City Council · Regular Meeting · February 16, 2026

Good evening everyone. Welcome to city hall as we are going to go and get started with the business. And at this time I will um call for a moment of silence. Thank you.

I'll pass it over to Council Member Rest for the Pledge of Allegiance. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. If it's your practice, I invite you to rise and uh recite the pledge of allegiance. Thank you so much, Jesus Christ. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

>> All right, madam clerk, will you please call the role? >> Good evening. Mayor Williams >> here. >> Mayor Pertmp Cabo >> here.

Council member Baker >> here. >> Council member Burrus >> here. >> Council member Cook >> here. >> Council member Copac >> here.

>> And council member Rrist >> here. Thank you. All right. I'll start to my left tonight for council comments, announcements.

Uh, council member Kobac me just a moment, please. Just you can be there. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Just a few brief announcements. First of all, just a reminder for everyone about the public hearing uh for the updates to our UDO, the new land development code, the LDC,

coming up on February 25th. So please mark that on your calendar. Uh and please do uh be present and join us if you are interested and available. Um wanted to highlight um upcoming tour at the Paulie Murray Center on the 21st of this month in honor of Black History Month uh that will tell about the history and social justice work of Paulie Murray uh in our city.

Uh and I've always really enjoyed that tour in the past and hope folks will join me uh this month. um really enjoyed celebrating uh Lunar New Year with many of my colleagues uh and I'm sure others will mention that as well uh to celebrate the year of the uh the fire horse uh and our shared resilience as a community. That was a wonderful community celebration that we were able to take part in. Uh happy Ramadan starting tomorrow to all of our Muslim residents.

And finally, early voting has started and so please uh make a point to uh check out the candidates who are running uh for local and statewide office and make your voices heard. Thank you. Wonderful to see everybody here in person and online. Um, thank you for being with us.

>> All right. Uh, Council Member Baker. >> Good evening, everyone. Thank you all for being in the building.

Um, good to see you all. Want to wish everyone a happy Lunar New Year. um want to focus my comments uh locally, but do want to lift up one one thing uh internationally, which is um which is what the the United States federal government is doing in in Cuba right now. Um we have seen our federal government's ability to wage violence uh across the the world and in the Middle East and across Latin America recently.

I'm very worried about uh what can happen to to uh the people of of Cuba as uh the federal government um does not allow any oil into into that country. So um if if that uh moves you um I would encourage folks to reach out to our uh federal uh representatives. Uh, as council member Copak uh pointed out, the planning commission public hearing is

going to be on February 24th for uh what you all know as the UDO. Uh it is going to be changed in name to the LDC. So um you probably hopefully you've received your letter uh in the mail. Um everyone who is a land owner should have received a letter as well as anyone who's a renter or a resident of Durham should have re received a letter.

So the public hearing would open on February 24th a special meeting here in this room with the the planning commission and then um most likely we don't know what the planning commission will do but most likely their final deliberation will be sometime in April or in May. So I I highly encourage people to get involved as early as possible with the LDC process. Uh after that is going to be uh a joint meeting between the city council and the county commission after the July recess and then it will go on to votes by the city council and the county commission following that. So most

likely in September October the new regulations would go into effect January 1st 2027. Um, and then finally, I just wanted to to lift up um the issue of violence in our community. Of course, uh we we lose too many young people to to guns and also to to car accidents. Um and uh regarding car accidents, there's a lot of work going on around transportation infrastructure.

Um there are also uh in this this project working together to end violence. some upcoming sessions that might be of interest to to people on also February 24th, uh March 13th, and March 20th. And you can find that information online and attend those um digitally or in person. Thank you.

>> Good evening everyone and thank you so much for joining us. Um happy Black History Month once again. I'm going to

associate myself with comments made by my colleague. So, happy Luna New Year. I thoroughly enjoyed our celebration last Thursday I think. So I'm getting a little bit older so I can't remember those dates.

Um definitely enjoyed the experience and hanging out with my council colleagues. Also had the opportunity to present a inclusion month proclamation. Last month my alma mater NCCU on behalf of Mayor Williams. So deep appreciation for um the Dr.

Carlton Wilson as well as the other students who were there presenting about Carter Woodson and the origins of black history month. Um, next month we are fortunate here in Durham that we're not next month, next week that we are hosting the conference of a minority public administrators at NCCU's hosting that this year. So I'll be um speaking next Tuesday on the panel and also to associate myself and the colleagues with my um by Mr. I'm sorry, Council Member Baker. We have had a pretty turbulent past couple days here in Durham and it's not um very easy to get up here. we have um extended my condolences to all the families who've been impacted by gun

violence in our community and also think about our city employees who are the first responders and just the magnitude of what it's like to walk into some of those situations. So I ask that you all if you are a person of faith extend your faith those people who can never unsee those events. Um I'm looking forward to moving forward the work we have with the vi introduction. So, I want to also remind you to look online for those upcoming dates and meetings and that we are equally committed to addressing this issue of gun violence.

No one has a right to play or take a life in our city. So, we just want to address that and not place blame. We know that some of the tools we have are going to be reactive, but I want to challenge all of us to be proactive and making sure that none of these children have access to a gun and that we're ensuring they actually get to see adulthood because that's what we're seeing right now. A lot of the black and brown children are losing their lives before they can even turn 18 or hit some of those milestones such as graduating college or graduating high school or even going to the prom. So, I want to make sure that all of our youth have a dignified life here. So, thank you all again for joining us this evening.

>> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Good evening. Uh colleagues, staff, residents who are here, and those online, welcome to tonight's meeting.

Um yeah, lots going on in the Bull City. Um uh first of all I want to thank the Durham Sports Commission for uh inviting Council Member Bers and I yesterday to the Duke UNCC women's game. Exciting game. Congratulations to Carol Lawson and the Blue Devils for the win and their 16th straight win.

Exciting game. Um I do want to echo my my uh colleagues comments about the fun time we had last Thursday at the Chinese New Year celebration sponsored by uh North Asian-Americans Together. It's always a lot of fun. Council Bur was there, Council Member Copac, the mayor, Council Cook.

So, um, shout out to the, uh, Asian-American community and also for the year of the Firehorse, which is this coming year. Um, we had a great budget retreat last Friday, um, staff and and staff and council members. Thanks to the staff for organizing and a great event, but also presenting some unbelievable data about where we are, both where we are in planning for the budget for next year, 2627, but also what the data says about our community and where we are. Um, everyone should check out on the

city's website the 2025 community goals and objectives report card. It's a new report from the planning department that lists a bunch of data about where we are um about housing, homelessness, population, demographics, and jobs, etc. Um, on the budget side, we should be really proud of Durham that we're the only city in in North Carolina with a significant living wage ordinance. Um, if the council approves it in this budget, our so-called Durham minimum livable wage will go up to 25 hours.

uh per per $25 per hour as of next year. So, we are well above any other city in North Carolina. It's a great opportunity for our staff to be rewarded that way. It's also a challenge in the budget side that we got to work through as a council.

So, we look forward to that conversation with staff and and council colleagues. Um it's also worth noting we had an amazing we every year we do a resident survey. I think this year we had about 700 folks responded online to the resident survey. Amazing results this year on the survey.

And I just want to mention a couple things. Um uh 84% of respondents rate Durham as an excellent or good place to live. Um but these

satisfaction ratings increased in 74 of 90 categories this year. Kind of amazing amazing jump from even last year. Um the city of Durham also rates 20% above the US average on the overall quality of city services. So that's a testament to the new leadership of our city manager and all the staff who are here.

We really appreciate all they do every day to provide high quality efficient um and um and caring services to all the residents of Durham. So, thank you so much staff for that. And I think that the residents, the 700 residents that responded, that's not a blip. That's not a dead like a real significant source of data.

So, thank you so much for your work and the the strong response we're getting from our residents for your service. Um on that also on that survey, again, the key priorities are things like housing, safety, sidewalks, and streets. We hear that all the time and we hear that and we're going to keep working on that with with the manager and staff. Um, speaking of housing, we also had a really interesting meeting last week of the joint city county committee. We heard an encouraging presentation about the joint city county strategy now to address homelessness in Durham, but also related a related presentation about the

recently completed housing task force work that's been done in Durham. Um, both of these point to the need for more housing to address homelessness, but also for the need for affordable rental housing at all levels for folks in Durham. One factoid that we're going to keep coming back to here on the council and in our conversations in the community is that our current gap for housing to meet the needs of residents at or below 80% of area median income is 12,000 units. And so we'll either need to work for partners in the private sector to help build those houses or we're going to have to subsidize them ourselves.

If we subsidize those units ourselves, it would cost$1 billion dollars to do that, those 12,000 units. So we've got to figure out how we can develop and produce more housing for folks. I think largely in partnership with the private sector. Um but I do after all that some good news there and some nice nice factoids.

I do want to echo my my colleagues comments. Um very sad news in the last week or so. Um a very a very concerning rise of violence, number of shootings, including several that happened in and around the Cornwallis Road public housing complex. I know Shanti Brown, the new interim

director of the housing threat is here. I know the mayor is going to say more about this. I think, you know, the the city, police department, community safety, you know, there's DHA are all collaborating on this. Um, but this is uh this is not something we could accept in Durham that this is way too much violence.

No one deserves to live in that kind of fear. And so, we're going to keep working. We'll not stop in the city. We have a new we have a new violence prevention uh plan we're developing with the city and county.

We're going to keep working on that. It can't come soon enough, but we hear the residents concerns. We've heard the emails. We've heard the calls.

Um, and we want to see more. We want to ensure that everyone in this community can live in a safe um and affordable environment. So, I look forward to your comments, Mr. Mayor, and thanks for your work to address that.

I know it's something we won't accept here in Durham. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. >> Thank you, Council Member Cook.

>> Thank you. Good evening, everyone. Thank you so much for being here and hello to those watching online. Um I'm going to echo a lot of what my colleagues have said.

I'm not going to repeat. Um but we had lots of lots of good and lots of hard this week. Um, we did have this

resident survey that talked about how satisfied overall residents are with living in Durham and also it is hard to sit up here with the amount of violence and crime that we have had just in this past week, but also really any um any violence uh is disruptive, but we know that a lot of it is concentrated in certain neighborhoods and we also understand the implications of that uh on health care on um on children's abilities to uh grow and develop um and on folks abilities to be economically sustainable moving forward. Uh we also know a lot of the root causes of this um and I'm grateful that my colleagues brought up the homelessness framework. That's a a joint venture that we're looking at. This is a huge way to prevent uh violence is to ensure that folks are housed and have that basic need met. Once people are housed, they

have the ability to access other needs. Um you all know how important housing is to me. I do this work day in and day out. Um I see the impacts of folks who are unstably housed and what that looks like for themselves and their families all the time.

I'm really proud uh that we have uh such an aggressive goal in ending homelessness, functionally ending homelessness by 2031. So that's five years from now. Uh if you want to go back and watch the presentation on get some more information on exactly sort of the uh benchmarks that we've set and and how that is going to happen. Um there was a great presentation done to the joint city, county, and school board last Tuesday at 9:30 and that's available online.

So feel free to watch that. Um but really excited about that and really just really again really proud that we have decided that that is important enough that we are going to set an aggressive goal for ourselves. We might not make it but uh why not aim for

that because that is the Durham that we want to see. Um, my colleagues have already stated that we had a good budget retreat. Um, it's going to be a a hard budget season. I think everyone sort of acknowledges that we've got cuts coming down from various places.

We've also got increases in our um minimum living wage that we're really proud to have. Um, but it does create a bit of stress in the budget. Uh, it's worth I mean it's really long. I know that nobody wants to watch it, but it is worth watching if you all want to see.

Uh there was more groundwork laid at the last one on Friday. The next one's going to be more nuts and bolts and that's coming up on Friday, February 28th. Again, it's 27th. Just kidding.

I can't add 14 apparently. So, February 27th. Um and again, it's a long day. Feel free to do it in parts or do it times two on YouTube, but that will be recorded and it is open to the public.

And I am looking forward to seeing how we can be creative in thinking about these things. We have solutions. We saw from our resident

surveys that folks have the same ideas that we've been hearing over and over again about ending violence, about affordability, which is make sure people's basic needs are met. And um and there are great ideas on how to do that. And so I look forward to uh hearing creative solutions and hopefully being able to get to work on some of those goals. Thank you.

>> Pro Tim. >> Thank you. Good evening everyone. Um I just want to say thank you to my colleagues for all of their comments.

Um I will be brief and just say good to have everyone here with us. That's all. Thank you. Thank you all very much.

Thank you for your comments. I um also would like to uh resound and repeat uh some of the things that have happened over the last week such as a great budget retreat. I think this may have been the best one that I've been a part of. uh lots of

information, but it feels good to be able to formally accept um not only quantitative data, but qualitative data. And I just want to shout out the staff who just are amazing and put all of this work together. Uh it it reminds you of why we're so prideful in Durham because of who we are working with. It's just absolutely amazing.

Um it it's also amazing that you know when you ask residents how they feel about certain things and we're not slightly above the national average in many areas but you know like 20% higher 30% higher and you know elected officials we you know we obviously stand up here and we smile and we'll accept the award but really it's it's our staff who are the folks that are making this magic happen on a daily basis. is um you know and the little things you don't even think about. You're walking down the street

and it's cobblestone over or brick you know and the brick just looks really good you know it's like there are people that are making sure that the finest details are you know um doing its part to make sure the city looks good. So in every form and fashion uh Mr. Ma Mr. Manager uh kudos to you and the team for all of what's um we're we're able to brag about.

Um, we did have some external events that were pretty cool. I think I went to like four Luna New Year uh events across the triangle and um, let's just say that people know how to party and it is a task. " And, um, I got to get out of here. I'm tired. But it was a great time. And I want to thank the North Carolina um, uh,

Chinese Business Association. And I want to thank uh Bella and uh Representative Yaloo and all of the folks that that put all of these events together, Cababa uh who put these events together um to celebrate the year of the Fire Horse. Um and yes, there are a lot of things that we could talk about internationally. There a lot of things we could talk about what's going on at the national level, you know. Um but but two things that are really important is one voting early voting is happening right now and it's there are a lot of big elections that are happening our two judicial races are happening you know the congressional and senate races are happening supreme court and and I you know we we I know Durham is heavily a Democratic town but the rest of the state also relies on our turnout. So, I really hope that people get out there and vote and and make sure that you are paying attention, you know, to who you're voting for, do your homework, you

know. " And um I I am if I'm just being honest I I you know we have had a lot of opportunities to do a lot of things in this community and um your city council we are a representation of this community. So if we seem conflicted that means the community is conflicted. Um, there are I woke up this morning to I think I think maybe 300 comments and most of the comments were were mayor, what are you going to do?

Mayor, you need to do something. The mayor isn't doing enough. And part of this I blame on TV because people watch things like the mayor of Kingtown or they watch these shows and they think the mayor is just this dictator who has all the

mighty power, allighty power to just do whatever. That's not real life. In democracy, the loudest voices win. The room that's that's filled with the most, the majority wins.

That's just what it is. And um this phone right here, everyone on this dice, we're all in a text message. And it's not to do city business, but it's for notifications when someone is shot and killed. Bill Bell started this way back in the day.

" And we've expanded that to the full council. We also get a message when someone is shot and they're underage. Here's reality. I talked about silver bullets.

There are no silver bullets. All right? But there are a lot of resources. We had Shot Spotter. Shot Spotter was voted

down. Bull City United was discontinued. We uh had the data program with, you know, uh the PAR grant. It was sent back, but also we've expanded HART.

And finally, we have a long-term strategy to where we're going to be focusing on bringing all the possible resources we can together to bring down crime, violent crime in this community. But the question we have to ask ourselves, are we going to really do this or not? Because that's the long-term plan. There isn't anything right now other than the status quo.

We can't social work our way out of this. We can't restore the justice our way out out of this. So, as I said this morning to the 300 comments, I'll do my part, but as you're walking out of the house,

look in the mirror and ask yourself the same question. And I'll say that to everyone in this room and everyone up here. We've had about four to five people shot and killed in the last three or four days. most of them under the age of 18.

