Board of Commissioners · Regular Meeting · December 11, 2023

Back to meeting

Board of County Commissioners

December 11, 2023 · Full Transcript

The Pledge of Allegiance commissioner Carter would you lead.

Us.

Thank you so much commissioner Carter are there any adjustments to the agenda that anyone would.

Like now moving on to announcements I'll pass it on to our clerk good evening Commissioners and public I will read the announcements that are published in tonight's agenda Durham County Board of Elections phase one information session in mwbe Outreach will take place on Monday December 18th from 3: till 5:00 p.m. here in the commissioner's Chambers there is a link for you to visit to RSVP and you can also contact Johnny seagar at J seagar that's s i g r s at same.com if you're interested in future Highway bicycle rail pedestrian and Transit projects for the triangle region over the long term now is your chance to give feedback on the goals and objectives that will guide the planning process the DC hcmo which is Durham Chapel Hill carboro Metropolitan planning organization and the Capital Area Metropolitan planning organization are working on destination 2055 an update to the triangle Region's long range Transportation plan the 2055 Metropolitan Transportation plan MTP you can take a survey through January 10th 2024 there's a link for both English and.

Spanish and you can also visit their website there is a link for the website as well you can email at destination 2055 ATU input. or you can contact 855 925 2801 code 5731 the Durham County Department of Social Services is taking applications for the lowincome energy assistance program for applicants who are aged 60 plus as well as those with disabilities or who receive food and nutrition services the application opens to all Durham County residents on January 3rd there is a link to apply you can also contact 919 56081 92 to make a virtual appointment the Durham County Tax Administration allows citizens the option of making partial payments on real property taxes through January 5th of 2024 payment options include check bank draft money order or cash for citizen convenience equal installment payment payment coupons are enclosed with real estate tax bills for more information you can visit their website DC nc.gov Tax or you can call 919.

563000 residents are encouraged to give feedback on the Durham County Government website as well as the process of a comprehensive website redesign tell us what you're looking for in a website if you can can find what you need on the current site and what you like and dislike about it we've launched a 5minute survey to gather input the survey is available in English and in Spanish and there are links published watch the InTouch with Durham County TV show hosted by Chief communication officer Deborah Craig Ray this month's show features a conversation with Durham County Department of Social Services Maggie s viiin about Medicaid expansion in North Carolina and the office of emergency services director Jim grow discusses his Deco career which ends in retirement in January the show is available on The Deco YouTube channel the Durham County website and the Durham television network and lastly most Durham County offices will close for the winter holidays beginning Monday December 25th through Wednesday December 27th reopening on Thursday December 28th most.

Offices will also close on Monday January 1st 2024 and reopen on Tuesday January 2nd for impacts to specific services including convenience sites and library locations you can visit our website at DC nc.gov that concludes the announcements published in tonight's agenda thank you so much clerk Wallace I have one not announcement but just a request of the board commissioner Howton is not able to be here today so she's requested a excused absence so if before we move on with the voting materials of the agenda I'd like to offer anyone would like to introduce a motion to excuse her from this meeting move to excuse commissioner Howton and then I'll take a vote commissioner Burns I commissioner Jacobs commission Carter I and I'm an i motion passes for to Z and then I'll pass it do any of my colleagues have any other announcements okay I would just like to wish everyone a happy holidays before we start this meeting and also a Merry Christmas to folks who celebrate and a commissioner Jacobs correct me if I'm.

Wrong K SAA all of our community members who are celebrating Hanukkah right now with that we will move to the ceremonial item where we have the Eno River Association 2024 calendar presentation I'll ask Jessica Sheffield the Ed of the Eno River Association to please join.

Us good evening it's nice to see friends here at the table thank you for allowing us to join you my name is Jessica Sheffield I have the privilege of serving as executive director at the Eno River Association and with me is a colleague who I'll have the pleasure of introducing in just a moment but as you may recall if you've been on the county commissioner seat a while this is the wonderful time of year where we get to come and bestow upon you our holiday greetings and share with you our next year's annual walk calendar which is a beloved tradition in the community I have just a few remarks if you'll permit me again thank you for the opportunity to come and be with you this evening in celebration of our beloved Eno River many of you have known me a bit this is my fifth year in the role as executive director at the Eno River Association the land trust that has been working to conserve and protect that natural.

Resource in our area since the mid 60s if you and I haven't had a chance yet to walk and talk on the Eno mark your calendar for the 1st of January we have our traditional First Day hike at Ena River State Park at 2 p.m and of course we always invite you on the 4th of July out to the park for the festival for the Eno now entering 2024 it is a year where we are rededicating ourselves to the Community Based work that we're known for in the community and also advocating for the folks who need that resource of clean water and healthy access to Natural spaces and in that vein I am pleased to introduce you to our newest team team member we've recently created a new position at the association Community Partners manager which was recently filled by my colleague Natalie Wallace who is here tonight wanted to make sure to introduce you but again we're here to share with you the 2024 annual wall calendar the theme this year is the.

People's River we're taking an intentional pause from our 40-year tradition of highlighting all of the beauty of just the natural world we've made sure to include the community spaces in this one too young and old the million plus visitors that enjoy the en know and the trails that we've helped to protect these past 40 years perhaps you'll find any pictures of you and your family in there as well so again Natalie and I are here simply to wish you a happy holiday leave these calendar with you to share amongst yourselves as you see appropriate and to thank you for all the work that you've done and will continue to do in the areas of land and water conservation we look forward to working with you in the new year thank you thank you so much Miss shefield I always enjoy the Eno River Festival in July even in the scorching hot I learned my lesson this past year to bring a water bottle we have any other comments commissioner.

Jacob well I just want to thank you the county is a partner with the Eno River Association and I just really appreciate all that you do for all of us in the community and this is always a highlight for me for you coming and sharing this beautiful calendar with us every year thank you so. Much thank you so much again with that that is our only ceremonial item we move to our consent agenda these are items that we have discussed and reviewed at our work session and staff have provided attachments and madam can we just go back to the minutes approving the minutes thank you my first meeting appreciate it can we move to if anyone want to move to approve the November 6 2023 work session so moveed second thank you I will now take a vote commissioner Burns I commissioner Jacobs I commissioner Carter and I an I minutes approved 4 to.

Anything there's no public comment on this item so no one's mad at you or me right now which that is not how the rest of this night is going to go but I did I did want to make it U really really clear that I appreciate your work I'm I'm always excited when we try when we are working to make sure our language lines up with other language I remember even on the child care language I was a little thrown off I was like well what's the difference but of course depending upon who you talk to what you're applying for and and and what you're actually doing the language does change so the fact that we're opening ourselves up to it the fact the staff did this work and they saw it coming nobody from the outside had to tell y'all to do yeah I'm I'm messy early this evening I just want to say thanks and I and I let my colleagues go ahead and go but thank you for this.

Work thank you to you and to Sarah and I appreciate y'all and I just think that this is all going to be for the better manad.

Duram no I have no questions we have reviewed this at Joint City County planning committee and there's very good ration and justifications for all these recommended changes thank you so much I.

Agree with that I'll Now open up our public hearing and as Vice chair Burns mentioned we do not have any public comments and no one has signed up online so following that I will close the public hearing and ask again if my colleagues have any other questions or comments they thought of during that rigorous debate we just had no okay then this item has two motions that would be required for its approval Madam chair I'd like to make a motion to adopt an ordinance amending the unified development ordinance incorporating revision to article three applications and permits Article Five use and regulations article six District intensity intensity standards article 7 design standards article 9 landscaping and buffering article 14 non-conformities article 17 definitions and second been moved by Vice chair bur seconded by commissioner Jacobs take a call vote Vice chair Burns hi commissioner Jacob I commissioner Carter and I and I Motion One passes 4 to zero I'll now entertain the second motion Madam chair I might like to make a.

Motion to adopt the consistency statement as required by North Carolina General statute 160d 605 second mov by Vice chair Burns seconded by commissioner Jacobs take a vote Vice chair Burns hi commissioner Jacobs hi commissioner Carter and I'm an i motion passes 4 to Zer and with that the Udo text Amendment Omnibus 18 has passed May I just wanted to say it is really neat to see us already making changes in the Udo to implement our comprehensive plan that we adopted so thank you for that it's really exciting wonderful now we're g to move to our second public hearing item 23- 0894 public hearing unified ordinance text Amendment pedestrian malls and the board is requested to conduct a public hearing and receive public comments on the Udo text Amendment pedestrian malls and if appropriate approve the amendment and adop the appropriate consistency statement and we have again Mr Kill thank you cheram this is the last time I'll bug you tonight I promise it feels weird not to be dressed.

As a snowman either we like you up here it's you have the easy ones y' had to be to meeting on Tuesday he was indeed dressed like a snowman he was dressed like with a tie and everything yeah Alexander you should have come dressed that way tonight because not everyone had the opportunity to experience that I'll send pictures Pam Andrew saw me she can attest to. It thanks y'all so this next amendment is a privately initiated text amend so that means an applicant or someone from the community has initiated in this CA is a applicant from a firm Thomas and hudon this is a Amendment for pedestrian malls to potentially make them wider so I'm going to go over two definitions tonight because as I said defining things is super important so the first is the general definition of a pedestrian Mall a pedestrian mall is character rzes a number of blocks of public downtown streets design designated for pedestrian only use and closed to vehicular traffic our definition in the Udo slightly more.

Technical a public or private improved area intended for public pedestrian and non-motor use that is permanently preserved for such use through limited easements or rights of enforcement granted to the city or other similar legal techniques so applicant proposed to change The Pedestrian Mall width part of TC 2304 this is to change the width from 50 to 75 ft or potentially 100 feet and I'll cover cover those two scalable distinctions in a second at the jccp on October 4th 2023 staff were provided direction to potentially include options for wider pedestrian malls with the inclusion of additional amenities so the applicant initially proposed changing from 50 to 75 ft JCC PC members would like to see potentially going wider if there are additional amenities included in that Pedestrian Mall staff reviewed with that applicant and made some changes to the the potential ordinance language these potential additional amenities would include a public art feature would include additional Landscaping and additional tree coverage and additional outdoor seating as potential amenities if the.

Applicant went 200 feet if they did not provide those additional amenities the maximum of allowed width would be 75 ft staff did do some research and compared to other jurisdictions there runs a range from 13 foot maximum to 137 foot maximum so not a good clear standard across the industry or across jurisdictions in what is appropriate for Pedestrian Mall you the reason you wouldn't want to get too wide is you want to create that pedestrian feel that sense of safety you want to really activate and engage with the space so show a couple of images of what the different widths look like so the current maximum is 50 ft and this would be what bright leaf square is for a pedestrian Mall the next one is CCB Plaza on the East side this is what a 75 foot Pedestrian Mall looks and feels like of course there's an adjacent RightWay or roadway so it has slightly different feel that's what 75 ft looks and sounds and feels like and then lastly if you go.

To American Tobacco campus down towards the kind of water tower Silo area you come up to what 100 ft would be so that's what a pedestrian mile would feel like if they provided additional amenities So based on these other successful pedestrian modes in the country and across the state increasing the width from 50 to 75t appears to be reasonable however only with additional design commitments and that is what we've included and proposed in this text amendment in front of you tonight staff and the applicant are available to answer any questions this evening so much Mr Kill for another agenda item with no public comment signed up I will pass it along to my colleagues to see if anyone has any questions I see commissioner Jacob thank you so much I would when we get to the public hearing would love to I don't if it now is appropriate or during the public hearing just hear directly from the applicant what their planned use is going to be but I.

Think this is a really important issue because as our Urban fact gets more and more densely developed you know this concept is going to become more and more important not for things you know connectivity being able to use what we normally might think of as Alleyways you know we already see people creatively using spaces like that downtown anyway but even it came up with our development at 500 East Main Street because we're going to have two separate apartment blocks and we we're going to have a p a pedestrian mall going between the buildings and so I think even just how do we even make a successful Pedestrian Mall so that it is a space that people want to use that does benefit the community and I think one thing that we did forget to talk about at joint city county is around safety and lighting and so I know we talked about this a lot at our 500 at East Main Street but just wondering how how that factors into you know especially ones.

That are more narrow how that would factor in and are we addressing that currently yeah that's a great question thank you commissioner Jacob so the ordinance actually already regulates and requires a lighting for these spaces there's certain of course like fixture types you have to use and height requirements so crime prevention through environmental design is essentially what you're getting at is our already kind of baked into the Udo but I I'm assuming we'll be looking to expand some of those when we work to rewrite the.

Udo great thank you and I can wait to hear from the applicant or now whatever is. Appropriate okay. Great good evening Jeremy Anderson Thomas and Auten need to sign up just to address your question we we have a project in design that this kind of came up from It's a larger scale in the downtown in excess of 8 to 10 acres so as we're getting to a project at that scale the buildings are getting a little taller and that 50ft space started to feel very narrow so so to address lighting down into that space activate the space give more opportunity for outdoor dining and activity wider on a project of that scale just seemed right so on some of the projects that Alexander pulled up like bright leaf square that 50 foot feels very right because the buildings are smaller but as you get larger developments and that scale goes up you want to get a little wider just to make that space feel right so there is a project that's designed around but we.

