Durham Planning Commission · Regular Meeting · September 9, 2025

Good evening. Welcome to the Durham Planning Commission. The members of the Durham Planning Commission are appointed by the city council and the county board of commissioners to make recommendations to the elected officials. We emphasize that the elected officials have the final say on any issue before us tonight.

While this meeting is being conducted in person, it is also accessible using the Zoom virtual meeting platform. In the virtual meeting platform, public participants do not have the ability to talk or be seen on video by default. In order to maintain meeting decorum and a discernable record of the meeting, the chat function has been disabled. For those attending in person, if you plan to speak on the agenda tonight, please go to the table to my left and sign up to speak.

When speaking, please state your name and your address clearly when you come to the podium. Please speak directly into the microphone. If you are attending the meeting virtually, you will be given the ability

to speak at the appropriate time. If you have pre-registered, your name will be called so you can make your comments just like an in-person public hearing. You may also call in during the meeting tonight by dialing 1317158592. If you call in during the meeting, you will need to wait until the particular public hearing you are interested in starts.

After all pre-registered speakers have shared their comments, I will ask if there is anyone else wishing to speak. At that point, you will need to digitally raise your hand by pressing star 9 on your phone. And when recognized, state your name and address before making comments. The applicant has a total of 10 minutes for a presentation. Each speaker after the applicant has two minutes to speak. Commissioners have five minutes for Q&A and will only be called upon to speak after for a second time after all other commissioners have chosen to speak for a

first time. Please have your thoughts and questions organized. Commissioners, as a reminder, after the public hearing is closed, you attain the floor by being recognized by the chair. Commission members, please remember you share this time with your fellow commissioners.

Keep your comments, questions pathy, and please don't repeat topics that have already been discussed or questioned. The time to make all public statements is before motions are made. Once a motion is on the floor and further discussion regarding that motion must all come after a second, all motions are stated in the affirmative. So, if a motion fails or ties, the recommendation is for denial.

Commissioners, if you are not ready to move a case forward, please indicate as such when questioned. Finally, I ask everyone here and on the Zoom commission members, staff, and the public to conduct themselves in a courteous and respectful manner. If someone fails to act in that manner, the

chair will ask the offending person or persons to leave the room or to be muted on Zoom until such time they regain personal control. If decorum fails to be restored, the chair will recess the meeting until a genuine commitment to act respectful and courteous is observed. After the case you are here for ends um and you want to leave, please leave the room quietly and um waiting for conversations until you have exited those glass doors behind us for your postcase discussion as the commission continues to its remaining business on the agenda. Thank you.

May we have the roll call vote, please? >> And that's the last time I will make that speech. >> Just a moment. I have a new computer and I'm still getting used to it.

There we go. Um, before we begin, I'll just like to acknowledge uh one of our new commissioners, Commissioner Montes. this is his first meeting. So, uh, grant him a welcome.

And I don't think I properly welcomed Commissioners Richie or Bailey last month. So, thank you for your service. I'd also like to mention that we still have, uh, Commissioner McCyver's seat. His term actually ended in June and his seat is still open.

So, if you live in Lebanon Township and would like to be a member of the planning commission for those you don't know, uh, Lebanon Township, basically think north of the Eno and west of the Little River. So, think, um, Roxboro Road, uh, Guest Road out north of the of the Eno River, that area. Um, we have a vacant seat and it's been available now for about 5 months. So, if you're interested, please apply through the county clerk's office. Uh, Chair Cameron >> here.

>> Vice Chair Shagaras >> here. >> Commissioner Capers >> here. >> Commissioner Oh, he's not on there. Commissioner Chicowski >> here.

>> Commissioner Copac >> here. >> Commissioner Hunter >> here. getting used to that. Commissioner Bailey >> here.

>> Um, Commissioner Richie >> here. Commissioner Woke >> here. >> And Commissioner Jacowski >> here. >> Pontac.

Did you call Did you call Commissioner Pontac? >> Oh, Commissioner Pontac and Commissioner Ninekner. >> Yes. >> They are not here, but we do have a quorum.

>> Okay. Thank you. All right, we do have a quorum established. There are no adjustments.