I don't know why we're not up in arms about that. It's not complicated. Where are the speakers when we have policies and people want to say we want to we don't want to over we don't want to over surveil. We're the activist.

Go talk to the parents. Go talk to the community members who are living in this crap every single day. I don't have anything else to say about it.

Go to where it's happening. Let's see how serious you are. Then I won't be perfect on this. And I don't want to be, but I'm tired of kids dying when they don't have to.

And if you're not coming at me with solutions and contributions, I don't have anything to say to you. I'm sick of just commentators. So, Mr. manager >> on you.

>> Good evening, mayor, mayor prot, members of council. Good to be with you this evening. The city manager's office uh has one priority item and that's just to note that uh agenda item 29 uh had not been added to your agenda as of the work session. It has been added this evening. That is the continuence of the public

hearing that uh for Creekide mixed use. So that is now on your agenda as item 29. Thank you. >> Thank you, madam attorney.

>> Good evening, Mr. Mayor. Good evening, Mr. Mayor, Madame Mayor Protim, members of council.

The city attorney's office has no priority items tonight. >> Madame Clerk. >> Good evening, Mr. Mayor, Madame Mayor Promp, and members of council.

The city clerk's office has no priority items tonight. >> Thank you. All right. At this time, I'll read the uh consent agenda.

Item number one, mayor's committee for persons with disabilities. Thank you. Item number two, Durham Historic Preservation Commission appointment. Item number three, fiscal year 2025 2026 second quarter financial report.

Item number >> that was pulled back. >> That was pulled. Yeah. Actually, could you remind me? I'm just >> Just keep going. >> All right.

>> That was number three, right? >> Yep. >> All right. Item number four, Bloomberg Center for Public Innovation Grant Budget Ordinance.

Item number five, mayor's council council for women 20 2025 annual report. It's also pulled. Um item number six, contract BR11, national bridge inventory structural repairs 2026. Number seven, utility revenue refunding bond series 2026.

Uh number eight, equal business opportunity program annual report participation participation goal review and ordinance extension. Number nine, interlocal agreement with Durham County for joint funding of the low-income homeowners relief program. Number 10, limited obligation bonds series 2026. >> You're you're reading the wrong agenda, sir.

You're on the work session agenda for Thursday. >> You're here. >> Oh my gosh, you're right. Scratch all of that, everyone. I'm so sorry. I'm just getting my granicus reset and I am on the work session agenda.

>> No, you're on the right one. I >> This is it. >> Yeah. >> All right.

You start with number one. >> We're going to start over and scratch all of that from the record. >> Item number one, affordable housing implementation committee appointment. Item number two, audit services appointment oversight committee calendar year 2025 annual report.

Number three, first amendment to 2020 fiscal year 26 grant agreement for an immigrant legal assistance program. >> That is pulled. >> That is pulled. Number four, Dorm Convention and Visitors Bureau DBA Discover Dorm 2025 annual report.

Number five, 2025 Homeless Services Advisory Committee annual report >> has been pulled. Number seven, Junction Road Parat Transit Facility in F Street Transportation Renovation Renovation Professional Design Services. Number eight, condemnation action to obtain one temporary construction easement at 3835 Guest Road for the Horton Road

Pedestrian Improvement Project. Durham City County Environmental Affairs Board 2025 annual report. Number 10, Durham Convention Center Authority Board 2025 annual report. Number 11, Durham Performing Arts Center Oversight Committee 2025 annual report.

Number 12, cultural Durham Cultural Advisory Board 2025 annual report. Number 13, Fiscal year 2025, Housing Appeals Board annual report. >> Pulled. >> That is pulled.

Number 14, Human Relations Commission 2025 annual report. >> Pulled. >> That's been pulled. Number 15, 2025 Citizens Advisory Committee annual report. Number 16, 2025 Durham Workforce Development Annual Report. 2025 uh number 17 2025 board of adjustment annual report number 18 2025 Dorm Open Space and Trails Commission DOS annual report number 20 number 19 2025 Historic Preservation Commission CLG

annual report number 20. Number 20, 2025 Durham Planning Commission annual report number 21. Second amendment to contract number 20316, supplemental agreement number two to master agreement number 18908 with Kimley Horn Associates Incorporated for design of a roundabout at Marine Road and American Drive. 22 2025 bicycle and pedestrian advisory commission annual report.

23 purchase contract for gold during battery electric bus charging equipment. 24 contract for professional engineering services with HDR Engineering Incorporated for the Carolinas of out for outfall and transmission main project management. Then for GBA the public hearing number 2026 public hearing for the development of fiscal year 2026 2027 annual action plan. Number 27 consolidated annexation Lee Village Center.

Number 29 zoning map change creek side miss mixed use continued from February. Oops. These are

the >> February 2nd, 2026 meeting original PR 18334. So that is our consent agenda with the exception of 3, 5, 13, and 14. Then we'll get to our public hearings. Right.

At this time, I entertain a motion to um accept the consent agenda with the exceptions of >> three um 35, 13, and 14. >> So moved. >> It's been moved and properly seconded. Madam clerk, I'm sorry, second.

It's been moved and properly seconded. Madam clerk, please open the vote. Thank you. Please close the vote.

>> And the motion passes unanimously. >> Thank you. We'll start with item number three. This is Yeah, I'm looking now. Um so uh we have two speakers uh

Victoria Peterson and then Pablo Freeman. >> This this is item number three. And welcome. You have three minutes.

>> I'd like to first say good evening to everyone. >> Good evening. >> I'm Mrs. Peterson, Victoria Peterson. I'm one of the political activists here in Durham. I have spoken to quite a few individuals about the immigration legal assistant program that the city wants to offer to persons in this community who may have various various immigration issues.

And Mr. Mayor, I would like to know who has this organization been working with, Mr. Mayor and city council, please listen. I would like to know who has this organization been working with.

It looks like that they have already received over $200 and some thousand dollars and I do not know if an itemized budget who have they been helping and how much monies have they been giving out to individuals who may have immigration problems. Mayor Williams, I also would like to know since Durham is a sanctuary city, whoever you are, you're welcome to come to Durham. But my concern is who are they working

with? Are you working with persons from Nigeria, Ghana, Canada, the Middle East? It's not clear to the public. So far, it at least it will be close to $500 and some thousand dollars that monies are going to be used to work with the immigrant community.

I don't have a problem if those if those individuals are legal and they have some issues, some immigration issues, some immigration problems. And I have to be honest. I've spoken to other folks in this community. Some folks say, "Oh, Mrs. " But other folks are also saying, "Well, Mrs. Peterson, we do have concerns that we want to make sure that the individuals that we are helping are legal persons that are supposed to be here, but they

have some issues with their immigration papers. And we need to make sure that is diverse, that there are people that they're working with who look like me. There are people that they're working with who look like the mayor. That we want to make sure that this is a diverse.

This is Black History Month. We have numerous people in this in this community who come from the motherland. >> Thank you. >> And so we need to make sure, Mr.

Mayor. >> Thank you. So I don't know if we can get a report on this. >> Next speaker is Pablo.

>> Okay. >> Thank you. >> You're welcome. Welcome.

You have three minutes. >> All right. Um, good evening, Mayor Williams. Good evening, Mayor Prom Cabetto, members of city council and city managers and the millions of viewers out in the audience partaking online or in person. I'm here tonight to

specifically talk um a little bit about this grant, but also I to talk a little bit broader than this. So, it's framed as immigrant refugees access. I would argue it's a little bit broader than that. To me, it's the right to counsel.

For those of you who may or may not know, if you're an immigrant and you're in proceedings, you don't you don't get the right to counsel much like you do if you're charged criminally in state court or in federal court. You have the right to it, but you have to provide it yourself. In many cases, that type of representation runs thousands of dollars. So, I do I do support the idea of this city um providing funds so those that don't have access to council can access council.

Just a fundamental matter of due process. I think it's a good thing. My feedback to the council is really around the process that you all are using to get to this point. I think if you look at sort of the last couple of months of city council, you all allocate funds to specific nonprofits by fiat as your role as elected officials. Like right now it's this grant, but in other cycles you give plenty of funds to Centry Spano. Okay?

You don't give other opportunities for other nonprofits, other people to put their hat in the ring and offer their proposal for the same idea. And so my guidance or counsel to you all is that you all open it up. Right? If you're in the business of providing folks access to counsel, that's a fair idea.

There may be some private attorneys that may be willing to do it at low bono or maybe no bono, right? Um, if you're interested in providing uh services to different communities, open it up, create an RFP process that's transparent so everyone has a fair bite at the apple of providing service. I think the taxpayers deserve that and the community deserves. I think the goals that you're trying to propose tonight with this grant funding, I fully support.

Access to council mark me 100%. Um, but I do think the way that you go about it is also critically important. So, best of luck, council. May the forces be with you.

I'll give you one minute back for your annexation debate. Thank you. >> Thank you.

>> There we go. All right. At this time, I'll entertain a motion to authorize the city manager to execute the first amendment to fiscal year 26 grant agreement for the immigration legal assistance project with Justice Matters Incorporated in an amount of $200,000 for revised total contract amount of $450,000. >> So moved.

>> Second. It's >> been moved and properly seconded. Madam clerk, please open the vote. >> Please close the vote.

And the motion passes unanimously. >> Thank you so much. All right, our next item is item number five. I have one speaker, Victoria Peterson. Welcome. You have three minutes.

Uh over the last several years, I've known that the uh city, at least I've observed that the city uh has had a serious problem about homelessness. But this past winter, we're still in it. It really has been an eyeopening to me. Mayor Williams, you and I I I'm not here to embarrass you.

uh not here to embarrass uh I think it's Dr. Lewis who is uh chair of the uh county commissioners uh for the county. I just have a serious serious concern what is going on here in Durham with so many African-American men and this is um Black History Month. why so many of our men are homeless. Why so many African-American men

are on the streets and during the winter months over on Feedville Street, Austin Avenue, I live in the inner city. If you don't live in the inner city, you won't see this unless you come into the inner city. All these homeless camps down by the food line on Favville Street, over there by Fisher Memorial United Holy Church, over there by Witt School, all these homeless camps. Mayor, city manager, city council members, you speak about Black History Month.

I would like to see what plans are going to be put in place to address the large portion of African-American men. And I'm not even speaking about crime. I'm not speaking about the crime. Not on this issue. I'm speaking about why is it that so many of the African-American men

are living in the streets in this community? I don't understand it. I really don't anymore. Literally on the corner with fires 12 and 1 and 2 o'clock in the morning because they're trying to keep warm. But you have a huge old police building that's sitting I believe is West Main Street sitting there vacant that could be very easily turned into some form of a shelter that homeless men and also in this um community I'm not trying to put my sister on the on on on the burner of African-American women who have children an attorney, Miss Cook, another female sitting on the council. Ladies, do you know there's only one homeless facility in Durham for women across the street

from the public library and they only house 20 families? These are women who have children. >> Thank you, Miss Peterson. >> We've got to do something.

You got to say more than >> more than recognizing Black History Month. >> Thank you. But we got to do something. Am I correct, Mayor Williams?

>> We have a homelessness plan underway right now. Just had an extensive presentation on it. So, we'll make sure we'll make sure you get that information. But we do have an extensive homeless uh plan with recommendations, but I'm going to cut that mic so we can get going.

Thank you for your three minutes. And colleagues, I'll entertain a motion to receive the annual report for the homeless homeless services advisory committee. >> So moved. >> Second.

It's been moved and properly seconded. Madam clerk, please open the vote. Please close the vote. >> And the motion passes unanimously. >> Thank you.

All right. I have uh two speakers, Kelly Lane and Brian Ramirez. Welcome. You have three minutes.

>> Thank you. Hi. It'll just be me. Um, same issue for both of us.

Um, and I apologize. I'm not sure. >> I'm sorry. What did you say your name was?

>> Um, this is about your ordinance that was passed and um it's about housing. >> Okay. You're Kelly Lane. >> Yes.

>> Okay. Gotcha. >> I'm just saying same issue. It'll just be me speaking.

>> Okay. Got it. >> So, I apologize. This is the first time I've done this here, so I'm not sure if this is the right area to speak under, but um I was very happy to see I've got a case pending right now um involving a Durham landlord and I was dealing during the pandemic um with a housing situation uh that was rodentinfested. And I'm very happy to hear that you passed this

ordinance. I think it was October. Um, but my concern, I don't know if you can answer this here or not, but my concern is that what is actually going to be done about this because I learned through what I went through that there are state uh statutes and laws that say that this is illegal, but there's there's no enforcement. So, you are you're you're left to spend thousands of dollars on an attorney.

And I tried to go through legal aid. They were overwhelmed with evictions. So, you're caught in this in between where you're a good tenant paying rent. You're just stuck dealing with rodents.

And we had two, it was in the landlord was in Durham, but the property was in Scarboro. And we had two uh failed town of Carrboro inspections, but there's no enforcement. So, I noticed that here, and maybe this is specifically just about your um affordable housing units, but it said that there could be um

fines uh right to and we inspect those buildings and we therefore have the right to levy penalties on those buildings if they do not meet the health and safety standards. But again, my concern is just what are the tenants to do if there's a law, but there's no legal assistance. There's nothing. Where where do they go?

Thank you. >> Thank you. Next, Brian Ramirez. >> Okay, got it.

Okay, got it. If you will just send those comments uh by email as well. All right, colleagues, I will now entertain a motion to receive the fiscal year 2025 housing appeals board annual report. >> Second.

>> It's been moved and properly seconded. Madam clerk, please open the vote. Please close the vote. >> And the motion passes unanimously.

>> Thank you. And I have item number 14. Um, Alena Snavly, welcome. >> You have three minutes.

Welcome. >> Hi, everyone. Uh, my name's Elena Snavely. I am a data scientist by trade.

You might remember me from the scintillating uh Durham racial equity presentation I did with uh Attorney Williams last year. I'm here to speak in favor of the Human Relations Commission's annual report. I hope you all know what a very um deep thinking and intentional reset this was of this commission. Um, I speak as a member of the racial equity commission. As you know, we delivered our report and have been attempting a similar sort of

reset and thinking about, you know, what does it mean to be a commission? What kind of value do we bring? Are we just meeting once a month and sort of talking for three hours or is this actually, you know, going somewhere? Um, Councilman Wrist listed off a number of different um, interesting data points that were brought up for your budget uh, discussions and the first thing that came to my mind was, I wonder if those numbers were disagregated by race.

Um, like I said, I'm a data scientist. That's sort of the role I've been playing on the commission. Um, the human relations commission did meet with the racial equity commission a number of times in the beginning of last year. I do want to say that the racial equity commission has not met since July.

We are part of the human relations commission's uh 2026 plan. Um, and I think thinking about the intentionality of like what is a commission for? Do y'all need a racial equity commission?

Do you find value in them? Um, is the risk of the words racial equity, you know, sprinkled around what Durham City and County is working on, you know, worth what we're bringing or not bringing? Um, so we have been re-engaged. Um, I believe we're going to meet once until, uh, there will be a joint discussion with you and the county commissioners to determine the future of the racial equity commission.

Um but I do think that if you look to the human relations commission and what can be done with a group of passionate um people here in Durham who want to bring value to the city council. I think um I would appreciate if you sort of thought like what does it mean to be a commission and like how do we bring you value? Um, so with that, I hope you all approve their annual report. >> Thank you so much for your comments.

>> At this time, I'll entertain a motion to receive the Human Relations Commission 2025 annual report. >> So moved. >> Second. >> It's been moved and properly seconded.

Madam Clerk, please open the vote. >> Please close the vote. >> And the motion passes unanimously. >> All right.

Thank you. Next we have our first public hearing public hearing for the development of the fiscal year 2026 2027 annual action plan. Welcome staff report. Right.

