Planning Commission · Regular Meeting · March 11, 2025

MAY WE HAVE THE ROLL CALL PLEASE? ATTENDANCE. >> THANK YOU. [ROLL CALL]. CAPERS, WELCOME, BY THE WAY. >> THANK YOU. [ROLL CALL CONTINUES]. WHOEVER PUT THAT TOGETHER. [ROLL CALL CONTINUES]. >> THANK YOU. WE HAVE A QUORUM. >> THANK YOU. ADJUSTMENTS TO THE AGENDA AFTER.

THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES, WE'RE GOING TO MOVE NEW BUSINESS P UP TO TAKE CARE OF THAT VERY QUICKLY. NEXT WE'LL HAVE ITEM 4 ON THE AGENDA WHICH IS THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES AND CONSISTENCY STATEMENT FROM THE FEBRUARY 11TH, 2025, MEETING. DO WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL? >> SO MOVED. >> SECOND? >> SECOND. >> IT'S BEEN MOVED BY COMMISSIONER CUTRIGHT; SECOND BID COMMISSIONER KOPEK TO AMOVE MINUTES AND CONSISTENCY STATEMENTS. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED SAY NAY. THE AYES HAVE IT.

BEFORE MOVING ON, I WOULD LIKE FOR OUR NEW COMMISSIONER TO INTRODUCE HIMSELF VERY QUICKLY. WELCOME COMMISSIONER CAPER. >> GOOD EVENING, HNLY CAPERS, THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME. I LOVE THE CITY OF DURHAM AND GRATEFUL TO BE ABLE TO SERVE IN THIS CAPACITY PIP LOOK FORWARD THIS CITY GROW AND FLOURISH.P THANK Y'ALL. >> THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. MOVING ON, WE'RE MOVING UP NEW BUSINESS ON THE AGENDA. WORK PROGRAM. >> GRACE SMITH WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. GOOD TO SEE YOU ALL. AS YOU MY HAVE SEEN FROM THE MEMO AND THE WORK PROGRAM INCLUDE WITH THIS ITEM, WORK PROGRAM FOCUSES ON THREE AREAS, MAINLY.

ON GOING PROMPTS AND PROSETSDZS THAT REFLECT LEGAL RQUIREMENTS SUCH AS SITE PLANS, ZONING MAP CHANGES, USE PERMITS AND CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS AND ZONING ENFORCEMENT ACTIONINGS ARE EXAMPLES. ONGOING PROCESSES THAT RELATE TO CITY AND COUNTY E POLICY TO PROVIDE PUBLIC INFORMATION AND DEPARTMENT MANAGEMENT. ANOTHER AREA IS PROJECTS AND PROCESSES THAT ARE SOMEWHAT DISCRETIONARY LIKE LONG RAGE PLANNING ACTIVITIES TO IMPLEMENT.

ACTION ITEMS FROM COMP PLAN AND OTHER LARGE PROJECTS, FOR EXAMPLE THE UDO REWRITE THAT'S UNDERWAY NOW. THE MAJORITY OF THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT'S WORK IS DICTATED BY STATE AND LOCAL LAW. THOSE BUCKETS OF THINGS THAT WE HAVE TO DO THAT WE'RE REQUIRED TO DO BY LAW. THE MAIN YEAR OF VARIABILITY IN THE WORK PROGRAM COMPLETED BY STRATEGIC SUPPORT WORK GROUPS. FOR THIS COMING FISCAL YEAR THE PLAIN POLICY PLANNING EMPHASIS AND OUR RESOURCE ALLOCATION WILL FOCUS ON REWRITE OF UDO. WE'LL WORK ON A VARIETY OF OTHER PROJECTS AS OUTGROWTH OF COMP PLAN INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO SOME SMALL AREA PLANS, ENVIRONMENTAL PLANS, OPEN SPACE PLANS, CORRIDOR PLANS AND OTHER STUDIES THAT YOU CAN SEE ON PAGES 4-7 AND 23-24 OF THE DOCUMENT.

SO THIS IS -- I'LL ADD FOR THE ONES OF YOU THAT HAVEN'T SEEN THIS BEFORE THIS ITEM COMES TO YOU ONCE A YEAR ABOUT THIS TIME OF YEAR AND WE, THE NEXT STEP WOULD BE TO TAKE THIS WORK PROGRAM TO THE JOINT CITY-COUNTY PLANNING COMMITTEE AND THEN PRESENTED TO BOTH CITY COUNCIL AND BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS FOR FINAL ACTION. OUR JCCPC HAS WE DID HAVE A BRIEF DISCUSSION WITH WITH THEM ABOUT THE DIRECTION WE WERE HEADED, BUT WON'T OFFICIALLY I GO BACK TO THEM FOR RECOMMENDATION UNTIL IT'S HAD A RECOMMENDATION FROM YOU, SO WE ASK PLANNING COMMISSION MAKE A RECOMMENDATION THON ITEM THS EVENING AND TYPICALLY IT'S JUST DONE THROUGH A MOTION OF FOR FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION TO MOVE IT FORWARD.

SO WE'RE HERE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT ANY ITEMS YOU SAW IN THE WORK PROGRAM. IT MAY LOOK LITTLE DIFFERENT. WE DID, CHANGE IT OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS. IT LOOKS DIFFERENT FOR THE ONES WHO HAVE BEEN ON THE COMMISSION FOR A WHILE SO THE FORMATTING ANYWAYS IS WHAT I'M SPEAKING TO. SO. >> THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS? NO QUESTIONS? NONE. THANK YOU, GRACE. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. WE JUST NEED TO GET THE RECOMMENDATION TO MOVE IT FORWARD AND VOTE ON THAT.

>> NEED A RECOMMENDATION TO MOVE FORWARD ON THE WORK PROGRAM. >> YEAH. >> MAY I HAVE A RECOMMENDATION TO MOVE FORARD ON THE WORK PROGRAM. >> SORRY. >> I THINK HUH YOU CAN DO A CONSENSUS LIKE YOU DO FOR MINUTES. >> JUST FOR CLARITY. >> MOVE IT FORWARD AS PRESENTED. >> CHAIR, AS RELATES TO FISCAL YEAR 26 WORK PROGRAM I MAKE A RECOMMENDATION THAT WE MOVE THIS FORWARD TO THE JOINT CITY -- >> GOFRNING BODIES -- >> -- ALL THE GOVERNING BODIES. >> YEAH.

>> IS THERE A SECOND? >> SECOND. >> IT'S BEEN MOVED BY COMMISSIONER CUTRIGHT AND SECONDED BY CHAIR CHAGARIS TO MOVE FISCAL YEAR 26 PLANNING WORK PROGRAM FORWARD TO GOVERNING BODIES. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? ARE YOU READY FOR THE QUESTION? ALL IN FAVOR PLEASE AAYE? ANY OPPOSED? AYES HAVE IT. THANK YOU. ARE WE READILY TO MOVE THE CASES FORWARD IN ORDER OR TAKE THE ONE THAT HAS CONTINUANCE FIRST, GET IT OUT OF THE WAY? YEAH, OKAY. WE'RE GOING TO AGAIN ADJUST THE AGENDA AND GO TO PUBLIC HEARINGS ZONING MAP CHANGE Z2400022, DURHAM RESCUE MISSION EAST MAIN STREET.

MAY WE HVE THAT COME UP, PLEASE? >> THANK YOU, CHAIR. STAFF WOULD LIKE TO STATE THAT THE REQUIRED SECOND NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING HELD ON MARCH 9, 2025 DID NOT MEET NEGHBORHOOD GUIDELINES. APPLICANT INFORMED STAFF THERE WERE TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES AT THE START OF THEIR MEETING THAT RESULTS IN THE ADVERTISED 6:00 P.M. MEETING TO START AT 6:50 P.M. STAFF REQUESTS THE CASE TO BE CONTINUED TO APRIL 8TH MEETING BECAUSE OF THAT, IN 2025 IN ORDER TO CONDUCT SECOND NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING THAT MEETING OUR GUIDELINES AND STAFF AND APPLICANT ARE HERE FOR ANY ADDITIONAL CARITY OR QUESTIONS.

>> THANK YOU. >>. >> DO, -- YES, GO AHEAD. >> CHAIR, AS RELATES TO CASE Z24000022, DURHAM RESCUE MISSION EAST MAIN STREET, I MAKE A RECOMMENDATION THAT WE POSTPONE THIS CASE UNTIL APRIL MEETING. >> IS THERE A SECOND? >> SECOND. >> IT'S BEEN MOVED BY COMMISSIONER CUTRIGHT AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER KOPEK TO MOVE CASE Z2400022 DURHAM RESCUE MISSION EAST MAIN STREET FORWARD TO THE APRIL 8TH, 2025, MEETING. MAY WE HAVE THE ROLL CALL VOTE, PLEASE? [ROLL CALL VOTE]. >> IT PASSES. >> THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.

WE ARE GOING BACK ON TRACK TO PUBLIC HEARINGS TEXT AMENDMENTS. FIRST CAE WE HAVE IS TC2400003 STATUTORY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AMENDMENT. MAY WE HAVE THE STAFF REPORT, PLEASE. SORRY, FORGOT THOSE WORDS. >> GOOD EVENING, MY NAME IS ROBIN SCHULTZE, WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. BEFORE I 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 AFFIDAVITS OF ALL NOTICES ARE ON FILE IN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.

I AM HERE TO PRESENT ON TC2400003, WHICH IS A PRIVATELY INITIATED TEXT AMENDMENT. THIS TEXT AMENDMENT SEEKS TO AMEND SEC. 3.26 OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE, WHICH GOVERNS STATUTORY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS. STATUTORY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS ARE ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE CITY OR COUNTY AND AN APPLICANT; THESE AGREEMENTS ARE INTENDED TO PROVIDE FLEXIBILITY OUTSIDE OF TRADITIONAL ZONING PRACTICES. THESE TEXT AMENDMENT IS SEEKING TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL FLEXIBILITY WITHIN THOSE AGREEMENTS BY ALLOWING ALTERATIONS WITHIN UDO SEC. 8.3, TREE COVERAGE AND TREE PROTECTION TO BE INCLUDED AS PART OF THOSE AGREEMENTS.

NOTE THAT STATUTORY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS ARE LEGISLATIVE DECISIONS, AND ARE SUBJECT TO A PUBLIC HEARING. EACH AGREEMENT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO THE DISCRETION OF THE APPROPRIATE GOVERNING BODY. LASTLY, THIS REQUEST IS CONCURRENT WITH CASE Z2400027, PAGE CORNERS, A ZONING MAP CHANGE WITH AN ASSOCIATED STATUORY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. BOTH STAFF AND THE APPLICANT ARE AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU. IS THE APPLICANT READY? AT THIS TIME, THE CHAIR IS OPENING THE PUBLIC HEARING AND THE APPLICANT IS GOING FROENT. -- PRESENT. >> GOOD EVENING. PATRICK BYER, 2614 STEWART DRIVE, AN ATTORNEY WITH MORN MORNINGSTAR LAW GROUP REPRESENTED LINCOLN AVENUE COMMUNITIES NEAR SUPPORT OF THIS TEXT AMENDMENT WHICH IN TURN SUPPORTS THE NEXT ADEN SDWRAEN ITEM BY I CREATING GREATER FLEXIBILITY FOR THE USE OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS IN DURHAM.

NEXT AGENDA ITEM RELATES TO PAGE CORNERS A 160-UNIT APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT THAT WILL BE 100% AFFORDABLE TO PERSONS EARNING UP TO 60% OF OUR AMI. TO THAT END, THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL CONSIDER THIS EVENING WHAT WILL BE THE THIRD DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IN THE HISTORY OF DURHAM IF WE ARE FORTUNATE ENOUGH TO RECEIVE IN REGARD TO THIS AGENDA ITEM RELATING TO THIS TEXT AMENDMENT UDO SECTION 3.26 POINT -- STATES QUOTE A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT SHALL NOL REDUCE ENVIRONMENT REQUIREMENTS WITHIN ARTICLE 4 AND ARTICLE 8, UNQUOTE.

FOR THE FIRST TWO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS THIS LIMITATION WAS NOT ANNISH. THE FIRST DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THE City Council UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED ON OCTOBER 19, 2020, WAS TO SUPPORT A LOW INCOME TAX CREDIT FUNDING HOUSING UNIT IN THE COMPACT NEIGHBORHOOD TIER. ABOUT TWO-AND-A-HALF YEARS LATER ON MARCH 20, 2023, CITY COUNCIL UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE SECOND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT SO THAT A MARKET RATE APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT ON CHAPEL HILL BOULEVARD WOULD PROVIDE GAP FINANCING FOR 66 APARTMENTS FUNDED WITH A LOW INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDIT IN BRAGGTOWN. THOSE 66 APARTMENTS ARE WITHIN A MIXED INCOME DEVELOPMENT IN BRAG TOWN CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 134 ACRES.

NOW THIS EVENING, OUR PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENT IS NECESSARY TO ADDRESS SMALLER SITES WTHI THE SUBURBAN TIER AND I THINK THAT REPRESENTS THE MAJORITY OF THE POTENTIAL SITES FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN DURHAM. OUR PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENT STATES, QUOTE, A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT SHALL NOT REDUCE ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS WITHIN ARTICLE 4 ZONING PREDICTS AND ARTICLE 8, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF SECTION 8.3, TREE PROTECTION AND TREE COVERAGE. WE HOPE THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THIS TEXT AMENDMENT SINCE IT WILL SUPPORT AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR SMALLER IN FILL SITES IN THE SUBURBAN TIER.

IN CLOSING, I WANT TO THANK THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, ESPECIALLY OUR DIRECTOR, SARA YOUNG, AND OUR POINT PERSON, ROBIN SCHULTZE FOR THEIR ASSISTANCE. TIM AND I WILL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU.ATE YOUR TIME TONIGHT. >> THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE A A SIGN-IN SHEET FOR THIS? THANK YOU. NO ONE BUT THE APPLICANT. DO WE HAVE ANYONE ON ZOOM THAT HAS SIGNED UP TO SPAK ON THIS? NO ONE? GOING ONCE -- YES, SIR. PLEASE COME TO THE PODIUM, STATE CAN HAVE THE QUESTION.D THEN YOU >> MATT LI SACK, 203 OLD CASTLE AND I ATTENDED THE WHATEVER YOU CALL THE OTHER PREVIOUS MEETING WHERE GUYS MET WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD PEOPLE, AND IN THT MEETING IT WAS VERY EVIDENT THAT THERE WAS SUPPOSED TO BE A BUFFER BETWEEN YOU GUYS AND, YOU GUYS WERE SAYING IT WAS AT ANT T BUT IT COULD ACTUALLY BE FRONTIER THAT'S THE ACTUAL BUFFER BECAUSE THERE'S A SMALL BUILDING THERE BETWEEN YOU GUYS AND ATT THAT SAYS FRONT TIER ON IT.