Think it benefits a lot of projects on some of these larger sites as. Thank you that's really helpful and that totally makes sense and I didn't even you know light is and the proportion and scale thank you so. Much I I just wanted to say it's interesting that tonight we have two agenda items that are related to privately initiated text amendments and it's just I don't I don't know that's happened before but anyway it's an interesting phenomenon tonight and I thought it was funny too now that new leadership took over but go ahead girl it's I I not sitting on the JCC PC I I really you know can I I really benefit from these very specific examples these concrete examples and loved hearing what you were going to do and how this applies to it and also just watching how our processes work and this one seems like it's working really well M yeah and look look forward to approving this and hanging out in your Pedestrian Mall sometime there's no other comments or.

Questions from the Commissioners I will go ahead and open up this public hearing and we had no one signed up to speak again on this item so I will move to close this public hearing and bring it back just in case anyone has had any questions or comments come up wonderful this item also will have two motions necessary for its adoption do I hear anyone for the first motion Madam chair i' like to make a motion to adopt an ordinance amended to UniFi development ordinance incorporating Provisions to article 16 Design District section 4 streetscapes RightWay block lot standards moved by Vice chair Burns seconded by commissioner Carter take a Voice vote Vice chair Burns I commissioner Jacobs I commissioner Carter and I'm in I the motion passes 4 to zero and now we have the second motion commission Jacobs Madam chair I'd make a motion to adopt a consistency statement as required by North Carolina General statute 160d d605 here move by commissioner Jacob seconded by commissioner Carter take a Voice vote.

Vice chair Burns hi commissioner Jacobs I commissioner Carter I and I'm an i the motion passes two to sorry four to zero with that agenda item 23894 has passed and we will now move to our next agenda item which is 23- 0895 public hearing unified development ordinance text Amendment conservation subdivisions the board is requested to conduct a public hearing and receive public comments on the Udo text Amendment conservation subdivisions and if appropriate approve the amendment and adopt the appropriate consistency statement I see our attorney ctis Massie coming up and Mr Kill sneaking up closer my adult.

Supervision Madam Clerk does this me and I can drive the. Screen can he control the screen that okay all right good evening Madam chair Commissioners here tonight to talk about an amendment to the Udo concerning conservation subdivisions and I'm rep I'm presenting this matter instead of planning because the impetus for this change arises from litigation and attempting to address a situation which has result in current lawsuit against the county essentially this is an effort to preserve the status quo as section 6.2.4 regarding conservation subdivisions has been interpreted and applied by the planning staff now as you know planning conservation subdivisions are a planning tool and the goal is to.

Preserve sensitive environmental areas or other significant features by permitting the concentration of development in some areas and preserving others now the initial obligation is to preserve at least 50% of the open space which is part of a subdivision and that's to be reserved as either natural or open space but beyond that general statement of 50% then there are very specific categories of land to qualify as a conservation subdivision now in the ordinance 624a you have the general purpose statement now there are 12 purposes listed there and the litigants currently suing the county have taken the position that the language in the ordinance both in A and B requires that all 12 of these have to be met in order for property to be preserved as a conservation subdivision on its face there is an understanding of that but when you read the ordinance when you consider the implications you realize it does not work it would prevent any conservation subdivision from ever being approved and that's why to clear this.

Matter up planning has proposed an amendment but I want to go through these 12 quickly now what you will notice is that the very first one to provide flexibility of design in order to promote environmentally sensitive and efficient uses of the land that's your typical purpose statement but is that actually a standard to be met or is it an explanation for why conservation subdivisions are allowed similarly when you look at numbers four 4 6 7 8 and 10 what do they talk about they talk about permitting and promoting certain things those are not specific standards those are vague General goals number nine which is in blue to encourage Street design that reduce traffic speed and Reliance on Main arteries really has nothing at all to do with conservation subdivision for preservation of PL so you've really got in terms of a purpose and a goal 2 three5 11 and 12 and again what do you see vague general statement typical of a purpose but not a standard which must be met in.

Fact the way planning traditionally has interpreted 624 is they go to the requirements of 624h which provide I'm going to let the train. Pass which provide very specific standards now whereas in 624a it talks about preserving unique and sensitive natural resources or in Woodlands here it talks of about first you'll notice that of the 50% of the land to be reserved As Natural or open space 80% must constitute what are listed as primary conservation areas special flood hazards repairi and buffers Wetlands protected by the Army Corp lakes and ponds excluding created storm water control measur areas of at least 5,000 contiguous feet with natural slopes greater than 25% forests in which healthy hardwood trees at least 10 in in diameter at breast height comprise at least 50% of the area that's a specific standard as opposed to Woodlands which are mentioned in 624a now and then there are more of course these are the specific standards and if you can't once you've met 80% in primary if you can't do the.

Full 100% you can get into secondary conservation areas and other open space but again they still have specific standards. Now this slide is intended to illustrate the Practical effect of the litigant position they say all 12 must be met now what planning has done is they have put on this map a few specifics got the flood planes first of all the yellow area is rural residential areas which is where you can have a a conservation subdivision have the flood planes you have the historical and archaeological sites defined in 624h you have the existing Greenways and the scenic views which by 624h must be either state or federal Scenic byway and what you'll see is all of those requirements do not exist together anywhere in Durham County so even if you limit it just to the things that are actually purposes or identifiable standards in 624a they don't exist no conservation subdivision can exist in Durham County under their standard and what that means is is it's a construction of the ordinance that would basically.

Eviscerate the goal which is to preserve certain areas by permitting concentrated development on part of a land as long as you can preserve other significant feature that was how we defended the lawsuit in court we were upheld by the Superior Court they've now appealed it to the court of appeal basically our arguing their construction of the ordinance is correct there's an argument there but even if their arguments upheld it leads to an absurd result and it's a result that can be easily addressed by a simple Amendment to the ordinance because right now if somebody else comes in and applies for a conservation subdivision that meets the requirements of 624h it will be approved somebody else could sue over it we'd be right back in court until we get either final Appel action or we amend the ordinance and res and remove the ordinance construction the language that they're.

Pursuing so here are the amendments and you'll see they're very simple conservation subdivision standards are established for the following purposes we're going to remove number nine which talked about designing streets we're going to drop the word an and the other change is in 624b remove the language that looped in. 624a now the language in 624a was added in February of 2008 and as explained it was an interim action while a more substantial rewrite of 624 conservation subdivisions was ongoing that substantial revision which was adopted in November of 2008 is what created 624h those specific standards I showed you earlier but again 624a are not truly standards half of them aren't standards at all they're aspirational it promotes and encourages and if you were to give the construction that the opponents in the litigation want and which some will argue you should hold tonight that's what it would look like that's what it mean you could not approve planning could not approve any conservation subdivisions but that's not the way they've been interpreting it for.

Years if you have any questions I'll do my best to answer them thank you so much as always attorney messie for your thoroughness as well as for keeping the county protected than I will'll pass along see if any of my colleagues have any questions or comments around this one I shurn oh no I just it on with that since there are no questions for my colleagues we will move to open this public hearing and we have two individuals who have signed up the first one is Katie Ross Miss Katie Ross if you can join where Monica our clerk is standing and you'll have three minutes for your comments and then following Katie we have Robin Barefoot if you want to come line up hello Katie Ross B and my background is that I practice law for 45 years I was an appet attorney I understand statutes and I understand how the court of appeals work I was in Washington state but there's they're pretty much the same everywhere Mr Massie was addressing you.

Like you're the judges of the court of appeals he doesn't want to wait for the court of appeals to render their decision in a few months so you we will all know what the current statute what the proper interpretation of that current statute is you know what the results are as to what's been going on what Mr Massie is urging as a correct interpretation and that's the horrific destruction that almost all of you have seen when preserver Al Durham took you out to developments that were undergoing that were approved as conservation subdivisions under the exact Provisions that he is proposing that you adopt tonight as the amendment what I suggest that you do is wait for the court of appeals in a few months to tell us whether the planning department has been interpreting the statute correctly or whether it these standards actually mean something I want to tell you something very important that Mr Massie did not tell you and that's that all everything in the law all ordinances all statutes are viewed.

Through The Eyes of the reasonable person so anything in the stat statute that is that can't be done like in those purposes like say preserve a a historic building if it's there and you can preserve it you must preserve it but if it's not there then that requirement would not apply that's what a reasonable person would see so conservation subdivisions that actually mean something and preserve and conserve our natural resources can in fact be built under the current statute. The Amendments that were made in 2008 and 2009 they were made specifically to strengthen the conservation subdivision and that's when they specifically added the provision that those purposes the part that this amendment wants to render totally meaningless that those could be applied and that the planning department would have the statutory authority to reject applications that didn't meet that my time is up but what I would say is if no more conservation subdivisions could go in like the ones you've seen that would be a good thing not something to avoid but.

If this the statute that we have can be interpreted by the court of appeals for you thank you Katie then appreciate your comments and it's good then we will have better conservation subdivisions thank you thank you Katie Robin Barefoot hey thank you so very much I love following Katie Ross she's my wingman I am the plaintiff in the lawsuit against the county so the one thing I want to disabuse this audience of is the fact that there would be another litigation I can tell you that the amount of time and energy and money that has been spent in order to bring this matter to the court as been extensive and in the 12 months that have elapsed there has not been another lawsuit so I really don't think that the county is at risk for another lawsuit I also am not going to repeat the ecological damage that has happened you've all seen it preserve Durham has educated this body and the city council over the last 12 months to.

Show what has been the result and that definitely is tied to conservation subdivisions there have been 16 of them that have been ped as 15 or 16 I could be wrong what I want to say is that if the county has an appetite to amend this ordinance then I'm all in favor of that and I'm prepared to work with Sarah Young and the planning department in order to propose an amendment that gives meaning to the word conservation and that actually is based on the legislative history which Katie just mentioned to you through 2008 and N was to strengthen this if an amendment is what the county wants let's do that but this is not the correct amendment to absolutely he used the word eviscerate he took my word but I'm going to use it again to eviscerate the statue by taking away those purposes and giving the planning staff the ability to say no to a project that it believes is detrimental to the county I think is what we want to do don't be.

Frightened into approving this amendment by a fictionalized risk that Mr Massie proposes in on an onslaught of litigation don't be complacent either thinking this is is a minor cleanup or that it's somehow promotes an absurd result because it would not promote that absurd result the ordinance was intended as protection and Safeguard and guard rails when developers come for our land and they damn sure have come so say no to this text Amendment do not relinquish political ground that your predecessors in these seats made sure was protected put your hands on the steering wheel of Durham's future and vote no thank you Robin Barefoot that was the only two individuals that we had signed up to speak on this agenda item before iose public hearing want to ask colleague any colleagues have commissioner Sherburn yeah Mr Mass I'm gonna bring you back up if you don't mind Sarah you might have to be as wing woman I do want to just I want to get some things clarified one thank you.

As always for folks speaking up again when we go to 6.2.4 right now there are 12 things listed correct yes so can we go back 624a a yes can we go back to that slide yes ma'am and I'm not trying to relitigate it because I I you know I'm not a lawyer nor do I play one on TV so that's not what I'm trying to do here but the argument that I'm seeing right right right so there's 12 of them the argument being made is that that end makes this inclusive of all and there is language before the number that says shall right I got that part okay so and then we go back to so the I don't even want to say reasonable prudent person I don't even want to get bogged down in all of that but what I do want to say is historically and Sarah you can correct me if I'm wrong we have not either approved nor denied nor required that somebody meet all 12 correct right.

So that for those of y'all who can't see the planet director is shaking her head to negate that statement so it is not an affirmative we have not set the standard and so the only thing we're doing now is upholding the standard that we've had historically she is shaking her head the affirmative for those of you all who cannot see her it this is a and I'm G say this on camera it is mighty funny that we got all these Udo on the night that Netta and I get in the leadership but I I'll deal with that later that's not for anybody else to deal with I just want to put that out for public consumption conversations that could have been had previously or being had tonight on the eve of an election but you know it's it's that's the heavy is the head that wears the crown of leadership but I do want to throw out there Mr Massie back to you go back to the map again yes ma'am.

Thank you sir if you could and Sarah I might pull you in also so no the other one well it might be this one where we said in the event that we did overlay all 12 of these requirements as opposed to the sh we would have how many I did not I did not have them try to figure out the all 12 I had asked for some selected ones right six or even seven of them five of them yes ma'am because if you'll notice this goes back to when you talk about promoting or encouraging that's not really a standard you can put up there right it's like so what we've got here are the scenic byways and there's no federal ones but you have two State ones you have the flood zones you have Greenways and trails and but you're kind of making my point sir like you couldn't even overlay six so how in the world could we overlay 12 I'm trying to bring it back down here.