Good evening Mayor Williams, Mayor Proim Caballero, and members of the city council. Uh my name is Braden Corwitz, planning and performance administrator for the housing and neighborhood services department. Uh this public hearing is to receive resident comments and input on the affordable housing and community

development needs in Durham neighborhoods as it relates to the use of the following US Department of Housing and Urban Development or HUD annual block grant programs. We have C uh community development block grant CDBG home investment partnerships program emergency solutions grant ESG and housing opportunities for persons with AIDS HOPA. Um this public hearing is a requirement for the development of the annual action plan. It was advertised and noticed via the city of Durham's website, the Herald Sun and KASA newspapers as well as the housing and neighborhood services department's web page and various listerves. The annual action plan or AAP guides the implementation and use of the city's CDBG home ESG and HOPA funding for the upcoming fiscal and program year which runs from July 1, 2026 to June 30th, 2027. HUD has not yet notified the city of grant funding amounts for fiscal year

2026 2027. 1 million in HOPW funds. For the first time in many years, the Housing and Neighborhood Services Department released a competitive application for CDBG and home funding on January 20th, 2026. This application process aims to enhance our engagement with the community, increase transparency in the process for selecting projects funded with federal grants, and establish expectations for partners and federal grant funding availability.

Through this process, more than 80 individuals attended the required workshops on February 6th and 11th, respectively. All applications for CDBG and home funding are due on March 3rd at noon. Projects recommended through this process will inform the CDBG and home project funding allocations outlined in the draft

FY202627 AAP. Once completed, the city is required to publish a copy of the draft um annual action plan for resident comments for at least 30 days prior to its submission. The public comment period will open by early April as the city's draft annual action plan must be submitted to HUD by May 14th, 2026. Comments made during this public hearing, as well as written comments submitted in response to the draft document, will be included in the final draft uh submitted to HUD.

I am available for questions as needed. Thank you. >> Thank you. Are there any questions, technical questions or comments for staff?

All right. At this time, I'll declare the public hearing open. I do have one speaker, Miss Peterson. Welcome. You have three minutes.

I want to mention to the citizens, this is the time when you come down to the city council and you talk about how how we want our federal dollars to be spent. You sort of spoke very quickly and very fast, sir. I I really would like to get the total of dollars that we're speaking about from HUD, but here is an opportunity to the city council members. you really want to do something about homeless, here's a here's a good opportunity because these funds can be used to work with the homeless people and the homeless organizations in our community. Can you tell us uh sir again the total amount of the of the HUD dollars that's going to be available? So, Mayor Williams, I remember you saying I can't quote exactly about uh about the police station uh that that when you folks when it came up a few weeks ago for one of the uh historical sites uh wanting that building and I

think you made a comment about that, Mayor Williams. We really have to do something in this community about the homeless situation. Can you tell us sir the total dollar amount? 175 million.

That's how much we're planning for in these >> 4 what sir? 175 million. 175 million of HUD dollars. 1 $75 million of federal funds just for one program.

That's awesome. That's awesome. And thank you. And Mr.

Mayor, we really need to find and other city council members. We really need to find some organizations who are serious enough who can put in a grant. Am I correct, sir? They need to

write up a grant to use for these dollars for the homeless folks who are living on the streets. There are two groups, men, particularly African-American men. I know we cannot discriminate. So men, uh, African-American men, white men, because if you're on Fedville Street, you will also see white males, and a lot of them, I think some of them are in the communities because of drugs.

One of the homeless problem, and I'll talk real quick, we we still have a serious drug problem and an alcohol problem in this community. Why a lot of our people are on the streets. and also to the two women that are on the city council. We have women who are homeless with their children.

So, I I want to ask the two women to also get involved. I'm not trying to embarrass you young ladies. Uh

Attorney Cook, uh uh Councilwoman Bur, you ladies, please help us to bring some women together to deal with the women who have children. >> Thank you, Mr. Thank you. Madam clerk, I have those.

Thank you. >> All right. Uh those are all of the speakers that I have signed up for this item. So therefore, I'll declare item closed and back before council.

>> No action. >> It's just no action. Correct. We're just receiving >> just all right.

Oh, yeah. Go ahead. >> Thank you. Um, I appreciate the I know it's been a long time since we've done an RFP. Uh, so I think that that's uh great. Um, can you just share the the kind of and you don't need to say it now, but if you could just send council an email about the timeline when RFPs

close, when will uh letters be awarded, and when we can expect the work to to begin with those dollars? >> Yeah. Again, >> I can definitely share the timeline with you. >> Yeah.

Thank you. >> Yes. Go ahead. >> You uh thank you.

Good evening. Just a quick question. We had talked previously about when we were talking about opening this up for a competitive process about support in the community to ensure that folks potentially would be ready to receive federal funding since that is kind of a high barrier. Can you just talk a little bit about the work that staff has done to to ensure that community can be competitive for this process?

>> Yeah, definitely. Thanks. So for this process, we made we hosted two application workshops, one virtual, one in person, and we made them mandatory for any organizations looking to apply just so they were fully aware of the expectations of the application process and kind of what we're looking for in these um potential subreients. Um so we

work through kind of the program regulations for home and CDBG. We work through application narratives, um, application questions, what we're kind of looking for out of the applicants, and that includes all the supporting documentation that is needed for them to uh, demonstrate kind of the sufficient capacity. Um, and we are open and willing to provide feedback to applicants as well. So if they aren't unsuccessful this time around, they get to know the process and there's an expectation of the same types of funding will be available next year at the same time just so we can build up that capacity over time.

>> Thank you. Those are all my questions. >> All right, thank you for your report. All right. Next up, we have Consolidated Annexation Lee Village Center.

>> Welcome. >> Awesome. Thank you, Mayor Williams, Mayor Pro Tim Caballero, and honorable council members. My name is Andy Lester with a planning and development department.

It's good to be with you all tonight. Before begin, staff would like to state for the record that all planning department hearing items have been advertised and noticed in accordance with state and local law and affidavit of all notices are on file in the planning department. 75 acres and located east of George King Road and west of Crescent Drive. This indexation petition is for contiguous expansion of the primary corporate limits. The current zoning is residential suburban 20. The applicant proposes to change this designation to compact suburban design core, compact suburban design support one, and compact suburban design support 2, all within a textual development plan to allow for a

mixture of residential and non-residential uses. The properties are currently designated transit opportunity area on the place type map. The proposed CSDCD, CSDS1D, and CSDS2D zonings are consistent with the designated place type. At the December 15, 2025 city council meeting, the case was continued to a date certain for February 16, 2026.

Thank you. Staff and the applicant are available for any questions. >> Thank you for the staff report. Any questions?

All right. At this time, I'll declare a public hearing open. >> How much time do you all think you need? >> Good evening, Mayor Williams, Mayor Proten Caviierto, members of council.

I'm Patrick Bike with Morning Star Law Group. Um, we just need a few minutes. Um, mayor, we're here to provide a few more text commitments in response to community concerns uh that have been raised since uh the public hearing was

initially open and um happy to answer any questions, but I think um for the sake of efficiency, it might be best for us to provide the additional test commitments uh that relate to, for example, vertical integration, uh dedication of parkland, um few other items. uh we'd be happy to do that at the time uh that you've heard from others uh so that the staff can u memorial memorialize them uh for the vote on this annexation this agenda item. But Mr. Juel and I are happy to answer any questions and we're very proud again to have our our ownership team, the father and daughter uh duo of Jed Harris and Laura Martin here.

So they flew all the way from California and be with us tonight. So we're happy to answer any questions. We appreciate your time and we would like to uh add a few more test text commitments uh to this uh textual development plan at the appropriate time. Unless you all want me to do that right now. That's up to obviously that's up to the council.

Go for it now. Okay. Um first of all, I'd like to address vertical integration. Uh we will be profering a text commitment that quote any site plan including both residential and non-residential uses submitted after the completion of Falconbridge extension to NC54 shall include vertical integration with groundf flooror non-residential uses integrated into a mixeduse building.

This commitment shall apply until a minimum of 25,000 square feet of ground flooror non-residential space has been achieved. Any vertically integrated mixeduse building with ground floor non-residential uses constructed before the completion of Falcon Bridge extension to NC54 shall count towards this 25,000 ft requirement. That's the text commitment for vertical integration. Secondly, we'd like to profer um in regards to a public parkland quote upon completion of the Falcon Bridge extension to NC54 completed construction of the Eastern Greenway Trail within

REID 141610. Uh that's the large 64 acre tract. Uh that's the uh main parcel of Lee Village Center and the provision of transit service by either Go Durham or Go Triangle to Lee Village Center. The developer shall offer to dedicate at least 2 acres of land within REID41-610 to the city of Durham for a city of Durham Park.

Such acreage may complain may contain land within a riparian buffer and such acreage shall have vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian access to Falcon Bridge extension and access to the Eastern Greenway Trail. The last last text comm um has to do with transit service and this is what uh our team uh would like to put forward. We would profer quote the development team agrees to meet and confer with representatives of Go Durham and Go Triangle on a semiannual basis to evaluate the provision of transit service to Lee Village Center. The Lee Village Center development team will

provide email correspondence reflecting such meetings to the planning department on a semiannual basis. Upon agreement regarding the location of a bus station within Lee Village Center, the development team agrees to use reasonable efforts to aggregate density within a 15minute walk of the bus station. And lastly, we also want to profer the uh standard $500 per incremental student uh to Durham public schools and that will be paid at the uh approval of the site plans. With that, be happy to answer any questions and address any other concerns that the council may have.

Thank you. I'm going to start my online speakers. >> I have Ryan Stewart. >> Mr. Mayor, I only have one person for item 27 who's currently online and that's uh >> Ryan Stewart, Rob Davis, Linda Harden, or Shannon >> Kaylor.

>> Hi. Yes, this is Shannon. Can you guys hear me? Hold on one second.

Shannon, I'm gonna mute you. Ryan Stewart is in person. You still want to do >> Oh, sorry. >> Yeah, start with online.

So, who's that online? >> This is Shannon. Shannon Gay. >> Shannon Gay.

Okay, let's go. Let's talk with her. >> Hi, Shannon. How are you?

Can you hear me? >> Yes. Can you hear me? Okay.

>> Yes, I can. Loud and clear. Welcome. You have three minutes.

>> Okay. Thank you. Good evening, mayor and council members. My name is Shannon Gaylord and I live in the town home community directly adjacent to the proposed Lee Village development under agenda item 2027.

We are not opposed to growth. We understand Durham is evolving and housing is needed. What we are asking for is responsible integration with existing neighborhoods. As currently designed, the proposal replaces the entire wooded area behind

our homes with a primary roadway and multi-use path. There is no meaningful vegetative buffer shown between that roadway and our backyards. Zero. Today, that wooded area functions as more than scenery.

It absorbs storm water. It reduces heat. It dampens noise. It provides privacy.

It is active wildlife habitat. We regularly see song birds, woodpeckers, and even deer families. For many residents, it is our daily connection to nature and a meaningful contributor to mental well-being and quality of life. Replacing mature canopy with pavement and traffic fundamentally alters the livability of our homes.

We are also concerned about cumulative traffic impacts. NC54 and Fington Road are already heavily congested corridors with documented peak hour backups. Introducing a new roadway connection

without clearly defined and enforcable mitigation measures and without fully accounting for long-term buildout impacts raises serious concerns about safety and cutthrough traffic affecting adjacent neighborhoods. Durham has adopted sustainability and urban canopy goals. Eliminating an established wooded buffer without requiring substantial preservation or enhanced buffering appears inconsistent with those commitments. We also believe our neighborhood has not been meaningfully represented in the design process.

Many of us purchased our homes with the wooded area behind us serving as environmental separation. We are now facing the prospect of traffic, headlights, and roadway noise directly behind our backyards with no substantial buffer proposed. We respectfully ask council to defer approval of agenda item number 27 until the following are addressed.

Number one, a substantial enhanced vegetative buffer between the proposed roadway and existing homes. Number two, preservation of mature canopy where feasible. Number three, clear enforcable traffic mitigation commitments. And number four, meaningful green space that maintains environmental continuity.

Growth should not come at the complete expense of existing neighborhoods livability. We ask you to pause this approval and require revisions that better align with Durham's comprehensive plan principles. Thank you. >> Thank Thank you, Miss Gay Lord.

Thanks for your comments. Do you have anyone else online for number 27? >> Okay. Thank you, >> Mr.

Mayor. >> Thank you. All right. We'll move to in person.

Ryan Stewart. After Ryan Stewart will be Chris Selby. >> Is Chris in the room? Hey there.

>> Ryan. Uh, we we do not um for time. >> Good evening. My name is Ryan Stewart and my address is on record.

Hello, Honorable Mayor Williams and the members of Durham City Council. As a resident of Chapel Run, a community situated directly south of this project. I feel compelled to address the potential impact on our neighborhood and the surrounding areas of Eastwood Park, George King Road, and Falcon Bridge, as well as Blenheim Woods and anyone that currently uses uses NC Highway 54 to access Highway 40. During the first public hearing, three access points for this development were discussed.

Issues arose, first with the lack of clarity over easement rights on George King Road. Second, with Crescent Drive residents unwilling to sell for the proposed Falcon Bridge extension that eliminates yet another access point. Residents from Chapel Run, Eastwood Park, Blenheim Woods, and the Oaks

expressed concerns about using neighborhood streets for the proposed access via Crossland Drive. Additionally, many mentioned the traffic holding area for all of us to access 54 and leave these communities accommodates only two vehicles at a time, as well as the fact that our streets lack sidewalks and are very narrow at certain points. As of now, I wanted to add that we have 430 verified petition signatures opposed to this development. Just last month, the city council voted to deny the resoning request for Britmore, a notably smaller development.

This decision was shaped by environmental and traffic concerns mirroring the issues raised by Chapel Run residents in our initial hearing. This included developments proximity to state roads, Army Corps of Engineering Land, and its location in the area heavily dependent on vehicle traffic, which contradicts previous statements from the council aimed at curbing urban sprawl. Council member Burus specifically emphasized traffic

concerns at the intersection of Highway 54 and 40, the very area where Lee Village is said to be located. On January 13th, I wanted to note that the planning commission voted 8 to3 to oppose the resoning of the Enclave at Little Creek. This project is located right next to Lee Village. Residents provided remarkably detailed impact statements regarding the environmental concerns associated with these projects.

The Little Creek Trails adjacent to these parcels serve as a preservation area, and I can personally vouch for the beauty and ecological diversity they contribute to the area. Given the significant scope of this project encompassing over 2100 apartments, 86,000 ft of retail space, 675,000 ft of office space, 40 town homes, along with additional profers for potential hotel and daycarees. We strongly recommend that you reject this request. According to IG trips formula, the apartments alone would generate 975

trips during peak hours. This development not only contradicts the UDO's TIA policy, but also features five donnut holes. Thank you. >> Thank you so much.

Welcome. >> Welcome. You have three minutes. I'm Chris Selby.

I live at 138 Celeste Circle in uh Eastwood Park in the city of Durham. >> Could you uh pull that mic up to you? Uh much better. >> Chris Selby live in Durham.

Thank you. uh here and uh at the last uh meeting on this issue, I uh explained in detail how Lee Village does not have a plan to link the two north south collectors here and here to uh NC54. Uh and this would cause uh very heavy

traffic to traverse our neighborhood uh our local streets and passing between these collectors in Lee Village and NC54 down here. uh and in addition would create a pinch point at the uh Hunting Ridge Road intersection down on NC54. Uh it seems there may be some progress with the Falcon Bridge Road extension. Uh but we need both of these to link to NC54 uh to avoid the pinch point and to to provide direct access to NC54 with Crossman Road.

This is uh without this this is just bad planning to have local streets in between an artery arterial and a collector street. I think I think the uh applicant knows that and I think the council knows that as well. That's just bad planning and I think there's a right way to develop uh Lee Village and

a wrong way. and I respectfully ask that you do the right thing and demand the needed commitments for linking both of the two collectors directly to NC54. Thank you. >> Thank you.

Those are all of the speakers that I have for this item. >> Uh Mr. Mayor, um Hi Shin and uh alarm. >> Oh, yeah.

Yeah. I'm sorry. And I acknowledge that I acknowledge your text message. My apologies.

>> No worries. >> Uh, okay. I see what happened here. All right.

Um, Halishen and Laura McCall. I promise I did not try to do that on purpose. Hello. Welcome.

You have three minutes. >> Sorry. I had some um things for the projector, but >> Oh, so it should be on the computer. They said it didn't work, but I sent everyone a PDF last night or this morning and everything I'm referencing.