SO THAT WASN'T VERY EVIDENT HERE ABOUT THAT BUFFER. >> YEAH, SO THIS IS FOR THE TEXT AMENDMENT WHICH IS ASSOCIATED WITH THAT CASE, BUT THAT CASE IS ACTUALLY GOING TO COME NEXT, SO I THINK THAT YOU'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO HAVE E QUESTIONS FOR THAT PORTION. >> OKAY. >> NOT TO SHOE YOU OFF, BUT -- >> THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THE TEXT AMENDMENT? ALL RIGHT. HEARING NONE I'LL CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING. OPEN FOR COMMISSIONER DISCUSSION AND QUESTIONS.

COMMISSIONER CUTRIGHT. >> THANKS, CHAIR. JUST A QUICK CLARIFYING QUESTION. FOR SOME REASON I DON'T SEE THE TEXT IN HEE, BUT BASICALLY IT STATES THAT ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONS WILL NOT BE REDUCED WITH THE EXCEPTION OF TREE PROTECTION AND TREE COVERAGE; IS THERE ANYMORE SPECIFICITY TO THAT LIKE TO WHAT EXTENT OR IS IT JUST ABLANKET. JUST WON'T ABIDE BY THAT PARTICULAR CLASE? >> IT SIMPLY ALLOWS THIS ISSUE OF TREE PROTECTION AND COVERAGE TO BE ONTHE TABLE WHEN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IS NEGOTIATED BETWEEN THE CITY OF DURHAM AND A PRIVATE PARTY.

SO IT COULD BE A -- RIGHT NOW YOU CAN'T EVEN HAVE A 1% REDUCTION SO IT COULD BE A 1% REDUCTION OR 10% REDUCTION. THE CHALLENGE, COMMISSIONER, IS THAT THE STANDARDS FOR TREE PROTECTION VARY SO MUCH BETWEEN THE TIERS SO IN SUBURBAN IT'S 20% BUT IN COMPACT AND URBAN IT'S ONLY 7%. TO BE HONEST IF OUR PROJECT WERE IN URBAN OR COMPACT TIER, BEWOULDN'T BE ABLE FOR THIS. >> WHO'S DISCRETION IS IT TO SAY HOW MUCH TREE PROTECTION IS NEEDED ON THE PARTICULAR PROJECT THAT COMES BEFORE THE JOINT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT?

>> YEAH, SO RIGHT NOW, IF YOU COME WITH A PROJECT, YOU TO MEET EVERY STANDARD IN SECTION 8.3. SO THIS IS SAYING THAT IF YOU DO A STATUTORY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THAT YOU GO THROUGH A LEGISLATIVE PROCESS SO IT GOES BEFORE YOU ALL AND THEN GOES BEFORE EITHER THE CITY OR THE COUNTY. SO IF BLANK YOU GET OUT OF 8.3 BUT IT ALLOWS FOR THAT NEGOTIATION AS A TOOL. >> THANK YOU. >>. >> ANY OTHER -- COMMISSIONER WOUK. >> YES. SO BECAUSE THIS IS A ASSOCIATED WITH ANOTHER PROJECT ON HERE, AND WE ARE TALKING ABOUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING, ONE OF THE POLICIES THAT THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT DOES NOT COMPLY WITH IS PLICY 39 WHICH IS PRESERVING AND CREATING NATURAL AIRS, OPEN SPACES, ETC, PARTICULARLY FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING TO IMPROVE PHYSICAL AND MENTAL HEALTH OF RESIDENTS, AND SO TO SET ASIDE LAND FOR OPEN SPACE BY ALLOWING GREATER BUILDING HEIGHTS OR DENSITIES, SO INSTEAD OF TAKING AWAY TH OPEN SPACE AND THE TREE COVERAGE, IS THERE ANOTHER WAY TO -- I MEAN THIS IS OBVIOUSLY A.

GREAT PROJECT THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE, BUT I DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH TAKING AWAY THE GREEN SPACES FROM THIS AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT. >> I THINK IT'S TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. THIS IS TREE COVERAGE AND OPEN -- GO AHEAD. >> IF I UNDERSTAND, THIS IS JUST AS RELATES TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS. >> CORRECT. >> THS IS THE THIRD ONE THAT'S COME BEFORE THE CITY IN HOW LONG? >> I THINK IT'S, IT'S AT LEAST IN THE FOUR AND A HALF YEARS I'VE BEEN HERE.

>> AND WOULD ONLY ALLOW FOR FUTURE TO KNEE YOESHUATE AD IT WOULD STILL COME BEFORE US BEFORE ANY DECISIONS WERE MADE? I KNOW THAT'S BEEN STATED BUT I3 WANTED TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND IT. >> YEP. SO THEY'RE ALL SUBJECT TO PUBLIC HEARINGS AS WELL. >> THANK YOU. >> ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS? GO AHEAD. >> SO THIS MAY BE FOR CITY STAFF OR APPLICANT. IS THIS TEXT AMENDMENT GOING TO BE JUST FOR THIS PROJECT OR IT'S GOING TO BE UNIVERSAL FOR THE UDO FOR THE WHOLE REST OF PROJECTS THAT MIGHT QUALIFY?

>> RIGHT. SO THIS IS FOR THE ENTIRE UDO, BUT IT ISN'T MAKING CHANGES FOR ALL PROJECTS BY-RIGHT. SO EVERY PROJECT THAT WANTS TO MAKE A CHANGE TO 8.3 THROUGH A STATUTORY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK THROUGH Y'ALL, AND THEN EITHER THE CITY OR THE COUNTY. SO IT JUST PROVIDES THAT AS A TOOL FOR NEGOTIATION, IT ISN'T A BY-RIGHT YOU HAVE ANY SORT OF EXCEPTION FOR THE TREE COVERAGE REQUIREMENT BUS IT E DOES ALLOW THE CITY OR THE COUNTY TO USE THAT IN TERMS OF LEVERAGING BETWEEN COMMUNITY BENEFITS WHICH ASK THE INTENT OF A STATUTORY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BECAUSE THIS I THE ONLY WAY THAT YOU CAN REDUCE TREE COVERAGE UNLESS YOU ARE GOING TO DO A VARIANCE AND TO DO A VARIANCE, YOU TO HAVE HARDSHIP, GO THROUGH TH QUASI-JUDICIAL PROCESS SO THERE'S NO SPOT IN A VAIANCE FOR THIS IS A GOOD PROJECT, ETC, SINCE -- SO THIS IS THE ONLY WAY TO LEGISLATIVELY CHANGE THE AMOUNT OF TREE COVERAGE ON A SITE S THIS IS ALLOWING FOR THAT THROUGH THIS PROCESS WITH.

BOTH YOU AND ALL EITHER THE CITY OR COUNTY. >> THAT WAS ANOTHER ONE OFMY MY QUESTIONS. IS THERE NOT ANOTHER IN-PLACE SYSTEM TO DEAL WITH THIS? >> ONLY IF IT'S A HARDSHIP. SO IT HAS TO BE A PHYSICAL HARDSHIP RELATES TO THE PROPERTY THAT MEETS CERTAIN STANDARDS THAT ARE THEN HELD IN A KWAU PSI JUDICIAL LIKE A COURTROOM. SO IF THEY DON'T HAVE A HARDSHIP, THEN NO. NOR THIS PROJECT THEY WOULD NOT TECHNICALLY HAVE A HARDSHIP BECAUSE THERE'S -- THEY COULD STILL BUILD SOMETHING ELSE, IF THAT MAKES SENSE.

YES. >> OKAY. SO MY CONCERN IS THAT THIS WILL SET SOME SORT OF PRECEDENT FOR SMALL AREA AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECTS IN THE CITY OF DURHAM WHERE THEY WILL NOT HAVE THE SAME REQUIREMENT FOR TREE COVERAGE AS OTHERS AND THEN THEY WILL LOOK DIFFERENT, AND THEY WILL THEN, YOU KNOW, BEOME URBAN HEAT ISLANDS AND THAT IS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I BELIEVE IS IN THE UDO, OR THE COMP PLAN, TO NOT HAVE AFFORDABLE HOUSING LOOK DIFFERENT. >> RIGHT. AND SO EACH TIME THAT CAME BEFORE YOU, YOU AL COULD VOTE TO DISPROVE IT ON THOSE GROUNDS.

YOU COULD SAY, YOU KNOW, THS PROJECT DOES NOT MEET COMMUNITY BENEFITS BECAUSE OF X, Y, OR S WE DO NOT THINK THIS IS A GOOD STATUTORY TO BE ENTERED INTO. SO THIS GIVES THE ABILITY TO PROVIDE THAT NEGOTIATION BUT NO EXCEPTIONS WITHOUT FIRST GOING BEFORE YOU SO YOU CAN EXPRESS THOSE CONCERNS AND MAKE THOSE DECISIONS ON A PROJECT-BY-PROJECT BASIS. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. >>. >> ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER? >> I JUST WANT TO EXPRESS THAT I HAVE VERY REAL CONCERNS THAT THIS WILL INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF PROJECTS COMING BEFORE US WHERE THEY DON'T MEET THE AGREED UPON TREE COVERAGE.

I JUST WANT TO EXPRESS THAT. >> ANYONE ELSE? I THINK ANY TIME WE MAKE A CHANGE, IT COULD OPEN A DOOR FOR ANYBODY TO DO ANYTHING, BUT WE HAVE TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THIS IS AFFORDABLE HOUSING THAT IS GREATLY NEEDED IN DURHAM, AND SOMETIMES WE NEED TO MAKE EXCEPTIONS. GO AHEAD, COMMISSIONER KOPEK. >> WANTED TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THIS REQUEST IS BASED OON CASE THAT WHILE WE'VE REPAIRED FOR WE HAVE ARE NOT HEARD ABOUT AND NOT ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT TO UNDERSTAND WHAT ALTERNATIVES MAY BE AVAILABLE FOR THIS CASE, WHICH WOULD THEN MAYBE LEAD TO THIS TEXT AMENDMENT TO NOT BE NECESSARY RIGHT NOW TO NOT OEN THAT DOOR.

DID WE THINK ABOUT THAT IN TERMS OF ORDERING OF THE AGENDA? >> THE OPPOSITE COULD ALSO OCCUR IN WHICH YOU ALL SAID ABSOLUTELY NOT AND THEN THERE WOULD BE NO POINT IF THEM COMING UP AN PRESENTED BECAUSE RIGHT NOW WITHIN THAT REQUEST, THEY REQUIRE A CHANGE IN TREE COVERAGE, SO I THINK THIS CAME BEFORE BECAUSE THIS IS SORT OF PRIMING YOU, BUT, YES, AND THIS ALSO IS SORT OF ALERTING YOU TO THE FACT THAT IT'S GOING TO BE A KWB WITHIN THAT SUBMITTAL SO YOU CAN THEN SAY THE REDUCTION IN TREE COVERAGE IS PENT UPON THIS TEXT AMENDMENT AND ALSO ALERTING YOU TO THE FACT THAT THIS IS A TIME TO ASK THOSE QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT TREE COVERAGE AND SPECIFIC CONCERNS WITH THAT PROJECT.

>> SO I THINK IT'S HELPFUL TO HEAR ABOUT THIS FIRST. WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE TO HAVE HEARD THIS AND THEN MOVE ON TO THE CASE? AND THEN AS WE OFTEN DO SUCH AS IN THE CASE OF REZONING AN ANNEXATION, WE HAVE SEQUENTIAL VOTING ONE AFTER IF OTHER? >> WE HAVE POSTPONE THIS VOTE, I CAN CLOSE THIS PART, POSTPONE THE VOTE, OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR PAGE CORNERS, AND THEN HAVE SUBSEQUENT MOTIONS. TEXT AMENDMENT WILL HAVE TO GO FIRST AND THEN THE ZONING WOULD HAVE TO GO.

>> THAT WOULD GIVE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR MORE QUESTIONS BY COMMISSIONERS TO YOU SAID. >> THAT'S THT FINE WITH THE APPLICANT? ALL RIGHT. >> AND I'LL REITERATE JUST WHAT CHAIR CAMERON SAID, TOO, THAT I DO ACKNOWLEDGE AND APPRECIATE THAT IT SEEMS THAT THIS WILL APPLY IN LIMITED CASES OPEN WHICH THIS BODY AND ELECTED OFFICIALS WILL HAVE CONTROL SO IT T DOESN'T FEEL LIKE SO MUCH ABOUT OPENING PAN B DORA'S BOX AND IT'S IMPORTANT FOR AFFORDABILITY, BUT IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO HEAR CASE AND HAVE DISCUSSION FIRST AND THEN RETURN VOTES.

DO I NEED TO MOVE, THEN? >> WE JUST AGREED TO IT AND WE'RE GOING TO POSTPONE THE VOTE. THEN WE'RE GOING TO -- PUBLIC HEAR'S ALREADY CLOSED SO CASE IS NOT OVER IT'S JUST CONTINUING. ALL RIGHT. SO WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO ZONING MAP CHANGES, AND WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO CASE 1. Z2400027-BDG2400012 PAGE CORNERS. MAY WE HAVE THE STAFF REPORT, PLEASE? >> THANK YOU, CHAIR. HERE TO PRESENT Z2400027, PAGE CORNERS. THIS SITE IS LOW IT KAED AT 4004 AND 1410 PAGE ROAD.

IT'S TWO PROPERTIES CONSISTS OF 7.602 ACES. THE APPLICANT PROPOSES UP TO 160 APARTMENT UNITS WITH 100% BEING INCOME RESTRICTED THROUGH DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. EXISTING ZONING IS RR AND COMMERCIAL CENTER AND STAFF WOULD LIKE TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THE STAFF REPORT INCORRECTLY STATES THE EXISTING ZONE AT COMMERCIAL GENERAL; IT IS CENTER AS ZONE I EXIST A. PROPOSED ZONING THY'RE WANTING TO DO IS PDR 22.456. THE AERIAL MAP SHOWS GENERAL LOCATION OF THE PROJECT ON THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF CHIN PAGE ROAD AND PAGE ROAD INTERSECTION. THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY DESIGNATED NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES ON THE PLACE-TYPE MAP.

