Cape Fear Memorial Bridge Replacement

As we navigate the future of Wilmington’s infrastructure, conversations around the replacement of the Cape Fear Memorial Bridge have reached a pivotal moment, and our community stands at a crossroads. We urge you to follow along with this important issue, which will have profound effects on the Wilmington National Register Historic District. 

HWF’S Position Regarding the CFM Replacement Bridge

North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) determined that the Cape Fear Memorial Bridge is becoming functionally obsolete because of the growing volume of traffic using the bridge and escalating repair and maintenance costs. The replacement bridge will be located in the Wilmington National Register Historic District, requiring determination and mitigation of adverse effects to historic resources under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. HWF is a consulting party in the ongoing Section 106 review. We do not have a vote but we have access to information which we share with our members, and the opportunity to advocate for our historic assets.

Two design alternatives are being considered, by NCDOT, the Federal Highway Administration and other agencies (collectively the Merger Team) for the replacement CFM Bridge:

  • ALTERNATIVE A: A movable span/lift bridge with a 65’ clearance when closed and a 135’ vertical clearance when open; and
  • ALTERNATIVE B: A fixed span with a 135′ vertical clearance

HWF Urges the Selection of Alternative A, the Lift Bridge

Alternative A, the lift bridge, is the best alternative for Wilmington, the Historic Districts and our region. Alternative A is essentially the same as the bridge we have now, but with more traffic lanes (6 lanes instead of 4), plus pedestrian and bicycle paths. It is a little further south, but it will still connect with Dawson/Wooster at South Third, just like the current bridge. Its height is similar to the current bridge so it is fits in and does not overwhelm the historic districts, the Battleship NC, and the minority businesses and communities along the Dawson/Wooster corridor. It preserves acres of wetlands on the Brunswick County side of the bridge. Significantly, it will maintain existing traffic patterns.

By contrast, Alternative B, the fixed bridge with the 135 ft clearance, will do great damage. It is much bigger in scale and overwhelms the surrounding historic district and Dawson/Wooster corridor. It has a steep 5 % grade. (The maximum grade allowed on a federal highway is 6%.) On the New Hanover side, it will land between S Fourth and S Fifth, much deeper into the historic districts, and it will pass over S Third with a 60 foot clearance. On the Brunswick side, the fixed bridge will extend to the US 17/US 76/US 421 interchange and will eliminate almost 11 acres of protected wetlands. HWF believes this massive bridge will bring significant traffic congestion, noise, grime, vibration and ugly sight lines to the historic districts and the Dawson/Wooster corridor. HWF also believes it will depress property values, especially the values of historic properties within sight of the bridge, and therefore will discourage investment in historic preservation. Urban blight in historic district areas closest to the bridge may ultimately lead to loss of historic buildings through demolition by neglect. Perhaps most significant for our region, Alternative C will permanently change traffic patterns causing so much congestion and disruption that it will defeat the purpose of the bridge replacement project (improving traffic flow along the bridge corridor).

Alternative A, the lift bridge, meets the region’s road transportation and river navigational needs, while minimizing damage to important economically and culturally important environmental and historic assets. Please join us in our advocacy for Alternative A.

1. Sign the ROW/HWF Petition 
2. Send a letter to elected officials
3. Be on the lookout for NCDOT’s request for public comment through an online survey, expected in late August, and use the survey to support Alternative A, the lift bridge, and oppose tolls.

Learn More

Learn more about the Cape Fear Memorial Bridge Replacement Project by viewing the Presentation from our 6/22/2026 Member Information Meeting:

View Presentation

Sign

Please sign our petition urging the WMPO to reject all tolling plans for the replacement of the Cape Fear Memorial Bridge and to vote in favor of Design Alternative A: the lift bridge with the 65/135-foot vertical clearance.

Sign Here

Write

After you sign the petition, please consider reaching out to your elected officials. To make it easy, we’ve put together a sample letter you can reference.

You can find your specific legislators using this tool: https://www.ncleg.gov/findyourlegislators

More information on the WMPO is available here: https://www.wmpo.org/ 

 

Sample Letter

In the News:

Cape Fear Memorial Bridge Replacement FAQs

Why does NCDOT claim the bridge needs to be replaced?

According to the NCDOT, the current bridge is functionally obsolete. This means that it does not have the capacity to serve the projected increase in vehicles (commuters, visitors and port traffic) over the next several years.

How much will it cost to replace the bridge?

The current estimate is between $1.1-$1.3 billion.

How will the new bridge be funded?

NCDOT has secured around one third of the $1.1 to 1.3 billion needed. It has obtained a federal grant in the amount of $242 million and a commitment of $85 million from the NC Transportation Fund. WMPO has said that all funding options are on the table to fund the $900 million shortfall, including tolls, a local sales tax increase or a regional transportation bond. The tax and bond options would be paid by Pender, Brunswick and New Hanover County residents and would require voter approval. The toll option would not be subject to voter approval.