>> Do you have it physically with you? >> What? >> Did you have it physically with you? >> I I um little things printed out, but not >> So, if you want to utilize that projector right there, you can do that as well.

>> They said it didn't work. >> Oh, sorry. >> That's okay. Okay.

Um let's see. Okay. As you all may recall, my concerns are regarding the block diagram and collector streets of Lee Village. This area has been designated a transportation opportunity area.

Is the irony lost on you all that these developers are trying to develop this 90acre transportation opportunity area yet they lack the parcels necessary to connect vital collector streets within the development to surrounding thorough affairs. The failure of this group to secure parcels for necessary infrastructure access for this private project is their problem and should not be thrust upon their neighbors. These are developers who have a glossy 14-page perspectus for potential investors. Thomas and Hutton is the applicant of record on both the zoning map change and the petition for

annexation. They have a buildout schedule and a utility extension agreement with the city. So, these developers now are attempting to use city council to get the taxpayers of Durham to subsidize the creation of infrastructure they need to develop this land to the benefit of their bottom line. It's disappointing that city planning has allowed this project to progress to this point in this iteration.

Dan Juel asked Director Young in an email how they could avoid doing a TIA. She responded, "This straight resoning is the way to avoid that requirement. This is very clearly not a straight resoning. It is titled textual development plan.

Straight resonings contain no textual or graphic commitments and as such are exempt from a TIA. This textual development plan is replete with commitments, open spaces, affordable housing, and no drive-through businesses. It curiously omits the density information readily available on the buildout schedule and utility extension agreement. Why has city

planning allowed this project to move forward without the applicant following the procedures and guidelines set forth in the UDO? It certainly seems that city planning is working in the best interest of the friends of Durham, not the people of Durham. I request that this project be remanded to planning so the developer can take responsibility for following the guidelines of the UDO and submit an application that adheres to these guidelines. If council moves forwards in voting on this project tonight despite its non-compliance with the UDO and in light of the inevitable consequences of this decision on adjacent properties, I request that city council condition any approvals on the following.

City will not exert its planning jurisdiction on my or my neighbors properties. The city will not annex our properties. The city will not condemn her properties. The city will require a TIA to be submitted before a final vote. And the city will require the applicant to replace the existing block diagram with one that routes the streets through its own property. And finally, I ask that the city request confirmation on the record from the

applicant that it will not seek to condemn or request the city to condemn my and my neighbors properties. If what planning has said to me in emails and here at the first hearing on December 15th is true, making these assurances part of the official record should be no problem. >> Thank you. Next, we have Laura McCll.

Come on up, please. Do you want me to hand these out to them? m.

Thank you. I'm Malar McCall. My address is on file. At a recent work session on repairar and buffers, there was an important conversation about how development plans sometimes advance in the background without transparency.

But yet applicants may describe certain elements as too conceptual to commit to as part of zoning map change decisions. An October 25 offering memorandum includes a site plan for Lee Village Center and that plan aligns with the annexation build schedule, the UEA and the block diagram. Those materials were sufficient to complete a fiscal impact analysis and structure city contacts contracts. Given that, it's difficult to characterize this development plan as too uncertain to evaluate.

materials show a roadway over a pond and a town square over a stream. Since no graphic plan has been submitted, the question is straightforward. Does the applicant anticipate submitting an NPA to accommodate the town square or Falcon Bridgeway extension? Can they commit to no disturbance of required buffers beyond necessary collector street crossings? Legislative decisions are where foreseeable impacts are evaluated

and public protections are secured. Traffic, transportation, and infrastructure are part of that public interest analysis. Capacity restraints in this constraints in this area, including the Falcon Bridge extension and widening of NC54 are not abstract issues. Questions remain regarding the city's potential funding responsibility, the timing of improvements, and whether property acquisition could be required, particularly for the Falcon Bridge extension.

If those discussions are occurring, they should be part of this public record and this decision. The applicant previously committed to use and intensity in order to respond to a first review staff feedback of UDO's 1613E3A. That language remove was removed just prior to the planning commission. And the supporting narrative is that you can get better traffic information later when it really matters.

But council review is where impacts are weighed and mitigation is secured. Approving this project project without binding commitments shifts risk to the public. Both the current and proposed LDC frameworks allow committed improvements to be modified if downstream analysis

shows they are unnecessary. There's no structural barrier to obtaining clarity. Now residents deserve to understand what improvements will be funded by the developer, what infrastructure costs may fall to taxpayers, and how capacity constraints in this corridor will be addressed. You've denied other cases based on transportation concerns.

The expectation of consistency matters and where foreseeable impacts are not openly evaluated and weighed, the record is incomplete and decisions become vulnerable to challenge. Council seen situations where key information surfaces only after approvals are granted. Refer this back to planning so that the traffic impacts and mitigation framework is fully developed and proper evaluation of the public interests is considered before actions are taken. Durham does not just need more housing.

It needs housing that's responsibly integrated into infrastructure, environmental protections, and long-term community stability. Solving one problem while worsening others without a clear path to resolution is not smart growth. Thank you.

>> Thank you. Those are all of the speakers I have on this item. Before this, well, do you want to respond to any of the comments? Thank you, Mayor Williams, Mayor Proen Caballero, members of the city council.

06 opacity uh buffer between Lee Village Center and the Chapel Run neighborhood. So, uh there there certainly is a um substantial buffer in place. I want to make sure that the council knew that since there's obviously been allegations to the contrary. Uh I'm only we're only aware of one donut hole.

U so that that um is not resolved uh at at this time. Uh so there was a statement I think about five donnut holes that that is incorrect. And I think all these arguments were presented to the planning commission and they voted 10 to one to

recommend approval to this council uh for Lee Village Center. So I want to make sure that was uh recited as well. Um our team we we actually have no idea what this offering memorandum that speakers have spoken about. We did not authorize it.

We have no idea what it is. Um, we know there are other concerns that council members have and so, uh, we welcome the opportunity to, uh, see if there are additional profers that we can make and our team respectfully asks, uh, for your, uh, support of this annexation and Lee Village Center since it's in compliance uh, with our current comprehensive plan and the 2005 comprehensive plan, which has called for this area to be transit oriented development for 20 years. Um, anything else? I think I think we'd love to hear your questions and concerns and uh address any additional profers that that might be appropriate at this time.

>> All right. Thank you. At this time, I'll

declare the public hearing closed and back before the council colleagues. >> Yes, Mr. Baker. >> Thank you.

Thank you to uh everyone who who's in the room and who spoke. I've got a a few questions for um staff and for um the applicant. Um first of all, just you mentioned this 30-foot buffer and um apologies if I just didn't see it. Is that a commitment?

>> Yes, sir. It's commitment. Okay. >> Uh commitment number three.

I'm sorry, four. Commitment number four on page two of the staff. Thank you. >> Um to staff, transportation staff. Um my first question is about the the TIA. Can can you run through the TIA situation, why there's no TIA now, when we'll see

future TIAs? >> Sure. Erlene Thomas, planning and development. So there is no TIA with this application since there are no commitments for specific uses and how and the intensity of those uses.

The way we evaluate how traffic is generated is with with those commitments and we need those to uniformly u apply that across developments when we are determining if a TIA will be required or not. So it we would need to know what what the uses are. Even if it's residential, there could be different types of residential that all generate trips at different rates. Um commercial, same thing with commercial um development.

They all generate traffic at different rates. And if we don't know what those uses and intensities are, we can't I can't tell you what amount of traffic will be generated and what mitigation will be needed. If we have a

um don't have a complete picture then we might have um might not have enough mitigation to for the entire development. So TAS will be required at the time of site plan when we do have that specific information. >> Thank you. And so site plan and and like preliminary subdivisions.

So >> is there a chance I mean are there scenarios where there are multiple TAS that come to the city? Yes. So in this particular case, the develop the applicant has committed to doing a TIA with every site plan that's submitted, which is above and beyond normal ordinance requirements because they could submit individual site plans that don't necessarily trigger the TIA threshold. But in doing this, we capture the cumulative impact of the overall development as it builds out as well as other developments in the area that may come in and be accounted for.

>> Okay. Um, thank you for that. Um, so

this is a a textual development plan. However, they have included a a diagram, a layout. Um, what happens if they hit bedrock or something happens and they can no longer follow that layout or they're working with a designer and the designer comes up with a better idea that is still consistent with the commitments and uh the design districts um would that have to come back to planning commission and to council for changes? So the layout that is attached in the diagram is conceptual. So it'll be a guide for implementing the road. Meaning and I say conceptual to mean that without detailed design and environmental analysis, you know, within that development, the road could vary, you know, to mitigate environmental impacts or or avoid other

things on the site. But generally speaking, those roads they are committing to providing those collector streets as well as building um the Fington Road um extension and the southwest arm drive through the site. >> Okay. Thank you.

Um there were concerns about um roads that are being shown on site >> that um if extended would potentially cut through someone's home, someone's property. Can you can you elaborate on on what that process is or if people should be concerned about something like that happening? >> Sure. I I think that's it's twofold. So the roads that they are showing that are offsite, they are showing that it's illustrative and it is and they are the alignments that are shown on the long range transportation plan. So whether

this project builds it or future project or future development or a state funded project, that would be the alignment that would be followed. And you know, whoever is building it would have to go through the right ofway acquisition process to um obtain that rightway to make the connections. And if this at the time of site plan, the development as it builds out, if those connections need to be made to mitigate the traffic impacts and they cannot um build those, then they've hit, you know, the limit of what they can build out until such time that those connections can be made. So, um, so what you're saying is what you're saying is that the road would basically end. The project could get built out, the road would would end and it would just be sitting there until some future date.

>> Yes. So, they would be able to build what they control within their project boundaries. And if they're able to obtain right away and make additional connections, then they can certainly build. But if not, the road would stop at their property line for future connection >> unless another alignment were found >> within within the corridor that's shown.

You I mean, I guess >> that's unlikely what you're saying, >> right? >> Okay. I mean the long range plan could be amended um additional routes you know identified in the future but for now that's the alignment um that's on the adopted plan. >> Okay.

Okay. I might have more questions about that later. Um let's see here. So I wanted to Okay, that's it for for for now. Thank you. Um, I wanted to ask

I wanted to ask uh, Director Walcut, are you here? So they've made this commitment for parkland. Um it it allows flexibility at a future date. You know, if if it's determined that there's no desire for parkland, then so be it.

Um, so there's a commitment for for a park, but there but we don't know 100% that there would be a park on the site is what I'm currently understanding. Is that is that your understanding as well? >> I think the commitment was for land >> they provided. >> Okay. Can you tell me more or less very roughly because I know that this is

would have to be very rough what it would cost to construct a park on empty land that you might have. >> Sure. Roughly would be an understatement. So I don't want to get cornered on on any kind of price commitment.

um but similar size parks and not knowing all the lands or specifically where this park would be on the site. Uh I can give you some estimations. So think about a a playground and to our standards if we used if we built design and build a a accessible playground with accessible surface like the poured in place surface uh and we wanted to add shade shade sales to that and we wanted to do a nice decorative fence around the playground you're looking at approximately $300,000 plus dollars for just a playground. So, anything on top of that with extra amenities could be would be hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Okay. Thank you. That's all that I have for you. Um, I appreciate that.

Yeah. And uh and obviously, you know, for any for any master plan community, having a a public park, a city park um that is that is owned and operated and maintained and serviced um by the public uh is a is a huge is an enormous amenity and something that of course improves sales and is well documented to um you know typically increase property values as well. So that's something that that I want to keep in mind. But I'm going to I might have a few more questions.

This is a big case. I think it's worth our deliberation. So, I I'm going to turn turn it over for additional questions from other council members. Thank you, >> colleagues.

Go ahead. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um, so the first question is for planning staff, building on the questions of my colleague Council Member Baker, uh, in regards to concerns. is kind of building on what

Miss Thomas was just saying about the ability of the city to uh basically take folks property uh in order to build this out um um either through this development or future development. And I'm just would would like to hear from staff what uh whoever would feel it's most appropriate, right? Uh you know, what what are the the what's the the city's ability to to step in and be able to to actually do that to to have this project go forward? Erlene Thomas again.

Um so all of the mitigation that's required um to make this development happen would have to be constructed by the developer. So they would have to go through the rightway acquisition process to be able to make those connections. >> Can the city pursue an extr territorial jurisdiction process or annex properties condemn properties? what can the city do uh to to step in and um further this

this project? >> So, no, there would the city could not. >> Good evening, Sarah Young. We're using the phone a friend method tonight.

Um the so extr territorial jurisdiction may be helpful to define what these things are for those that may not be familiar. That is when a city has land use zoning authority over an area that is not in their city limits. When the uh city and county agreed many many moons ago um to have a joint ordinance and a joint department, the city gave up its ETJ. City no longer has extr territorial jurisdiction. So that is not a possibility in this case uh because that area is already in the joint city county right it's county and so it already falls under the same comprehensive plan

and other zoning ordinance provisions. Um so that's ETJ annexation. Um in the state of North Carolina the only way that a city could forcibly annex is through a public referendum. So taking it out to a vote to the community is highly unlikely.

I don't know that any jurisdiction has done that. So basically in North Carolina functionally forcible annexations are prohibited and really only voluntary annexations. So the city would not pursue trying to annex someone's property. Um I think the other question if I remember correctly was about condemnation proceedings.

Um, as Miss Thomas said, you know, it's up to the applicant to obtain the right of way necessary. Uh, typically the city may um do condemnation of right-of-way when we are trying to do our own roadway projects, um, if needed. Uh, typically we do not get involved in condemning

property for developers. Um although that is a power that the city has and um could potentially be used um that is not typically done. >> All right. Thank you.

So a couple of questions for the applicant. So the first is in regards to the park profer. just want to understand the commitment language in regards to the park. Uh in particular, you said that at a time when Falcon Bridge is completed uh and upon completion of transit service.

Is that correct? >> Yes, sir. That's in compliance with the city of Durham's uh park location policy manual. because otherwise if the transit service had not been yet completed uh building a park there would not be in compliance with the city's policy. So I guess does that become a question for

staff? >> Good evening Mayor Mayor Pro Tim and members of council. Austin Bolan, senior planner with Durham Parks and Recck. uh the policy compliance that uh the applicant mentioned, we do um as part of our policy um give preference to sites that have pre-existing transit access, but sites that don't have transit access planned or existing are certainly not procluded from being accepted by the department.

>> I mean, with that in mind, I'd like to remove the the and from the clause. Um okay, thank you. >> That's fine. If that's the will of the council, we'll be happy to word smith that appropriately appropriately and remove the provision of transit service by go Durham or go triangle for the uh park dedication.

>> Okay, >> we can do that. >> Um the next question is around uh affordable housing. I appreciate the commitments that the owners uh have have made to date uh around the 9%

u of apartments that would be affordable. I think it's 30% at 60% AMI, 30% at 80%, 30% at 100%. Um, typically for us within the UDO, the definition for rent is 60%. Uh, and so I wanted to ask if the the applicant and the owner would be uh prepared to offer the uh 6% at 60% uh AMI and 3% at 80% AMI instead of the 333.

>> Yeah, we can do that, Councilman Cop. Okay. All right. Thank you.

Um I may come back with more. Those are the questions I have at this time. Thank you. >> You >> Thank you.

Any other colleagues? Council member Wrist a couple questions. Um yeah. So the f actually for the applicant the first one um remind me of the buildout of this of this I know this is a large project. Remind me of the buildout of how long this is going to >> Oh my goodness. Um

a minimum of 10 years. It's probably more likely to be in the 15 to 20 year range. As a example, in in the city of Durham, I started working on Davis Park in 2004, I believe, at at Hopson Road and Davis Drive. Um, that was a larger project.

It was about 150 acre, but also transit oriented development. U very pedestrian friendly. We're still working on the commercial uh components of of Davis Park. So these uh mixeduse projects take at least uh at least 10 years would be my guess.

And and again I want to emphasize that uh Jed and Laurel are owners. They're not developers. So they have to find essentially joint venture partners for each phase um and feel comfortable that that um joint venture partner can implement the vision that that is being established for Lee Village Center. So, I I apologize for the roundabout answer. I would say a minimum of 10 years, probably longer.