THE PROPOSALED ZONING WAS DETERMINED INCONSISTENT WITH THE DESIGNATED PLACE TYPE. STAFF WOULD RECOMMENDED PLACE TYPE OF APARTMENT AND TOWN HOUSE NEIGHBORHOOD IF APPROVED. HERE IS A SUMMARY OF SOME COMMITMENTS. THE APPLICANT HAS INCLUDED TEXT COMMITMENTS INCLUDING LIMITATIONS ON HEIGHT AND SETBACKS. A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IS INCORPORATED INTO THE TEXTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN. STATUTORY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IS A CONTRACT BETWEEN CITY AND APPLICANT INTENDED TO PROVIDE COMMUNITY BENEFITS WITHIN DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE DIFFICULT TO ACCOMMODATE WITHIN THE TRADITIONAL ZONING PROP SESZS. ENABLED BY THE SIT AND UDO SET FOR WHICH CAN OPERATE.

UNDER PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT APPLICANT RECEIVE REDUCTIONS FOR PROJECT BOUNDARY BUFFERS, OPEN SPACE AND TREE COVERAGE AND FENCE HEIGHTS. APPLICANT WOULD REREDUCTION OF PROJECT BOUNDARY BUFFER TO ZERO, REDUCTION REQUIRES AMOUNT OF OPEN SPACE FROM 20 PER SENT TO 135ER SENT WITH NO DIMENSIONAL STANDARD, ALLOWANCE OF OPEN SPACE FROM 20% TO 40% WITHIN STORMWATER CONTROL, FENCE HEIGHT FROM FOUR FEET TO SIX FEET AND REDUCTION OF 20% TREE COVERAGE TO 7%. THIS LAST BENEFIT TO APPLICANT FOR REDUCED TREE COVERAGE IS BASIS OF THE PREVIOUS TEXT AMENDMENT YOU JUST HEARD.

IF APPROVED, THE CITY WOULD RECEIVE BENEFITS IN THE FORM OF 160 INCOME RESTRICTED UNITS, TWO ELECTRIC CAR CHARGING STATIONS, NATIVE TREES FOR THE SITE, LIMIT OF 70% IMPERVIOUS SURFACE, AT LEAST TWO RECREATIONAL AMENITIES. BECAUSE STATUTORY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IS A COMMITTEDED ELEMENT OF THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN, TERMINATION OF THE AGREEMENT WOULD REQUIRE REZONING TO PERFORM ANY WITHOUT THE AGREEMENT. NEIGHBORHOOD MEET HELD IN ORDER ON JUNE 6, 2024, AND FEBRUARY 26, 2025. NO COMMENTS HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED TO EXPLORE IN REPLAC LA CASE. THE PROPOSAL IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE PLACE-TYPE MAP DESIGNATION.

IF THE ZONING MAP CHANGE IS APROD RECOMMEND APARTMENT AND TOWN HOUSE NEIGHBORHOOD. PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH 19 OF 26 COMP PLAN POLICIES. STAFF AND APPLICANT ARE AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU. AT THIS TIME, THE CHAIR IS OPENING THE PUBLIC HEARING. APPLICANT, YOU'RE THERE, GO AHEAD. >> GOOD EVENING. PATRICK BYKER, 2614 STEWART DRIVE. ATTORNEY WITH WITH MORNINGSTAR LAW GROUP HERE TONIGHT REPRESENTING LIN CONE AVENUE COMMUNITIES. BRYAN MALONE BASED IN CALIFORNIA SO JOINING US BY ZOOM. LAND PLANNING AND SITE VERS OUR ENGINEERING COMPANY FOR THIS OUTSTANDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT THAT IS CALLED PAGE CORNERS.

PAGE CORNERS IS A SU PERK PE PERSON -- SUPERB INFILL DEVELOPMENT. AS YOU CAN SEE ON THIS SLIDE, OUR NET DEVELOPMENTABLE AREA IS JUST OVER SEVEN ACRES. OUR GOAL IS TO BUILD FOUR STORY BUILDINGS THAT WILL CONTAIN 160 APARTMENTS, ALL WILL BE AFFORDABLE FOR DURHAM RESIDENT AT OR BELOW 60% AMI. PAGE CORNERS WILL BE FINANCED WITH A 4% LOW INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDIT. THE DURHAM PLACE-TYPE MAP DESIGNATEDS THIS AS NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICE AREA, UNFORTUNATELY, THE PRESENCE OF BRIER CREEK MAKES COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT HERE UNLIKELY TO SUCCEED.

ASs THE ZONING ATTORNEY FOR THE OVER400 ACRE BETHPAGE DEVELOPMENT ON THE NORTH SIDE OF CHAIN PAGE, WE HAD ALMOST 20 ACRES ON THE CORNER OF PAGE AND CHIN PAGE ZONED COMMERCIAL SNCE 2007. WE COULD NOT LOCATE ANY ANCHOR TENANTS FOR THAT SITE. LIKEWISE, ONE OF THE HARDEST TASKS FACING AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPERS IS LOCATING A SITE AND GETTING IT UNDER CONTRACT SINCE THEY HAVE TO COMPETE WITH MARKET-RATE DEVELOPERS. SO WE'RE FORTUNATE TO HAVE THESE 7-AND-A-HALF ACRES UNDER CONTRACT WHICH WILL ALLOW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF 160 THESE APARTMENTS WILL BE IN FOUR STORY BUILDINGS SERVED BY ELEVATORS MAKING THESE ACCESSIBLE TO A WIDE RANGE OF AGES AND FAMILY TYPES.

I I NEED TO STRESS NORTH CAROLINA HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY TYPICALLY REQUIRES 1.75 PARKING SPACES FOR APARTMENT. OUR TEAM WAS ABLE TO OBTAIN A REDUCTION DOWN TO 1.5 PARKING SPACE SPACES PER APARTMENT. IT'S LINCOLN'S PLAQUE TOIS PROVIDE ROBUST ON-SITE AMENITIES FOR THE RESIDENTS OF HAS TO AS I APARTMENTS IN ORDER TO CREATE A SENSE OF PLACE AD SENSE OF BELONGING FOR LINCOLN AVENUE RESIDENTS. IN ADDITION TO OUR ZONING MAP CHANGE APPLICATION, OUR TEAM ALSO HAS SUBMITTED A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. NORTH CAROLINA STATUTES ALLOW FOR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS SINCE EVERY SITE IS DIFFERENT AND FROM TIME TO TIME THERE ARE SITUATIONS THAT REQUIRE CERTAIN MODIFICATIONS OF THE STANDARDS IN THE DURHAM UDO.

OF COURSE, SUCH MODIFICATIONS OF THE YOU CAN DO SHOULD BE JUSTIFIED BASED ON A DEVELOPMENT PROVIDING STRONG COMMUNITY BENS. FOR PAGE CORNERS, THE COMMUNITY BENEFITS WILL BE 160 APARTMENTS THAT ARE AFFORDABLE FOR FAMILIES EARNING 60% OR LESS OF AMI ALONG WITH STRONG ON-SITE AMENITIES FOR THIS COMMUNITY. WE NEED TO MODIFY THE 20% OPEN SPACE DOWN TO 15% BASED ON-SITE CONSTRAINTS SUCH AS REQUIRED PARKING AND STORMWATER CONTROL MEASURES. WHEN YU START WITH 7-AND-A-HALF ACRES THEN TKE OUT AREA FOR THE APARTMENTS, TAKE OUT MARKING YEARS, TAKE OUT AREA NEEDED FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION AND AREA FOR STORMWATER CONTROL MEASURES IT'S NOT POSSIBLE TO ALLOCATE 20% OF THIS JUST OVER 7 ACRE SITE TO OPEN SPACE AND TREE COVERAGE REQUIREMENTS.

ACCORDINGLY THE FOUR KEY POINTS OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ARE, ONE, IN REGARDS TO OPEN SPACE, PAGE CORNERS WILL PROVIDE 15% RATHER THAN THE REQUIRED 20% DUE TO SITE CONSTRAINTS I JUST MENTIONED. TWO N REGARD TOS TREE COVERAGE, PAGE CORNERS WILL PROVIDE A MIGHT BE MU OF 7% -- MINIMUM OF 7% WHICH IS SAME IN COMPACT NEIGHBORHOOD TIER. I NEED EMPHASIZE THAT THE COME TACT NEIGHBORHOOD TIER IS ONLY A MILE AWAY GOING SOUTH ON PAGE ROAD. I ALSO WANT TO STATE ON THE RECORD THAT PAGE CORNER WILL PROVIDE AS MANY TREES AS POSSIBLE ALONG STAERLING COMMUNITY PROPERTY LINE.

THREE, PAGE CORNERS NEED TO INCREASE PERIMETER FENCE HEIGHT FROM FOUR FEET TO SIX FEET. FOUR, PAGE CORNERS NEEDS TO REMOVE REQUIRED BUFFER ALONG ATT/FRONTIER PROPERTY LINE TO ALLOW FOR COST EFFECTIVE SINGLE FACE BUILD OUT OF THIS 7 ACRE SITE. TO WRAP UP, PAGE CORNERS WILL BE ONE OF THE STRONGEST AFFORDABLE HOUSING DWREMS THAT'S BEEN PROPOSED WITH 160 APARTMENTS TO DURHAM RESIDENTS MAKING UP TO 60% AMI. OUR TEAM RECOGNIZES WE NEED TO PROVIDE AS MUCH TREE COVERAGE AS POSSIBLE AN PROVIDE AS MUCH BUFFERING AS POSSIBLE ALONG STAERLING COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION PROPERTY TO THE WEST.

I ALSO WANT TOED ADDRESS THE HEAT ISLAND COMMENT THAT HAS BEEN MADE DURING OUR NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS. NOTHING IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WILL REDUCE VEHICLE USE AREA LANDSCAPING. ALL OF THE TREES THAT ARE REQUIRED IN THE PARKING AREAS WILL BE INSTALLED. LASTLY, STRESS THAT LINCOLN HAS A FINE TRACT RECORD ACROSS OUR NATION. LINCOLN AVENUE COMMUNITIES OWNSOVER 170 PROPERTIES CONTAINING OVER 30,500 DWELLING UNITS. THEY EXPECT TO BE THE LONG-TERM OWNER OF THIS DEVELOPMENT AND WILL PROVIDE SOLID ON SIGHT MAG MANAGEMENT FOR THE NEW RESIDENTS.

WE HOPE WE'LL BE FORTUNATE ENOUGH TO RECEIVE APPROVAL AND FOR ALL THESE REASONS WE RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL. MR. SIVERS AND I WILL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TONIGHT. >> THANK YOU. SIGN UP SHEET FOR THIS. DO WE HAVE ANY -- SIR, DO YOU WANT TO COME BACK UP AND ASK YOUR QUESTION NOW? JUST STATE YOUR NME AND ADDRESS AGAIN. >> MATT LISACK, 203 OLD CASTLE L AND SO THE GENTLEMAN JUST MENTIONED IT WAS FRONT TIER AND/OR ATT, BUT, YOU KNOW, I THINK HE MADE A GOOD CASE FOR WHY THIS PROBABLY SHOULDN'T HAPPEN, RIGHT, ALL THE EXCEPTIONS, ALL THE CHANGES, SLIPPERY SLOPE ONCE YOU MAKE THIS FOR ONE PERSON YOU GOT MAKE THEM FOR A LOT OF OTHER ONES, BUT, ONE THING IS THEY HAVEN'T MENTIONED WHETHER OR NOT THEY MADE ANY CONTACT WITH ATT OR FRONTIER TO GET THEIR APPROVAL TO REMOVE BUFFER BETWEEN THE TWO LOCATIONS THERE, OR HAVE THEY HAD ANY AGREEMENT AS FAR AS THE STORMWATER RUNOFF THAT IS.

PLANNED TO GO IN FRONT OF THE AT & T LAND AND ALONG CHIN PAGE ROAD THERE'S A TRENCH THERE WHICH I THINK THEY'RE PLANNING ON USING BECAUSE THEY PROMISED US IN THE PRIOR MEETING THAT THEY WEREN'T GOING TO BE USING THE STORMWATER SYSTEM FOR THE STERLING COMMUNITY WHICH WE GREATLY APPRECIATE BECAUSE WE'RE CURRENTLY RUNNING INTO A SITUATION WITH ANOTHER BUILDER WHO IS USING OUR STUFF WITHOUT US KNOWING IT, AND IT'S CAUSING SIGNIFICANT DETRIMENT TO OUR STORMWATER FACILITIES. PROBABLY GOING END UP UP IN A LAWSUIT THERE.

SO THE OTHER THING AS FAR AS SPACE, YOU KNOW, IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE THERE'S GOING TO BE THE ABILITY TO TURN THE WAYS THEY NEED TO TURN. THAT'S ALREADY A VERY CONGESTED INTERSECTION AND THE PEOPLE AT STERLING AND EVEN AT THE CITY CAN ATTEST TO THE FACT THAT THERE'S BEEN NUMEROUS ACCIDENTS ON THE CHIN PAGE IN THE STERLING COMMUNITY ON, WHAT IS IT THE ONE PERSON LIKE LOST A LIMB, AND SO THEY'VE MADE AN ATTEMPT TO TRY AND REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF CROSS TRAFFIC THROUGH THAT YEAR BY PUTTING IN A, BIKING PATH, BUT THAT BIKING PATH DRIVES PEOPLE RIGHT INTO A MEDIAN BETWEEN THE ONGOING TRAFFIC AND A SIGN AND I SAW SOMEBODY HAD LIKE LOST A SIDE MIRROR BECAUSE OF THE WAY THE LINES WERE DRAWN, SO, YOU KNOW, EVEN IF THIS WERE TO GO THROUGH BY SOME STRETCH, I THINK THERE SHOULD BE SOMETHING DONE TO HELP REMEDY THE ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC THAT'S GOING TO SAY I DON'T WANT TO GET STUCK AT THIS CHIN PAGE/PAGE INTERSECTION SO I'LL JUST GO THROUGH THE.

STERLING COMMUNITY AT 55 MILES PER HOUR TO MAKE UP TIME, SO WE'VE BEEN SEEING A LOT OF SPEEDING THROUGH THERE, AND THERE'S WAYS OF MITIGATING THAT, THE SLOW RAMPS AND STUFF LIKE THAT, THAT KEEP PEOPLE GOING 25. THERE'S THE SPEED LIMIT THERE THAT'S CURRENTLY 35 MILES PER HOUR, SHOULD PROBABLY BE DROPPED 25 TO HELP PEOPLE.NET THE IDEA THAT THEY'RE GOING THROUGH RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY. >> THANK YO, SIR. >> AM I -- >> YOU HAD TWO MINUTES. >> OKAY. >> YOUR TIME IS UP. SORRY. >> OH, OKAY.

>> THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK? IS THERE ANYONE -- I HAVE SEVERAL PEPLE THAT HAVE RAISED THEIR HANDS ON THE ZOOM. FIRST WE HAVE DANIEL HAWK. GO AHEAD, SIR. >> HELLO AND GOOD EVENING. DANIEL HAWK, 2152 TULIP LANE ACROSS FROM PAGE CORNERS. SUPPORT FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING AS WELL AS MY CONCERN TO THIS. THE BEST TIME TO BUILD HOUSING WAS YESTERDAY AND THE SECOND BEST TIME IS TODAY. I BELIEVE CONSTRUCTION OF WORKFORCE HOUSING IS SOMETHING TO STRIVE FOR AND IMPROVG ACCESS TO HOUSING WILL HELP THIS REGION.

HOWEVER, THERE ARE A FEW POINTS TO CONSIDER IN OPPOSITION TO GRANTING EXCEPTIONS TO THE UDO REQUESTED HERE TONIGHT. FIRST OFF T PLANIBLY REDUCING OPEN SPACE AN TREE COVERAGE. UDO ESTABLISHED THESE MINIMUMS FOR GOOD REASON. IN THE PURSUIT OF MAXIMIZING DENSITY, PARKING AND BUILDINGS ARE PROPOSED TO BE JAMMED IN IN UNDEVELOPED FIELDS. SECOND POINT, CURRENT NEIGHBORHOOD FABRIC AND OVER ALL HEIGHT. FOUR STORY BUILDS. GIVEN ADJOINING PROPERTIES THREE STORY WILL BE BETTER. DIRECTLY ACROSS PAGE ROAD TWO STORY TOWNHOMES COMPLETED. MANY OF THESE TOWNHOMES ARE NOT UPGRADE WITH PAGE STORY SO THEY'RE MORE THAN A STORY BELOW SO CLOSER TO FOUR OR FIVE.

FINALLY DIRECTLY BEHIND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT SINGLE FAMILY HOMES ABUT DIRECTLY AGAINST THE PARCEL. NOW IN MY VIEW THE ADDITIONAL OF HIGHLY PACT FOUR STORY APARTMENTS AGAINST ROAD AND LESS INTENSE DEVELOPMENT WILL FEEL OUTOF PLACE, COMMUNITY. KEY.4 STORIES OF THIS HOUSING IS RESULT OF REDUCING TREE COVERAGE AND OPEN SPACE FLIERMENT A MANNER INCONSISTENT WITH THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD. BY KEEPING EXISTING UDO REQUIREMENTS, COMMISSION WILL ENCOURAGE LESSER DEVELOPMENT, LESS DENSE DEVELOPMENT POTENTIALLY WITH FEWER BUILDINGS THAT WOULD PROVIDE SIGNIFICANT AFFORDABLE HOUSING. HONESTLY MOE IS NOT ALWAYS BETTER. >> THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. >> WE HAD SOME OTHER HANDS RAISED, THEY WENT DOWN. I'M GOING ASSUME THAT YOU DON'T WANT TO SPEAK. LRT ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE ON THE ZOOM THAT WOULD LIKE T SPEAK? MIKE ANICHI. >> YES. I HAD A -- >> CAN YOU PLEASE STATE NAME AND ADDRESS. >> MIKE, 402 CRUSADERS DMROOIF STERLING COMMUNITY AND THERE ARE AMONG OTHER CONCERNS ONE MAJOR CONCERN IS THAT THEY KEEP SAYING THAT THIS IS REQUIRED TO REDUCE AMOUNT OF OPEN SPACE AND SPACE, BUT I DON'T SEE HOW IT'S A REQUIREMENT WHEN THEY COULD BUILD LESS BUILDINGS.

THEY COULD BILLIONTH BUILD SMALLER COMMUNITY AND STILL HAVE ENOUGH. THE POINT OF THESE UDO RESTRICTIONS IS TO KEEP A CERTAIN LEVEL OF OPEN SPACE AND TO KEEP A CERTAIN LOOK TO THE AREA. I'M WORRIED AND I KNOW MANY OTHER PEOPLE IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD ARE ALSO, THAT BUILDING AN AREA THAT SEEMS SO MUCH MORE SO MUCH MORE DENSELY-PACKED WITH BUILDINGS IS GOING TO TAKE AWAY FROM OVER ALL APPEAL OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND NEIGHBORHOODS IN THE NEARBY VINTY THEREBY REDUCING PROPERTY VALUES.

I KNOW THIS IS A MAJOR CONCERN IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD AND OTHER NEIGHBORING NEIGHBORHOODS. SO WHYEN THOUGH THEY KEEP SAYING SIT A REQUIREMENT, WHY CAN THEY NOT SIMPLY BUILD A SMALLER COMMUNITY, TAKE UP LESS OF THE OPEN SPACE, AND NOT INTERFERE AS MUCH WITH THE OVER YAWL APPEARANCE OF OUR AREA? THAT IS MY CONCERN. >> OKAY. >> THAT THEY'RE PUSHING RULES THAT EXIST FOR A REASON TO KEEP A UNIFORM AFEEL THE AREA. -- APPEAL TO THE AREA JUST TO CRAMP MORE APARTMENTS? >> THANK YOU.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE ON THE ZOOM WISHING TO SPEAK? CALLER 919-599-2892. UNMUTE AND STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. GO AHEAD. >> THIS IS MIMI KESSLER, SORRY I'M CALLING IN LATE. I THINK THAT THIS PROPERTY DOESN'T [INDISCERNIBLE] THE APPLICATION THAT THE DEVELOPER WANTS TO MAKE. I THINK THERE'S SUFFICIENT THINGS THAT D NOT FIT WITH THE PLAN THAT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MANDATES, AND I DON'T THINK THAT WE SHOULD REZONE OR PROPERTY FOR DEVELOPMENTS THAT DON'T FIT WITH THE LOCATION AND ASO THE TOPOGRAPHY. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

JEFF THORNBURG. >> HI, CAN YOU HEAR ME? >> YES. >> KELLY THORNBURG, I AM 117 ROUNDTABLE PLACE IN STERLING. GOING BACK TO THE TRAFFIC ISSUES HERE, IF THIS WAS TO O GO THROUGH, YOU KNOW, PAGE AND CHIN PAGE, THAT WHOLE ROAD IS A TWO -- IT'S A VERY SMALL ROAD AND WITH THE UPCOMING TOWNHOMES THAT ARE TRYING TO FINISH AND ON THE OTHER SIDE, OF TW ALEXANDRIA, IT'S STILL BEING BUILT AND NOT ALL OF IT IS OCCUPIED AND THEY ARE PLANNING TO PUT MORE APARTMENTS ON THERE.

ARE THEY DOING ANYTHING ABOUT WIDING UP THE ROAD [INDISCERNIBLE] -- THAT'S MY ONE CONCERN. THE OTHER CONCERN IS, IS THIS GOING TO GO THROUGH LOWERING THE VALUE OF MY HOME; IS THE CITY GOING TO GIVE ME BACK MY INCOME TAX FOR THE DEVALUING OF MY HOME? BECAUSE I DON'T WANT THAT TO BE HAPPENING. >> THNK YOU. IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE ON THE ZOOM? OKAY. AT THIS TIME, CHAIR CALL APPLICANT BACK FORWARD FORTH TO ANSWER SOME OF THOSE QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS THAT THE COMMUNITY STATED. >> SURE.

THANK YOU. DO WANT TO EMPHASIZE THAT THE REDUCTION IN OPEN SPACE IS FROM 20% TO 15%. AND AGAIN, FOR THE RECORD, THE COMPACT NEIGHBORHOOD TIER ONLY REQUIRED 7% S WE'RE STILL DOUBLE WHAT WOULD BE REQUIRED IN COMPACT NEIGHBORHOOD TIER. WANT TO EMPHASIZE ONE THING I SHOULD HAVE STATED, THIS LOCATION, PAGE CORNERS, IS ONLY ABOUT ONE MILE EAST OF RTP AND ONE MILE NORTH OF IMPERIAL CENTER, TWO OF DURHAM'S, BY FAR, LARGEST EMPLOYMENT CENTERS AND TO MY KNOWLEDGE THERE'S NO AFFORDABLE HOUSING ANYWHERE IN SOUTHEAST DURHAM.

I WORKED ON ZONINGS OF MOST OF THESE NEIGHBORHOODS. THERE'S NO AFFORDABLE HOUSING WITHIN A MILE OF THESE TWO AREAS. I'D LIKE TO ADRESS REDUCING PROPERTY VALUES. I MENTIONED THE FIRST DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THAT I WORKED ON WHICH IS OVER IN SOUTHWEST DURHAM ON CRESCENT DRIVE AND THAT'S JUST A LITTLE BIT WEST OF FARRINGTON ROAD. AS YOU ALL KNO, WE JUST WENT THROUGH A COUNTY-WIDE REVALUATION. WE HAD THAT ADVANTAGE WITH THAT BEING ABLE TO COMPARE THE CURRENT EVALUATIONS THAT WERE ASSESSED ON JANUARY 1, 2025, AGAINST THE REVALUATION DONE JANUARY 1ST 20SHGS 19.

AS I MENTIONED THE FIRST DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT HAPPENED IN OCTOBER 2020. THAT WAS FOR A VERY SIMILAR DEVELOPMENT; FOUR STORY APARTMENT BUILDINGS FINANCED WITH A 4% LOW INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDIT. I LOOKED AT THE CLOSEST SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE TO THOSE APARTMENTS THAT WERE BUILT BY LAUREL STREET OUT OF CHARLOTTE. IT WAS A BRICK RANCH HOUSE PROBABLY BUILT IN 50s OR 60s AND ABOUT 175 FEET AWAY FROM THE LAUREL STREET AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT. 175 FEET WHICH IS PROBABLY CLOSER THAN MOST FOLKS YOU HEARD FROM THIS EVENING.

PROPERTY VALUE IN 2019 WAS $413,000. AFTER AFFORDABLE HOUSING WAS BUILT, $643,000, A 56% INCREASE. STRONG INCREASE IN PROPERTY VALUES. AND SO I DON'T SEE ANY EVIDENCE FOR THERE BEING A REDUCTION IN ANYBODY'S PROPERTY VALUES PAIG BASED ON PAGE CORNERS. LASTLY, TRAFFIC. ZEL A RIGHT IN/RIGHT OUT ACCESS ON TO CHIN PAGE ROAD. ZEL A FULL MOVEMENT ACCESS ON TO PAGE ROAD. WE'LL BE PROVIDING THE TURN LANE, WIDENING FOR BOTH OF THOSE INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT. THAT'S WHERE WE LOE HALF AN ACRE OF PROPERTY IS DEDICATING RIGHT-OF-WAY ON THOSE TWO ROADS TAKING US FROM SEVEN-AND-A-HALF DOWN TO SEVEN.

IN REGARDS TO CROWN PARKWAY THAT WAS REF -- THIS DOES NOT ACCESS TO CROWN PARKWAY. STAFF REPORT SAYS PAGE ROAD IS APPROXIMATELY TWO-THIRDS OF CAPACITY AND CHIN PAGE ROAD IS ONLY AT ONE-THIRD OF CAPACITY. SO IF WE CAN'T PUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING HERE, WHERE CAN WE PUT IT? SO, OUR TEAM IS HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS BUT DID WANT TO ADDRESS TRAFFIC, PROPERTY VALUE USE AND PROXIMITY TO IMEMPLOYMENT CENTERS. >> WE HAVEN'T DONE THAT YET. ALL RIGHT. THE PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW CLOSED, AND WE ARE NOW OPEN FOR COMMISSIONER DISCUSSION.

GO AHEAD. >> THANK YOU. I JUST HAD A QUESTION. I KNOW WE'VE TALKED QUITE A BIT ABOUT THE DECREASE IN GREEN SPACE, BUT YOU ALSO MENTIONED A NUMBER OF AMENITIES DESIGNED TO BUILD COMMUNITY, COLLABORATION, GET FOLKS TOGETHER. CAN YOU TALK MORE ABOUT WHAT THOSE AMENITIES ARE ANTICIPATED TO BE? >> YES. IF YOU LOOK AT THEY'RE ACTUALLY SPECIFIED ON TOP OF PAGE FIVE IN DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. THE DEVELOPER WILL PROVIDE AT LEAST TWO OF THE FOLLOWING: DOG PARK, PLAYGROUND, SWIMMING POOL, DISK GOLF COURSE, PLAYFIELDS, COMMUNITY GARDEN AND CLUB HOUSE.

GAME PLAN RIGHT NOW IS FOR CLUB HOUSE, SWIMMING POOL, AND THEN PARKS AND OPEN GREEN SPACE FOR PEOPLE TO GATHER AT WITH SEATING AREAS, PLACES FOR COMMON MEALS IN ADDITION TO A LARGE CLUB HOUSE AND A SWIMMING POOL THAT WOULD MAKE THIS A VERY ATTRACTIVE COMMUNITY. THAT'S TOP OF PAGE KNIVE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. -- PAGE FIVE IN DEELOPMENT AGREEMENT. >> COMMISSIONER CUTRIGHT. >> THANK YOU. >> YE, SIR. >> I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO HELP SINT SIZE REDUCTION IN SPICE PEOPLE CAN SEE -- I DON'T KNOW IF YOU ANY VISUALS TO HELP SHOW WHAT 20 TO 15 LOOKS LIKE.

I THINK THAT HELPS SYNTHESIZE WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE. >> YEAH. >> I'LL PAUSE THERE. >> I APPRECIATE THAT. UNFORTUNATELY, THE DURHAM PRACTICE IS, WE SHOW A GRAPHIC, IT'S GENERALLY TAKEN AS A COMMITTED ELEMENT OR TEXT COMMITMENT. WHAT I CAN EMPHASIZE IS THAT THERE WILL BE AS MUCH BUFFERING AS POSSIBLE ALONG THE WESTERN PROPERTY LINE. THERE'LL BE A LARGE CENTER GREEN SPACE/OPEN SPACE. THEN THERE'LL BE SIGNIFICANT TREE SAVE ALONG THE BOTTOM CORNER AND THE COMMUNITY AREA WILL BE AT ETRANCE OFF OF PAGE ROAD.

THERE WILL BE GREEN SPACE. THERE'LL BE SPREAD OUT THROUGH COMMUNITY AND WE WILL HIT 15% OPEN SPACE, WHICH IS MORE THAN SITE WOULD REQUIRE.HBORHOOD TIER SORRY WE CAN'T PROVIDE THAT ON THE RECORD. GENERALLY, IT'S TAKEN IF THE I PUT UP SITE PLAN -- WE'VE TURNED IN SITE PLAN SO THAT'S PUBLIC RECORD BUT IF I SHOWED YOU IT WOULD BE TXT AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING. >> APPRECIATE IT. >> WE WANT TO BE A GOOD NEIGHBOR, THAT'S WHY I PUT UP THIS LAST SLIDE BECAUSE IT SPECIFIES NEIGHBORS SINCE LINCOLN HAS OVR 170 PROPERTIES THEY UNDERSTAND HOW IMPORTANT THAT IS.