Because we've had the lawyers to talk thank you Katie thank you Robin thank you Mr Massie but trying to bring because we got to deal with this every day but you could the the thought process of this litigation is that 12 could be overlaid and we couldn't even overlay four five three of these things and find where it could actually be a a conservation subdivision under those stand Sanders so I did just want to kind of sort of showcase that I'm going to Yi the rest of my time in the event my colleagues have something that they want to.

Say thank you so much is Dan juel still sitting here yeah you're back there Dan juel and I were both served on the eudo was it 2000 what year was it 2008 okay when we with a large group of residents all different stakeholders that that came up with the conservation subdivision ordinance so it was it was actually created with for the most part this language and you know the intent sometimes we don't get language right and I think what we've seen is that we obviously did not directly We There was issues with the language but you know the intent when the conservation subdivision ordinance was created was to try to meet some of these purposes and with the different standards the primary and secondary features I actually was the first person and I was I was project manager for the very first conservation subdivision ordinance the pool Farm Road project with the company I worked for at that time time which was focusing on preserving Farmland in Northern Durham.

But I think what I would say is that the way I interpret what our attorney is as is is recommending that we do is you know we have a responsibility as elected officials to protect the county that's actually one of the one of our responsibilities and to make decisions that does not put the county at risk so that is part of the obligation of our office but I hear you all about some of what we see is related to we've had some changes in state law since this ordinance was first created and we've seen that there are things that need to be addressed so one thing I'd like to so for me there's two they're two separate issues and so what I guess what I'd like to hear from staff from you SRA I know if you could respond to the I where we are right now I know we have passed some in the past few months some revisions to our Udo to address some of the issues that we've seen on the ground.

In East Durham and to and I just want to thank you all because you have brought us out there you have really lifted up these issues for for our entire community and for all us so and has led to concrete results so just want to hear from you how will some of those new ordinances actually will they have an impact moving forward on how the conservation subdivision ordinance is implemented moving forward if something comes forward to you today how how will we see any changes sure that's a really good question Sarah Young with the planning department so the text amendment that you're referring to was a phased development and tree preservation text amendment that was passed a few months ago that also that would apply to any subdivision including conservation subdivisions so even though in a conservation subdivision you're you're preserving 50% of the land as open space or or what whatnot the other 50% it would still have to come in as phases and each phase would have to have.

Its its proportioned amount of treat coverage and basically conservation so you would no longer be able to just massg grade for instance the entire 50% unless it was teeny tiny conservation subdivision but for all intents and purposes those amendments that were just passed about B's development will apply to conservation subdivisions so you would not see conservation subdivisions constructed in the same way that we have seen them up until now and are there any other you know as we look at the rewrite of the Udo can you do you foresee any other changes that we would make related to the conservation subdivision ordinance where we've seen any issues and also secondly could you also explain what how State Statute has has also impacted the way this is currently being implemented sure there is a provision in state law that requires that we allow raring buffers so stream buffers to count for a variety of things we have to let them count for density calculations for the gross land area we.

Have to let them count for any required open space for any required tree coverage and for any conservation areas so you know there have been a lot of concerns about developers ability to double dip basically count the same you know stand of trees for multiple things that is baked into state law state law allows them to double thank you and related to any other potential changes to strengthen this yeah as we look to rewrite the Udo you all know we have a consultant that we have hired and is working on that we've given them a laundry list of topics that we would like them to revisit and bring to us kind of best practices and most upto-date thinking conservation subdivisions is definitely one of those topic areas so I do foresee that we will probably get some recommendations from them in terms of you know if we want to change the proportion you know is 5050 the right proportion of developable land to preserved land if that percentage changes does that mean there's also.

Changes in density or design requirements or housing type or whatnot so those are all things that we're we're hoping to have a conversation with them and get their best recommendation on thank you that's really helpful I'd like to request that that's something that gets prioritized for us because frankly we we don't get we don't we don't do a lot of development in the county anymore a lot of stuff doesn't really come to us anymore but this is this is something that we do still see being used in the county so especially we're seeing so I I guess is it possible that this be something that we that we prioritize I know I think it would be important to County residents yeah so in the schedule from the consultant their first deliverable to us is an evaluation of our current ordinance and a report that basically charts out their recommendations for kind of the the big things to change and how to change them in a direction we will be bringing that forward when that.

Comes out this spring after that the very first deliverable after that is the rewrite of residential districts and since this is residential districts that's kind of already prioritized so okay I'm glad to hear that thank. You that then I will close this public hearing and we already at commissioner's already asked questions but in case there's any other additional comments or questions that anyone wants to make before we move forward with this item okay this item is also another item that will have two motions if the board so chooses to approve them do we have a motion yes I move that we adopt an ordinance amending the Udo incorporating revisions to articles six District intensity statements second we have a motion by commissioner Carter second by commissioner Jacobs.

Take the roll call vote commissioner Burns I commissioner Jacobs I commissioner Carter I and I'm an i motion Motion One passes four to zero and now we have a second motion for this one on the consistency statement I move that we adopt a consistency statement as required by North Carolina General statute 160 D- 605 second moved by commissioner Carter seconded by commissioner Jacobs roll call vote commissioner Vice chair Burns hi commissioner Jacobs hi commissioner Carter I and I'm in I second motion passes 4 to zero with that 23- 0895 passes and now we move to the big Feast for tonight which is 23- 0896 public hearing for unified development ordinance text Amendment simplifying codes for affordable development for short and to scad so the board is requested to conduct a public hearing to receive comments on the Udo text amendments applying codes for affordable development and if if appropriate approve the amendment and adopt the appropriate consistency statement and we have presenting to us today is bo our assistant planning.

Director and he will be assisted by our planning director Sarah young as needed awesome Bo now wait a minute Alex didn't dress up like a snowman but you was dressed up like a Christmas tree y'all just didn't care to come in here dressed for us today came in here all professional I appreciate it Be Ready for War you look good go ahead I I figured I was talking about my sweater and the elevator on the way here so here somebody to say something good evening Madam chair Commissioners this is a privately initiated text Amendment the applicant Jim Anthony of the Anthony Property Group application was received May of last year the intent and the focus of the the provisions to be modified according to the app was to allow additional flexibility in sighting and design to develop additional infill housing opportunities and housing types increasing small scale commercial opportunities talk a little bit about that in a moment and to promote different housing types throughout the jurisdiction now in your staff report.

You you were provided a detailed analysis that staff put together and it's organized by the proposals topics I'm going to go through those topics here just sort of at a high level for the room included in this text Amendment there's some exemptions for small site plans these are Town Homes town home developments of 10 or less units and Commercial developments in some non-residential districts on lots that are 20,000 feet or less the proposal adds a new housing typee this is the detached row house this is a good way to to describe it would be a a detached townhouse these would be individual Lots with communal land around them it would be multif family development we currently allow something very similar where you the housing type would be an apartment but those were not be for sale and these would essentially have the same form but would be a a for sale product there's some modifications to accessory structure setbacks and increasing the allowable size for accessory dwelling units the proposal changes the way.

That we or would change the way that we measure Residential Building height so currently we take an average of the corners of the structure and go to the midpoint of the roof this proposal references the apex of the roof so sort of simplifies height measurement calculation but doesn't functionally change or increase High limitations there's some modifications to residential infill standards an example of this is the setbacks for Corner Lots right now you'd have to meet two Street yards this allows for one of those to be a side yard development standard for small non-residential Lots this really expands the use of the commercial infill District standards in various commercial districts for small small Lots some minor changes to the PDR District standards looking at incorporating more non non-residential specific uses in the pr development I'm driving some additional topics flag lot standards some changes to the setbacks for flag Lots expanding the use of the reduced flag pole flag lot option and some other minor changes that would encourage more flag lot modifications to the.

Setbacks and the small lot option removing some of the additional requirements that small lot small house currently have project boundary buffer exemptions this is a topic that you'll see in the analysis it it removes project rounding buffers in instances where the same use is being developed adjacent to a property that is U similar use so for example residential to residential a project Bounty buffer would not be required there's some changes to the nonform structures section this would reduce the number of minor special use permits that we have coming in for existing opor structures when they want to expand the height this would say that the additional height as long as it conformed with Udo could be approved by right there also some other miscellaneous Provisions modified and some adjustments to minor incs into setbacks so there's the sort of the the high level topics that are being proposed to and removal of parking minimums is one as well so here in the slide I we took a look at the provisions they all would.

Many of them would apply in both the city and county but due to the where particular zoning districts are located tried to highlight here the pieces of the scat Tex amendment that we would see the impacts in the county jurisdiction most likely of course the removal of parking minimums the increasing the Adu size you know we see Adu is developed in our district quite often and so that increase would impact in the county the height measurement method applying of course as we review residential construction and then of course the removal of the project boundary buffers between residential uses we do see that that instance would would most likely come up in the county jurisdiction I I will note one caveat if there was a subdivision that chose to mass grade there's an exemption in the in the Udo that requires a buffer in that instance and so that would still apply if this if this were adopted so the Planning Commission recommended denial back in March by voto 66 it was originally heard by.

City council March 20th was continued on two separate occasions both times to allow for additional engagement once during that that time frame there were several meetings hosted by staff with the Inc and the applicant which resulted in some changes to the application subsequently there was a task force appointed by the mayor that held three meetings with the applicant ultimately the proposal was adopted by city council November 20th they the City Council did and just wanted to to note that there were several Provisions that staff had recommended not be adopted as a part of the analysis and and you'll see these listed here the City Council did not adopt one of them is the path program this was a sort of an incentive program that was in their original application that I'm sort of offed offered a tradeoff if if there was a percentage of affordable units as a part of the development some of the standards were relaxed and so this was not adopted there were modifications to the application of the neighborhood protection overlays.

Specifically old west Durham the original application had a a provision that would allow an accessory structure to be built prior to the primary structure the sequencing was removed or this allowable sequencing relaxing at the residential infill standards the the infil standards have mostly stayed the same in the city's recently adopted version residential uses in various non-resident districts this was not adopted density exemptions for CI commercial infill projects there was a additional flexibility for setbacks with mechanical equipment we maintained the current standards for the councel did flag flag Lots with poles that would get as low as 5 foot for the purpose of utilities to the the RightWay that portion was not adopted and then the elimination of reard setbacks in the CI District we maintained the rear yard setbacks in the the city's version that was adopted and that is it for the staff Port the applicant is here I can probably potentially answer some questions about the proposal and if you have any questions for staff here and.

Available thank you so much and thank you staff for all the work in months I know yall have been putting into this and all of the public that's been engaging in this process over these long long several months. You discussed so the items that are that that had been removed from the the final adoption from the city but also just wondering so now that the city has adopted these amendments essentially all of that since the the city area that falls into the county that automatically is the precedent correct so this us adopting the or not rejecting it tonight will only impact the areas that are outside of City Limits that is correct main question right now I'm gonna pass my colleague commissioner Jacob thank you madam chair I want to just follow up on what you just said just for clarification could you define because now with the adoption of the urban for the future land use future Place type map could you define now so in starting what date does the the.

Scat Amendment be what is what is the date of implementation it'll be effective in the City January 1st okay so January 1st 2024 and could you define for us where it will be implemented the the various Provisions would apply throughout the the city limits so is that within the urban growth area or I'm just thinking about the urban growth boundary that we just adopted did that would all be within the or further within the urban growth boundary okay so basically our decision tonight is only pertaining to the county land that is outside of the urban growth boundary yes okay that's helpful okay and I have I do have some questions but I'm going to well I guess going going back to your slide could you go back to the slide where you specifically listed the impacts of the county could you just explain a little bit more I guess you know some of some when we think about the way the county land is developed a lot a lot of it is rural.

Where we you know some of the restrict there aren't as many restrictions anyway on what people can do in rural areas so I guess how do you I mean if you could just tell us a little bit more about what these impacts really mean to Residents because I think that's you know we've gotten a lot of emails and concerns from and some met with citizens who are concerned really specifically about the impact to the county I mean I think that's what we really want to zero in on is you know the impacts to the county areas so if you could help us with this a little bit more sure I I'll I'll explain on these topics a little bit so the proposal removes parking minimums in the county obviously that would remove parking requirements for you know majority of his RR or for a residential you know residential development they would most likely provide parking when a when a home is constructed on site even without the minimum requirement and then.

Of course RTP bulk the non-residential development that we see in the county jurisdiction is RTP they frequently provide you know they're usually bumping up against the parking maximums for their developments which would still be in place so so the impact for the removable parking minimums we don't foresee you know great deal of development that would still provide same parking in terms of the accessory dwelling unit size so the size increased to 1,000 square feet we do think that we would see larger adus constructed in the Count's jurisdiction many of the Lots residential lots in the county are larger so you know from a scale standpoint this is actually maybe more appropriate in the county than elsewhere so that but that would be certainly an impact that you see the height measurement method we actually don't expect the measurement method to result in development looking any different in terms of the the actual height Heights that are allowed so that that's really more a simplification for the applicant and for.