And that's assuming I mean, if we I'm sorry, I digress, but I mean, if we have another major recession like we had in 2008, that just freezes development for years. >> Appreciate that. Um, also appreciate the additional profer on the um on the affordability levels for the rental units. Um I wonder um I'm looking at the 3% townhouse units to be income restricted 80% AMI for 20 year 10 year.

I wonder the typical unit is their typical period is 30 years. I wonder if you'd consider those town homes affordable at a the affordable units for a 30-year period. >> Yeah. Um we're not what we're trying to do with the town homes is is start to create on-ramps for generational wealth.

And if you deed restrict it for 20 years, that family that lives there really doesn't create a lot of generational wealth. That's why we thought 20 years was better for the for sale housing and 30 years was appropriate for the rental. Um that's our thinking on it. It's a

delicate balance. Um but >> I mean the point being that if you land trust model when you tie it up for 30 years really >> becomes a land trust you mean that there sort of has limited >> ability to sort of appreciate. So it's >> yeah if it if it's if it's deed restricted in that way there's a very nominal increase and the problem you have is that the person has all the maintenance obligations of the townhouse but they don't get the appreciation at the end of it. So it for those types of u homes it's um it's very difficult to deed restrict them for 30 years because you're asking people to do all this maintenance work but they really aren't going to recapture that appreciation that you and I enjoy in our homes and other people.

>> You know I appreciate the thinking on that. I think the um I mean I think there is a perspective of affordability from the perspective of the or the wealth appreciation for the for the owner, right? Then there's also affordability for future buyers, right? So I think so yeah for me that the the

ability to keep it affordable for anyone to buy within the 30-year period would be prevable. So I hope you consider that. >> Yeah. I mean, if if that's a material consideration, council member wrist, we'll make that change, but I will go on the record saying I I do not think it's appropriate.

>> Thank you. Um, also on the uh issue of the um on the park, and I appreciate the staff's comments on sort of like the the the um details around this, the park profit, and I appreciate the profer. If the if the city of the department of um parks and recck decided not to accept that as a park, what would happen then? It' be developed as um in in keeping with the compact suburban design um zoning which is the formbbased district and would not have um uh other than the use limitations that are listed as text commitments the um permitted uses in the

uh compact suburban design would apply. Any thoughts, Steve? >> Dan Juel u sketchy applicant. Uh keep in mind that we uh we also have pretty robust open space requirements.

So um whether there's a twoacre public park or not, there'll be a good amount of open space in this community. >> Thanks. And there's a question for staff from DPR. Um appreciate the comments on what it would cost roughly sort of just ballpark to to build out a park there. I'm also curious in addition to the cost of building out like what's the what would it what would it cost the department annually to maintain a park there in terms of you know costs hard costs as well as staff what does that look like also for I know that that's sort of on the edge of the of our county right so just kind of curious any sense of what that would cost to maintain that on an annual basis >> sure I mean similar to the construction cost it'd be purely speculative I mean we do have an existing facility close by so I wouldn't say that it's completely out of our service range and at 2 acres I don't foresee that requiring a

significant amount of additional staff just to maintain that park. But I think the thing to keep in mind is this is not potentially the only park coming online over that 10-year timeline. So I don't think it's I guess fair to say, you know, this park will cause us to increase, you know, maintenance staff or maintenance financial obligations by this much when it's really the entire system that's going to dictate that. So, so I mean is it's going to be certainly a marginal increase in sort of staff requirement as well as cost.

>> Yes. Yes, there would be some increase. I it's just hard to say what that is without knowing the other changes in the operating environment that would happen between now and then. >> Okay.

Thank you. And I have a final question for planning staff just on the issue of um on the roads. So I know that again the profer for the park was like upon completion of of uh of Falcon Bridge. So, and I think this may have been the comments my colleagues had earlier, but just again to clarify this issue of connecting this to 54, whose responsibility is the completing Falcon

Bridge Drive and Crossland Drive to connect to 54? >> So, if that is one of the improvements that's identified through the TIA, it would be the developer's responsibility to do. >> Thank you. >> That's it for now, Mr.

Okay, thank you. Any other colleagues? Yes, go ahead. >> I'm just reiterating that um I'm unfortunately not going to look too much at the quality of the project because um I still believe that the TIA needed to be done prior to its getting to council.

Uh I know colleagues are tired of hearing me say that, but that is the read of the statute. It is a mandatory shall, not a discretionary on how we feel about when a TIA would be best done. Um, and with that concern, I'm not going to be participating. So, I'm just going to be a no vote.

All right. Thank you so much to the applicant and everyone who spoke on behalf of this item. Um, there are too many unknowns for me at this moment to support this. I'm really concerned about the infrastructure continue to grow in Durham and I feel as though I still have concerns about that traffic corridor also concerns about at what point the TI conducted and so I just want to be clear that I while I appreciate the profers and your concern about generational wealth I will be unable to move forward this project as it stands.

wanted to follow up on another question that was raised by a resident um that I I I think is directed toward the applicant, but do you anticipate requesting an MPA on this project? I know we've seen cases where um you know pretty soon after um resoning request that that kind of moving forward in the process and that request being made. What do you anticipate in terms of the needs around

um an NPA with this project? Um given the the current concept, Council Member Copek, could you elaborate on your the terminology? >> Um >> Dana and I are a little confused. >> Yeah.

Yeah, sure. So, just and perhaps staff could assist with this as well. Um but just um wondering about um you know if you think that based on the routing of the roads or areas that you'll develop if you'll anticipate needing to make adjustments to some of the buffers the riparian buffers um for this project to be able to proceed you know through the MPA process. >> We don't anticipate that happening >> at this point. We we it our team meetings actually started with the buffers and then looked at how we use those as amenities and develop around them. We have never contemplated

u reducing one of the jurisdictional buffers. >> Okay. Uh thank you. Um So, you know, I definitely take to heart the planning commission's vote on this case.

I think the traffic concerns are real, um, which can impact people's quality of life, which is something that I think, uh, I think we all, I'll just speak for myself, take seriously. Um, you know, it's hard thinking about the trade-offs of that sometimes with meeting housing needs, um, promoting that connectivity, working toward that 15-minute city. And I do also at the same time appreciate, you know, the affordability elements, the the potential for future connectivity with transit being in the the the transit opportunity area. Um, you know, I think the commitments around, you know, verticality, mixed use, making the site

walkable, child care, green building, um, 100red-year storm water, um, being above tree requirements, the enhanced buffers, um, the commitments around the southwest corner, uh, and the natural heritage site. Uh, and so I think that there's also a lot that's good, uh, in this project. I know that there's questions around the TIA. Um, the best that I can do is is is is do my best to to understand and follow the the the guidance of our legal team and and planning staff.

And I do think that there is a material benefit with the the TIA at every stage of site plan where it will come to us to review uh and accept before it can move forward, which is not something that we have seen with with other projects. And so my hope is that would would help to mitigate um uh some of the traffic concerns, though of course it will not fully mitigate it and it will be something that impacts um people's quality of life. So um you know definitely weighing uh the concerns I've

heard against the benefits um and I appreciate the discussion tonight, the concerns that were raised uh and the the profiters by the applicant. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Council member Baker. >> Um, coming back to the coming back to the parks, obviously parks huge amenity to have on site. Council member Ris raised the issue of the maintenance cost for for the city. Um applicant team, uh are you able to commit to constructing the park? Uh I if the park gets constructed, >> council member Baker would would need to understand um every um dwelling unit within Lethal Center will pay a parks and wreck uh uh impact fee. And so, um, I would have to ask the staff, is that

how does that is it possible for the impact fees that are paid by these dwelling units to be used for the park inside Lee Village Center? Otherwise, it feels like we're paying an impact fee and we're paying for capital expenses. So, I honestly don't know how that works, but I know every unit has to pay uh an open space impact fee and a parks and wreck impact fee. So, I would think that if those funds were collected, it would be uh substantial uh given the uh uh nature of this development. So, um yeah, it's just I don't know if we can determine a specific number at this time without knowing what uh how the impact fees would be allocated that le that'll be generated at Lee Village Center if you see my point. See what I'm saying?

like every unit pays an impact fee in order to get a certificate of occupancy. And then the question is what what happens with those impact fees. Having said that, I'm reliably informed by my that uh the ownership team will uh commit to $250,000 for a park at this location and we'll draft a profer to that extent with the staff. Um if we're fortunate enough to receive your approval.

>> All right. >> Could you repeat that the number just we hear >> 250,000. Thank >> um All right. Thanks so much.

Uh two more questions. Um, one is there's this obviously building out the site would require a lot of infrastructure on site. One, are we confident that there is enough sewer and water capacity to serve

this area? Two, um, would with regard to Falcon Bridge in particular, is that being built out the by the applicant or would that require public subsidy? Those are my questions. So, I'll tackle the water sewer question.

Um, this is not in an area impacted by sewer capacity limitations. >> So, the Falcon Bridge extension project would be funded and constructed by the applicant. for director Young. I have a followup for you. I think the specific question was does this area have water and sewer um capacity and you just said it's not impacted. So I just want like a definitive answer on like what the

situation with the infrastructure is if you have that information available for us. >> Yes, this uh there is according to our water management department there is uh adequate capacity in this area. the they have identified the improvements um that are I believe needed in the UEA and so I can pull those up. Sorry, give me one minute.

Actually, that's right there. Well, hold on one second. Let me find the UEA. Sorry about that.

So, the UEA does include as I'm scrolling through it. Um, on page 14, um, it starts to talk about the conditions. 15, the project specific provisions. Um it talks about the size of the water lines that are required that is also included in your staff report.

Um and essentially the developer is required to make any improvements that are needed to maintain flow of the system etc. So there is there is capacity available. They would have to do some improvements but that is typical of pretty much all development. And I understand this um project is scheduled to last over well it's supposed to be like maybe a like a decade or so before it's fully built out. So do we know and

I just wanted I know that it's included in our staff report but I think it's really helpful for the public to hear it as well which why I'm asking you the question. So do you have any intervals or the time frame in which these improvements be made or just thinking about like because I don't want us to have a situation where we approve massive development and then we get the emails because it's like at capacity and we have like a moratorum in inadvertently. So I just want to be clear with that. >> Yeah, good question.

So these improvements would be required of the developer as they build their project out. >> All right. Any other questions? Yeah.

>> All right. Um, a lot of the, uh, I mean, you guys committed to buffer. I was going to ask about that. Uh, he said 30 ft, right?

>> Yes, sir. Along the southern edge. Uh,

okay. On the on the U, it's indicated if you can see the, uh, street and block diagram for Lee Village Center. It's a 30-foot buffer along the southern. >> Yes, sir.

You, but you you committed. Good. >> Yeah, it was committed on day one, mayor. >> All right.

Good. Uh, I can appreciate the conversation um that you were having with council member Riss. That that is council member that's something I always struggle with because I I do want people to be able to um build generational wealth, but we also want to pre prevent, you know, what we've dealt with over the last few years where corporate entities are coming in buying up properties and flipping them immediately. um basically throwing our market out of whack. Um so for everyone who's listening to that, the reason why we try to extend that is to prevent that. And I think the state may I'm not sure if they did it or not, but I think there was some type of law passed where um they're restricting corporate entities from buying up properties um in

mass. Um if not, I know it's been talked about. I would welcome that. Um, but at the same time, you know, you you're beholden to a property.

You you move in and it's like you enjoy it the first few years because you have your own property, but you're deed from being able to enjoy the luxuries of of, you know, home ownership and and being able to sell it and buy another property and accumulate, uh, which so many people enjoy, especially in this area. Um, I I know this area well. I used to live across the street. Um, and I know the traffic patterns over there.

I know also that, you know, there's potential for this to maybe be a smaller or, I don't know, comparable size to Metomont, but maybe done better. Um, not as boring as Memont. Um, because this will be on the dorm side, it's going to be better. Um, but it is a a nice commercial area over there.

It is right next to an to an interstate. Uh, I think that there are a lot of qualities that that make sense over here. Um, anytime we are disturbing

land and and and it's going from the nature that it that currently exists to uh construction, that process is always going to be uncomfortable. And but you know, then then you have um and just for the record, mayor, um I mean, Madame Clerk, please run the clock. Um you can you can start at two minutes. I'm just about done.

Um but also you know it just like those who enjoy you know living over there right now which is a really nice area you know there will be neighbors to get to enjoy the same thing. Um also we just had a homelessness uh strategy that had significant recommendations and one of the recommendations was housing supply and diversity. Uh we had a public safety we have a public safety um strategy we're working on. But already you know the in the cities that have incorporated this plan uh housing security is one of the things that that is a public safety

solution. Uh we have a housing assessment done that talks about the housing diversity that we need. We have a housing plan that we're trying to build up because we know the demand that's in this area. And um there are some that say we you know we've already surpassed a certain point.

we don't need any more housing, but you know, uh it's harder to I mean, we just heard tonight it's just going to take 10 years at minimum to build this space out. Um we we also have seen that we've dorm 324,000 people now. We were just 282,000 people about 70 years ago. So sometimes we grow a lot faster than we can build.

And that, you know, trend set that market, the trajectory, and it makes it really difficult. And we say we want affordability. affordability. Well, it's it's really hard when you're not contributing all of the factors to make things affordable.

Uh and you know, we say we want affordable housing. Well, affordable housing doesn't mean the supply or the material is cheaper. It just simply means it's being supplemented on the back end, you know,

so someone's going to pay for it. But also, you know, uh supply meeting that demand also helps out with the cost of it. That's just fact. That's just logic, economic logic.

So, uh, with all of the things that I've heard tonight amongst my colleagues and what we have here, um, I think you know the planning commission got it right. So, with that being said, I am going to bring us to a vote. >> Mr. Mayor, I have some >> recording stopped.

>> Let's start the recording back up. >> Yeah. >> I appre I appreciate it. Thank you.

Um, >> that's wrong. Go ahead. Yeah, thank you. Um, yeah.

Uh, I think it's I think it's worth the time just because this is again 80 acres. I think we we want to make sure we we get it right. So, um, I joined the Durham Planning Commission in 2018. I joined the city council two years ago. Uh and uh a large part of

what drives me is is fighting back against uh unsustainable autocentric development and sprawl that that we've seen on the outskirts of our city since 2017. Seen half the area of Manhattan annexed into the city. It has impact our accessibility to parks. We've dropped from 72nd out of the 100 most populous cities in the country in parks and parks accessibility to 97th uh this year.

Um more and more people are stuck in their cars getting around. Traffic has gotten worse, trees getting cut down. Um and over and over I think that we have just simply set our comprehensive plan aside and not followed it and not paid attention to it. Uh, I would love to sit up here and um say that I was part of a council majority that was willing to say no to large annexations uh and uh annexations moving our city outward and sprawling and tearing down forest and

farmland. The reality is that I'm not part of a council majority that wants to do that. However, I do think that this council is different from the last council and that it the floor is higher. the standards and expectations are higher.

And I do think that we are closer to a philosophy of if we tear something down, we need to replace it with something that makes Durham a little bit better, that provides more public goods uh to to the people of our city. This um this case as it currently sits is um it's it's the best case that I've seen since 2018. It's the best resoning and annexation case that I've seen since since 2017. the floor um is elevated and it's not exactly what I want um because what I would want is to be able to uh say no um to these uh large annexation cases. But knowing that that's that uh is not and and was not uh possible going into this,

I have been able to work uh with uh colleagues to to improve the case. Um there's commitments. This is a reasonzoning to a design district which already has additional standards. There's uh commitments to green building.

There are commitments to affordability in the apartments, affordability in the town homes. Um not just rightway dedication, which we've so often received, but actual construction of greenways, high quality design materials, um town homes, alley loaded, and I could go on and on. these are commitments that that we haven't seen um on top of just the the standards that are that are in the development regulations. So um it always hurts it always hurts to to see um more outward expansion when I know that we have uh abundant land in our city that we can develop um already. Uh, I would love for us to

get to a point where we say that we're going to pause and not grow outward anymore, but knowing that wasn't going to be the case here, uh, I do think that the applicant has brought this case to to uh, an elevated standard that that we haven't seen um, as as long as I've been observing resoning annexation cases since 2018. So, uh, I will I will be voting uh, in favor of this case this evening. >> Thank you. Thank you.