>> Oh, okay. You got her. There are no adjust

adjustments to the agenda. Next up is the approval of the minutes and the consistency statements from the August 12th, 2025 meeting. Um, may I have a motion, please, to approve? >> Some moved.

>> Is there a second? >> Second. It's been moved by Commissioner Copac and seconded by Commissioner Hunter to approve the minutes and consistency statement from the August 12th, 2025 meeting. All in favor, please say I.

>> I. >> Any opposed? >> The eyes have it. All right.

Uh, yes. And we did not properly have any of the new commissioners, I think, last time either introduce themselves. Correct. At the meeting.

Yes. So, let's let's go ahead and if you want to um introduce yourself and just tell a couple sentences about yourself and why you're interested in the planning commission. Yep. You can start over here on my left.

>> Sure. Thank you so much. Uh my name is Juan Monz. Uh resident here in Durham. Uh some of you may know me, some of you

may may not, but I'm super excited to be able to bring some expertise to land development. I'm a civil engineer by trade. I am a land developer. Um, so I do understand how this works.

Um, trying to bring some some technical analysis and experience to the board and and hopefully um bring some balance to to what I think could be uh a lot of potential here in Durham. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Commissioner Bailey. >> Good evening.

Thank you, Madam Chair. My name is Anitra Bailey. I'm a Durham resident as of May of 1999. I came here two years after I graduated from North Carolina ent.

My primary background is within corporate citizenship um anything dealing with community investments and I have a strong passion for strategic planning and for um just the logistics of how processes work and seeing the growth in the community over the years. I just became interested in the process and just wanted to learn more about it. So that's why I'm here.

>> Thank you Richie. >> Uh Ramsey Richie. I am a sustainable energy and affordable housing expert. It's what I do in my day-to-day job.

Um, and I'm really interested in what it means for cities and communities to grow affordably uh for everyone. So, that's why I wanted to be on the planning commission. I'm really excited to be here. >> All right.

Thank you all. All right. We are going to move to our um public hearings for our zoning map changes. The first case is Z 23 triple042 Lee Village Center.

Are we ready? >> No. >> Yes. Did Did you do a motion for the minutes?

>> Yes, you did. >> Yes, we did that. >> Okay, great. Thank you.

>> Do I need to slow down? >> Got a little distracted there. Um before I begin, I would like to state for the record that all items have been advertised in accordance with state and local laws and affidavit are on file in the planning department. This case is

the 230042 Lee Village Center. The request is to reszone from residential suburban 20 to compact suburban de compact suburban design core with a development plan. Compact suburban design support one with a development plan and compact sub design support compact suburban design support two with a development plan. 75 acres.

It is within the Lee Village compact neighborhood and is within the place type of transit opportunity area. As I mentioned before, the existing zoning is residential suburban 20. It is surrounded by a mix of zoning districts primarily residential compact to the

east and north. uh planned development residential and RS20 to the south and more RS20 to the west. The aerial map shows the general location of the project. It is located north of the terminus of Cambian Place at Sorry, that's not correct.

It is located west of Fairington Road and north of NC54. It is also near the interchange of 54 and 40. It is bounded on the west by George King Road. As mentioned before, the property is currently transit opportunity area on the place type map.

There are several notable commitments to be aware of. There are two different uh commitments regarding incomerestricted units either uh town houses or apartments. Uh elevators are committed for any multif family buildings over

twotory. There are additional project boundary buffers to the south and also design commitments as well as transit improvement commitments subject to go dry go Durham and go triangle approval additional storm water control measures a minimum 9% tree coverage commitment and specifically regarding transit I'm sorry traffic impact analyses rather than providing one at the zoning stage what they have committed to is providing a transit impact analysis is for each site plan that would be submitted under this zoning district. An attachment or an exhibit to the list of commitments in the textual development plan is this street and block diagram that's been provided uh showing the consistency with the adopted collector street plan and the road network and greenway trails that would be provided as part of the overall development.

Neighborhood meetings were held in accordance with the neighborhood meeting guidelines on April 11th, 2023 and August 6th, 2025. Six comments have been received by staff in relation to this case on the Durham Reszoning Explorer. Five are against and one was neutral. The proposal is consistent with the place type map designation of transit opportunity area as it as it is in the proposed zoning district that incur is a proposed zoning district that encourages urban streetscape form through bicycle pedestrian and transit oriented development.