The the review team for staff and then the last one the removal of the project ground re buffers so th this is one where so the current Udo requires project boundary buffers in many many instances many times with similar uses adjacent to each other staff feels that it may not always be appropriate to have project browny buffers if you've got a like use adjacent to another use in that they would still have tree coverage requirements there would still be the basing and Grading requirements that were discussed earlier there would still be open space requirements and streetscape and Landscape requirements so the project Bounty buffers in many instances you know you'll you'll still be you'll still see very similar landscaping and and tree coverage tree preservation also because of the provision for Mass grading I think for a lot of subdivisions we'll still see that the 6 opacity buffer however if a subdivision does not choose masquerading and is adjacent to residential development then there would not be a buffer around the boundary but.

They would still have the same percentage of coverage required is that helpful any any more yes that's very helpful and again again just to reiterate the the the new ordinances that we've passed related to storm water buffers the phasing all of that that would still pertain no matter what it does not supersede this good question that is correct yes all those would still maintain the existing Provisions that have been adopted okay thank. You I sh firms than commissioner Carter I'm going to have a lot more to say after the public hearing but I do want to go back for a second go to the slide where you show everything that was gutted out of this 80 page that not yeah since we want to go over what affected the county Bo if you would iner if you would educate folks could you go through because I had the same question about how it would impact the county and I'm going go back to that in a second I'm not going to punch at it.

Right now but could you maybe take some time to say why each one of these pieces was gutted out of this gutted out of this amendment or at least the top could you do the top four like why was this taken out why were they taken out now not not in aggregate if you could just do the first four about why they were taken out yeah I will I will do my best of course and then you got help it's help over there call them up there they don't like to so the the the path program staff had some serious concern about the proposed length of time for the affordable units we we didn't feel that it was an adequate length of time providing those affordable units in given the the trade-off for some of the the regulations that would be relaxed in terms of the modifications to the neighborhood protection overlays specifically old west Durham that that would not impact the county because of course both or the are located.

Within the city's jurisdiction that was removed certainly the old west durum NPO for example fairly recently adopted you know staff felt that after all all the engagement efforts and since it was recently adopted we were not in favor of a provision that would remove those requirements allowing an accessory structure prior to primary structure the concern there was if let's just say that you've got a vacant residential lot they came through and they built the accessory structure say say it's an Adu and it would meet the Adu standards and setbacks and then in the future they were going to build primary structure well what if they didn't build that primary structure and so staff was concerned that that provision would result in some non-conforming structures and and situations on those lots relaxation of residential infil standards staff was in opposition to that particular and it was a suite of changes that would Rel some of the residential info standards or allow for some options staff in the interest of neighbor character and preserving the.

Current infal standards recommended that we didn't adopt city council not adopt that of course that particular provision or Suite of Provisions is relevant within the city that's where the residental standards would would would mostly apply and would not impact the county should I keep going I want stop you right there only reason why you see you you all clearly there was some advocacy done right there was some advocacy done so thank you to to the folks who raised their voices there's a reason why we have public hearings there's a reason why we have public meetings there's a reason for transparency there's a reason why we make sure that ourselves and our staffs are made available to the public and again we've seen three other Provisions where like these are the outcomes like we want to work together in tandem so that we can make this community better and so you saw some examples like this is what we're going to pull out could you go to another slide if you wouldn't mind the slide.

That shows how much public comment we had how much how much public engage that right there see because there might be there might be a tide of folks who want to prolong this process even further I would not be in support of that for a myriad of reasons I've not always been privileged enough to go to a lot of public hearings but by the grace of God this past election cycle I've had the opportunity to go to the public hearings that you all had there I had the opportunity to take time off from work and do the the work session that we had here during the last election cycle there were a myriad of of of debates and I got to go and sit and listen into in during the debates I got to look at the recordings from the task force so this has been going on let's see the Planning Commission first denied this y'all can call it a tie if you want to it was a denial denied this.

In March of 2020 so I mean March 20th of 2023 so here here it is you know nine months later and anyone who says we need to hear more about it I got a problem with that because we've been dealing with this since then additionally I want you I want us to go back that application was put in could you go back to the very first slide thank you is there supposed to be a owen property it it is y' killing me call me out I'm sorry that but I I do want to throw so that is the applicant right MH that's the applicant yes so that says May 5th 2022 yes all right so I just want to put and and we don't have anybody else on there there's no habitat there's no less fake another black woman signature there's none of that that's the applicant correct okay I just want to put that out there for public consumption so those are the three things I just want to elevate how long.

This process has been going on since May of 2022 where your staff has had the opportunity s staff as had the opportunity to kind of sort of go through it climb through it then it came up to to the Planning Commission made its way out into the public sector the community's had opportunity it's been a task force created they've come to work session so I just want folks to know that no matter what happens tonight commissioner Burn's ready to vote so y'all can go ahead on that commissioner Carter yes I I'll probably hold most of my questions for after the public hearing but I I did want to ask either one or two now let me ask this one so well first of all I want to say thank you to the proponents and opponents I feel like the community's reached out to us and and given us such wonderful opportunities to get together with you to talk to you on the phone and you know to hear both sides and there's.

Always so much to learn on both sides and so I want to say I really appreciate that chance my my question is related to the fact that it seems like many many of these text amendments are related to small lots lots that are less than 20,000 Square ft is there any way that that requirement could be gamed or worked around through an exempt subdivision action where a larger lot is then subdivided into lots that would meet the less than 20,000 foot requirement so the 20,000 requirement yeah all right so I'll back up so an exempt subdivision or one of the ways the most applicable way would be if you had a existing lot that was less than two acres and it was being subdivided into less than three lots so I don't exactly know what you mean by gamed but I do think an exempt subdivision by state law could be applied and approved and a a 20,000 lot could be created and then subsequently the development could could meet those exemptions or or.

Standards and that would that would but they would be bound to that 20,000 foot maximum in terms of the development and the lot does that answer your question so it could it could an exempt plat could be approved to create the lot that would then benefit from those exemptions yeah and so if there are no buffer requirements on these lots for like use that's right is that correct could want could a developer you know then have this one acre lot they divide it into four 20,000 square or two two 20,000 or let's say they have two acres and they divide it into four of these lots and then without a bu you know any sort of buffer requirement they could actually be contiguous and that you know that someone could build a big mansion or a Shopping Center yeah commiss C so the if there were four lots that would not be an Exempted flat and therefore it would trigger a storm Water Analysis and and most likely s plan review and.

And but if it were three lots yes each individual lot could subsequently be developed individually the 20,000 foot standard and and I and I forgive me I don't remember specifically what those standards are I believe it means that they would meet the commercial infill standards which are reduced setbacks and reduced buffers yeah I was going to ask you a little bit about commercial infill standards too. But director they could not be combined into a larger development to circumvent the rules which I think is your that really was my question yeah that that would not be the case okay not not possible to circumvent the rules on that by combining okay thank you and and just to to follow up on yeah they would because storm water code isn't changing they're still the same thresholds in terms of impervious surface and disturbance limits and all those same mechanisms can I just ask a real quick that's a great question commissioner Carter related to that though where in the county would someone be able to do.

That when they don't when we they would need they wouldn't have you I mean you can't build a septic system and a well on less than an acre so I'm trying to understand how where would that be able to happen I don't think there is an area in the county where that would occur pretty pretty I'm pretty. Certain I'll also add that you know most of the property in the county is zoned RR has very LGE large minimum lot size requirements a lot of the property in the county is also in our Watershed districts which make the minimum requirements even bigger and impose other limitations so I don't staff does not foresee this really playing out in.

The you and I had two follow-up questions also before we open up the public hearing so Mr wondering how much so when I looked at the slide about how this impacts the county thank you a lot of what I was thinking and wondering is most of the time that we see larger scale development or all of the time really in the county that typically has been land that first is annexed into the City and so if that is the case then the city having approved scad already will supersede and become the president since it's no longer County only jurisdiction is that correct that's correct okay and so around the concerns about like you know how is this going to impact larger size Development coming into County areas because those areas County areas don't have access to water or publicly available Water and Sewer typically developers will come and request annexation just wanted to that clarified and then I know that this the items that were removed before the city voted on it.

Going back to the planning commission's vote how many comments were made by I know since we wouldn't have a Planning Commission meeting after the vote had happened or after those City had decided to remove those items is there any understanding or knowledge of where the planning commissioner's concerns were were they aligned also with staff's concerns around the items that were essentially that were eventually removed from the final adoption that is correct and yes they were there was actually a a subcommittee the plan commission had put together and they agreed with staff's recommendations and Analysis that was a subcommittee of the Planning Commission members that's correct and did they ever take like a vote on that subcommittee about you know after the removals or anything just just wondering okay they just put together the the report for the for the commission thank you there's no other comments or questions from my colleagues I will open up the public hearing we do have quite a number of folks signed up to speak I believe we.

Have 22 people no one has signed up online and for the sake of everyone's time we're going to have two minutes instead of three per comment and so we will start with Sebastian fet I know this Sebastian F to lack what you lack oh yes over here on this side next to the clerk and then after Sebastian will be Mimi Kesler and I'll call youall up two at a time to give you more time to sit good evening I just wanted to Echo some of the comments i' I've spoken at city council as well but I think this is important to also share here my name is Sebastian petlac resident of Durham County off of Irwin Broad near Duke Forest I do represent building trade members Craftsmen working on actually a lot of infrastructure projects across our state and in our cities but I did want to State my support for the scad amendments to the Udo to increase mock ability density and access to more affordable housing I do represent hundreds of members and.

Young apprentices in the construction industry who may not afford to live in a city or county lines while they work here because of housing costs but I do believe as many other cities across the country and already in our state have done that these amendments can help move the needle towards affordable affordability and density nationally we are seeing that increased Supply and denser housing has helped to reduce the rise in rental costs and allowed new and young families to buy homes in the cities and neighborhoods they live in if we don't continue to improve our development plans we'll leave all future housing affordable only for wealthy individuals lastly the Amendments can help create greater walkability reduce traffic on our roads helping us reach environmental sustainability goals and reduce overburdened requirements on developers such as parking minimums I implore the board to approve these amendments without hesitation or delay thank.

You after Mimi we'll have Jennifer Franklin and Pamela Williams good evening Commissioners my name is Mimi Kesler I live in the city of Durham we want to talk to you about due process there have been many times and ways for the proponents to have been asked to work with us to find Common Ground I started trying the day after the August 30th 2022 community meeting which was the first of two where they actually presented to people who did not have a Financial incentive in the building or real estate market so understand that they think that it's been going on a long time and we think it hasn't because of all those opportunities and repeated failure to engage in good faith negotiations I believe that there has not been adequate Community engagement on sweeping changes to the building codes that will fundamentally change the fabric of the city and our quality of life the proponents have had had protected presentation time with the governing bodies and in fact twice before JCC PC before that August meeting.

2022 and and they then and yet that was the first time that we learned about it in contrast the residents have only had their two or thre minute pieces and like in this present in this situation how can our voice be truly heard and con considered before it's time for you to vote proponents have told us many times they have the votes on Council they said that at that August meeting presumably that was a deterrent for us but it hasn't worked out that way but not sitting down with us they have created sides and making this issue a political issue and indeed many voters have told me since November 20th vot vote on scad that they would vote differently if they had known I sincerely believe we have more common and we have more in common than the other side thinks I believe we are trying to achieve the same goal the goal density and add added adding more housing units but thank you Mimi but differs in the means of getting there.

Thank you thank you. Good evening we come to you now if you can share your name please Jennifer Franklin sorry your address we come to you now because you're last hope there's still even after changes have been made ambiguous language in the document and several sections that are simply illogical there are opportunities for developers to game the system and avoid over it and the city attorney's office needs to review it before it becomes law when we appealed to the planning director for help in improving the document she explained that with a private Amendment staff were not authorized to make changes but she was receptive to the idea the City Council voted on a motion that was seemingly only understood by councilwoman Johnson who made it when asked they had followed what was in the motion the planning director said that it fortunately it was being recorded neither those present nor council members understood what sections were in or out and there was nothing we citizens could do without being out of.

Order despite residents asking for a no vote significantly outnumbering the proponents the usual four adopted in favor or voted in favor because that was what they were planning to do from the beginning the current Udo section 3.9.5 part a item three reads following the public hearing the governing body May approve the amendment deny the amendment or send the amendment back to the Planning Commission or a committee of the governing body for additional consideration please send this back to the Planning Commission who will work with the residents and the staff to find compromise in the specifics with language that is not ambiguous and not so extreme please save Durham from being overrun thank.