All right. Um, >> staff needs to clarify the profers. >> Honorable director. >> Yes.

Uh, staff would like to clarify a couple of things. I would like Andy to kind of go through the profers and make sure that we got them correct, especially because they were several new ones that were not previously vetted with staff. But in addition to that, um, apologies, Council Member Burus, my eyes could not find the thing I was looking for. And so, I just wanted to follow up on the sewer. Uh the only improvement is to upsize the sewer lines from 8 in to 12 in. This is in the Celeste Circle

lift station basin. And so that's an area where the city did improvements a while back and is in good shape. So I just wanted to follow up on that. Um Andy, if you would.

Sure. >> Thank you. I just want to clarify the profers that are made tonight. Um there's one for vertical integration that we have those prevetted.

We also have the park donation of at least two acres with the provision the the second clause being removed regarding the transit service. 5 acres of land at the southwest corner >> in lie of >> in lie of >> Mhm. Okay. >> Would you please restate your third profer staff has not um been able to >> Sure. This is um um I have to really

shout out our our ownership team especially uh Jed Harris. He has been relentless on communicating with our our transit providers and um at this point in time we would like to profer the development team agrees to meet and confer with representatives of Go Durham and Go Triangle on a semiannual basis to evaluate provision of transit service to Lee Village Center. The Lee Village Center development team will provide email correspondence reflecting such meetings to the planning department on a semiannual basis. Upon agreement regarding the location of a bus station within Lee Village Center, the development team agrees to use reasonable efforts to aggregate density within a 15-minute walk of the bus station.

I realize that is not our typical profer, but this is not our typical project. Uh so we're happy to profer it. If that's not acceptable to the plane department, we'll be doing it anyway. >> Okay.

No. Um I think we can do that. Regarding the DPS contribution, um I

think the commitment you stated was per student, >> $500 per incremental student. >> Yeah. In order to do that commitment, it needs to be a lump sum. At the site plan stage, we do not generate student numbers.

>> Can you make an exception? Um, yeah, we just don't have any way to assess that at this point in time. We're happy to do it on a site plan basis just like the TAS would be done. All right, we will work with you on that.

>> Appreciate it. >> But that is not a typical uh way that we like to capture these And that'll be sorry and that'll be at the time of site plan. When will the that the calculation will happen? When are you profering that the payment is made >> prior to site plan approval? >> Okay.

>> Thank you. And could you clarify the revised um apartment um AMI percentage? >> Uh yes sir. That is uh 6% at 60% AMI and 3% at 80% AMI.

>> Okay. And you're removing the 100% AMI as part of that. >> Gotcha. Thank you.

And the last one is the $250,000 park donation which uh planning and DPS will work you on the language regarding. >> Correct. >> All right. Thank you, >> Council Member Copek. >> Yeah, two clarifications. 3 acres to the southwest is that still protected as uh is open space wetland protected for the natural heritage it's just not the park right okay >> correct >> all right thank you and then I guess I had a question about the the town homes as well council member wrist had raised was that a profer as well to go to 30 or

was that not a profer >> we prefer not to profer it unless uh the council insists on it. Then we'll uh yeah, it's the tension that the mayor referred to between uh creating generational wealth and creating affordability ownership options. So our our faith is >> at the will of the council. >> Yeah, it's at the will of the council.

Our position is that 30 years is a long time for a homeowner to go paying all the maintenance and having very little appreciation. We'll leave it at that. >> Thank you. I just want to share with colleagues I while I appreciate like I understand that tension and it's actually a question that consistently comes up in housing circles is the the idea we talk about social housing but in this country we often use home ownership as a as a means to build wealth. And so it's hard for me in these individual cases to really limit those homeowners.

Um, and I recognize that that's a tension that there's like a crosswinds there and that that is a a really honest and broad conversation that's happening in housing circles. Um, is you're really limiting folks who don't have access to wealth to how do they build theirs? Uh, and so I I appreciate why colleagues are pushing on it. I just want to share I'm comfortable with with the profer profer as it stated and not and not moving or and not moving it up to 30 years.

meet like the initial profer. Yeah, >> correct. Thank you. And I understand we're not at We're all at odd to that.

I am, too. >> All right. >> Sorry. Go ahead.

>> I'm just going to I want folks to be able to do what my family's doing >> at the end of the day. Like I want people to come to this country like my family got to come and, you know, show up with a suitcase and build their wealth and do better for the next generation. I'm still working on it. I'll get there one day. Maybe I'll get one of these. I

don't know. I'm not I'm not moving out there, but I do love it out there. It's a really nice area. All right.

Um, thank you everyone for your comments. Thank you all. Um, I'm going to agree with uh um much of what I heard up here and uh just just just go forth um with with um a project that I think is really good. You know, nothing's going to be perfect.

Um but I do think the pros outweighed the the the cons on this and um just based on what's out there, it it makes sense to me. So, with that being said, I'll entertain a motion to adopt an ordinance annexing annexing Lee Village Center into the city of Durham and to authorize the city manager to enter into a utility extension agreement with Silvin Lee LLC. >> So, moved. >> Second. >> It's been moved and properly seconded. Madam clerk, please open the vote,

please. Uh, please close the vote. >> And the motion passes 5 to two with council members Burrus and Cook voting no. >> All right. Thank you. Also, I'll entertain a motion to adopt an ordinance amending the unified development ordinance by taking property out of residential suburban 20 false Jordan wershed overlay district B major transportation corridor I40 county jurisdiction and establishing the same establishing the same as compact suburban design core with the development plan, compact suburban design support one with the development plan, compact suburban design support two with a development plan, false Jordan watershed overlay district B major transportation corridor I40 city jurisdiction >> so moved second >> it's been moved and properly seconded it clerk please open the vote >> please close the vote >> and the motion passes 5 to2 with council

members Burrus and Cook voting no >> and lastly I'll entertain a motion to adopt the consistency statement as required by North Carolina general statute section 160D-605 >> move to have a consistency. >> Second. >> It's been moved to properly second it. Madam clerk, please open a vote.

>> Please close the vote. >> And the motion passes six to one with council member Burrus voting no. >> All right. Thank you.

And thank you all for uh bringing a good project. All right. Uh colleagues, we're going to take a take a break. It's 9:18. Uh let's come back at 9:28. We're in recess.

All right, let's uh get to our next item. One, two, three, four. Next item is zoning map change creekside mixed use continued from February 2nd, 2026. Ready for the staff report.

>> Thank you. 5 acres and located between Miami Boulevard and Angier Avenue. The current zoning is residential suburban 20 and residential suburban multif family with the development plan. 346. The applicant is proposing to reszone the properties to allow up to 630 town houses, apartments, and two family dwellings with up to 9,500 square ft of non-residential uses

excluding drive-thru facilities and convenience stores with gasoline sales. The properties are currently designated mixeduse neighborhood and place type map. 346 zoning is generally consistent with the designated place type. At the February 2nd, 2026 city council meeting, the case was continued to a date certain for February 16th, 2026.

And thank you staff and the applicant are available for any questions. >> Thank you so much for your staff report. Colleagues, are there any technical questions to staff? All right.

At this time, I'll declare the public hearing open and refer to the applicant. Welcome. How much time do you think you need? >> 10 minutes.

>> 10. Two. >> 10. >> 10.

All right. Let's put 12 on the clock, please. All right.

Okay, thank you. Uh, good evening, mayor, madam pro Tim, and members of the city council. My name is Laura Hollowman, and I'm with McAdams representing the land planning of this project. Address for the record is 2905 Marian Parkway here in Durham.

Joining me tonight are Kate Murdoch, also with McAdams, Steve George of the CSC Group, developer and property owner, and Rhynold Stevenson and traffic engineer with DRMP. So, thank you staff for the uh wonderful lead in and wonderful work on this case thus far. I know we've we've worked hard to bring uh the project that is before you tonight. Again, some project background.

Um it is just under 53 acres and located along Andrew Avenue here and uh South Miami US70 here. 346 which again allows for 630 town houses, apartments, and two family dwellings and up to 9500 square feet of non-residential use. Again, um, as staff

u mentioned just a few minutes ago, this is right in line with the place type map which designated this this property as mixeduse neighborhood. We also eliminated the use of uh the uses of gasoline or excuse me, convenience store with gasoline sales and drive-through uses after neighborhood feedback and wanting to attract uh local type businesses. The project also stipulates a minimum of 220 apartment units and a minimum of 200 townhouse units. 15 of those townhouse units shall be surface parked with no garage.

A minimum of 20% of town home units shall be 1,700 square feet or less. And additionally, since planning commission, we have an we want to add an additional commitment tonight stating that a minimum of 15% of those town homes will be rear loaded accessed by an alley. Therefore, further diversifying unit types. Uh this is the proposed resoning development plan and we've highlighted the developable area there in brown and

the um protected open space area there in uh green. We've also um wanted to mention that we've increased our open space uh commitment prior to the issuance of the first building per uh permit. The developer shall convey to the city of Durham an open space area of at least 2 acres. That's an increase uh tonight.

Previously um when planning commission reviewed it, it was 60,000 square feet and with frontage of on Andrew avenue of no less than 100 linear feet. If the city does not accept the dedication, the area will be still uh be meant for public use and will be instead publicly accessible open space. So either deed to the city or a public access easement will be recorded prior to the first CEO. So either way, it's a um guaranteed public open space for folks. Uh, should the city of Durham accept the

dedication of park area, this is a new commitment tonight, a one-time donation of $50,000 shall be made to the Durham Parks Foundation prior to the first CO to contribute to the development costs associated with that park. This plan um before you tonight, as you can see, does show open space throughout the development. Um this is the the commercial uh space here dedicated up to 9,500 square feet. And then the um idea is that the public park open space will be here um along Andrew Avenue as previously stated.

So we're trying to make those we've heard feedback uh from the city as well as members of the public that they really want that park uh to be close to the um exterior so folks can easily find it. Um again, this is meant to be for the surrounding area as well as residents. So it don't make it don't make it too hard to be found. Uh only one stream crossing is proposed

which is on the um right ofway of Cortez Drive. So not much of a choice there, but it's extremely rare for a project of this size to not have any additional string crossings eternal to the site. So I wanted to point that out. Uh also this dash line here is the building height line.

everything um in this area to the west of it um will be limited to 45 feet in height that is meant to uh create an appropriate transition uh to the to the neighbors in this area and then folks um that are surrounded by open space and commercial as well as US70 they have their they have the um higher height there. So, so logic would tell you that the the apartments will be in this area and the town homes duplexes will be in this area. There are many sustainable amendments with this case. Additionally, subject to determination by go Durham and Go Triangle, the developer shall construct a bus pull out with shelter along Andrew Avenue. Additionally, a construction of

a 10-ft shared use path along the east side of Andrew. Uh, all apartments will meet the Energy Star multif family new construction program requirements and all street trees, vehicular use area trees, trees within permanent buffers, all must be native plantings. So again, we we feel like we've got a pretty strong sustainable uh commitment list there. Uh, affordable housing commitment, a minimum of 8% of the apartment unit count should be affordable as defined by the UDO, which is 60% of AMI.

town homes and duplexes 3% at 80% AMI for 30 years. The project I know there's been debate on that tonight. The project is unique and that it focuses on both rentals and occupied owner occupied for affordable housing. Uh all all told um the proposed zoning is right in line with what the city is envisioning here and we are extremely pleased to receive a positive recommendation and planning commission. Um you a couple of y'all are on were on the city council when um the the case

for the portion of this uh got denied. Um and really sometimes it takes a second look at things to really get it right. " And we're here thinking that we've provided puzzle pieces closer to this. You know, there's this this has a current um approved resoning with a with a graphic development plan for up to 350 apartments, but it really misses the mark because it gives no commitments to have cross access between this area and this area. So these folks have no have no um cohesive development at all and the and you risk the developments not talking to each other, not connecting for vehicular access, pedestrian access, open spaces. Um so good on good on the owner and

developer um to to buy this land and really feel like, hey, I've got to do something right here. I've got to make this cohesive for everybody. So with that, um, Steve George is also with me here tonight to answer any questions and thank you all for your time. >> All right, start with my online speakers.

>> I have um you have a Fening Lee >> and I'm sorry. >> Steve George is not online, sir, but uh Changing Lee is she's the next one up or they're the next one up. >> All right. So, we have um and just were you continuing the presentation or you're >> probably be better if I could >> continue the presentation before I get to questions?

>> Yes. >> Oh, go ahead. I'm sorry.

>> Okay. >> My my my apologies. I thought Laura had um completed it. No problem.

Um, good evening, Mayor, Mayor Prom, and council members. U, my name is Steve George. I'm with the CSC group. We are the owners of the property in question here.

Um, and I just want to I'll probably hit a couple of the highlights that, uh, Laura covered here. Also, we just want to cover some of these items that again to put some highlights on them. Um, first off, I want to point out it showed 50. 5 acres in total.

It showed on there 52 somewhere on that on that list. Um the I want to emphasize this plan is fully consistent with the designated place type map. It is fully compliant with all UDO requirements. We meet or exceed everything on the UDO. It meets 22 of the 24 applicable comprehensive plan policies. And I think I could argue that the other

two we actually meet also, but but we meet 22 of the 24 on there. Um, as Laura mentioned, we've uh profered affordability 3% of the town homes at 80% AMI, 8% of the apartments at 60% AMI. And I wanted to point out again, we've we've designed this so the town home section will have three separate types of units. We have um surface park, which will have no garages.

We have a typical town home with two-car garage, one and two-car garages, and then we have a rear load uh alleyway design also. So, there'll be three separate types. The surface park will allow us also to hit actually all of these products will hit various spots in the affordability uh spectrum. Um and that's what we're really shooting for. the the uh surface park especially will be able to hit we hope to get in the possibly the 200,000s or high 200s or low 300,000s with those. So working class um affordability

um we have profered a a school donation of $36,000 which is higher than what actually the the generation would would uh would come out to. Um the the park I want to touch on this. We did as as Laura mentioned we've increased the size of that to two acres also with the 500 or $50,000 donation towards development of the of that park. Um and we have talked with the park district and just listening to the last case here. Um, if we if as we go forward, if we knew more about what was going to go in the park, well, if if they want the park first off, for sure, and what's going to go in the park, we may be able to do more in terms of the development costs and help out in terms of the development uh of that park once we know the scope of what's going out there. Um also the bus line and shelter we have talked to go Durham uh regarding that and are

set up to put that in if they want it. Um the green initiatives the energy star requirements on all apartments electric charging station at at the amenities for the apartments and u the one stream crossing which we kept this whole area 75 acres the one stream crossing which was a very great design by McAdams. I want to touch on Laura mentioned we've combined these two projects into one and what it's done is a lot of the concern from the neighbors especially was the traffic on Angier and Pleasant Drive. Um by doing this you'll see our when we've redone the TAS now with the combination this gives another outlet for people from Anier 270 directly to 70.

So it doesn't solve all the problems, the traffic problems, but it does make the situation better in this area because it gives another outlet for that traffic. Uh it's a it's a plus win-win for the area in terms of the overall traffic uh flow. We also have um committed to there

will be another study done at Pleasant and Angier when we start this and if NC do determines that a light is is necessary there we are committed to put the the traffic light in that location. Um I mentioned the affordability factor that we've built into this. We think that this the town homes especially will meet that working class um uh price range that is needed in this area for sure and at that point I am available for more questions also. Thank you.

All right I have three speakers online. Uh, Fening Lee, followed by John Lewis, and then Katy Ross. Fenching, can you hear me? >> Uh, yes, I can. >> Welcome. You have three minutes.

>> Okay. Um, good evening, mayor, and members of the city council. My name is Fing Lee. I am here tonight to strongly support the Creek Side mixeduse resoning.