If there is a toll, how much might it be?

The current proposal by Delivering Bridges LLC, an affiliate of United Bridge Partners, is projecting a $2.75 per crossing toll, which will be higher for multi-axel vehicles.

Who decides if there will be tolls? Are they elected officials?

Both the Wilmington Urban Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (WMPO) and the state legislature must approve the use of tolls to finance the new CFM Bridge. Most of the WMPO members are elected officials and include a commissioner from each of the three counties, two Wilmington City Council members, and the mayors of Wrightsville Beach, Kure Beach, Carolina Beach, Navassa, Belville, and Leland.

What are the replacement options?

Alternative A: 65’ vertical clearance lift bridge (135’ when lifted)
Alternative B: 135’ vertical clearance fixed bridge

Who determined that the bridge must have a 135’ vertical clearance?

The Army Corps of Engineers (ACE) has determined that it will only issue a permit for a bridge with a 135’ vertical clearance based upon studies leading to the 1996 Wilmington Harbor Act. These studies are part of a federal law that authorized the deepening and widening of the Wilmington Harbor. ACE has said it cannot issue a permit for a lower clearance without a change in this law. Federal and State elected officials have not supported a change in the law to permit a lower clearance.

Are there plans to dredge the river north of the bridge to accommodate commercial vessels?

Army Corp has not dredged to the authorized depth north of the bridge since 2006 and has no plans or budget to do so in the future. There are too few commercial vessels using this part of the waterway to justify the cost of dredging. Further, there is no turning basin north of the bridge to accommodate commercial vessels. As a result, it appears there will be no large vessel traffic north of the bridge that requires a 135 foot vertical clearance, now or in the future. Yet, Army Corps’ claims their hands are tied by 30 year old navigation studies and outdated legislation.

Would a lower bridge meet vessel needs?

Yes. The NCDOT’s Navigation Impact Report, a 2024 study of vessels passing under the bridge, determined there are no vessels requiring more than 100’ vertical clearance using the waterway. In fact, there are no commercial vessels requiring more than 65 ‘ vertical clearance using the waterway.

Where will the two proposed alternative designs land and how will they affect traffic patterns downtown?

The existing bridge lands at and is primarily accessed from S Third, a four lane State Highway (NC 17 Business). The proposed lift bridge (Alt A) can be built within the right of way of the existing bridge. It will land and be accessed at South Third, the same as the existing bridge. As a result, the lift bridge maintains current traffic patterns. By contrast, the proposed 135’ vertical clearance option (Alt B) will land between S Fourth Street and S Fifth Avenue, much deeper into the historic district, and will direct bridge traffic onto S Fifth, a two lane residential street lined with historic National Register properties. South Fifth cannot carry the volume of bridge traffic currently carried by S Third. In addition, the fixed 135 ‘ clearance alternative will eliminate the intersection of South Third and Dawson/Wooster and thus sever the Highway 17 Business/Highway 76 artery into and out of downtown.
This artery is also a hurricane evacuation route. As a result, the fixed 135’ clearance option will permanently change traffic patterns in ways that will cause ongoing delays and disruptions.

Why are the Residents of Old Wilmington and the Historic Wilmington Foundation advocating for Alternative A, the lift bridge?

The lift bridge can be built within the right of way of the existing bridge and will maintain existing traffic patterns. It will preserve the Historic District, maintain the important S Third/Dawson Wooster intersection and evacuation routes, minimize harm to businesses and neighborhoods along the Dawson Wooster corridor, and preserve 11 acres of Brunswick County wetlands. By contrast, the fixed bridge with the 135 foot clearance will land at S Fifth, deep into the Historic District. It will cause permanent traffic delays and disruptions because it will direct bridge traffic onto historic two lane residential streets and eliminate the intersection of S Third and Dawson/Wooster, two important regional transportation arteries.
This artery is also a hurricane evacuation route. As a result, the fixed 135’ clearance option will permanently change traffic patterns in ways that will cause ongoing delays and disruptions.

If I care about downtown Wilmington and the Historic District and am opposed to a 135’ fixed bridge and tolls, what can I do?

1. Sign the petition and share it with your contacts: https://c.org/6LVxzHppTM.
2. Write to your elected officials and express your concerns, your opposition to tolls and the fixed 135’ clearance bridge, and your support for the lift bridge.
Not sure who your elected officials are? Search here: https://www.ncleg.gov/findyourlegislators 
3. Stay informed about developments by following HWF’s social media and website.
4. Be ready to respond to NCDOT’s public input survey, expected in late August 2026, and say YES to the fixed bridge (Alt A), NO to tolls, and NO to the fixed 135’ vertical clearance bridge (Alt B).