You and please remember to announce your name and your address when you come to the mic thank you and after this we have Joseph F human and then Donna Stein back good afternoon my name is Pam Williams I'm on record my address is I'm a resident of Durham I'm also an engineer for over 40 years I was an engineer I did Land Development for 16 years I have read the ordinances and I worked for ncdot for quite a few years writing rfps and policies and even legislature changes get through legisl for CDOT and as I read these ordinances that we have now there's already loopholes and flex well there's already flexibility in these ordinance to get higher density I mean have you driven around have you looked at what's being done things are being done and there is flexibility already and I feel like that if I I'm requesting you to say no to this one is they they've said it doesn't really apply to Durham but as you know.

As each acre of land is annexed into the city then that acre of County Land now all these ordinances are applied I am also very upset about the buffer rules being taken away just because it's a a small acre you know it's four acres of land so they're not going to do math grading but you don't have to provide any buffers everybody needs trees and there needs to be a break between the residents I don't care if it's on one acre or 4 AC or 20 acres let's not have this continuous housing houses from one subdivision to another subdivision without a break between it you saw Olive grow you saw Sagewood you saw nickels Farms where they're continuous but the only break they have is between the two subdivisions and everything you have 20 some Acres of nothing but roofs concrete so I ask you to please vote no on this I see a lot of flexibility in this and we're working on the Udo now they are to match the.

Comprehensive plan let's let it match the comprehensive plan and not move forward on this thank. You Joseph and then Donna Stein.

Back my name is Joseph Fleming J 2104 C The Grow Drive dur North Carolina most of the time when a entity comes to Durham and want to develop something normally you will see what type of work in which they will do I think we have seen the type of work in which the developers have done here in Durham let me speak for a particular group this particular time let me speak for our rural area of Durham in our rural area of Durham we have seen carcinogen build up and dust particles build up in their neighborhood why this so significant because we have many people who cannot sit in their own front nor backyard because of these particles built up we have seen our neighbors in the neighborhood whals have been destroyed by this development we have seen our neighbors well been destroyed also they cannot help them fix because the insurance have refused to deal with the situation they have told them in essence that if they come back there.

Again they will drop them as a client these are a couple things that these are not rich people these are regular dermit regular people trying to live we are talking about a couple things that's have been afflicting them we have been told that scar will build will make more homes that is not true habitat for man have been the main entity nonprofit entity that have built more homes affordable homes that's the issue affordable homes we should be talking about affordable homes because that's the main element that need to be dealt with here in dur let me give you a couple statistics for for example Durham has stated that they need a certain amount of affordable homes we still have not met that quota now who has met a certain quota to build affordable home habitat for her manager not out developers so that the elements that needs to be developed has not been met yet thank you after Donna we'll have Steve Toller and Pam Andrews good evening Madam chair and.

Board of County Commissioners I'm Donna stach a lifelong resident of Durham County I live on 4825 Jimmy Rogers Road in Redwood Community I am opposed to scad for many reasons and I'll list just a few but I would like to state that I was at one of the meetings where everybody in the community there on Club Boulevard that came was seemed to be against scad and the fact that it was being developed by developers versus coming from the planet on department but they were told and I was there and witness it that the Habitat for Humanity did support them and did want to you know this to go forward and and then that got the crowd kind of changing but that was a false premise and it it really should never have been stated now I'm looking at the fact that they State it's not that applicable to the county well if it's not applicable do not pass it the one of the statements they said was this affected this only.

The part outside the ugb but I think it also affects the land in the future growth area because that still in the county and and hasn't been annexed so it's the future growth area and the land outside the ugb I am handicapped I get around with short distances okay but I am scared of reducing the minimum of parking spaces in Durham County you have to have a car you know that that part is really not applicable you we spread out and well M I think this can be used and abused by developers because of the way it's written in the ambiguous statements so I again would ask you not to approve it I have other points but I think I've ran out of time thank you Donna.

Yeah good evening Madam chair Madame Vice chair commissioners and fellow citizens my name is Steve Toller I reside at 8709 Milhouse Lane in Baha I've lived in Northern Durham County since 1977 I'm no stranger to this chamber I've LED two successful Bond referendums advised two more that a very successful 2011 education sales tax referendum was a county appointee to the RDU Airport Authority for 10 years and helped lead the terminal 2 construction and increased minority firms participation in construction I married a northern I'm married a northern Durham County girl which is probably the best but anyway and I was one of three County residents that helped create the Little River Regional Park and raised over $300,000 for Park infrastructure and I was honored to be one of the County's volunteers of the year to say that I'm passionate and protective of Northern Durham and Durham County is an understatement I help lead the county engagement process for the amendment none of my past Durham County campaigns had more Community engagement than this process not.

One after the first amendment there after the amendment was submitted the planning department made 93 revisions then an additional 61 revisions were made as a result of input from public and from Planning Commission to say this amendment came from one man for just developers is simply misinformation in the end at least 29 citizens wrote parts of the amendment including local Architects local Builders local Carpenters Local nonprofit leaders and local planners keyword local the version you're considering tonight is probably the 43rd or 44th version of this amendment I'm very proud of our community engagement and Outreach efforts led by the best local talent in our community thank you for your respectful consideration and leadership in passing this tonight.

After Pam Andrews we will have Tammy SOA and Rebecca. Freeman good evening my name is Pamela Andrews live on Wake Forest Highway I've heard tonight that there's been a lot of Civic engagements regarding scad but there has not been outside the city limits a especially in southeast Durham you know we come to everything and we have not been a part just like we had to fight to have engagement meetings out in the county when we work on the comprehensive plan those initial engagement meetings only after we requested them did we get to be a part at the table we really have not been a part of the table for this amendment although the mark the market scad is primary allowing infield development within the city limits out of 132 scab Provisions 122 new Provisions expressly apply to city and county when this was pointed out at one of the task force meetings the response was the HOAs would limit dense development in the county that's simply not true everyone in the county does not.

Live in a community with an HOA in fact most of the County residents do not live in an HOA we have whales we have septic tanks very expensive septic tanks that require land if scab were intended to be limited to infield within the city limits it would say that but it does not preserve R Durham has stood and met with you guys over and over again you cannot ever say we did not standing for over a year against damage to the environment and the citizens along the perimeter of these massive developments I have asked a number of attorneys and other officials including some of the planning department today how would this co-mingle with the two amendments that have been written particularly the tree preservation Amendment and the storm water Amendment we have all in this room from planning department to our citizens worked extremely hard to protect the environment and the citizens of Southeast Durham so I ask you again there were some little loopholes today when you were speaking earlier we are.

Concerned about those loopholes with scan a project boundary buffer won't be required at all anymore is what I was told today however the phase grading and tree preservation amendment requires a 30 foot buffer I was at the Creeks today they still look like blood check my Facebook page we need help please say no to this. Hi tamy sea at Baptist Road basically you've heard all the other comments as a County resident I feel like this will open the floodgates and will allow more development and not not not reasonable development in the county and when you talked about Wells well think about Community Wells that's how one way you can get around the water and the issues but I wanted to take your attention to the comprehensive plan plan where there was a statement where the triangle J Council of government estimates by 2050 dur will need additional 60,000 housing units if you break that down into 10year increments that's about 20,000 housing units each every 10 years so I also went to the triangle J.

Council government's website now called Central Pines Regional Council and they also note that the population growth between 2020 and 2030 is about 44,000 and going to the planed website you have about 2.3 people per per unit per housing unit that translates within a 10-year period from 2020 to 2030 we need about 19,000 units which is close to about the comprehensive plan about 20,000 units so then you know preserve World Durham we've been looking at all the developments in southeast Durham and so I personally went to every city Council minute meeting and added up all the other developments for Durham between 2020 to October 2023 that doesn't include any by right buildings or any buildings that are being built in zones already designated for high density so the total that I came up with is that we're about 23,000 built from 2020 to 2023 we're not even at 2030 yet we have overbuilt at this point time so my my point in saying this is why do we need scad we don't need it.

In the county and we don't want it thank. You after Rebecca we will have Jacob Freeman and cuff. Kle Cliff kle. Sorry hi I'm Rebeca fre and I live in the county and my addresses on file and I'm a little bit nervous because I had a three minute speech so let me try to get this in I am opposed to scad starting with the name scad simplified codes for affordable development affordable development not affordable housing affordable development that's a key element to start with there are the scat application was submitted with the Habitat for Humanity as a co- applicant I think I just saw a while ago that the only applicant was Jim Anthony of Riley but according to the to the letter that was sent to the City Council and the Board of County Commissioners the Habitat for Humanity is formally withdrawing our name from the SC application proposal and revision process that was that was sent to yall in a March of 2023 not the 2020 I think was or 22 that.

Was the application shown but unfortunately they got a a a letter back from the director of the planning departments informing them that their name could not be removed from the SC the amendment application but their letter would be added to the file for review however in in this continuous document that that you folks got as well as the City Council it did say that Habitat for Humanity Durham's Habitat for Humanity the premier group that provides and builds affordable housing in Durham could not support the scad document I think you really should investigate why they cannot support the scad document before you go ahead and vote Yes on something like that tonight please consider this important withdrawal of support for scad document and the other thing is that good grief the comprehensive plan was just passed and there's a lot of work to be done to get the udo's in alignment with the SC with the comprehensive plan that's a mammoth document and Mammoth rewrite and why preempt that with something else to start with thank.

You so very much. My name is Jacob Freeman my address is on file and I'll start by saying that I'm a resident of Wake County and at first I wasn't planning on speaking on this topic because you know I was thinking well I don't have standing as a member of a citizen of w County you know but you know when you actually when you consider the applicant you know maybe I do have standing in this in this matter but but the other thing too was today I was coming home and I drive 98 to Kemp Road quite a bit and and I looked at the where Martin Creek comes in with lit Creek and as Pam Andrew stated tomato soup and I was just compelled to come down here and speak tonight about the destruction that's going on in Southeastern Durham County and why that matters to me as a Wake County resident is because that is Wake County's source of drinking water is Li Creek amongst other the map that was.

Shown there is pretty compelling about how much surface area of Falls Lake is in Wake County but then how much of the drainage area of Falls Lake is also in excuse me in Durham County how much surface areas in Durham County but also how much of the drainage basin is also in Durham County as well so from from those those standpoints you know I would definitely be against the amendment and propose that you vote in the in the same manner the destruction that's going on in southeast Durham cannot continue there are going to be severe environmental repercussions cleanup and other things that will be required because of it thank you for your time after Cliff we'll have Mr Walter Jackson and Adam Lang good evening my name is Cliff cradle with cradle engineering at 204 East Markham Avenue where we've been here for over a hundred years serving this community I want to speak to you this evening as since my primary job is helping individuals figure out what they.

Can do with their land I want to speak to you about the positive benefits of this ordinance there's quite a few rules and standards right now that we're dealing with with individuals being able to build their H build their homes that is added greatly to the cost of building that home over on on East End we've had a situation where they were building a house that we had to survey 14 additional houses to meet the standard we have to go into the adjacent people's yard to survey the height of that the adjacent house because that's what the measurement standards call for we need these changes we're asking for these changes if you don't think it's affecting the county then the if you if you remember the bahima park that was next to the fire department on Baha Road it's not there parking requirements were too strong for them to build that Park this does affect the county I have one individual built a single family house in the middle of 13 acres the.

Additional surveying to to locate this is a fully wooded lot the additional surveying to locate his 13 Street trees and then protect those trees was quite a quite a quite a shock to them when it come to the surveying bill in addition to that he lost four more weeks because in the review process we didn't put the HVAC on the plan the middle of 13 acres that HVAC is nowhere near the rear setback we need these changes please make these changes thank you.

Madam chairwoman Madam Vice chairwoman commission members County Manager soell fellow citizens my name is Walter Jackson I'm here representing the Durham committee on the Affairs of black people there was an old saying that I think almost all of you have heard fool me once shame on you fool me twice shame on me there's a car once burned twice cautious the African-American community of Durham has been burned and is very cautious going back 50 or 60 years to urban renewal promises were made about the what would happen as a result of urban renewal how it was going to improve our communities it did not as a matter of fact many believe that it led to the devastation of key communities in Durham what we have this evening is a proposal being put forth saying oh this is going to help you you can understand that we in the African-American Community to a large degree degree are saying I don't know about that we think this thing is being rushed through prematurely we think that.

Additional time and study would be in order I won't go against County Commissioner Burns who say Well I'm not going to support any further delays because I was going to ask for a delay based on the fact that the city in fact delayed its consideration on the absence of a council member tonight commissioner howon is absent and I don't know that I I think you should not pass this without a full commission basically there are too many outstanding questions it might be that when I get back to the Durham committee they would say to me Having learned tonight that since it's already passed by the city it would not affect the county perhaps there are those who would say to me well Walter you should have let them go ahead and pass it because all that bad stuff will only be coming to the city now as opposed to the whole County thank you after Adam we have Tom Miller and Dan juel good evening Council my name is Adam Lang 633 Swift Creek Crossing.