>> APPRECIATE IT. >> YES, SIR. >> AS WE THINK ABOUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN OUR COMMUNITIES, ONE IS IT'S NOT EASY. IT'S NOT EASY TO CREATE, PARTICULARLY 60% AMI AFFORDABLE HOUSING. IF YOU GET A CHANCE AND YOU WANT TO SEE SOME NUMBERS AND HOW THIS WORKS, GIVE ME A RING AND I'M HAPPY TO SHOW YOU THAT YOU CAN'T GET IT ALL, IT JUST DOESN'T WORK LIKE THAT, NOT THAT EASY. IT WAS, WE'D HAVE A LOT MORE OF IT SO THERE ARE SACRIFICES THAT HAVE TO OCCUR, SOME OF THAT BEING SCALE, AND SO AS YOU THINK ABOUT GROWING, THINK ABOUT HOW MUCH OR HOW MANY UNITS YOU NEED TO PUT ON A PARTICULAR SITE IT'S IMPORTANT TO CONSIDER THAT NUMBER AND SOMETIMES IT TKES SPACE TO FIT THOSE NUMBERS INTO A PARTICULAR SITE.

SO AS YOU'RE LOOKING AT AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND SOME OF THE SACRIFICES THAT HAVE TO BE MADE; SOMETIMES IT'S TREES, IN ORDER TO GET MORE SCALE SO NAH YOU CAN ACTUALLY FINANCIALLY AFFORD TO DO THESE PROJECTS. WITHOUT THAT, IT DOESN'T WORK AND THERE IS NO HOUSING, AND SO I TALK ABOUT THIS ALL THE TIME, THERE'S OFTEN SACRIFICE AND THE QUESTION IS WHAT ARE WE SACRIFICING. THIS CASE WE'RE SACRIFICING TREES AND OPEN SPACE, NOT ALL BUT SOME SO WE CAN CAN BUILD 160 UNITS FOR OUR COMMUNITY.

I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND THE NUMBERS AND HAPPY TO DISCUSS THOSE WITH ANYONE WHO HAS QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT. >> I'M GOING TAKE CHAIR PRIVILEGE AND PICK UP FROM COMMISSIONER CUTRIGHT LEFTOFF. WHEN WE DISCUSS AFFORDABLE HOUSING, THERE'S OFTEN ANYMORE BY AND MISCONCEPTION OF WHAT AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS AND THE DIFFERENT LAYERS OF AFFORDABLE HOUSE. THIS IS GOING TO BE BOND FINANCING WITH 4% TAX CREDITS OF 60% AMI. TYPICALLY PEOPLE AT 60% AMI HAVE A JOB. THEY'RE A POLICE OFFICER, TEACHER, FIREFIGHTER, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE THE FOLKS THAT YOU HAVE A SOME TYPE OF STEREO TYPE ABOUT THAT'S GOING TO COME IN AND JUNK UP YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD, IT'S FOTD GOING TO HAPPEN.

I'VE NEVER SEEN AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT THAT'S WITH TAX CREDITS THAT TYPICALLY HAS TO LOOK LIKE MARKET RATE BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO ABIDE BY RULES, BRING DOWN ANY TYPE OF PROPERTY VALUE E EITHER. WITH THAT, I'LL GET OFF MY SOAP DOKSBOX AND IF YOU WANT TO TALK, WE CAN TALK AS WELL. ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER WANT TO SAY SOMETHING? COMMISSIONER KOPEK. I RECOGNIZED YOU, SO YOU GO. >> THANKS. AND I UNDERSTAND THAT'S A ARKING REQUIREMENT FROM NORTH CAROLINA HOUSING AGENCY. IS IT SURFACE OR DECK AND DID YOU HAVE A CHOICE?

>> CHOICE BUT STRUCTUREDED PARKING WOULD BE COST PROHIBITIVE AND NOT FINANCEABLE. SO IT'S 100% SURFACE PARKING JUST LIKE THE OTHER DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN APPROVED BY THE CITY OF DURHAM FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING. ALL OF THOSE ARE SURFACE PARKED. 4% TAX CREDIT DOES NOT SUPPORT STRUCTURED PARKING. >> SECOND, YOU WERE DEVELOPING THIS PROJECT, WHAT WAS THE MAX NUMBER OF UNITS YOU LOOKED AT AND WHAT WAS THE MINIMUM? >> IT WAS ALWAYS RIGHT ON 160, I BELIEVE. YOU NEED THAT NUMBER OF UNIT TO SUPPORT A AN AMENITY PACKAGE I E REFERENCED, AND IT'S A FOOTDPRINT THAT'S WELL ESTABLISHED FOR LOW INCOME TAX E CREDIT PROJECTS AND ALSO LINCOLN COMMUNITIES.

THIS IS PROVEN TRACT REPORT ON HOW TO PROVIDE QUALITY AFFORDABLE HOUSING. AGAIN, FOUR STORY WITH ELEVATORS WITH AMENITIES AND THEN OBVIOUSLY WE HAVE THE PARKING AND STORMWATER CONTROL MEASURES. SO ALL THAT WAS FACTORED IN AD TO MY KNOWLEDGE WE'VE ALWAYS HAD A GOAL OF 160 UNITS AND THAT'S AGAIN TO MAKE OUR FINANCIAL MODEL WORK. >> I THINK IT'S HELPFUL JUST TO VOICE SOME OF THE TRADE-OFFS ARE THERE ARE FACED IN THIS SORT OF DEAL AND SINCE YOU'RE SAYING LIKE TO DO FEWER UNITS WOULD MAKE IT HARD TORE SUPPORT AMENITIES BUT THAT ALSO MIGHT ALLOW TO YOU HAVE MORE OPEN SPACE AND TREES BUT THAT WOULD BE SACRIFICING AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS WHICH ARE SO HARD TO COME BY AT 60%.

THOSE ARE SOME TRADE-OFFS THAT HAD BEEN CONSIDERED IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS, SO TO HAVE FEWER UNITS WOULD MEAN FEWER AMENITIES AND JUST FEWER UNITS. >> YES, EXACTLY RIGHT. WE CONSIDERED IT. WE HAD TWO LENGTHY NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS AND, YEAH, TO DROP DOWN TO 120 UNITS WE FELT WAS NOT GOOD PUBLIC POLICY, AND IT WOULD HAVE SACRIFICED PROBABLY THE AMENITIES THAT ARE REFERENCED IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT DOWN TO LIKE A TOT LOT. NOT ONLY DO BUT GET MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING NEXT TO EMENT EMPLOYMENT CENTER YOU GET BETTER QUALITY FOR THE COMMUNITY.

>> I VISITED THE SITE YESTERDAY AND I WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE AND THANK RESIDENTS WHO HAVE COME TO SPEAK AND THAT YOU KNOW IT CAN BE DISRUPTIVE WHEN YOU PROJECTS COME IN THAT DON'T LOOK LIKE THE PROJECTS, LIKE THE HOUSING THAT YOU HAVE IN PLACE, AND SO I E ACKNOWLEDGE THE DISCOMFORT IN THAT. ALSO CONSIDERING THE PROXIMITY TO THE EMPLOYMENT CENTERS AND KNOWING HOW DIFFICULT IT IS TO PUT THESE SORTS OF DEALING TOGETHER AND ACCESS AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR 60%, I'M GLAD TO SEE THIS COME FORWARD.

SO, THANK YOU. >> COMMISSIONER WOUK. >> HI. THANK YOU. AS I SAID EARLIER AND I GUESS AT THE WRONG TIME THAT THIS IS, 620% AM CIRCUS FANTASTIC, BUT -- 60% AM-I IS FANTASTIC. GIVING RESIDENCE -- HAVE WE CONSIDERED, LIKE, RAISING BUILDING HEIGHT AS A WAY TO E PRESERVE MORE TREES, MORE OPEN SPACE IN THIS AREA YET STILL GETTING 160 UNITS THAT MAKE IN PROJECT VIABLE? >> YOU HEARD CERTAIN FOLKS MENTION THE HEIGHT OF FOUR STORY. WE THOUGHT THAT GOING FIVE STORIES, WHICH IF I UNDERSTANDING YOUR QUETION, THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN OUT OF CHARACTER WITH THE COMMUNITY, AND AGAIN I'VE WORKED ON MOST OF THE DEVELOPMENTS IN THIS PART OF DURHAM.

I'M NOT AWARE OF ANYTHING THAT'S FIVE STORIES IN THAT PART OF DURHAM, SO I THINK IT WOULD HAVE BE SOORSLY OUT OF CHARACTER TO GO TO FIVE STORIES. USUALLY FIVE STORY APARTMENTS ARE ASSOCIATED WITH STRUCTUREDED PARKING, WHEN YOU'RE GETTING TO THAT LEVEL OAF DENSITY, SO -- OF DENSITY, SO, YEAH, WE LOOKED AT IT, BUT AGAIN, IT'S, WHEN YOU LOOKALITY THESE 4% LOW INCOME TAX CREDIT FINANCING PROJECT, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, I CAN TELL YO WHAT I'VE WORKED ON IN THE REGION, IT'S A FOUR-STORY EL VA SERVICED BUILDING WITH -- ELEVATOR SERVICED BUILDING WITH SURFACE PARKING AN WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE OTHER STNDARDS, YEAH, IT'S JUST UNFORTUNATE THAT IN THE SUBURBAN TIER SS SORT OF AN ASSUMPTION THAT YOU CAN GET MORE LAND.

WE E HAVE A FINITE AMOUNT OF GOT -- YOU PUT TOGETHER JUST E STORMWATER CONTROL AND RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION AND YOU LOSE PROBABLY TWO ACES. SO THAT 7-AND-A-HALF JUST GOT KNOCKED DOWN TO FIVE AND A HALF. YOU GOT THE PARKING -- I PROBABLY SHOULDN'T SAY THIS ON THE RECORD, 1.5 UNITS ISN'T A THAT MANDATE WE COULD PROBABLY BUILD LESS PARKING BUT WE DON'T HAVE A CHOICE, COMMISSIONER, WE DON'T HAVE A CHOICE. WE WERE VERY FORTUNATE TO GET DOWN FROM 1.75. IF WE WERE THERE, THESE NUMBERS WE'VE SHARED WOULD BE WORSE.

AND THE HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY DIDN'T HAVE TO GIVE US THAT REDUCTION. WE LOBBIED HARD AND GOT IT. AGAIN, THAT'S A CONDITION E WE CANNOT ALTER. WE HAVE TO PLAY THAT. >> THANK YOU. LET'S LET EVERYONE SPEAK FIRST. ANYBODY ELSE WANT TO SPEAK FOR THE FIRST TIME? NO. OKAY. A MINUTE SOMETHING LEFT. >> THANK FELLOW COMMISSIONER FOR RAISING ISSUE OF OPEN SPACE AND TREES BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING WE'D ALL BE VERY RELUCTANT TO AGREE OR OR SPEAKING FOR MYSELF IF IT WASN'T FOR SOME SIGNIFICANT AMENITY O BENEFIT.

THANK YOU FOR RAISING THAT AGAIN. I DON'T THINK I FULLY UNDERSTOOD THE BACK AND FORTH ABOUT THE ATT FRONTIER BUFFER. WAS THAT RESOLVED TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE RESIDENTS? DID WE ANSWER THAT QUESTION? >> IF I OULD ANSWER THAT, COMMISSIONER. HERE, YOU SEE THE RED TRIANGLE AT THE TOP OF THE SLIDE? ALL THAT RELATES TO IS ABOUT 120 FEET WHERE THERE WOULD BE RESIDENTIAL USE AGAINST THE COMMERCIAL USE OF THE ATT SWITCHING CENTER. THERE'S A VACANT LOT IN-BETWEEN THE TWO SO THE BUILDING IS 200 FEET AWAY.

SO IT'S A REALLY NEEDLESS BUFFER AND THE BUILDING'S NOT EASTBOUND OCCUPIED. IT'S JUST A BUILDING THAT HOUSES SWITCHING EQUIPMENT. SO IT'S NOT LIKE IN'S A BUNCH OF PEOPLE GOING THERE, AND THAT'S REALLY ALL WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IN TERMS OF THE PROJECT BOUNDARY BUFFER BETWEEN COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL AT THAT LOCATION WHERE IT SAYS 118.66 WAS MY ROUGH MEASUREMENT ON GIS. THAT'S ALL IT IS. >> SO THERE'S A BUILDING THERE. >> RIGHT, BUT IF YOU SEE IT, YOU CAN SEE IT ON THE SLIDE.

>> THAT'S ON THE SLIDE. >> IT'S THAT BUILDING ON THE SLIDE. >> AND WHAT IS HAPPENING WITH THAT BUILDING? IS THAT DESIRE BLG FOR SOME REASON? IS THE BUFFER DESIRABLE OR IN QUESTION? >> THERE'S A VACANT LOT INBETWEEN THE TWO SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT PURPOSE IT WOULD SERVE AND IF THIS SITE WERE TO BE REDEVELOPED THEN THERE'S MORE THAN ENOUGH LAND TO DO THE BUFFER ON THE WEST SIDE. >> ALL RIGHT. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE PROBLEM IS. IT'S A UTILITY BUFFER. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?

YES. >> I THINK THIS IS MAYBE A QUESTION FOR STAFF, MAYBE APPLICANT. IS THERE N WAY NOR PROJECT TO MOVE FORWARD WITHOUT CHANGING THE UDO? >> THAT IS CORRECT. >> THANK YOU. >> OKAY. [INDISCERNIBLE]. COMMISSIONERS, ARE WE READY TO MOVE THE TEXT AMENDMENT FORWARD? >> CHAIR AS RELATES TO TC2400003, STATUTORY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AMENDMENT, I MAKE A RECOMMENDATION WE MOVE THIS FORWARD WITH FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION. >> SECOND. >> IT'S BEEN MOVED BY COMMISSIONER CUTRIGHT; SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER KOPEK TO MOVE CASE TC2400003, STATUTORY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FORWARD WITH FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION.