The compact suburban design district and the compact design district both were um intended for the transit opportunity area place type and the proposal is consistent with 19 of 31 applicable comprehensive plan policies. Staff and the applicant are available for any questions. >> Thank you. At this time, the chair is opening the public hearing

after the May the applicant come forward after the fire truck is done. Good evening, Chair Cameron, Vice Chair Shagaras, members of the planning commission. I'm Patrick Biker. I live at 2614 Stewart Drive.

I'm an attorney with Morning Star Law Group and I'm here tonight representing Silven Lee LLC. While Silven Lee is the majority property owner for this case entitled Lee Village Center, I need to emphasize it at the outset that Lee Village Center is being put forward by longtime family owners and not a developer. Oh, sorry. I thought I was projecting pretty well. The Booker family has owned some of the acreage in Lee Village Center since the American Revolution. I think that was

about 250 years ago. The majority of Lee Village Center has been owned by the Harris family since 1979, which is a mere 46 years ago. I want to emphasize that the patriarch of the Harris family was the legendary city planning professor Britt Harris, a fellow in the American Institute of Certified Planners, who passed away in 2012. " unquote.

Prof. Professor Harris's son Jed, his daughter-in-law Wendy, and his granddaughter Laurel are all here with us tonight. They are spearheading the long-term development of Lee Village Center. I'm also joined by Dan Juel, the regional director of Thomas and Hutton to represent these longtime property

owners in Southwest Durham. Over the past 15 or 20 years, Dan and I have become good friends with the Booker and the Harris families, and so it is a privilege to represent them this evening. At the outset, I noted that the staff report mentions the natural heritage program. It is important to recognize that this program relates only to the western edge of Lee Village Center along George King Road.

As you can see in our presentation, this area will primarily be a dedicated greenway greenway. It is also necessary to emphasize that the natural heritage program is a nonregulatory information gathering program aimed at three things. The first is to inventory North Carolina's natural areas. The second is to gather and use information from those inventories to guide recommendations to create a network of nature preserves.

And the third is to encourage the protection of natural heritage. Of course, that principle could be rephrased as if you do not touch this land, it could become a natural heritage area. That principle would apply generically to many areas within 299 square miles of Durham

County. However, and this is a big however, the non-regulatory natural heritage program does not account for the fact that for at least 20 years, our planning department has designated the parcels you are considering tonight for transit oriented development. From its adoption back in 2005, our former comprehensive plan called for Lee Village to be a higher density mixeduse development as shown on the 2005 future land use map. Our ownership team has always strongly supported that vision for this area of Durham.

And what was stated in 2005 was confirmed in the Durham future place type map adopted in October of 2023 with a designation of transit opportunity area. In our recently adopted comprehensive plan, a key component and perhaps the dominant theme is creating the 15minute community. Based on my 30 years of working with our planning department, I would say that compact suburban design is the best means available to implement that goal of a 15-minute community. In

3. " unquote. Accordingly, our team has been very sensitive to the surrounding existing neighborhoods by designating areas within Lee Village Center across the southern edge of support one and support two as shown on this slide. 6 opacity buffer along the southern property line adjacent to the existing neighborhood.

Therefore, these subdis district boundaries become enforceable zoning conditions if we are fortunate enough to receive approval. Next, I wish to address policy 165 referenced at the bottom of page 11 and top of page 12 that has to do with those infamous doughnut holes. I am happy to

report that we are making good progress on two out of of the three donnut holes. We have a handshake agreement for submitting an annexation petition for the parcel at the end of Wendell Road, which is the uh yellow rectangle that you see uh at the top top just to the right of the center here. We also have um an agreement with the parcel at the end of Hornbeam Drive on the eastern edge of Lee Village Center, which is going through an estate proceeding. After the estate is closed, we expect that parcel to become part of Lee Village Center as well.

