave Ellegood spoke in support based on prior experience housing Living Hope at First Baptist Church.