CAPE FEAR MEMORIAL BRIDGE REPLACEMENT: HISTORY AND CURRENT STATUS [as of june 2026]

Project Overview

​​Plans to replace the Cape Fear Memorial Bridge in Wilmington began in 2020. The 0.66-mile bridge carries U.S. 17/U.S. 76/U.S. 421 across the Cape Fear River between Brunswick and New Hanover counties. Built in 1969, NCDOT says the existing four-lane, steel vertical-lift bridge is becoming functionally obsolete because it can no longer effectively service current and future traffic demands. All of the bridge designs under consideration would increase the number of lanes, from 4 to 6, and would add bicycle and pedestrian lanes. ​NCDOT says that while the existing bridge is safe, it is reaching the end of its lifecycle and must be monitored, inspected and maintained on a more frequent basis.

Design Decision Making Process

For all transportation projects that use federal funds, federal law requires environmental studies to determine the impact of the project on the natural environment, cultural, social (e.g. public parks) and historic (National Register or National Register eligible) assets. (See National Environmental Policy Act; Section 106 of the National Preservation Act; and Section 4(f) of the US DOT Act.) These statutes do not prohibit projects that have adverse environmental impacts, but they do require study, assessment, documentation, and mitigation. The process determines the Least Environmentally Damaging Practicable Alternative (LEDPA), and once the LEDPA is determined, that is the only design alternative for which federal funds can be used. The process also includes applications for all necessary permits, in this case permits from Army Corp of Engineers and the Coast Guard. Because the process “merges” environmental analysis and permitting, it is called the “Merger Process” and is conducted by the “Merger Team.”

The following factors are used to determine the LEDPA:

  1. Purpose and need for the project
  2. Impact on specified natural environment, social, cultural and historic assets 
  3. Feasibility, considering engineering, technology, and cost 
  4. Ability to get necessary permits from ACE and Coast Guard under their permitting requirements 
  5. Public opinion. Although NEPA requires public comment and a public hearing, but the data driven Environmental Assessment, permitting determinations, and cost estimates carry more weight and may be determinative. 

The Agencies that will Decide the Bridge Design (the LEDPA)

An alphabet soup of Federal and State agencies, called the Merger Team, conduct the environmental review and permitting process and determine the LEDPA. The Lead Agencies on the Merger Team for the CFM Bridge Project are the Army Corp of Engineers (ACE), NCDOT, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and the NC Division of Water Resources. Other agencies on the Merger Team include the State Preservation Office (SHPO), US Coast Guard, US EPA, NC DEQ, and the Wilmington Urban Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (WMPO). Local elected officials serve on the 13 member WMPO. You may find a list of WMPO members here: https://www.wmpo.org/about/#committee.
The City of Wilmington, New Hanover and Brunswick Counties and other local governments DO NOT have a direct say in what bridge design will be chosen; they have only an indirect say through their votes on the 13 member WMPO. https://www.wmpo.org/.

Bridge Design Alternatives

Between 2020 and 2025, three design alternatives for the Cape Fear Memorial Bridge replacement were studied as possible LEDPA:

  • Alternative A: A lift bridge with a 65 foot vertical clearance when closed and a 135 foot clearance when open;
  • Alternative B: A fixed bridge with a vertical clearance of 135 feet; and
  • Alternative C: A fixed bridge with a vertical clearance of 100 feet (plus or minus 35 feet).

HWF, ROW and others strongly advocated for Options A and C, design alternatives that can be built within the right of way of the existing bridge thus minimizing damage to the historic districts, wetlands, and minority owned homes and businesses along the Dawson/Wooster corridor. Also, both Options A and C would land at S Third, maintaining existing traffic patterns downtown. Option C had the additional advantage of being the least expensive alternative.

NCDOT’s 2024 Navigation Impact Report (NIR), prepared as part of the ACE/Coast Guard permitting process, supports Option C, the fixed 100 ft clearance option. The NIR concluded there currently are no vessels using the waterway under the bridge that require more than a 100 feet vertical clearance. Industries requiring seagoing shipping have moved south of the Port where the river is wider, deeper, and better suited to large ocean going vessels. ACE has not dredged north of the bridge to the federally authorized depth since 2006 and has no funding or plans to do so in the future. Because the river and areas upstream are environmentally sensitive, it is unlikely dredging would ever be approved to improve navigation north of the bridge. NCDOT provided its NIR to ACE and the Coast Guard. During most of 2024, we were guardedly optimistic that ACE and Coast Guard would permit Alternative C, the lower option 100 foot clearance option, given that NCDOT’s NIR showed that navigational needs do not justify or require a costly and damaging fixed bridge with 135 ft clearance.