MAY I HAVE THE ROLL CALL VOTE, PLEASE? [ROLL CALL VOTE]. >> TEXT AMENDMENT PASSES 6-3. >> THANK YOU. MAY WE HAVE A MOTION TO MOVE CASE Z2400023/BDG 24000012 PAGE CORNERS FORWARD? >> AS RELATES FO CASE Z 2400027 AND BDG2400012, PAGE CORNERS, FORWARD WITH A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION. >> SECOND. >> IT'S BEEN MOVED -- NOW I GOT TO LOOK AT MY I CHART -- FORWARD BY COMMISSIONER CUTRIGHT; SECONDED BY PIONTAK TO MOVE CASE Z2400027/BDG 2400012 PAGE CORNERS FORWARD WITH A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION.

MAY I HAVE THE ROLL CALL VOTE, PLEASE? [ROLL CALL VOTE]. >> FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION, 6-3. >> THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. MOVING FORWARD. YOU WERE TALKING REALLY SOFT THERE, I DON'T KNOW IF EVERYBODY HEARD THAT IT -- YEAH. >> APOLOGIES, IT PASSES 6-3. >> THNK YOU. 7-3. 7-2, IT WAS DIFFERENT THAN THE FIRST ONE. >> APOLOGIES. >> ALL RIGHT NEXT CASE, 2. Z2300049-BDG2300032 DANUBE LANE. MAY HAVE THE STAFF REPORT, PLEASE? >> GOOD EVENING, PEYTON BURGESS AND I'M HERE TO PRESENT THE Z2300049 DANUBE LANE TOWN HOUSES.

I WAS REALLY HOPING YOU WOULD HAVE A SOLID PRONUNCIATION OF IT BECAUSE AYE BEEN SAYING IT SEVERAL DIFFERENT WAYS SO IF ANYBODY KNOWS THE RIGHT WAY TO SAY IT, FEEL FREE TO LET ME KNOW. REQUEST IS FOR REZONING AN ANNEXATION OF 5.04 ACRES LOCATED AT 3824 AND 3810 GOING FROM RS-20 TO PDR 7.813. SITE CURRENTLY IN MIXED USE AND RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE PLACE TYPES. PROPOSAL IS FOR UP TO 30 DWELLING UNITS TO BE A MIXTURE OF TOWN HOUSES AND DUPLEXES. AGAIN, THE EXISTING ZONING IS RS-20, SURROUNDED BY SAME AN PSHGSZ DR.

THE AERIAL MAP SHOWS GENERAL LOCATION OF THE PROJECT. THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY DESIGNATED MIXED USE NEIGHBORHOOD AND REC RAIGS AND OPEN SPACE. THE PROPOSED ZONING WAS DETERMINE CONSISTENT WITH THE PLACE TYPE. THE APPLICANT HAS INCLUDED TEXTUAL COMMITMENTS. MAXIMUM OF 30 YUBLTS TO INCLUDE BOTH TOWN HOUSE AND DUPLEXES AND NO OTHER HOUSING TYPES. MINIMUM OF TWO DIFFERENT UNIT HEIGHTS AND WIDTHS. PROVIDING A PLAT FOR FUTURE CONSTRUCTION OF GREENWAY. CONSTRUCTION OF BUS PULLOUT AND CONCRETE PAD TO THE GO DURHAM SPECIFICATIONS. 10-FOOT CONCRETE SHARED PATH.

MEDIUM DANUBE LANE, AND 18% OPEN SPACE. THE GRAPHIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN SHOWS THAT THE BUILDING AND PARKING ENVELOPE IS KEPTED OUT OF THE ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS AND TREE PRESERVATION IS IN THAT AREA AS WELL. RED DASHED LINE IS PROPOSED CUB CREEK GREENWAY TRAIL. GREEN DASHED LINE ON THE BOTTOM IS TEN FOOT CONCRETE SHARED PATH FROM TEXT COMMITMENTS. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS HELD ON NOVEMBER 15, 2023, AND OCTOBER 8TH 20SHGS 24. EIGHT COMMUNITY MEMBERS ATTENDED FIRST AND ONE ATTENDED THE SECOND. NO DURHAM REZNING EXPLORER COMMENTS RECEIVED TO THIS CASE.

THE PROPOSAL IS FOUND T BE CONSISTENT WITH THE PLACE TYPE DESIGNATION OF MIXED USE NEIGHBORHOOD AND RECREATION OPEN SPACE CONSISTENT WITH 17 OF 26 CONCERN PLAN POLICIES. STAFF AND APPLICANT ARE AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU. AT THIS TIME, THE CHAIR'S OPENING THE PUBLIC HEARING. IS THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD. >> HELLO. LAURA HOLLOMAN, PROJECT MAG PLANNER ON THIS CASE WITH MAC ADAM, 2950 MY MER RID YAN PARKWAY. THIS IS A SMALL INFILL RESIDENTIAL PROJECT AS STAFF MENTIONED ALLOWING UP TO 30 RESIDENTIAL UNITS AND WE'VE WORKED HARD TO MAXIMIZE THIS SITE AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE WHILE BEING MINDFUL OF SENSITIVE ENVIRONMENTAL AREAS.

THIS IS BHIE WE HAVE CHOSEN NOT TO DEVELOP THE NORTHERN PORTION OF THE SITE, IT'LL BE LEFT OPEN SPACE. SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE SITE WILL BE WHERE RESIDENTIAL UNITS ARE ALLOWED. THIS FITS IN NICELY WITH SURROUNDING AREA. AS YOU ALL ARE AWARE CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION ADJACENT TO THIS SITE ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF CARVER LANE IS CUB CREEK STATION WHICH IS URN CONSTRUCTION OW AND HAS A MIXTURE OF TOWNHOMES AIR, APARTMENTS AND SINGLE FAMILY. THE LAND HAS BEEN CLEARED DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THIS SITE.

THAT TOTE O L DEVELOPMENT TOTALS APPROXIMATELY 134 ACRES. AS WE MOVE NORTH OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTED AREA, THERE ISES AN EXISTING TOWNHOME COMMUNITY CALLED NEW BLAN TOWNHOMES SO THIS IS A NICE TRANSITION TO THEM. THEY'LL HAVE A NICE ENVIRONMENTAL AREA. THEREFORE WE FEEL THIS PROJECT IS IN HARMONY WITH SURROUNDING AREA AND WE WERE HAPPY THAT STAFF AGREED AND AGREED IT WAS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AS WELL. ADDITIONALLY, WE HAVE COMMITTED TO SUBJECT TO GOTRIANGLE DETERMINATION CONTRACTING A BUS PULL OUT AND SHELTER EITHER ON CARVER OR ON DANUBE DEPENDING ON WHERE IT MAKES SENSE AT TIME OF SITE PLAN.

WITH THAT SAID, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS Y'ALL MAY HAVE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. >> THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE A SIGNUP SHEET FOR THIS? THANK YOU. NO ONE SIGNED UP. IS THERE ANYONE IN THE GALLERY THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS THAT HAS NOT SIGNED UP? NOPE. IS THERE ANYONE ON THE ZOOM THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS CASE? IS THERE ANYONE IN ZOOM THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS CASE? ALL RIGHT. HEARING NONE, THE PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW CLOSED.

WE'RE NOW OPEN FOR COMMISSIONER DISCUSSION AND QUESTION. COMMISSIONER WOUK. >> COUPLE QUESTIONS. ONE, THIS IS IN A TRANSIT OPPORTUNITY AREA WHERE IT'S REQUESTING 20% OF UNITS BE AFFORDABLE -- IS MY FIRST QUESTION. ANOTHER ONE IS I SNOW TIS YOU'VE NOT COMMITTED TO ANY NATIVE PLANTINGS WHICH SEEMS FOR SUCH A SMALL PROJECT SEEMS LIKE A FAIRLY EASY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICY TO COMPLY WITH. >> THANK YOU FOR YOUR QUESTION. YOUR TWO QUESTIONS. FIRST OF ALL, AFFORDABLE UNITS WE UNDERSTAND THAT. WE UNDERSTAND THE POLICIES AT WHICH DURHAM IS TRYING TO MOVE FORWARD.

HOWEVER, WITH THE PROJECT OF THIS SIZE WTH ONLY BEING 30 UNITS IT'S REALLY HARD TO MAKE THAT WORK. IT'S SOMETHING WE'VE CONSIDERED AND WILL CONTINUE TO CONSIDER BUT JUST GUY BUY CRUNCHING THE NUMBERS OVER THE LAST YEAR-AND-A-HALF, THIS IS JUST SOMETHING THAT IT'S DIFFICULT TO DO WHICH IS WHY AS YOU ARE FAMILIAR WITH PROJECTS THAT HAVE COME THROUGH SIMILAR SIZE, YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO COMMIT TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING AS WELL, BUT CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND YOUR POINT. IN TERMS OF NATIVE PLANTINGS, THAT'S A GREAT IDEA FOR A COMMITMENT AND I THINK SOMETHING THAT WE WILL HAPPILY ENTERTAIN.

>> THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ARE WE READY TO MOVE THIS CASE FORWARD. COMMISSIONER KOPEK. >> THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION. I DO NOTE AND APPRECIATE THAT YOU ARE FOLLOWING COMP PLAN AROUND PROTECTING SENSE TI AREAS AN I LO THE SET ASIDE OF THE SPACE FOR THE FUTURE TRAIL. WITH THAT IN MIND, YOU KNO, SECONDING THE NATIVE PLANTS, THANK YOU FOR BEING WILLING TO MAKE A COMMITMENT ON THAT, IT ALSO CALLS TO GO BEYOND THE MINIMUM CERTAIN OF THE OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTIC OF A SITE LIKE TREE COVER AND I NOTICE YOU COMMITTED THAT AT THE LEVEL REQUIRED BY UDO BUT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IT ASKS FOR PROJECTS TO GO BEYOND THAT AND SIGNIFICANT NATURAL AREAS IS THAT SOMETHING YOU'VE CONSIDERED AND WOULD YOU CONSIDER INCREASING THE PERCENT OF TREE COVER?

>> I THINK WE'RE, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW THE MATH HOW IT WORKS OUT IN TERMS OF THE FULL AREA NORTH, BUT JUST WANT TO BE MINDFUL OF THE FACT WE DID LOOK AT THAT, HOWEVER, WE ALSO KNOW THERE'S A TRAIL THAT'S GOING THROUGH THERE, SO IS THERE AN OPPORTUNITY TO, YOU KNOW, DOES THE SNI THE FUTURE WANT TO MAKE THAT A WAY-FINDING AREA WHERE YOU HAVE A TRAIL HEAD AND SOME THINGS THERE, YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHY WE WERE RELUCTANT TO LOOK UP MORE RESERVING MORE TREE COVERAGE.

ADDITIONALLY THERE ARE EASEMENTS THAT RUN THROUGH THERE THT THE CODE DESN'T ALLOW US TO COUNT, SO IT JUST ENDED UP BEING, YOU KNOW, HONESTLY, IF THAT, IF THAT DIDN'T SET UP SO NICELY FOR ENVIRONMENTAL, THIS PROJECT WOULDN'T WORK BECAUSE ASEN WHEN YOU'RE DEALING WITH -- YOU SAW IN PREVIOUS CASE THAT SITE HAS SEVEN ACRES, WE'RE AT LESS TAN FIVE WHEN WE DO RIGHT-OF-WAY DEAD KAGSZ AND ACCOUNT FOR THE 10 FOOT SHARED PATH WHICH WE'RE HAPPY TO DO, BUT WHEN REWE HAVE TO PUT IN A ROAD THAT GOES THROUGH THE SITE, MEET STORMWATER REQUIREMENTS, YOU KNOW, THIS SITE IS JUST, IT'S TIGHT AS A TICK JUST TRYING TO GET EVERYTHING IN BUT I SEVENLY UNDERSTAND YOUR POINT AND YOUR WILLINGNESS TO MOVE FORWARD WITH ADDITIONAL TREE COVERAGE BUT UNFORTUNATELY IT'S JUST A SITE WE'VE DONE ALL WE CAN.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU. THE BIKE AND PEDESTRIAN COMMISSION HAD ASKED YOU TO LOOK AT ADDING THE BALL LARDS TO THE STREET AND DID YOU FIND OUT HOW MUCH THAT WOULD COST AND WHAT'S THE CONSIDERATION AROUND ADDING THAT? >> IT'S SOMETHING WE LOOKED AT. AGAIN, THE BIKE PED IS OBVIOUSLY WE TRIED TO DO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO MEEK THOSE REQUIREMENTS. IT'S SOMETHING THAT'S AN ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND THEY DO A GREAT JOB LOOKING AT ALL CASES. I THINK WITH WE FELT FELT LIKE WE COULD DEDICATE OUR BEST BIG TICKET ITEM ON SUCH A SMALL WHICH WAS 10 FOOT SHARED PATH CONSTRUCTING THAT PRIOR TO THE FIRST CO SO THAT'S WHERE WE CHOSE TO PUT OUR MONEY TOWARDS.

>> OKAY. AND [INDISCERNIBLE] THE TRANSIT STOP IS RIGHT THERE AND SO I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMITMENT TO DO THE BUS PULLOUT THERE AS WELL. OKAY. THOSE ARE MY QUESTIONS, THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? NOPE. READY TO MOVE CASE FORWARD? ALL RIGHT. MAY I HAVE A MOTION? >> REALLY QUICK BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD, WAS THAT AN OFFICIAL PROFFER FROM THE APPLICANT FOR NATIVE PLANTINGS? >> YES. >> THANK YOU SO I CAN GET THAT ON RECORD. >> READY NOW?

>> CHAIR AS RELATES TO CASE Z2300049 ANNEXATION BDG2300032, DANUBE LANE I I MAKE RECOMMENDATION WE MOVE THIS CASE FORWARD WITH FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION. >> SECOND. >> Y'ALL ARE SCARED TO SECOND. IT'S BEEN MOVED BY COMMISSIONER CUTRIGHT AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER PIONTAK TO MOVE CASE Z2300049/BDG2300032, DANUBE LANE, FORWARD WITH A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION. MAY I HAVE ROLL CALL VOTE, PLEASE? [ROLL CALL VOTE]. >> PASSES 9-0. >> THANK YOU. 30 MINUTES. NEXT ZONING MAP CHANGE CASE IS 3. Z2400012 BRIER CREEK MULTIFAMILY. MAY WE HAVE THE STAFF REPORT, PLEASE?