Durham is growing and that growth is exciting, but it also brings a real challenge. Many of the very people who serve our community can no longer afford to leave here. Our teachers, firefighters, young professionals, and public workers are being priced out of the city that they dedicated their life to. Uh this project helped address this in a real meaningful way. With home price in the upper 200,000s to lower 300,000s, this development creates opportunities for working families, not luxury buyers, but the people who make Durham work every day. Uh it includes substantial amount of affordable housing unit as

Steve just mentioned uh helping Durham move forward on one of the most important priorities. The project also give back to the community as mentioned earlier in terms of donation of the park, the various commitments and improvements of the traffic uh connectivity between highway 70 and avenue. All these would improve the traffic according to the recent TIA report. Just as importantly, the development is consistent with Durham's long-term vision for thoughtful mixeduse growth.

This is not just about zoning. It is about the future of Durham in my opinion. And it is about whether the people who serve our community can continue to live in it. It is about building a city that remains inclusive, vibrant, and strong. Therefore, I respectfully urge you to approve the creek side resoning and support a project that help ensure Durham remain a place where working families can belong.

Uh, thank you for your time and consideration. >> Thank you so much. Next, I have John Lewis. Can you hear me?

Sean, can you hear me? >> Yes, I can. Can you hear me? >> Yes.

Welcome. You have two uh three minutes. >> All right. Thank you so much.

Good evening, council and mayor. Uh I represent uh neighbor of an adjacent parcel uh 25 acres uh next to the proposed parcel. Uh we've sat through uh the planning commission meeting uh several months back. Uh we sat through the uh city council meeting a couple of weeks back.

Um we've listened diligently uh to the concerns uh of the neighbors uh at the planning commission. Uh we're very thoughtful um and very conscientious in uh their comments. Um

we feel like there are many many challenges that come with growth uh in respect to um you know the city of uh Durham and the challenges that that that exist. Uh we feel the development team and the ownership team um have worked diligently to meet uh the needs um for the city of Durham. Um, with that, we strongly support uh the Creek Side development and uh encourage you to uh vote yes. Thank you.

>> Thank you. And my last virtual speaker is Katie Ross. Miss Ross, can you hear me? Attorney Ross.

>> Hello. Can you hear me? >> Yes. Welcome.

You have three minutes. >> All right. This is Katie Ross and Behema. And I'm just going to uh give you some numbers that most of you are already familiar with. Well, not just for this project, but even more so, I'll be talking more as we get into the UDO revision. Um, but I

wanted to remind this council that the comprehensive plan for Durham uh was based on a projection of a needed for new housing units from 2020 to 20 55 of up to 66,000 new housing units. Um this and and I would also remind you that the planning department has endorsed that number and just by running through random hearings as late as this last September, uh Scott Whiteitman of the planning department was using those numbers uh in talking about the new UDO uh with the JCCPC and and other uh bodies as well as they explain that. Now, that being the case, it's important. We need 66,000 over 35 years or 60 uh,000 new units over 30 years. You alone through through the end of uh 2025

have approved through public hearings uh 20 over 28,000 units. Um that is way ahead of what would be necessary to to make those numbers. But when you include the administratively approved housing, uh we have uh by the planning department, we've uh we're up to 85,000 new units that have been constructed or under construction or already approved, way beyond the projected need for uh 30 years. Uh second, the uh Lean Associates that does research for real estate investors in our area has uh steadily held for the last two years that we have a rental vacancy rate of 12% give or take uh 1%. So it's like between 11% and 13%. uh that is far more than is considered uh healthy even even by the housing gap

analysis. Uh and then the last thing I just want to throw you away because I'll be talking about this a lot more uh to you guys uh all the bodies and uh on my blog and that's uh I'm writing you an open letter called don't be a ga a sap don't be a sap for the housing gap and I just wanted to put in your uh consideration that national research that uh performed the housing gap analysis that is mentioned so often these days at your hearings by by the applicants. Um, it's actually a lobbying tool. It it was it's intended to help influence policy where uh >> Thank you.

>> So, that that's a bias and I just want I I'll tell you more as time goes by. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Ross.

All right. I have in person that's number 29. All right. >> Uh, Andy. Yeah, Andy Low.

That's just out of order. And Paul Joffrey. >> Sorry. Welcome.

You have three minutes. >> Thank you. Uh, good evening, city council, Mayor Prom, and uh, Mayor Williams. Uh, my name is Andy Low.

here to speak also in favor which is rare to say in favor of Creekide mixed use. Um as uh folks have already said this follows compreh comprehensive plan place type map. Uh it actually aligns with uh I think commenter just mentioned the LDC or the new UDO. Uh the new UDO this area is RX3 which is a residential mixeduse district.

So this actually already follows our draft uh new zoning code. I'm looking forward to being engaged with that process as well. Um overall this is already in the city. This is technically an infill project. This is along a major transit corridor and has a variety of housing types. As someone who aspires to buy a house, I would also like a variety of housing types to shop

for. So, do appreciate uh that. Um, so yeah, all in all, I think there was already some comments that I would associate myself with in support of this project. Um, and think we need to do a lot more of this within our city limits.

I think that comment was made as far as the village talent center, which I previously supported as well as a public commentator, but do understand it is an annexation. this project is not and there are lots of other ones like it and parcels like it that as we go through the LDC process we should be zoning appropriately to be the info that we want to see. So, uh yeah, happy to support this and uh also with the mayor and looking for a variety of housing types to shop for. So, thank you.

>> Thank you, >> Mr. Paul. Welcome. You have three minutes. >> I need just a moment to get my slides up. Thank you.

>> There we go. >> Can the slides be projected? >> Uh, they should pop up. There we go.

>> There we go. Thank you. Um, Mr. Mayor, members of the council, good evening.

David Bramberg has a song. Um, is this what it feels like at the top of the slide? A little less living and a whole lot less pride. I realize I'm running against the grain here.

I'm asking you to vote no on this project. I appreciate uh Miss Ross' comments about capacity. I'd like for you to take a look at this and hold this in your mind. Uh, this is the greater Durham almost any day u at rush hour traffic times.

Notice the green 85 15501 interstate 40. Notice the red per uh daily. That's highway 70 south Miami. It is um the I 85 corridor. And if I were to zoom out on Andier Drive, you would see that backed up Glover Road towards uh Cortez a quarter of a mile

and then from South Miami towards uh Bungalow. Uh this is a closer view. Again, as you consider your vote, I'd just like for you to keep this in mind. What does traffic mean?

This is in front of our home. U this is January 13th of this year. I didn't slide in something from four years ago. Uh this is January 13th.

Uh in front of our home, traffic backed up because of accidents on these auxiliary roadways. This is um an accident map 2020 to 2024 accidents involving fatalities or serious injuries. U 18 on the segment of Highway 70 South Miami to Miami Sharon 8 on Angier Avenue. Circled blue is the intersection of Pleasant Drive and uh Highway 70.

Excuse me. There we go. Uh the circled

yellow again on this accident map is the proposed development area. This does not include the dozens of fender benders, accidents where there were u nominal to moderate injury. It does not include data from 2025 including May of last year when I was run into by an uninsured motorist uh while traveling south on Andrew. They were traveling north.

They tried to cut onto Glover uh at the traffic signal that had been placed there. And it was only through breaking sharply and steering sharply that I avoided uh t-boning them. Nonetheless, it was uh no serious injury, but it was traumatic for the 15-year-old daughter of the other driver. Uh and it totaled my very old vehicle.

I'm not sure what happened to them. Uh the profers uh two acres of a park. I appreciate that. Less than a mile away is the 20 acre um Hallmark Bethesda City Park with 12 different amenities. The affordable housing, Miss Ross spoke to the um uh

capacity gap and I would just encourage you to take those comments in mind as you consider your vote. So much more to say. Three minutes past. >> Thank you.

>> All right, those are all the speakers I have um to our applicant. Do you have anything you want to respond to? >> Uh I would just say to the the traffic uh issue again this was the main uh topic that came up with the with the residents when we had our neighborhood meetings. And again when when we've combined these two projects to get that pass through that cross-section to go the connection from Anier 270 the TIA report if you look through our TIA report with all the improvements we're going to do along with that uh it does improve it it doesn't solve all the problems it will not solve everything that's out there but it does improve

the overall traffic flow because of that connection. connection and along with the turn the turn lanes we're going to have at all of our our driveways out on 70 up on Pleasant and the light on on Pleasant will improve the entire area. So just want to throw that out there again. >> Thank you.

So therefore at this time those are all the speakers I have. I'll declare the public hearing closed and back before the council. Council member Rrist. >> Thank you Mr.

Mayor. Um yeah Mr. George, if you Yeah, I actually got a couple questions for you. First of all, I just want to say I really appreciate you coming back with a as as I think um the attorney referenced you come back after the the I think it was maybe more than a year ago.

So, I appreciate you coming back with them with an improved project addressing some of these connectivity things as you just talked about. Um obviously this meets the place type map, the mixeduse neighborhood place type map. Um the the five to six% affordable I think is roughly is my guess. I mean I you haven't said exactly

but I think it's 3% of the for sale 8% of the rental if I got that right and say but and you haven't committed an actual number but I'm I'm guessing it's roughly five or 6% affordable in the end >> if if you average it out pro probably will be yes >> yes so I appreciate that I also appreciate as you said that the price point of the forale units is something we haven't seen in a while so low if it's low 200s that's like that's a really that's an attractive offer because we don't we're not seeing that you our median housing price is now in the 400s, right? So, >> yeah. And and let me if I could just jump in because that's that's what we're shooting in talking to the builders with the the surface park. We hope to get to that high high 200 town home because you're right, that number has changed over the last 5 years tremendously.

Um so it's something we can't commit to, but that's what we're shooting for definitely. >> Yeah. Also, I mean, you're on transit, so this is very much as uh Mr. as the Mr. Low, the um citizen commented, this is on transit, which you know, this is a great infill project. Um I appreciate you saying that that highway 70 as you said like the analysis shows that it's

kind of at capacity. You've said you don't address all problems. I think it is worth noting that and and council member Kavier and I may prety highway 70. There's a study going on right now.

Our goal at the TPO is to boulevard highway 70 right to address some of these. So it's so I know residents sometimes say we've got concerns about infrastructure. What are you doing? In this case, there very much is an active plan to address the traffic on 70.

We don't want a freeway there. We have an aggressive plan to do a boulevard there, which I think it's not gonna happen tomorrow, but I think longterm will address some of those traffic issues on 70. Um, I appreciate the the park profer. It's strong with the two acres and the donation as well to DPR Foundation.

And I appreciate this the profer to the schools. A very strong offer there. I just had a couple questions. Um, one is so I know from the from the U planning commission report they mentioned that you didn't uh reference a minimum number of duplexes or a minimum number of square footage for the commercial. So I wonder if you would be willing to commit to some minimum to make sure so we have some assurance there is a mixture of of

apartments, town homes and duplexes. So would you be willing to commit to a minimum number of duplexes so that we have some assurance that that housing form will be part of the development? Um, we feel very strongly that with the the three types of town homes that we're showing that we've really shown a good good mix of product. The the duplexes is something we would prefer not to not to build out there.

Um, again, >> you prefer you prefer not >> not Yes. >> But but but the plan does call for duplexes, right? the we're showing we're showing town homes town homes on on everything. >> I'm sorry.

So the so the so town homes town homes apartments and two family didn't that the isn't that the the three types? Am I miss am I missing something? May maybe I'm

confused in terms of the >> do we have the duplexes on >> your your question was are are they an allowed use? You're correct. They are >> right. And I guess again from the planning commission I think there was the question would the applicant be willing to profer a minimum number so that we so that we can be assured that housing because I think we do want a mix of housing types across the city so that we would have some assurance there would be some of those duplexes in the in the mix.

>> Yes we could um give me one second. Okay. >> Question >> if we could put in the if we could commit to 10% of them to be duplexes. >> Minimum 10%.

>> Minimum 10%. Yes. >> Appreciate that. >> Yes. >> And then also on the the um the non-resident the square footage for non-residential,

would you be willing to commit to some minimum just to ensure again that that it is a mix of uses with with non-residential and residential? Please, I'm sorry. Ask the question again. >> Yeah.

So, again, this goes back to the planning commission, the request to have um some minimum number of square feet of non-residential use just because it because the plan calls for non-residential uses, but there's no commitment to a minimum amount of square footage. >> Well, we do have we do have 9,500 square foot of commercial on this site. >> That that's that that's committed, you mean? >> Yes.

Yes. Yeah. A minimum of 9,500 square foot of commercial. Okay.

>> Yeah. Is that Yeah, >> I don't think >> I think it's it's stated as a maximum, but he just stated that he's willing to revise that to >> you're willing to revise to the minimum of >> Sure. >> Okay. I appreciate that. Then the last question, I appreciate your your um um

willingness to to consider that. The last thing is I know and we um I'm a member of the bicycle pedestrian advisor committee and they always submit comments as you as you know for proposals. So um they've asked about the the having raised crosswalks within the development. It's a way to calm traffic and also provide greater safety to pedestrians.

I know in the in your response you said we'll evaluate that at the site plan, but I wonder if you would consider doing raised crosswalks for all those for all the internal roads within the development. So all internal roads. >> Yeah. Where where the where the where the crosswalks cross the internal roads.

Yeah. >> Internal roads. >> Yeah. >> Guess my question would be does is there any transportation concerns with the raised crosswalks with emergency access and things like that?

>> Thomas planning and development. I think that's something we want to consider and evaluate at site plan based on the layout um of the road network. And

>> so you're saying staff is not comfortable sort of requiring that and can you say more about that? >> It's that type of feature does add an amount of delay for emergency response um particularly if if the roadway is designated as a um primary route. Um, so it's it really depends. We that's just something we'd like to evaluate at the >> time.

That's I'll accept the stack recommendation. Appreciate, Mr. George. Thank you.

I think this is a great project. I'm I'm happy to support. Thank you. >> Thank you, >> Council Member Cook.

>> Um, thank you and thanks to Council Member Wrist because I felt like he was reading off my sheet with some of those questions. So, um, a lot of my things have been addressed. I am wondering about the um the townhouse uh commitment for uh affordability. My understanding is that that is those are

for sale units and that part is capped at 3% of affordable. Is that true? >> On the town home on the for sale unit 3%. Yes.

>> Um are you are we willing to add the duplexes that you've just committed into that affordability? >> That would be the for sale. Yeah. Okay.

All four sale units. Okay. Just wanted to make sure because it I think it specifically states town houses. Um >> and are y'all willing to add any to that >> 3%.

And I and I'm curious to know if you would add any I would love it to be at affordable, but I would also be open to it being at a higher AMI like at 100% or 120% AMI even uh just to have some income restriction on it. >> What if we did this? So what if we did the 3% at 80 the 3% at 80 and another 2% at 100 to make a total of 5%. >> That would that sounds great to me.

Thank you. Yes, that would be amazing. All right. Um and we got the minimum retail which was

interesting. Um you had mentioned earlier when you were speaking that y'all might be interested in adding even more commitment to a park uh depending on development. Are are you is there a way that we could word like a a match type situation up to a certain amount that y'all would be willing to additionally profer? I'm just wondering how we could capture a potential additional investment that y'all would be willing to make if the park was built.

>> I mean, we've had a number of discussions about this park and that's what the the unknown thing is if we knew what was going in the park and what was going to go there, we could be a little more open about this. I guess it's just um you know if you're going to put in 20 uh pickle ball courts that's going to be a different cost than you know that's something else. So that's that's the only real holdback but yes we're doing some sort of matching yes up to up to a point I guess. >> Staff would you help Yeah, of course it' be a maximum. Could you could you help us like think through an option there?

>> Yeah. Uh Austin Bowman Durham Parks and Wreck. So, um, the applicant has been very communicative with us and expressed their openness to work with us to build something. I think part of the thing that we're struggling with a little bit is there are a lot of other parks in this area, right?

And so, we want to have something here that's well-intentioned that's filling gaps in amenities or responding to a specific circumstance. So, because we don't really know what that park needs to look like right now, it's hard to then, you know, telegraph that to the applicant and have them commit to it. Um, >> yeah. Is there something we could do like if there is additional need, then we ask for a match up to a certain amount?

>> I am not sure of, you know, like the legal mechanism of that. Um, I I I think that the route they're taking now is to donate to the parks foundation. I think they could obviously increase that if they would like to, but because we don't know what it is, it's hard to tell them again what that match is going to be,

what the magnitude might be. I don't know if that's fully answering the question. >> I Yes. I mean, I I understand what you're saying.