I came out tonight to speak in support of scad I think that these text amendments Foster increased density and enhanced portability which is crucial for creating vibrant accessible Urban spaces I'll be brief tonight because I know a lot of but I know a lot of the amendments in scad don't affect the county as much but I think as our city grows I would love to see the positive fundamental characteristics noted by scad walkability Spirits.

Incorporated Madam chairman members of the commission my name is Tom Miller I've lived in Durham a very long life after a career of 30 years in the Attorney General's office and 40 Years of volunteering in Durham I have devoted myself to advocacy for the interest of ordinary people in their homes and neighborhoods have grown old in this work and what can I say about a 60-page set of complex legal changes to the Udo in two minutes you've seen you've cut people off you can't say hardly anything the answer is very little and this is part of the problem that arises when we allow a profit making industry to rewrite the rules that govern them on matters that affect the lives of everybody in Durham so what does scad do then nutshell it increases developer opportunities at the expense of quality of life of ordinary people and for the vast majority of people in Durham their interest in Planning and Zoning is the protection of their homes their neighborhoods the places where they live.

They're not in it for the money to the extent that our rules protect this interest the rules are a success when we tear those protections down we fail the people as members of the Board of Commissioners it might be tempting to say oh well the city has already adopted most of it and the county doesn't do much zoning what's the point of voting no but this is wrong under our unified countywide approach to the development regulation you have a great deal of influence the county is an equal partner in shaping the rules that govern development in Durham all of Durham you represent the whole County not just its fringes beyond the city limits the county is not a dog wagged by the city's tail if scad has problems and it does you should vote against it voting scad down will keep the issues it presents alive and for stakeholders who have been unwilling to make concessions to come to the table your representatives on the jcpc can urge changes to rebalance our.

Code and rewrite scad as quickly as we possibly can thank you very much for the opportunity to address you again please just vote this down and let us fix it later thank you m after Dan we have Morgan Haynes and Brian. Callaway good evening Madam chair fellow Commissioners my name is Dan juel I'm a landscape architect and private practice I live at 1025 Gloria Avenue in Trinity Park very much like to speak in favor of this and tell you about the benefits of a simpler entitlement process which this will bring for many smaller projects during my 38 years of working on approvals in Durham for clients and individuals we've gone through four zoning ordinances each more complicated than the one prior in the early 90s I could get a site plan approved in four or five weeks now it takes five or six months to get that same site planner and because of that and that that increased complexity it means there are longer and more thorough reviews too many small Builders and even.

Nonprofessional regular citizens now call me asking for advice on how to navigate their way through the system our current code is way too complex small practitioners individuals can't understand it it's way too expensive to interpret and Implement and way too risky for many small people to make that investment what I am end up with many times is people are angry they are incredulous and sometimes they are sobbing at the end of the conversation and most importantly many times they don't move forward with building a home or a duplex or a townhouse something like that these are good intentioned folks just try trying to provide some more housing sometimes for a family member sometimes for some income sometimes to put a kid through school they need a more simplified code they deserve a more simplified code code and that's what we're asking you to approve tonight the Amendments we before you this evening will make it easier for small practitioners and individuals to do really interesting stuff it'll be bad.

For my practice because that's how I make a living doing site plans but I'm okay with this because we need more housing and Durham and simplifying this as a way to provide it so please vote to approve this amendment thank. You. Good evening C council members my name is Morgan Strider Haynes I am a Durham resident who lives who has lived in the same location at 701 West Trinity Avenue for the past 15 years I'm here tonight to speak in favor of scad I am an architect I recently founded my own firm Monarch Studio a small practice specializing in residential and small scale commercial architecture largely as a byproduct of the demand for these types of spaces that this Amendment seeks to address many of my clients are homeowners in the urban tier with growing families seeking to expand their existing footprint others have added the existing housing stock by building adus on their property and renting the top floors for much less than a new typical apartment one of the last major.

Amendments expanding housing choices did just that it expanded the opportunities for the same type of smallscale residential development making Common Sense changes to the Udo in order to increase density in the urban tier and create more more responsive and well-designed architecture and urbanism the arguments against EHC were the same we're hearing these days against scad big bad developers will swoop in and game the system in order to destroy our neighborhoods I don't think there's evidence for that and I don't believe that's going to happen should these text amendments pass more importantly in many cases regular citizens will be able to more effectively make sensible and reasonable improvements to their own property I have one such client that under the proposed text amendments will now be able to constr construct a modest new carport in his driveway which would not be allowed under the current ordinance while I recognize this is an anecdotal piece of evidence I think these kinds of Common Sense changes abound in scat removing minimum parking requirements is.

Another example that I think has been pretty well summed up by others that support scad creating more walkable communities starts with de prioritizing the car while there always be nimius and naysayers the positive impact that new development has had on the walkability of the Foster Street Corridor for example is UN deniable over the past 15 years I've watched surface parking lots and industrial buildings with Barren blank facades transformed into Living Spaces that engage the street with public amenities and much needed retail spaces so with that I'd like to thank you for your time council members and thank you to the planning department for your ongoing work to improve this wonderful Community we live in thank after Brian we have Sher xan Rosenthal and Katie rth hi I'm Brian callway of 307 gram Avenue there is evidence that gentrification has been happening at an expanded rate since expanding housing choices scad we are concerned will will continue to exacerbate that you can just look at the people who have been moving into this community and the.

People who' been moving out of this community I was also part of an analysis of all the public speakers both for and against the scad amendment at the Planning Commission and at the March 20 meeting the on average the average proponent of scad owns over 12 sorry over 11 properties valued at more than $2 million per proponent the average opponent owned less than one property valued at under $300,000 scad is an amendment created by Developers for developers it is you know we saw a tapestry of opponents at the City Council meetings from the Durham Community as you see a small group here today too that are quite concerned about the the the damage that scad can do and and will be doing now to the city U granted the economic forces of speculation and gentrification don't exist with the same potency in rouan and Gorman as they do in Hyde Park and and Walltown but this this community deserves to know where you stand you know the city.

Council deled this so they could have an election one of the council members paraded around at forums that they were not supporting they're not going to vote for scad and its forum and then promptly voted for the majority of scad they received Applause during those forums and there there's a disconnect right now of democracy and Durham so please let us know you guys are all on the the hot seat here in a couple more months and the community wants to know and so yeah I encourage you to to not accept scad tonight thank.

You hi there Sher xan Rosenthal 2205 Wilson Street in beautiful Durham been debating with myself what to say to you because after so many months of working on this on something that does not make the code simpler and the code does need simplification when Frank Duke led the planning department and giving us this Udo it made it gave us a very complicated code that's difficult to understand I don't like the organization of it I think it was a downgrade from the compreh from the code that we had previously when the proponents talk about affordability that's such a red herring because we know from this massive analysis of 1136 cities that passed you know this is a nationwide Push by the real estate industry to get exactly this kind of thing past deregulation elimination of setbacks are very short setbacks which by the way makes it very difficult to have large Street trees just of the time where we need them most because of climate disaster looming so this analysis was done.

Appeared in urban studies in January of 22 I've given some of that article to many of you and it showed that there is no verifiable statistical evidence within 9 years after passage that this results in any affordability whatsoever if you look at the provisions and you've read it I'll also say that reading it is not the same as understanding it I have spent well over 30 hours with colleagues reading and trying to do hypotheticals about different provisions and I will tell you that there's still things I don't completely understand how they Ricochet off each other and I heard both say things I like Bo very much I appreciate our planning staff I heard him say things tonight that I do not believe are true I do not believe that it's a technical change that has no substantive effect for example the new measurement oh I want to leave you with this you have a specific role to play You're the only elected officials for the whole County and in the face of.

Looming climate change deregulation is not the way to have a conscious preparation for what's to come as far as fire or storm resilience after Katie we have Robin Barefoot and then Bob. Chapman hello Katie Ross bah so it's very important point that you commissioner sitting here are the only representation we in the semi- rural and rural area areas of this County have I can tell you from being on next door and walking around my neighborhood and talking about this issue that people in in North Duram County anyway the ones that I Ted do not want this amendment very very concerned about the effect of unrestrained development and less regulated Development coming in where we depend on our wells and septic assist you have a golden opportunity because that has passed the Judo total revision is is already underway coming up you can watch what happened with scad within the city limit and you can see if the developers are being responsible or and doing as you would hope they would do or whether they're.

Pushing the limit and whether they're they have created ambiguities that are damaging to neighborhoods and undermining our environment it's my belief as I told you earlier I'm I'm a lawyer it's my belief that the City Council behaved illegally irres in violation of Udo when they changed the amendment that had been delivered to them the Udo 319 3.1 9.5 A3 which has already been referenced to you but it says a governing body following a public hearing May approve an amendment may deny the amendment or send the amendment back to the planning Comm there's no Authority there to change the amendment as as it lik so earlier you voted in a way that I didn't like because you said it would avoid lawsuit for the county I don't agree age with that but this this right here puts the county at risk because if you vote for what the couny what the city sent you you're voting for something that they didn't have the authority to do thank.

You Robin Barefoot again I'm on record scad has been a costly exercise for Durham it has consumed a disproportionate amount of the planning Department's work hours it has diverted a disproportionate amount of the city council's attention away from the people's business it makes a show of solving our dire lack of housing for essential Workforce with the least effective strategy for affordable housing which is to build new units rather than to repurpose existing inventory and naturally occurring affordable housing it offers no strategies for reversing the egregious displacement of Durham's communities and of course it doesn't because scad is the brand brainchild of the same private equity-backed development professionals who displaced our communities in the first place you know all this you know the City Council's approval was a circus and potentially unlawful you know there are no good you good reasons to follow the lead of a hijacked Council and you know only harm and Devastation in profit mongering is going to result if scat extends to the county you know all of.

This so tonight the question is do you have the political will to say no reject scad from cover to cover demand regulatory Integrity instead of zoning Bingo put your hands on the steering wheel and direct Durham's future vote. No my name is Bob Chapman I've lived in Durham for 48 years I'm a new urbanist real estate developer I've developed quite a few affordable units probably over half of what I've done I was board chair of the North Carolina smart growth Alliance I found I signed the charter of the new urbanism for Congress of the new urbanism and was co-founder of the smart of the national Town Builders Association I was asked along with half a dozen other small develop ERS to participate in something called the practitioners panel for the expanded housing choices text amendments when that was done it made a big difference we're talking about small incremental developers no National developers nobody has hedge fund money this is all people who do one at a time and look.

At ways to reduce cost in order to offer a better place at a lower price when we finished that there were things that were still barriers in the code and so a group of the people who were in The practitioners panel got together and said what can we do to finish the job of making it simpler for people to build wonderful desirable and less affordable and less less expensive and more affordable homes for people in Durham and we found a planning graduate who read the entire code went through it line by line and we submitted it to the planning department since then there have been 44 separate versions the planning department proposed suggested that the council pass part of what we submitted and they did about 90% male we'd like for you to do the same thing and hope that you will thank you very much thank you with that that has concluded the people who have signed up for public comment I would like to thank everyone so much for sticking with.

Us and all of the engagement they've provided throughout this entire process and all the comments that they have shared. Yeah you did have a sign up ending at the at the end of the consent agenda being approved to be able to give time to our clerk staff to be able to collect everyone's information if you would like to provide your comments in a written format to the clerk you can share that with the.

Commissioners if you can walk over. If you can walk over to Monica.

And we'll have your comments we no one can hear you when you're not at the. Mics good evening my name is ibraim Sai and I've been living in dor for the last 22 years probi Durham County Durham city I've lived in ront before and after ront I moved into the the city of Durham and now I live in in by South Point mall area and we just being an next we used to be County now we are city right there by South Point on 751 South so I have several thing I always call myself a West as West African calist progressist and the reason why I say this is because I came to this country with nothing I've watched the city grow when I pack myself a few cents in my pocket and say I'm coming to the United States I was not coming for studo I was not coming for things to stop I'm coming for progress and I understand the concern of some of the people but I.

Watched the community I'm part of I'm inside the community I've been teaching in dur Public School School k12 and I've been at North Car Central University as a professor for the last 14 straight years I speak eight languages I know 13 I speak Spanish French Italian Portuguese wof Arabic fani and S I'm inside the community I've been in Big Brothers I've mentored I've Ted I am in the community I listen to the community I hear the community and everything is beautiful as it was said but our community need a place to live believe our community need affordable housing in this place and I'm the dummy I revealed that scan I've read these lines I just show out of nowhere I didn't know anybody here and I get the chance to talk to some of the people some of the documents was given to me and I went over and it boils down to this thank you so much if these people are talking about building when you understand building something.

For our community our community above all the African Community CU we getting bigger able to leave so your time is I would really ask you and I think it's needed it's a it's really really I'm begging you to vote for this thank you thank you so much if you can make sure to fill out a form with our clerk Monica you and for future public comment periods want to remind folks that the sign up period ends at the right before consent agenda is passed to make sure that you know everyone who comes by that time has the ability to sign up because they are individuals that you know were told that they were passed that deadline and weren't able to sign up so you want to be fair folks with that I will close this public hearing and bring it back to the board to ask questions and comments of.