>> THANK YOU, CHAIR CAMERON. THANK YOU. THIS IS BRIER CREEK MULTIFAMILY. THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION SUMMARIZES THE APPLICATION. TEN PAR CRIMINALS OF LAND TOEL TOTALLING 16.56 ACRES PROPOSED FOR TOWN HOUSE DWELLING UNITS AN ACCESSORY USES. EXISTING ZONING IS RR AND ALSO RS-10. THE APPLICANT PROPOSED TO CHANGE THIS DESIGNATION TO PDR 25.000. THE AERIAL MAP SHOWS THE GENERAL LOCATION OF THE PROJECT. THE SITE IS SURROUNDED TO THE WEST, SOUTH, AND EAST BY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OF VARIOUS DENSITIES. TO THE NORTH IN DURHAM COUNTY THERE IS AN INDUSTRIAL USE AND SOME UNDEVELOPED LAND.

THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY DESIGNATED MIXED RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD ON THE PLACE TYPE MAP. THE PROPOSED ZONING IS CONSISTENT WITH THE DESIGNATED PLACE TYPE. THE FOLLOWING ARE SUMMARY OF COMMITMENTS. ROOFING AND EXTER YOUR DESIGN COMMITMENT. MINIMUM OF 35% NATIVE SPECIES. 10 FOOT SHARE PATH. 3% WILL BE 80% AMI. MAXIMUM IMFEFRS IS 70%. 180 LINEAR FEET OF OFF-SITE SIDEWALK. NAISH NEIGHBOR HOORD MEETINGS HELD IN ACCORDANCE ON JANUARY 9, 2024, AND FEBRUARY 5, 2025. NO COMMENTS SUBMITTED TO EXPLORER IN RELATION TO THIS CASE. THE PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH PLACE TYPE.

PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH 15 OF F 25 COMP PLAN POLICY. STAFF AND APPLICANT HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU. AT THIS TIME THE CAIR IS OPENING THE PUBLIC HEARING. MAY THE APPLICANT PLEASE COME FORWARD? >> CAN I GET HELP PULLING UP OUR PRESENTATION? HERE WE GO. I THINK I GOT IT. >> GOOD EVENING. WORTH MILLS WITH LONG LEAF LAW PARTNERS, 4509 CREEDMORE ROAD IN RALEIGH JOINED BY BOB ZUMWALT HERE ON BEHALF OF MONTHS RIDGE LLC WHO IS THE OWNER AND REZONING APPLICANT FOR THIS CASE WE'VE TITLED BRIER CREEK MULTIFAMILY.

THE REQUEST CONCERNS SIX PARCELS ALONG ANDREWS CHAPEL L ROAD TOTALLING ABOUT 16-AND-A-HALF ACHE YEARS, SPLIT BY THE WAKE COUNTY/DURHAM COUNTY LINE. A PORTION OF THE PROPERTY ZONED RR, THE PLAN RS-10. WE'RE PROPOSING TO REZONE TO PDR 25 TO FACILITATE A TOWN HOUSE AND APARTMENT COMPLEX THAT WOULD TOTAL L 408 UNTS. WE'RE XINT WITH THE PLACE-TYPE MAP DESIGNATION AND CONSISTENT WITH WITH A MAJORITY OF THE RELATIVE POLICIES IN THE COMP PLAN. SO WE HAVE A LOT OF DIFFERENT HOUSING TYPES AROUND US TODAY.

TO OUR WEST ARE THE CORNERS OF APARTMENTS. TO SOUTHWEST ARE THE CORNERS TOWNHOMES. AND THEN TO OUR EAST AND OUR SOUTHEAST ARE THE TOWNS AT BRIAR CROSSINGS AND THEN AS YOU MOVE FORTHEY ARE DOWN ACC TO T.W. ALEXANDER YOU A 4-STORY APARTMENT COMPLEX WITH FIVE-STORY SENIOR LIVING ON THE SOUTHERN SIDE OF T.W. ALEXANDER. AS MENTIONED, THAT PORTION OF THE PROPERTY IN DURHAM COUNTY ZONED RR, THAT PORTION IN WAKE COUNTY ZONING RS-10 SURROUNDED BY PDR ZONING DISTRICTS TO OUR WEST AND OUR EAST.

COPY OF OUR DEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT MR. CAIN SHOWED AND I'LL NOTE A COUPLE OF THE HIGH LIGHTS FROM OUR REZONING CONDITIONS. WE'RE LIMITS BUILDING HIGHT TO 75 FEET AND THE TOWNHOMES TO THREE STORIES AND 35 FEET. WE HAVE BUILDING MATERIALS CONDITIONS, PROHIBITED BUILDING MATERIALS, WE'RE COMMITTED TO CONSTRUCTING THAT SIDEWALK EAST OF OUR PROPERTY TO THE INTERSECTION OF ACC AND ANDREWS CHAPEL ASSUMING THERE IS SUFFICIENT RIGHT-OF-WAY EXISTING THERE TO EXTEND THAT SIDEWALK ALL THE WAY TO THE TRAFFIC CIRCLE THAT YOU SEE TO THE WEST.

WE DO HAVE AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING CONDITION OF 3% OF UNITS AT 80% AMI FOR 20 YEARS. AND THEN TWO OTHER ZONING CONDITIONS WE WOULD LIKE TO OFFER THIS EVENING ARE A PRODUCT OF THE SECOND NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING THAT WE HELD IN FEBRUARY. MOST COMMON FEEDBACK WE SVED THAT MEETING WAS FROM NEIGHBORS AT IF TOWNS AT BRIER CREEK TO OUR EAST AND SOUTHEAST PRIMARILY CONCERNED WITH THE POTENTIAL FIVE-STORY HEIGHT AND IMPACTS THAT COULD RESULT FROM FIVE-STORY DEVELOPMENT NEAR THEIR TOWNHOME COMMUNITY, AND SO WHAT WE HAVE OFFERED HERE IS WITHIN 250 FEET OF THE SHARED BOUNDARY LINE WITH SOME OF THE HOA PROPERTY THAT IS HIGH LIGHTED IN BLUE THERE ON YOUR SCREEN, BUILDING HEIGHT SHALL NOT EXCEED FOUR STORIES AND 60 FEET SO PROVIDING A STEP DOWN IN HEIGHT.

AS YOU GET CLOSER TO THOSE ADJACENT COMMUNITIES. AND THEN ALONG THAT SAME BOUNDARY LINE, ESTABLISHING A MINIMUM 30-FOOT.6 OPACITY VEGETATIVE BUFFER AND ANY TREE CONSERVATION AREAS THAT FALL WITHIN THAT BUFFER COULD BE COUNTED TOWARDS THE VEGETATION REQUIREMENT, BUT WE THINK THAT THOSE TWO ZONING CONDITIONS IN CON CERT HELP TO PRESERVE PRIVACY BOTH AT THE GROUND LEVEL AND ALSO FROM THE OVERHEAD COMPONENT AS WELL. AS MENTIONED, THE PLACE-TYPE MAP DESIGNATION RECOMMENDS A VARIETY OF HOUSING TYPES. WE'RE PROPOSING A MIX OF TOWNHOMES AND APARTMENTS, PRIMARILY APARTMENTS HERE, AND AS MENTIONED, THIS REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH THE PLACE-TYPE MAP.

SO JUST TO SUMARIZE, WE ARE LOOKING TO REZONE 16 AND A HALF ACRES THAT'S SPLIT BETWEEN WAKE AND DURHAM COUNTY I FROM RR AND ALSO RS-10 TO PDR 25. FACILITATING TOWN HOUSE AND APARTMENT COMMUNE I CONDITIONS THAT ARE IN OUR PACK AS WELL AS TWO CONDITIONS WE PROVERED THIS EVENING. MYSELF AND MR. SUM WALLET ARE HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS -- ZUMWALT ARE HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. >> THANK YOU. I HAVE A LYLE OVERCASH, IS HE WITH DEVELOPMENT TEAM THAT'S SIGNED UP ON THIS?

>> SORY, REPEAT, PLEASE? >> LYLE? >> THAT'S OUR TRAFFIC ENGINEER IN CASE YOU HAVE TRANSPORTATION QUESTIONS. >> NO ONE ELSE. ANYONE HERE IN THE GALLERY THAT HAS NOT SIGNED UP THAT WANTS TO SPEAK ON THIS CASE? ANYONE ON THE ZOOM THAT WANTS TO SPEAK ON THIS CASE? -- PLEASE USE THE RAISE YOUR HAND FUNCTION TO BE RECOGNIZED. ANYONE ON THE ZOOM? ALL RIGHT. THIS PUBLIC HARING IS NOW CLOSED. WE'RE NOW OPEN FOR COMMISSIONER DISCUSSION AND QUESTIONS. COMMISSIONER WOUK. >> I HAVE A QUESTION, AND MIGHT BE FOR STAFF.

SO IT SAYS IT'S NOT COMPLIANCE WITH COMP PLAN POLICY TO PROTECT ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE LAND BECAUSE THERE'S NO COMMITMENT TO LOCATION OF OPEN SPACE. IS THAT CORRECT? THERE IS NO WRITTEN CONDITION THAT DESIGNATES SPECIFIC AREAS FOR TREE PROTECTION AND CONSERVATION, BUT THERE IS THE PRESENCE OF A NEW USE RIVER STREAM BUFFER IN THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF F OUR SITE AND THAT BUFFER IS REPRESENTED ON THAT DEVELOPMENT PLAN. >> THANK YOU. I ALSO WANTED TO ASK ABOUT THE AFFORDABILITY. TYPICALLY THE 30 YEARS, THE REQUIREMENT FOR THAT AND 20% OF UNITS WITHIN THE TRANSIT OPPORTUNITY AREA, IS IN THE COMP PLAN AND THEN ALSO I WAS -- YOU'RE COMMITTING TO 35% NATIVE AND COULD THAT POSSIBLY BE BUMPED UP HIGHER THAN THAT?

>> JUST TO, I'LL START WITH THE NATIVE SPECIES QUESTION. IS THERE A SPECIFIC, PERCENTAGE THAT WOULD BE ADEQUATE TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION? I THINK WE'RE OPEN TO SUGGESTIONS. >> I E MEAN I THINK 100 WOULD BE GREAT. >> I THINK WE CA DO THAT. ON THE AFFORDABILITY QUESTION, JUST DOING THE MATH, THE CURRENT CONDITION, WOULD RESULT IN 12 UNITS OF AFFORDABILITY, ARE THE OWNER AND APPLICANT CURRENTLY OUT OF THE COUNTRY AND I FEEL HESITANT TO MAKE QUESTION XHICHLTS ON THAT FRONT WITHOUT HIS INPUT FIRST.

IF IT'S THE COMMISSION'S WILL, YOU KNOW, WE CAN TAKE ANOTHER LOOK AT THOSE AFFORDABILITY OPTIONS, BUT THAT WAS WHERE OUR APPLICATION IS STRTED. >> THANK YOU. >> DOES STAFF NEED TO HEAR THAT PROFFER AGAIN TO MAKE NOTE OF IT? >> YOU'RE JUST INCREASING 35% TO 100 WITH THE COMMITMENT OR ALL REQUIRED PLANTINGS WILL BE NATIVE? DIFFERENT VARIATIONS PEOPLE CAN USE. >> WE WOULD BE OPEN TO ALL REQUIRED PLANTINGS BEING 100% NATIVE SPECIES T NORTH CAROLINA. >> OKAY. I'LL WORK WITH YOU ON THE LANGUAGE, BUT WE HAVE THAT.

>> THANK YOU. WITH THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS YOU 383 MULTIFAMILY UNITS SO I'M ASSUMING APARTMENTS AND 25 TOWN HOUSES. DO YOU PUT 1 UNITS DIVIDING AMINGS OR JUST PUTTING IN APARTMENT UNITS? >> I DON'T THINK THAT DETERMINATION HAS BEEN MADE TO DATE AS TO LOCATION OR THE BUILDING TYPE. >> 'CUZ I'M ASSUMING THAT THE TOWN HOUSES ARE GOING TO BE FOR SALE OR RENTAL? >> IT'LL ALL LIKELY BE RENTAL COMMUNITY. >> RENTAL. I'M SORRY, I SKIPPED IN FRONT OF EVERYBODY. COMMISSIONER KOPEK.

>> WAS I E CORRECT TO SEE THERE WAS NO DATA ON LATEST TRAFFIC VOLUME IN STAFF REPORT? DID I OVERLOOK IT? OKAY. AND THEN I SAW IT WAS A.6 MILE TO TRANSIT. TO A A, YOU KNOW LOT OF INTERSECTIONS HERE IS IT STILL WALKABLE; DOES ANYBODY KNOW, TO THAT TRANSIT EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT WITHIN THE QUART OVER A MILE THAT COMP PLAN CALLS FOR? MAYBE THE DEVELOPER CAN SPEAK TO THAT, BUT -- >> HERE'S A BETTER OVERALL MAP SHOWING THE AREA.

TO THE BEST OF MY -- THERE ARE SIDEWALKS ALONG ACC BOULEVARD, I END JUST EAST OF THE ROUNDABOUT, SO PART OF OUR DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE OBVIOUSLY INCORPORATING NEW SIDEWALKS ALONG OUR FRONTAGE AND WE'VE OFFERED A ZONING CONDITION TO CONSTRUCT A SIDEWALK IN FRONT OF THAT ONE PROPERTY SEPARATING OUR AASSEMBLAGE FROM THE TRAFFIC CIRCLE, ASSUMING THAT THERE IS SUFFICIENT RIGHT-OF-WAY EXISTING TODAY TO MAKE THOSE IMPROVEMENTS. SO THAT WOULD, I THINK, MATERIALLY IMPROVE THE WALKABILITY FROM THE SITE ALONG ANDREWS CHAPEL DOWN THROUGH ACC BOULEVARD AND TANTY WAY.

I CAN'T SPAK FOR CORNERS PARKWAY AS TO THE SAFETY OF THAT STREET, BUT AT LEAST AS FAR AS ACC BOULEVARD GOES, THIS IS A BIG PIECE OF SIDEWALK THAT WILL BE INCORPORATED INTO THE EXISTING PEDESTRIAN NETWORK. >> OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. AND ALSO JUST WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THE TOA CALL OUT OF 20% AFFORDABLE FOR 30 YEARS AND FAR PROJECT OF THIS SIZE, I HAVE DO HAVE CONCERNS AND I KNOW YOU'RE NOT ABLE TO ADDRESS IT BECAUSE THE PROJECT OWNER'S NOT ABOUT BOTH PERCENTAGE OF THE UNITS THAT ARE INCOME RESTRICTED AND THE FACT THAT IT'S NOT 30 YEARS.