So, the 50,000 is not a contribution necessarily to this park specifically. It is a contribution to the to a park fund, which we would then utilize if we were to build a park. if that if Durham if the city decides to build a park on that land. >> That's a great question.

So, if the applicant were to donate to the parks foundation, that could actually be reserved for construction of that specific park. It could be restricted to building that. If they were donating it to the city in general, my understanding is that would just be at our discretion. there's no way to really earmark it um just for that portion which is why they've I think done the parks foundation route because then it can be specifically set aside for them >> earmarked for that and so um I >> and maybe there's someone could someone else maybe answer that question about whether or not there could be a

potential increase in match if if there was >> Yes, it's my turn to phone a friend tonight. >> Thank you. Good evening. So, as long as the profer is voluntary on their part, we could um and the attorney's office doesn't have any reservations, we could work on this is a little bit groundbreaking, like I don't think we've done a profer like this, but as long as it was voluntary on their part and there was some agreed upon way that parks and recck would determine at the proper time what the actual need was >> that they were satisfied with.

Um, I think it could be done. >> Yeah, I'm thinking about something like if if the city decides to build a park and if the cost of the park exceeds the amount that's already been profered, then the applicant could match up to an additional 50,000 or whatever it is, something like that. Is that something that y'all would be interested in working out language on?

>> Do you have a do you have I mean, >> do you have a number? >> We need to summarize that, but but something like that. Yes, possibly. Did you have did you have a number max in mind that you would be interested in in doing a match if if needed or if requested?

>> I mean, we would could could we just throw out there maybe there's an easier way to do this. Um and and I don't want to go back to the last case, but the last case they donated 250,000, okay? And they had 2500 units or whatever like that, much bigger than ours. What if what if we just upped it and said we will donate 100,000?

Okay, that makes things easier. Okay. >> And again to the point that's for this park, not for the general fund, >> right? >> To the foundation earmarked for this park.

>> Okay. Thank you. Everyone calls that. Okay. And then my last question is um do you all have interest in green building standards for the other buildings outside of the energy star for the apartment?

>> I'm sorry asking. Have y'all considered in uh any green building standards for any of the other buildings on the site outside of the apartment? >> We didn't we didn't codify those, but we've talked to it really depends on the build. There's a number of builders we're talking to in our group that that may come in sort of usual ones you've heard of.

Um and they have different they do different things. We definitely are encouraging that. Most of the builders want to do that type thing. So, it's a little high hard to codify on the for sale side.

>> Okay. >> But yes, we're definitely interested in doing that. >> Yeah. Okay.

But nothing further to commit tonight. >> I don't know how we would do that. >> Y Okay. Thank you.

And I just want to echo um the statements that I do appreciate y'all coming back with what appears to me to be a really wellthoughtout uh project that really like meets the needs of this area. So, uh thank you and thank you for the hard work on the traffic stuff. I know that that's of course we we don't we we would love for folks to come and with the developments solve all of the infrastructure issues and I know that that is not always how that works. Um

but I do appreciate the intentionality behind that. So thank you very much for that. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr.

Mayor. I think my colleagues have touched on most of the questions that I had. So I appreciate that. Um, I recognize the the traffic impacts and it was definitely um struck me the the map that was shared by by the resident um about incidents that have happened.

I'm I'm I'm glad to see that that there will be an improvement though we can't fully mitigate and make those promises, but hopefully that should help channel folks away um from 70 mitigate some of that. And also glad to hear about the the work of the the TPO around uh working toward the boulevard. So, I'm excited about that. Um, so also just want to uh, you know, recognize uh, you know, some of the the commitments that that you've made above and beyond, but once again, I think my colleagues have really touched on those, so I I don't need to to repeat those. Um, you did mention that you felt like

you could make an argument that you meet the remaining two policies, uh, policy 81, policy 85. Um, and those were uh those were uh issues brought up by some of our planning commissioners uh for reasons why they had concerns about the project even as they acknowledge some of the benefits uh that this project is offering. Um are you able to just go ahead and make the commitments to meet those policies so that you uh actually hit 100% of the comp plan policies? Uh that would be you know the committing to having remaining open space uh located uh in the environmentally sensitive areas of the site and going above the minimum of of tree coverage.

>> Yeah, we definitely can commit to the remaining open space to be within the repairarian buffers that that are currently there. Absolutely. Yes. >> Yeah, we can do that.

>> All right. Second one, >> it's it's just going above the UDO minimum for tree coverage, tree safe. Um

What would you consider substant What would you consider above the the the minimum that would that would make a difference? >> And I want to say I want to acknowledge that in any site like this, you're you're balancing different needs, right? you're trying to make sure you have sufficient housing uh on the site while also having the protection of the riparian buffers while also protecting the trees. Um and so, you know, I'm not looking for a massive increase in this.

I just would like to see it go above the minimum. Uh and so even just a couple percentage points above uh I think shows an effort as you've shown in other areas um to to try and keep this balance of kind of the ecological protection and space for for people to live. So >> we will commit to add another acre of

tree coverage to the site. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Thank you.

Uh thank you. And once again, I think all of these these projects are a matter of of balance, but I do really like this as an infill project. Um, I appreciate the parks commitments that you've come forward with, especially with the enhanced profiters this evening. And you know, it's just important to to reflect upon just one more time in addition to the affordability like the incomerestricted affordable housing commitments, also the effort to provide diverse housing types, you know, in some cases of varying sizes to try and help hit a price point that that helps more working people to be able to live and work and remain in our city.

And I think that's so critical. Um, and so that was also very uh attractive part of this proposal and I look forward to supporting it. Thank you. >> All right.

Uh, two questions here. Um, one is to staff. Um, when I open up the

zoning map change report, so so this case was before this case was um, two years ago, it was the Cortez uh, resoning case, right? Um and uh I proudly voted against that case. Um and it and it failed 33. There was a missing council member.

When I look at the staff report, um there's a link next to legacy cases. Uh when I click on the link, it takes me to a development plan. Um that is the eastern portion that that was added here. And in that we see text commitments.

there's a text commitment for 10% uh of of apartment units will be affordable. So my question is would this change on that on the eastern site? Is is there currently a commitment for 10% affordable units

>> with this resoning? That D plan that's on that's on the books would go away. >> And so theoretically that 10% would reduce to whatever this new development plan. >> So this would actually reduce the required affordable units on that eastern site from 10% to what is it?

Eight or 9%. >> Believe it's eight. Yeah. >> Yeah.

We have eight 8% now on the apartment side. >> It's eight 8% you said. >> Yes. Yes.

>> But currently it's 10%. As it's approved according to the legacy case and I apologize for this late question, but I I this is a section of the staff report that I haven't seen before and I clicked on the link and I'm looking at the development plan. Just want to make sure I'm understanding and that we're not losing potential affordable units.

Sorry to put you on the spot there. Uh the second question I have while you guys take a look at that is um we talked a little bit about um just the pedestrianoriented nature of uh the the non-residential buildings. Um and I I don't know I might have missed it. Did you commit to that or are you interested in committing to that?

>> Committing to again what's >> pedestrian oriented design for the non-residential units? >> Yes. Yes. >> Non-residential uh buildings.

>> Right. >> So with that commitment, you're stating that the buildings front on a public right ofway and that with bedroom 12oot sidewalks. Is that what you're referencing? >> Okay.

>> Yeah, we're we're comfortable with that. I know um there was there was talk about um committing to design standards in the UDO that would that would already default. So we couldn't list that as a commitment because it has to be you know above and beyond. So you you know it would it would um the

buildings would already um when those were under review um be held to the building design standards under the >> okay >> any current UDO. But can we can we commit to all this? >> Yes, >> we're willing to do that. >> So, we would commit to uh profer that the commercial uses shall be designed for pedestrians and accessible to neighborhood residents by fronting the buildings onto public rightways with a minimum 12 foot wide sidewalks and street trees and using sidewalks and greenways to connect to the residential buildings.

>> Is that all right? Is that too loosey goosey? Do >> you mind repeating that? We were >> I can give you a copy of this.

Yeah. I um >> Do you want me to read it off? >> Yeah. >> Commercial uses shall be designed for pedestrians and accessible to neighborhood residents by fronting buildings onto public rightway with minimum 12 foot wide sidewalks and street trees and using sidewalks and

greenways to connect to residential buildings. >> That's fine. Okay. All right.

Um, any update? >> Yes. Thanks for giving us a couple minutes to to compare and contrast. So, the old development plan was capped at 350 units.

So, you have to do the percentage on that versus this percentage which is on I think the total is 630 uh units. So you would by my quick math likely get more under this new scenario in actual units. >> Okay. All right. That's all.

I won't be before you long. I want to thank you all for your patience. I know this part's kind of felt like the deposition a little bit with all the different requests. I want to thank you for being able to >> We love this.

>> I bet you do. I don't. But no. Um so I thank you for your commitment to affordable housing.

I do wish that we could have more like maybe if that park was an additional unit affordable house. I'm not going to press our luck tonight because I know you've been very generous thus far. I will um say that I am not really thrilled about the traffic situation in this area and I know that there are plans in TPO but I think thinking about our neighbors now who are going to experience some of that congestion. So it's not for you know um I know that you say it's going to prove it but it I just want it doesn't matter at this point. So, I just want to thank you all for um your generosity and I look forward to the day we actually have a plan for affordable housing um holistically across Durham that we're just not doing three units over here and three units over there because yeah um just cuz you build it does not mean that everyone who is here can accept is necessary for everyone who's here. So, I just want to put that out for folks on

the record who have this theory that if you build housing that it will um provide more folks for homes. We see that population decline is real here in Durham. So, we are pushing some folks out or welcome other folks in. And I want Durham to be a place for all people, particularly those who live and work in the city who look like me to be able to stay here.

And we had a lot of lines come um homes come online and we are seeing our population decline. So, just want to put that out publicly. Thank you. >> Thank you.

>> I I want to follow up on the um the affordability question. I'm I'm looking at this and I see that there's 220 at a minimum apartment units and those are the ones that are affordability at 8%. I don't know what the math was that we just did, but I'm not sure that it follows. >> Well, that's the the I guess the the minimum number of apartments is that so it could increase beyond that, >> right? But >> so I think pre >> council member Cook if if if you do it

by that math I think you do 630 minus 200 because we have a minimum commitment of 200 townhouse units and so the math would be based on 8% of is that 4 430 >> math is not my strong suit I just want to be really clear uh I'm a lawyer That's uh sort of like the running joke. Um I just I heard us talk about a 600 number and I don't think that there's a 600 number here that I'm seeing >> because the 8% is only for the apartment units. >> So I just >> if I the maximum what we're seeking the maximum is 630 units. Yes.

>> Yes. Total >> total. But that's not that's not the calculation for this this percentage of affordability that we were just doing. >> Correct.

>> Yeah. Sorry, let me clarify. I'm glad you brought that up. >> Okay.

>> So, it is a minimum 8% of the apartment count and a minimum of 3% of the townhouse or duplex count. So, those two combined. And again, I haven't actually done math math. Um, it's a guesstimate that it would likely be the same or more because there is a greater number of total units uh included in this >> and and if I could just clarify we all we already have agreed to actually 5% of the for sale now too so I just want to point that out >> that's right income restricted not affordable >> that was income restricted not affordable right the additional 2% was at 100% AMI so it's yeah just making sure >> okay all right I'm going to sit down with some math but This will be great.

>> Mr. Mayor, just one last comment. I know one of the residents um was talking about that we're way beyond projected need of housing already in Durham. And I just want to say I mean I I appreciate this because I think what we're dealing

with here in Durham is a growing city and I think from the information we got last Friday at our budget retreat, we're growing by 5,000 people net a year. So we need more housing. Um, we also know um that from the from the housing task force report that Mayor Pertto Cavier led, we have a gap of 12,000 units of affordable housing we need in Durham. So, this is part of filling that gap.

Um, I think the other thing to note is that people sometimes talk about vacancy rates here, there, whatever. There's talk about that. Um, we also learned in our conversations about the Durham minimum livable wage, which is based on fair market rents, that the most recent year of data for the fair market rents shows fair market rents actually going down uh on to total between that that most recent year and the previous year or so. Rents are going down because we're building more housing and so this is a big part of that.

I just want to address that because we do need affordable housing desperately in the city. So, thank you. Just as a followup, as an actual renter, just because rents are going down, we are also being faced with exorbitant fees as well, like your trash fees. So,

while you might have a $1,200 base rent, you might end up with a 1,500. So, I would ask were empathetic of the journeys of other people. I know there are data points, but there's also anecdotal information and lived experiences, though. So, I would encourage folks and you were on the board for one of the largest affordable affordable housing, which is Durham Housing Authority.

So may be worth, you know, engaging folks to learn more about their actual experiences, what the rental industry is since you are privileged to have home ownership on your side. Thank you, >> Bruce. I don't think you need to educate me here in the council. I I can make my comments and that's my comments.

You don't need to you don't need to educate me about that. >> Vote. >> Yep. >> Thank you.

>> Thank you, colleagues. Um, thanks for all of the comments and questions. Uh just I I just want to put into context quickly. The average home cost in the city of Durham is about $425,000.

Um so I think that you know these are going to probably fill up quickly. Uh it's a it's a a very attractive attractive site. I mean, like I said,

any any development, it's going to cause a little change and it's going to feel uncomfortable initially, but I think this is a a great project, and I do appreciate you guys going back, making it better, and then coming coming here uh with a a really good case uh in a in a part of the city that's that's growing, developing, and hopefully we get some jobs that are, you know, um coming up in that area hopefully soon. and and you know that'll be even better where it'll make you know um being able to live, work and play a reality. And I understand that you know the center city or the city center is not the only place where we're going to have you know density. Um you know the there are going to be other parts of the city that are going to grow out like 15501 university area and the Rockwood area.

You know there are commercial pockets that have residential around them and folks live there. not everybody's want going to want to come downtown. So, I I look forward to continuing to um develop in

in those communities like like what we're doing in East Storm. East Storm has been underinvested for a long time. So, um I'm going to call for this this vote. >> Yeah, I'm fine.

>> Mr. here. May I clarify just a bevy of profers that were made? >> Yeah, let's clarify those.

>> Okay. Um, first, there's a minimum of 15% of townhouse units shall be rear loaded and excess via an alleyway. There is an update to text amendment 12 to at least uh at least 2 acres of land to dedicate to parks and wreck. Sub clause.

A onetime donation of $100,000 shall be made to the Durham Parks Foundation. A minimum of 10% of duplex units. A minimum of 9,500 ft of commercial. Uh townhouse duplexes are added a 2%

AMI. Um the only thing that's needed is a tenure. To clarify, >> we've done everything at 30 year. I would probably keep it to that.

>> Okay. Thank you. And there was a profer to provide the remaining open space to be located in environmentally sensitive areas. And then there's one additional acre of tree coverage to be provided.

And then there is a pedestrian uh connectivity um clause or commitment. >> Right. >> Yeah. >> Yep.

>> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you.

And so therefore, colleagues, I will entertain a motion to authorize the city manager to enter into enter into a utility extension agreement with Angier Investment LLC. >> So move second. >> It's been moved and properly seconded. Madam clerk, please open up a vote.

>> Please close the vote. >> And the motion passes unanimously. Boom. >> All right. Um,

346 Falls Jordan wershed overlay district B. So moved >> second >> second. It's been moved and properly seconded. Madam clerk, please open the vote.

Please close the vote. >> And the motion passes unanimously. >> Thank you. And lastly, I'll entertain a motion to adopt the consistency statement as required by North Carolina General Statute SE section 60 section 160D-605.

>> So moved. >> Second. >> So move the properly second it. I'm sorry.

>> Open the vote. Yeah. Sorry twisted up here. Please close the vote.

>> And the motion passes unanimously. >> All right. Let the record reflect. Council member Baker voted in 100% of development cases tonight

and I was with him. All right. Uh thank you all so much. Uh that is our that is our agenda tonight. Everyone, please get some rest and I look forward to seeing you all throughout the week.