Staff think so I'll start I had I first wanted to raise one question that we had all of course mixed up my cards so I can't remember who exactly it was that raised it but just wondering around the parking minimums there was a concern raised about the accessibility and how it impacts accessibility for individuals and residents that have disabilities I just was hoping that you could address that if that has been something that's been taken into consideration and how you see the inspections department is the department that enforces the accessibility code I will say that if parking is provided the the accessible spaces required but if parking is not provided then the spaces would not that is actually how it's applied today as well so that would not change thank you do any of my colleagues have any questions commissioner Jacob thank you I first of all want to thank everyone who came here tonight and who spoke we heard a lot of really heartfelt comments and people feel obviously very.

Passionately about this issue and about our community and frankly that's what makes Durham a great Community is because people care I want to try to you know what I listen to everyone's comments and took notes you know I I heard a lot of grievances about a lot of different things and I just want to be really clear about what what we're being asked to vote on tonight because I don't want to mislead people that what we may what what we are being asked to vote on will necessarily address a lot of the things that I heard that people are upset about and I think that would actually be really misleading of us to give you all the idea that we have the power to address things that we don't have the ability to address and things that are in our jurisdiction or not in our jurisdiction or whether we by this vote are are going going to impact issues around affordable housing or the lack of trust about certain.

Decisions or I think what I hear a lot of confusion misleading information and I don't want to add to that in terms of my responsibility as an elected official I want to be really really clear about that and that's why you hear us trying our best to to ask questions to to get things clarified we're trying to clarify things not just for ourselves because our responsibility is to make the best most informed decisions possible to listen but also we want to make sure that we get information clarified for the public for the community that that is our responsibility as well so I I'm going to ask a lot of questions to follow up and so one is again just to going back to the the fact that we do not what we are voting on is simply the application of the scad amendment as it exists today since the City Council voted on it a number of Provisions were removed where the application of it in within the county limits and so you know.

I guess one of my general questions to ask to our staff is because the scad the purpose of the scad was to create more opportunity to build more housing within the city limits and to remove some of the regulatory constraints and some of the burden that that puts now we did hear from Mr creedle about how it it is also impacting County residents because one of my questions is really like how what benefit does scad really even have to the county if those were really you know focusing on more urban you know development compact NE you know comp compact neighborhood development Urban tier all of that so I guess I would like to understand you know somebody somebody an elect official from the city actually reached out to me and said why are you guys voting on scat so you know I think just understanding what is the what is the thinking around why you know we have a joint City County Planning Department we have a unified development ordinance.

So I think getting clarity about how why is it important that we vote on on this or not or have this benefits County residents or not getting getting a better idea of that since it really was constructed more to be focused on you know the city Bo before you answer that I Just Want to Thank You commissioner Jacob for that question I just want to make note of time it is 10:15 and we're scheduled to end at 11 so I'm just going to keep that in mind colleagues that if we reach 1045 and it looks like the discussion is going to go on further we'll need to entertain a motion to extend the meeting longer thank you commissioner Jacobs I will I'm unable to go back to the slide with the the likely impacts but I will I will say that your your the point you bring up is very much I think correct in the sense that much of it because it the the infill and the small scale commercial wouldn't.

Apply into the county that many of the many of the benefits and many of the the recommended proposals aren't there these four things that I had highlighted here I will say that the increased size for the adus prob it is our belief and certainly the the applicant their intent is that they they become more viable if if it's slightly larger the 800 being limiting so we we probably probably predict that we will see more adus constructed as it you know with that increase and so you would probably see more adus in the county jurisdiction the height measure measurement and the removable parking minimums are going to be inconsequential most likely and so in terms of the benefit to the county I mean I think that's really where we would stop thank you I have a few more questions but I'm going to wait and let my other board members can go go first okay okay so and and again from a just a very practical point of view from a governing.

Point of view because that's a we are supposed to be doing here what would be the impact of us not approving the scab besides the fact that it could possibly actually help County residents I know there when we think about why people will build an Adu for a family member for you know not just a child but you know an aging adult family member actually and we see this out in the rural areas often family members do live together that's very common either side by side or just the benefit that that could provide to people to have that ability but but related to just governing being a joint City County Planning Department what would be the impact the actual practical impact if we voted no on this the result would be we would have two versions of the unified development ordinance one with the county standards and the other with the city and do we have this in any other situation currently no okay oh yeah of course there yeah storm water regulations have different.

Standards obviously city has their own code and the county has their own code so there are different different documents but in terms of the Udo right now it's one document okay and then related to how what will happen because we're we're starting the rewrite of the udio right now right how will this be looked at as part of this process because I did notice when you did that explanation from the staff of every single text Amendment item and then you gave your feedback about it the last page the very last page there were a number of items on page I think it was 44 whatever the last page was I don't I don't remember page number but anyway you that last very last page those items you said these things should be monitored now again that's going to be on the city Side not our side but I guess my question is number one how is this actually going to be monitored you know we had a process for expanding housing.

Choice how will the positive negative impacts actually be monitored what will you be looking for and then how will this be rolled into the rewrite of the Udo and and taking a second look at all of these things anyway sure so we had there were particular Provisions where we we said that we' monitor it those were instances where the the concept was some something that was fairely consistent with the comprehensive plan and is an idea that we would have analyzed moving forward with the Udo rewrite I'll use the example of removing parking minimums that's something that we've probably talked about internally at the staff level for several years and if we were to initiate that you know we would probably accompany maybe on street parking enforcement analysis with our transportation department and there are other caveats that we may have placed on if You' seen the analysis we talked about some concerns about residential infill in those instances and potentially requiring on street parking there so so there are.

Some of the provisions that if adopted or since City adopted we will be taking a look at to see you know what those negative impacts are that will include looking at quantity of development you know adus we're going to take a look and see you know do we have more and how many more of those are larger than 800 square feet now there's a significant number of those Provisions that we will not be able to capture data like we did for expanding housing choices just by the very nature of the changes but I think for several of the ones in that last page we'll take a look at that how they that'll be incorporated in the Udo rewrite certainly a mix of housing types and dens or walkable neighborhood walkable neighborhoods and small scale commercial are things that we will be a priority as a part of UD Udo rewrite and looking at ways to make those things more possible we'll evaluate you know these provisions and how effective they are over the next.

Two years or 18 months so I'll also add to that that one of the things that staff does routinely that we've always done is it's not necessarily data metrics type tracking but as we see issues come up with ordinance Provisions the way they're playing out on particular projects we make note of those things and those things typically become the substance of a future Omnibus so what we're going to be doing between now and the time that the Udo is rebit is doing the same thing in essence keeping track of anything that we see as an you know unintended outcome of these provisions and passing that along to the consultant so they can address that in the rewr thank you and last two issues one is could you explain what one of the residents brought up about impact to F future growth areas and also because the future growth area is it is still with I'm trying to remember it is still within the Udo right now I mean I'm sorry the.

Urban growth area but it's designated as a future growth area and then the second question last question is about development TI because in our current Udo we have development tiers but with the H with the new Udo we may we we we probably won't because our future Place Type M our future yeah future Place type map getting mix mixed up here will is not it does not correlate to those different de development districts that are referred to in scat so could you also so talk to that because that in itself means that scab would need to change wouldn't it yeah absolutely so to tackle the the urban growth boundary and future growth area question first there is certainly portions of unincorporated County even within the urban growth boundary and certainly that is future growth area in some instances in other instances it's just unincorporated County so the urban growth boundary is intended to be the extent to which the city will grow that doesn't mean that it's the city limits.

Now so certainly yes I think to comments that were made there is some applicability inside the ugb because there is some unincorporated County still inside the ugb some of that is future growth area did that answer that question would the would the land have to be re annexed into the city for the scad to apply yes okay and then the second question about development tiers certainly the we do not expect that the development tiers will continue on after the rewrite we expect there will be a new organization regime of of districts and how they work together and because the development tiers were really a a construct of our old 2005 comprehensive plan keeping them around just to make the ordinance function until we get a new ordinance but we are expecting that they will go away so yes scad the way that it is is presented now is certainly not something that will survive in that way past the Udo rewrite but there are Concepts in it there are some.

Provisions in it that may be translated forward into the ud rewrite does that help yeah I I think it's really helpful to note that that will absolutely be changing because it's just it's not possible for it to move forward the way it is okay that that's very helpful thank.

You. Sherbs I do apologize I have a lot of notes up here actually you know you usually I want to type out what I want to say tonight but I had food poison this weekend so whoever in here tried to take me out before this meeting it didn't work and I also wanted to hear from everybody I try to be fair I know that that's not what you were used to for some of your elected officials but I try to be fair when I sit and I think about and I'll let the train go by when I sit back and I think about just how this has progressed over the past two years I was somewhat of a novice when this first started that is no longer the case and and that has to do with people who have spoken on both sides of this issue you don't always know how commissioner burn is gonna vote I get mad at y'all I get mad at y'all because I don't want people.

To come into this space and Tain it and then it go out into the community and worse off than what it was one of the things I want to bring up I I get it we have not passed the Udo in quite some time and because we have not it has been overly burdensome in some in in some instances to build in this County I get that but what we have not seen from this amendment or any of the other 44 revisions and let's be very clear I went and I reached out to folks in the Planning Commission you don't even really see this many revisions so you almost have to ask yourself why the word need 44 in the first place so I'll just let that sit because there was some problems with it I think usually it probably would have passed if folks hadn't to notice some of the problems in it I see some people rolling their eyes it's fine I don't care folks came in.

This room they sat in front of us they started out their presentation with a Martin Luther King quote if you really want to get me right start off something by taking a Martin Luther King quote out of context then we went over to a lot of the joint not even some of the Joint City County meetings but then I looked at some of the meetings that were going on over at the City Council and everybody kept saying this is going to help black pastors so much and I get it the path portion is taken out it's GNA help black pastors so much no one in this room has met with more black pastors than I have over the past 12 months I promise you you haven't and same thing I kept hearing over and over again was what is scad and I made sure to go to the pastors that had a whole bunch of land churches that had 12 15 20 acres I went to the pastors that actually already.

Were doing things in affordable housing space and the issue wasn't regulation the issue wasn't land the issue was access to Capital but I digress but in all of these meetings and I even asked the folks who submitted this or the folks who were working with the person that submitted this show me Me One Pastor that can attest that this is going to help them I ain't never seen it show me one church congregation where this is going to help them build affordable housing I haven't seen it show me one city where these types of codes have been implemented and they have seen a significant upti and affordable housing they could never give me nobody could say Boston Austin Detroit Atlanta anything because if You' have came to me with that I could have stood up here 10 toes down and said you know I could have stood up here and been in a position to say okay this has worked in Austin and Boston I feel good about it.

In my gut it will work in Durham and for two years now almost two years now none of that has been brought to us and I've sitting on the presentations I really seriously have another issue I have I'm I I hate that somebody on the city council actually asked you you know why is the County voting on this I don't get that I I don't get that privilege I have to know what's going on in the school board meeting I have to know what's going on the City Council meeting I have to know what's going on here because whatever we vote on here affects everybody else often times we don't work in tandem but the regulations work in tandem what affects one affects the other if I take money from S one place it might affect money going somewhere else if I make a rule here so it's almost scary to me that somebody voted for something two weeks ago and did not know that it was going to affect.

This space and before folks sit up here and make this about an election I ain't get no votes in rule Durham probably won't get no more either I ain't get none you can go back and check that so that is not a me up here politically posturing and then we want to make this argument about affordable housing brother I believe you when you say you in the community I done seen you out in the community I absolutely believe you want affordable housing because I want affordable housing too but what I don't believe is this is what's going to get it for us what helps us get there is some beautiful public private Partnerships they're developers that this board works with all the time so I don't want to become a dirty word because it has become one under the tutelage of that woman sitting over there and this woman sitting right here this board has been able to move forward with about 2,000 units of affordable housing just this year just this year.

And that some of it's been with support from this we jumped me to do Gap funding for the city we've jumped in the partner if you look across the street every time people are upset about the novice going up on Main Street I have to tell them walk two blocks down because across the street we doing something on Queen and we doing something on Maine so that means in dur we can walk and you at the same time so there are some people who are actually being honest Brokers about this affordable housing discussion I just don't think that this is one of them another thing that was brought up people keep saying that oh they're trying to make this road easier well the city already voted on it so it should be really easy for you all to vote on it because it's just a county I'm a Durham County Commissioner I represent Ry and not parts of Raleigh because some of Raleigh's here I represent RTP Butner morisville bahim Rougemont Durham.