ACE’s 2025 Clearance Determination

Despite the findings in NCDOT’s 2024 Navigation Impact Report, in the summer of 2025, ACE determined it would require a 135 foot vertical clearance based on 1996 feasibility studies and legislation amending and defining the Federal Wilmington Harbor Project. ACE felt bound by the 1996 study and legislation. The Coast Guard deferred to and adopted ACE’s 135 ft clearance determination. Efforts to get support for new Federal legislation that would allow ACE to permit a lower clearance were unsuccessful.

Comparison of the Two Remaining Design Alternatives and their Effects on Historic Districts

Only two design options remain that can be the Least Environmentally Damaging Practicable Alternative:

  • Alternative A: A lift bridge with a 65 foot vertical clearance when closed and a 135 foot clearance when open;
  • Alternative B: A fixed bridge with a vertical clearance of 135 feet.

To see graphics of the two Alternatives and how they compare to the existing bridge please see the PowerPoint presentation from HWF’s June 22 Member Meeting here.

As the graphics show, Alternative A, the lift bridge, is essentially the same as the bridge we have now, but with more traffic lanes (6 lanes instead of 4), plus pedestrian and bicycle paths. It is a little further south, but it will still connect with Dawson/Wooster at South Third, just like the current bridge. Its height is similar to the current bridge and it Is congruent with, and does not overwhelm, the historic district, the Battleship NC, and the businesses and communities along the Dawson/Wooster corridor. And it preserves the 10 to 11 acres of wetlands on the Brunswick County side of the bridge.

By contrast, Alternative C, the fixed bridge with the 135 ft clearance, is much bigger in scale, more imposing, and is incongruent with the surrounding historic district and Dawson/Wooster corridor. It will have a 5 % grade. (The maximum grade allowed on a federal highway is 6%.) On the New Hanover side, it will land between S Fourth and S Fifth, much deeper into the historic districts and, according to NCDOT, will pass over S Third with a 60 foot clearance. On the Brunswick side, the fixed bridge will extend to the US 17/US 76/US 421 interchange and will eliminate almost 11 acres of protected wetlands. HWF believes this massive bridge will bring significant traffic congestion, noise, grime, vibration and ugly sight lines to the historic districts and the Dawson/Wooster corridor. HWF also believes it will depress property values, especially the values of historic properties within sight of the bridge and therefore will discourage investment in historic preservation. Urban blight in historic district areas closest to the bridge may ultimately lead to loss of historic buildings through neglect. Alternative C will also permanently change downtown traffic patterns.

Costs and Funding

NCDOT advises that both Alternative A (lift bridge) and Alternative B (fixed bridge) will cost in excess of $1.1 billion to build. Future operating and maintenance costs for the lift bridge may be more than for the fixed bridge. NCDOT has received a federal grant of $242 million, which is subject to a September deadline. NCDOT and the Merger Team must complete the environmental review and documentation and meet other benchmarks by that date or lose the grant. NCDOT also has secured $85 million from a NC Transportation Fund. There is at least a $900 million short fall. Based on presentations by NCDOT to the WMPO, the $900 million shortfall may be funded with tolls, tri-county transportation bonds, or a tri-county sales tax. Tri-county bonds or sales taxes would have to be approved by the voters in New Hanover, Brunswick and Pender Counties. But voters have no say about tolls.

Tolls

For the CFM Bridge to become a tolled facility, both the WMPO and the NC Legislature must approve the tolls. The WMPO already approved tolls when it voted for the 2025 Transportation Plan. That Plan refers to the replacement bridge as a tolled facility. But WMPO voted to approve tolls with two caveats: 1) NCDOT must continue to pursue other funding sources as alternatives to tolls; and 2) the WMPO may revoke its approval of tolls in the future. The Legislature would approve tolls through special enabling legislation presented by our local delegation, our NC Senators and Representatives. [You can see who these representatives are by going to ncleg.gov]

Tolling could take one of two forms. The $900 million shortfall could be funded by private investors who would operate the bridge and collect the tolls for some period to repay, and provide a return on, their investment. This arrangement is a private/public partnership or PP3. Or NC could borrow the money to cover the shortfall and collect a toll administered by the NC Turnpike Authority. A private investor group, Delivering Bridges LLC, has already presented an “unsolicited” proposal to NCDOT and WMPO. It calls a toll of $2.75 each way, or $5.50 round trip. Multi axle vehicles would pay more. The tolls could be in place up to 50 years, or until Delivering Bridges recoups its investment.

NCDOT Project Timeline

NCDOT’s current timeline shows the final public hearing in Summer 2026 and the selection of the design, or the LEDPA, in Fall 2026.

Milestone Date
Public meeting held Fall 2024
Environmental assessment published Spring 2026
Public hearing Summer 2026
Selection of LEDPA Fall 2026
Approval of Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) Winter 2027
Right of way begins TBD
Construction begins TBD

 

Become a Sponsor

Please complete the following information and someone will reach out to you soon.

Become a Sponsor
What is your desired sponsorship level?
How do you plan to make payment?