>> I'LL CERTAINLY RELAY THAT TO THE APPLICANT AND WE'LL SEE IF THERE ARE IMPROVEMENTS WE CAN MAKE TO THAT CONDITION. >> SORRY, YES, GO AHAD. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR. SO IT LOOKS LIKE SEVERAL OF THE SCHOOLS IN THIS AREA ARE AT CAPACITY. WAS A PROFFER CONSIDERED TO OFFSET THE IMPACTS ON THESE SCHOOLS? >> I DON'T BELIEVE WE'VE CONSIDERED ONE TO DATE, NO, SIR. >> WOULD YOU BE OPEN TO CONSIDERING A PROFFER? >> I' HAVE TO WORK WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT ON WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE AND A DOLLAR AMOUNT.

I WOULD CERTAINLY LOOK -- I'M WILLING TO EXPLORE THAT POSSIBILITY. >> COULD STAFF REFRESH MY MEMORY ON WHAT THE MOST FREQUENT PROFFER TYPICALLY IS? >> SURE, THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. THERE'S BEEN LIKE A UNSPOKEN FORMULA FOR 500 PER STUDENT THAT EXCEED WHAT WOULD BE REQUIRED BASED ON EXISTING ZONING. PEOPLE OR APPLICANTS TEND TO USE THAT TYPE THE OF FORMULA FAR IT, BUT ANY COMMITMENT TO DPS WOULD BE CONSIDERED ABOVE AND BEYOND THE UDO. >> I THINK AT THAT RATE CONSIDERING THERE'S $177,000 ROUGHLY IMPACT PER STUDENT THAT SEEMS LIKE THAT WOULD BE A REASONABLE CONSIDERATION.

>> I CAN ABSOLUTELY LIKE INTO THAT AND CONTINUE TO WORK WITH MR. CAIN ON THAT DOLLAR AMOUNT AND THE CONDITION LANGUAGE. >> THANK YOU. >> IF THAT'S THE BOARD'S PREFERENCE. >> ABSOLUTELY. >> JUST WANT TO POINT OUT THAT WASN'T A SUGGESTION THAT'S A QUESTION. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ARE WE READY TO MOVE TIS CASE FORWARD? EVERYBODY GOOD? OKAY. >> CHAIR, AS RELATES TO Z2400012, BRIER CREEK MULTIFAMILY, I MAKE RECOMMENDATION WE MOVE THIS CASE FORWARD WITH A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION. >> SECOND.

>> THEY DON'T WANT TO LEAVE. IT'S BEEN MOVED BY COMMISSIONER CUT RIGHT AND SECOND BID COMMISSIONER CHAGARIS TO MOVE CASE Z2400012 BRIER CREEK MULTIFAMILY FORWARD WITH A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION. MAY WE HAVE THE ROLL CALL VOTE, PLEASE? [ROLL CALL VOTE]. >> PASSES 6-3. >> THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. 7:19. I DON'T THINK WE'LL GET DNE IN TEN MINUTES. BE DONE IN TEN MINUTES? PROBABLY. ALL RIGHT. LET'S GO FOR IT. ALL RIGHT. NOW WE HAVE CASE 5. Z2400032 EAST CLUB AT 85. MAY WE HAVE STAFF REPORT, PLEASE?

>> GOOD EVENING. PAY TON BURGESS IN FRONT OF YOU TONIGHT TO PRESENT Z2432 EAST CLUB AT 85. THE REQUEST IS FOR A COUNTY REZONING OF 13 POINT # 6 ACRES FROM RR AND COMMERCIAL NEIGHBORHOOD TO COMMERCIAL GENERAL WITH A TEXTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN. THE EXISTING PLACE TYPE DESIGNATION IS TRANSIT OPPORTUNITY AREA BUT IF THIS REZONING REQUEST IS APPROVED, STAFF WOULD RECOMMEND PLACE-TYPE MAP CHANGE TO SUBURBAN COMMERCIAL. THE REQUEST WOULD ALLOW FOR MOST USES IN THE COMMERCIAL GENERAL ZONING DISTRICT WITH SOME EXCLUSIONS THAT I'LL LIST WITH TEXT COMMITMENTS.

AGAIN, THE EXISTING ZONING ON THIS SITE IS RR AND COMMERCIAL NEIGHBORHOOD. THIS SITE IS ADJACENT TO PDR AND MORE RESIDENTIAL RURAL AND COMMERCIAL NEIGHBORHOOD WITH INDUSTRIAL LIGHT AND COMMERCIAL GENERAL LOCATED NOT FAR AWAY. THE AERIAL MAP SHOWS GEERAL LOCATION OF THE PRODUCT BEING AT INTERSECTION OF EAST CLUB BOULEVARD AND I 85. PROPERTY DESIGNATED TRANSIT OPPORTUNITY AREA ON THE PLACE-TYPE MAP. THE PROPOSED REQUEST MORE CLOSELY RESEMBLED THE SUBURBAN THIS IS SUMMARY OF TEXT COMMITMENTS FROM THE PROJECT ALONG WITH THE PROHIBITED USES I MENTIONED EARLIER.

THOSE ARE RESIDENTIAL USES, VEHICLE SALES, VEHICLE SERVICE, HOSPITAL, CEMETERIES, MOZLY YUMS, MEMORIAL GARDEN, DRIVE THROUGH, ELECTRONIC, PAINT BALL, ETC. THERE WILL BE A SIX FOOT TALL FENCE FOR THE NEXT DOOR PROPERTY. 30% OF SITE TO BE FOR TREE PRESERVATION WITH 8230% OF THAT ADJACENT OR WITHIN RIPARIAN BUFFER. NO DISTURBANCE IN THE NEW HOPE WILDLIFE CONNECTIVITY PLAN CORRIDOR. NATIVE PLANTINGS, AND CONTINUED A DEDICATED RIGHT AND LEFT TURN LANES WITH TAPERS, TEN FOOT CONCRETE SHARED PATH, NO MORE THAN ONE DRIVE I'LL BETWEEN RIGHT-OF-WAY AND FRONT OF PRIMARY STRUCTURE.

MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT OF 40 FEET. SITE ACCESS FROM EAST CLUB BOULEVARD. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS HELD IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING GUIDELINES ON SEPTEMBER 30, 2024, AND JANUARY 16, 2025. ZEN COMMUNITY MEMBERS ATTENDED FIRST, 12 ATTENDED SECOND. NO DRHAM EXPLORER COMMITMENTS SED IN RELATION TO THIS CASE. THE PROPOSAL IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE MRMENT PLACE TYPE DESIGNATION OF TRANSIT OPPORTUNITY AREA WITH THE PROPOSAL NOT REQUESTING ANNEXATION AND THUS LIMITING INTENSITY THIS REQUEST MORE CLOSELY ALIGNED WITH SUBURBAN COMMERCIAL PLAT AND STAFF RECOMMEND THIS BE CHANGE IF REZONING REQUEST IS APPROVED.

PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH 19 OF 22 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AN STAFF AND APPLICANT ARE AVAILABLE TO ASWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU. AT THIS TIME THE CHAIR IS OPENING THE PUBLIC HEARING. MAY WE HAVE APPLICANT COME FORWARD, PLEASE? >> GOOD EVENING. NIL GHOSH ATTORNEY AT MORNINGSTAR LAW GROUP AT 700 WEST MAIN STREET NEAR DURHAM. I'M GOING TO JUST TELL YU BRIEFLY ABOUT THE PROJECT. THIS IS AN UNUSUAL PIECE OF PROPERTY AND BASICALLY THE MAIN STORY AND THING YOU NEED TO UNDERSTAND ABOUT THIS PROPERTY IS THAT ACCESS A REAL ISSUE.

CURRENTLY THE SITE CAN B ACCESS BOTH FROM CLUB BOULEVARD AND KIND OF FROM 85. THERE IS ESSENTIALLY WEST OF THE SITE THERE'S AN EXIT OFF OF CLUB BOULEVARD THAT Ts INTO THE ACTUAL EXIT RAMP FOR 85, SO BASICALLY YOU'D HAVE TO COME OFF CLUB, GO DOWN THIS FAUX EXIT, STOP AT EXIT RAMP FOR 85, WAIT FOR TRAFFIC TO GO BY, CROSS OVER THE EXIT RAMP ON 85 AND ACCESS THE PROPERTY THAT WAY. WELL, WHEN WE TALKED TO NCDOT ABOUT ANY DEVELOPMENT FOR THE SITE, ANY AT ALL, THE REQUIREMENT FROM NCDOT IS T GET RID OF THAT ACCESS WHICH MEANS THERE IS ONLY ONE POINT OF ACCESS AVAILABLE FOR THIS SITE AND IT IS ON CLUB BOULEVARD AND IT IS VERY CLOSE TO THE EXISTING INTERCHANGE.

SO WE DON'T HAVE END USER IN MIND FOR THIS PROPERTY BUT WE KNOW WHAT WE DON'T WANT IT TO BE AND THAT IS ANTHING WHICH PRODUCES ANY KIND OF SIGNIFICANT TRAFFIC, SO WE ELIMINATED ANY TYPE OF USE THAT WOULD BE INTENSE FOR TRAFFIC PURPOSES, WE DID ADD TWO NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS. WE ALSO ELIMINATED USES WHICH I THINK WOULD BE INCONSISTENT AND MAYBE UNSAVER RI WITH THE SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. WE HAD TWO NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS, AND THE USES THAT ARE LEFT ON THE AVAILABLE PEOPLE GENERALLY FELT LIKE MADE SENSE, I'M NOT GOING TY TO OVERSELL WHAT'S GOING ON HERE.

THIS IS A LEFOVER PIECE OF PROPERTY AND THE OWNER TRYING TO FIND A WAY TO USE THE PROPERTY IN A WAY THAT'S NOT GOING TO CAUSE NEGATIVE IMPACTS TO TE ROAD NETWORK OR SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS AND I THINK THAT'S HOW WE'VE STYLED OUR REZONING REQUEST. SO WITH THAT I'LL ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TONIGHT. >> THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE A SIGNUP SHEET? ALMOST MADE IT WITHOUT ME ASKING AGAIN. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT.

IS THERE ANYONE ON THE ZOOM THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK? ANYONE IN THE GALLERY? HEARING NO ONE, PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED. NOW OPEN FOR COMMISSIONER DISCUSSION AND QUESTIONS. COMMISSIONER WOUK. >>, SO I TRAVEL TO THIS PROPERTY YESTERDAY AND IT IS A WEIRD -- IT'S I A REALLY WEIRD PLACE. CONSIDERING THAT IT HAS A WILDLIFE CORRIDOR AN A RIPARIAN AREA, HAVE THE OWNER CONSIDERED A CONSERVATION USE? I MEAN IT SEEMS LIKE THAT MAKES A LOT MORE SENSE THAN TRYING TO STICK SOMETHING ON THERE THAT'S NOT GOING TO -- THAT HAS SUCH CHALLENGING ACCESS?

>>, WELL, I CAN'T SAY THEY'VE CONSIDERE CONSIDERED CONSERVATION USE. WE'VE LOOKED AT THE SITE, I THINK YOU'VE SEEN THERE'S SIGNIFICANT COMMITMENT TO TREE PRESERVATION AND ALSO TO NOT IMPACT CORRIDOR. WE'RE LOOKING AT MAINTAINING THOSE AREAS. THIS SITE IS NOT THE BEST SITE, NO QUESTION ABOUT IT. BUT THIS PESON IS NOT TRYING TO MAXIMIZE AND USE EVERY SQUARE INCH. TRYING TO MAKE SOME REASONABLE USE OF THIS PROPERTY. IF YOU WENT TO THE SITE YOU MAY HAVE NOTICED, THERE IS A BUILDING ON THE SITE.

I THINK IT USED TO BE AN UP SHOP. THAT HAS CAUSED ISSUES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD BECOMING A HANGOUT SO I THINK FOLKS ARE LOOKING FOR IT TO BE SOMETHING THAT ISN'T GOING TO ENCOURAGE UNFAVORED BEHAVIOR BUT ALSO ISN'T GOING TO BE JUST LIKE A CONSERVATION AREA, ALTHOUGH DEFINITELY MUCH OF IT WILL BE PRESERVED. >> THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER KOPEK. >> I ALSO FOUND THIS SITE CONFUSING. I APPROACHED IT FROM A COUPLE DIFFERENT SIDES AND I BASICALLY MISSED IT WHEN I WAS COMING OFF 85 AND THE EXIT.

>> YEAH. >> CAME UP TO THE GAS STATION AROUND THE CORNER, BUT K LIKE COMING AT IT FROM THE RESIDENTIAL SIDE, IT SEEMS TO ME LIKE A MORE LOGICAL CONNECTION AND WHY WAS RESIDENTIAL RULED OUT FOR THIS SITE? >> YOU CAN'T DEVELOP THIS SITE IN A WAY THAT WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH THE PLACE-TYPE MAP FOR RESIDENTIAL. AS MENTIONED, THERE'S ONLY ONE POINT OF ACCESS BECAUSE THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES ARE E EITHER DEVELOPED OR ENVIRONMENTAL COMPONENTS, SO ON ROUGHLY 14 ACRES, THE MOST YOU COULD GET HERE IS 90 UNITS, AND I'M NOT SAYING THAT MAKES SENSE FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT I'M JUST SAYING TECHNICALLY THE MOST YOU COULD GET HERE IS 90 UNITS, IT'S JUST NOT ENOUGH FOR THE TYPE OF DENSITY THAT IS THOUGHT OF OR CONTEMPLATED FOR THE TOA PLACE TYPE, RIGHT.

I WOULD BE FRANKLY EMBARRASSED TO COME TO THIS BOARD AND SAY WE'RE GOING FOR PDR 1.1 ON THIS, BUT THAT'S ULTIMATELY ALL YOU CAN DO HERE BECAUSE YOU ONLY GET ONE POINT OF ACCESS. THERE IS NO CONNECTIVITY TO OR PARCELS. >> ALL RIGHT. THANKS. >> THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ARE WE READILY TO MOVE THIS CASE FORWARD? AWESOME. MAY I HAVE A MOTION, PLEASE? >> CHAIR, AS RELATES TO CASE Z2400032, EAST CLUB AT 85, I MAKE A RECOMMENDATION WE MOVE THIS CASE FORWARD WITH A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION.

>> SECOND. >> MOVED BY COMMISSIONER CUT ROOILTH AN CUTRIGHT AND SECY VICE CHAIR CHAGARIS TO MOVE FORWARD WITH A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION. ROLL CALL VOTE, PLEASE. [ROLL CALL VOTE]. >> FAVORABLE REC MN DACIAN, 9-0. -- RECOMMENDATION, 9-0. >> THANK YOU. I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANY COMMITTEE UPDATES. WE ALREADY MOVED NEW BUSINESS FORWARD. DO WE HAVE ANY STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS? NONE.

THIS MEETING IS ADJOURNED. SEE YOU IN APRIL.