Redwood so when people come in here and they want to say well you don't need to worry about that because no everything is within our domain everything is within our do and that doesn't mean that we're on a power strike or a power struggle but that means that we are held to a higher standard and we have to understand everything that's going on in this community so that is a little scary for me I I I wonder why are we doing some of these things when we have a Udo coming we have a Udo coming we have hired a consultant I know how I I feel bad for y'all cuz I I work a job and and this has taking a lot of your your time taking a lot of your effort and I can't sit here in good conscience I'm chair of joint City County Planning Commission and we had a discussion at the end of the meeting and the discussion was based on how hard scad.

Has been on them on this community based on the heart attacks based on folks losing their job based on folks being Terri AP part in the media and all of that is part for the course because as elected officials we showed up we we signed up for it sadly but they actually wanted to know did we want to move forward or did we want to limit private amendments until the Udo was passed as chair of that board I put that question to the table and I didn't let nobody skirt the issue some folks didn't want to I asked everybody around it all save one said that until that Udo is passed we would limit our taking in text amendments so I can't sit here in good faith as the vice chair of this board when as the chair of that board I directed staff to go back and find ways that we could limit this from happening I can't do that like that would make me an honest broker it was enough of y'all.

Sitting at that meeting and it was enough people sitting around this table that was sitting that meeting that also said they wanted to limit text amendments until the Udo was passed so I don't know why we doing some of this political posture in tonight another thing we and y'all again I got food poison so my notes they looking kind of squiggly I I I brought up a point about the removal of parking minimums thousands of cities thousands upon thousands of cities exist in the United States not from Murphy to mano but from mano to LA County from Maine to Miami and only nine of them don't have parking requirements during the work session when I brought up that I didn't want to move forward I didn't I didn't feel comfortable about the parking minimums I'm not going to say what I heard one of y'all say about me when I was walking out the door but I'm going to say what I said that day I've pushed my grandma in a wheelchair I pushed my.

Daddy in a wheelchair I pushed my sister in a wheelchair in this County you cannot imagine how many times I've been kicked out of Jersey mics for trying to find out who is in that handicapped parking space when I need it more than anybody else and so no I'm not for the parking requirements and to the individual who said that that doesn't make me stupid it makes me conscious it makes me caring it makes me compassionate and in the only three words that you need to use to describe me when I'm voting on this issue as I move on the other thing you all brought up was aha I I don't have any examples of affordable housing here and what is the ability for us to move past this once the Udo has passed right now the story storm water bu the storm water buffer supersedes this am I correct Sarah like that question was asked earlier so the new rule around the storm water buffer the new new rules about.

Sorry storm water is a separate thing but the new buffer rules do thank you yeah so both of those that supersedes that so if we already got something that's going to supersede it while passing something else if the storm water rules are going to supersede it while we're passing something else and then I said and I thought about it you know we're sitting here making this about the C County and making it about the city the city's in a position to Annex at will so why they're annexing at will we can sit here today and say oh we're passing this and it's just the county and it's not going to matter that's until they Annex another piece of the county and then it does scad does apply and then they Annex another piece of the county and then scad does matter so I I I just want y'all to understand I don't have a problem with affordable housing I don't have a problem with us making it easier for folks to be able to.

Do what it is that we do endur and let make a good place to live but I I got a Durham is open for business I said it the other day but Durham is not open for piracy and the things that I've seen happen around this amendment and I imagine the things that are going to happen to me after this little speech turned my stomach but I'm not embarrassed about my record on affordable housing not embarrassed about my record on education not embarrassed about my record on on the environment so I look forward to after this vote goes down now to continuing to meet with y'all and to meet with y'all and hopefully y'all can give us the respect that we haven't gotten up until this.

Point Thank you madam chair and thanks to everybody for speaking tonight just want to say there are a lot of people I respect out there on both sides of this issue and that's because this in my opinion is a a technical and complicated you know policy decision and usually those aren't clear-cut usually the the the relative benefits and and drawbacks are pulling us in both directions and we're going to do we're all going to do the best we can up here I think and and you know make a decision that we think will be in the best interest of the most people over time in in Durham County I'll just say that I think that the vast amount of community engagement that happened with our comprehensive plan did put forward a vision that would support the intent of of the scat amendments I think people want small scale locally built housing and small scale commercial development to be viable and they want the these sorts of you know small scale developments to be welld.

Designed and interesting architecture and and not the things that we're seeing in in southeast Durham by the corporate developers and so all it to me it feels like if we're in favor of preserving rural Durham we we should be supportive of scad we we should be encouraging density in the urban tier and and expanding you know housing Cho choices by infill rather than than sprawl and I I think that the opportunities for expanding housing choices through mechanisms like ads on Church property makes good sense and and I think that there are some some church some churches that will be interested in that I mean I think some have already participated in shetes with the with the the group of people who initiated the text amendment I think that was one of the things in one of our attachments I am so for removing parking minimums I want us to deprioritize cars I want us to make our communities more walkable safe for walking rolling I want us to make our.

Transit system the best we can and we're working on that simultaneously I think our comp plan had a lot of emphasis on the 15 minute neighborhood I can't remember if that's really what it was called but you know what was it the 50-minute community where you you live somewhere but you live next to everything else that you need that's not residential and and I think this plan can help facilitate movement in that direction I think the U if we wait for the Udo rewrite that's you know I don't know how long that'll take a couple years three years two years so you know there might be a lot of interesting housing that meets our community's values that could be built in that amount of time if we can simplify some of the code I I think that in a unified spirit with the city we sh should vote to approve this I think we should be unified and I for the reasons I've mentioned support approving this tonight thank you.

I I do and I'm not going to prolong this as we I'm not going to reiterate this you're right there was a church listed when that application was submitted you know who else was listed on there a number I asked this during the work session I said have you met with all the people who are on this list go back and look at the video and I was told yes I went to a number of those groups had not met with them I do not know if Walter Walter Jackson is still here but they listed the Durham committee on Affairs of black people actually spelled committee wrong I remember that I might not talk the best some but I can check spelling and Walter had not met with them nobody in the leadership had met with them so yes there was a list presented to us of who they had met with but when we went back to verify that list they had not met with these folks.

So so I I hear you like we get stuff put in front of us all the time we got to start fact checking this stuff they fact check me they show show up at my job and we not showing up at theirs like I I want to be very clear about like where I where I stand on this issue I don't have I it like I don't want this to become a conversation about adus because we have passed amendments on adus I don't want this to be a conversation about affordable housing because we sit over here and do the heavy lift on affordable housing I don't want this to be a conversation about we having something unified for the city and the city didn't even know we had to vote on it so those like let's just I I'mma stop because this is not my meeting and I'm not going to roll this thing off I'mma sit back y'all already know how I'mma vote I'm marshan Lynch y'all know why I'm here I.

Want to work with y'all on affordable housing but I'm not GNA be held hostage by it I had a question for staff of just following up on commissioner actually before I do that since we're likely going to be going over 11 I'd like to entertain a motion to extend the meeting 30 minutes 15 15 start with okay we'll start with 15 second go for it we have big goals here okay moved by commissioner Carter seconded by commissioner Jacobs I'll take a roll call vote Vice chair Burns yes commissioner Jacobs I commissioner Carter I and then I'm an I so meeting is extended till 11:15 and at 11: we'll revisit extended first staff when Wendy you commissioner Jacobs was asking a question question about the impacts of whether scad is passed or not you had mentioned that with the udio rewrite some of these changes or the scad Amendments wouldn't live or continue as the scad Amendments currently will happen is that correct that's correct okay can you explain that.

A little bit well I mean I think like director young said I mean we're going to have different zoning districts we won't have the Urban you know there's a lot of references to the urban tier in the changes and we're not going to have the the tiers so just the formatting would be completely different there may be some Concepts that are maintained certainly I mean I you I can't say that but yeah in terms of the the way that you see is it more like the language would be different or the actual fundamental policy was would be different so the language would certainly be different in terms of of the policy yeah I mean I imagine that some of them would also change are there parts of scad that staff I know that there's a consultant who's been hired and that's going to be helping with the ud udite that wouldn't make it into the udite like if this wasn't approved today that this was something that staff are looking.

Into.

Sorry we had to confer there for a minute I think all of the things that really had concerned staff staff would not have supported going into the Udo rewrite were removed by Council so the things that we have left are things where we either fully support the idea and again it may get translated into new language you know a little bit differently than what it looks like today or things that we and I think this was said earlier you know we agree with the concept but maybe not necessarily the exact way it's been executed and so we're going to keep an eye on it and see what happens you know particularly there's for instance you know how buffers are working or how you know parking is working things like that so it's that's my best kind of attempt did an answer there then and I know there's been conversations about like how the city had changed what was and amended what they initi finally voted on do you think that staff has had time.

To review it and like know eventally how they would have worded or changed some of those items if they had written this themselves or would you think that would take the consultant's advisement and everything we decide that I I would think that would take the consultant's advisement and you know sort of the holistic changes but you don't anticipate like there being any detrimental impact like from those like is just something that you know we haven't really seen a test case or that that is correct I mean obviously some of that's just speculative but the provisions that we we were opposed to outright they were all removed.

So thank you yeah I I do think that's important that we also we are we are again we've heard from staff that the things that they were very concerned about have been removed at this point I I just want to clarify something the comment that I made about somebody from the city being surprised is related to the point that I was trying to make was just that this amendment was was really pertaining mostly to the city itself and I think that's why I asked the staff and point is that we have a unified development ordinance so normally we will approve things even if they are not really as pertinent to the county just because we don't have any separate ordinances so I I just want to put that back into perspective that I I didn't want to misrepresent that U and I do agree with what my colleague said about affordable housing I think that we need to be clear that why this may help with some affordable housing of the challenges that we we.

Need to be looking at every single tool that we have and that means and that's why the county is taking a leading role the city is Everybody they you know affordable housing needs to be incorporated into every single private development that it you know we we that that is a given and just want to emphasize that the new comprehensive land use plan calls for I think 15% across the board and at least 20% in Transit opportunity areas so we're is that correct can you correct me if I'm wrong on that Sarah I I need to double check that but okay yeah yeah so but we we that is something that it's going to take everyone to be responsible of trying to actually meet that goal so I will stop here and I appreciate the comments that you made commissioner harder about this process and again I I don't want to misrepresent what us voting this down would do I don't think it would actually address a lot of the concerns that I heard from.

The community tonight and I don't want to misrepresent that it will not change we are not going to be influencing I know I think I heard one person said you would be making a statement to the City Council by voting no on it again I think what I'm interested in is how it could impact the county and benefit County residents so one of my questions is I know we heard about the impact of setbacks parking requirements the adus to this have this could help County residents would that also be something that could be possibly addressed in the ud a rewrite yes and that would be Our intention okay thank you you commiss Jacobs with there's no more questions or comments what is the pleasure of the board this motion if this is if the pleasure of the majority of the board is to approve this there are two motions that need to be made for this one as well the others youve yes I'll make a a motion we.

Can then have a vote got to move forward somehow or other here I mean basically I want to make the motion to adopt the ordinance that our staff brought to us I don't want to say the scat Amendment but I can read this whole thing I guess to adopt an ordinance amending the unified development ordinance incorporating revisions to article three applications and permits Article 4 zoning districts Article 5 use regulations article 6 District intensity standards article 7 design standards article 8 Environmental Protection article 9 landscaping and buffering article 10 parking and loading article 12 infrastructure and public improvements Article 13 additional requirements for subdivisions article 14 non-conformities article 16 design districts and article 17 definitions I have a second moved by commissioner Carter seconded by commissioner Jacobs I'll take a roll call vote commissioner Burns no commissioner Jacobs yes yes and I'm an i the motion passes 3 to one that moves us on to the second amendment or second motion Madam chair I move that we adopt the appropriate consistency statement as required by.

North Carolina General statute 160 D- 605 second it's been moved by commissioner Carter seconded by commissioner Jacobs I'll take a roll call vote commissioner Burns no commissioner Jacobs I commissioner Carter I and I am an i motion passes 3 to one with that the board of County Commissioners has approved 23- 0896 the udio text Amendment thank you all so much. Again that brings us to to our final item which is the board and commission appointments we are appointing for two seats the city county appearance commission Durham open space and trails commission I will pass it on to our attorney Andrews if everyone can please make sure you leave quietly and continue conversations in the lobby thank you madam chair tonight for the ballot of the members for the two two boards and commit positions for the city county appearance commission had a vacant position the selected additional person is heat Desai for the Durham open space and trails commission we have a vacant position the the the candidate is Jeffrey.

Bleu who has been recommended by the board so those two that concludes the voting thank you thank you so much attorney Andrews with that no items were pulled from the consent agenda so that brings us to our final item which is adjournment if I have a motion so move okay move by Vice chair Burns seconded by commissioner Carter roll call vote commissioner Burns is a yes she made the motion hi commissioner Jacobs hi commissioner Carter and I'm an I so we are adjourned thank you all so.

Much.

Board of Commissioners · Regular Meeting · December 11, 2023

▸Pledge of Allegiance31:08

▸Consent Agenda41:51

▸Public Comment1:27:41

▸Roll Call2:13:33