While the three parcels at the end of Crescent Drive probably won't be annexed any annexed anytime soon, at least two of the three donut holes um noted in the staff report should be fixed in the near future. As shown on page four of your staff report, there are ranges of dwelling units stated for each subdist. Taken as a whole, the number of units in Lee Village Center ranges from a minimum of 1,667 to a maximum of 2,294. This lack of a specific number in this

range of over 600 units reflects the fact that there's this is an ownership team and not a developer applying for this zoning map change. Since there is no specific program of development, it was not possible to perform an overall traffic impact analysis. Rather, every phase of Lee Village Center will have to perform its traffic impact analysis at the time of sight plan. This allows for increased background traffic to be counted, which in the long run will make sure that required traffic improvements mitigate all the traffic generated in the area.

You may well hear objections tonight based on traffic. And another fact to show how seriously our team took this issue is that drive-through facilities, either for a restaurant or for a bank or a pharmacy or for anything, are strictly forbidden. Convenience stores with gasoline sales are forbidden as well. I reference those use prohibitions because it shows how the ownership group for Lee Village Center has taken concrete steps to reduce its financial return on the sale of this acreage.

Moreover, the owners have committed to treat the 100-year storm and exceed required UDO tree coverage. Similarly, the ownership team has stepped up to the plate on affordable housing. I personally do not know any other owners who would willingly take this big of a hit to their resale value. I hope all the members of the planning commission noted that there is a text commitment on page four that imposes affordable housing requirements on any resident residential developer who develops a phase of Lee Village Center.

In closing, Compact Suburban Design is the zoning district that probably is better than any other zoning district at implementing our comprehensive plan for creating 15minute communities. I think this assertion is backed up by this quote from former planning commissioner and current city council member Nate Baker who on April 21 of this year during the approval of the page Miami design district re reszoning said quote the more property we can put into zoning districts like this compact suburban design the better. The more

pedestrian and transit oriented we can be as a city moving forward. For all these reasons, we respectfully ask for your approval. And Dan and I will be happy to answer any questions. We'd like to reserve the remainder of our time for rebuttal.

Thank you. >> Thank you. >> We have the signing sheet. Thank you.

have a Dr. Shelby. >> Please uh speak into the mic and state your name and your address. >> Thank you, Madam Chair.

I am Chris Selby. I live at 138 Celeste Circle in CHAP in uh Durham City. And uh at the collector street plan

meetings, we learned that collector streets are physically and spatially designed to link local streets with arterials so as to provide connectivity and best traffic movement. The adopted collector street plan map includes two north south collectors linking local streets in Lee Village as well as southwest Durham Drive with the arterial NC54. The problem with the Lee Village plan is while the collectors are in the their plan, their connections to NC54 are not. Rather, the two north south collectors in Lee Village linked to NC54 through two local streets.

These two local streets are in my neighborhood, Eastwood Park. Electra Street traffic would be unsafe on our local streets, especially considering absence of sidewalks, narrow streets, and pedestrian traffic of all ages, including strollers, pets, and local employees. Amplifying the problem is the plan to atrophy the Fington Road intersection with NC54 and reroute

Southwest Durham Drive through the two north south collectors. To be successful, the Lee Village plan should include connecting both collectors as collectors directly and properly with NC54 as a committed element. It does not matter whether the connections are made by developers or in coordination with the state. If the connections are not in the plan, then with the proposed phased site plan approval process and possible state involvement, making the needed connections will become an exercise in passing the buck.

>> Thank you, Madam Chair. >> Thank you. >> Next, we have Phil Post. >> My name is uh Philip Post.

I live at 104 St. Andrews Place uh 27517. I was speaking on behalf myself and 124 houses in the Oaks subdivision in or

Orange County. I've lived in um I mean in Durham County, but I've lived in Durham County in southwest area about two years longer than the Harrises have loaned their land. Um I speak to you tonight uh saying that the project is too dense and it doesn't contain uh open space, usable open space. Uh you can pencil it out.

It's 28 units an acre. But by the time these folks subtract the riparian buffers, the wetlands, the street wide arrays, we know that this is going to be developed at much higher than 30 units an acre. It's really a high density urban development in a area next to a one-lane gravel road, next to natural heritage lands, next to sensitive uh areas owned by the botanical garden. Uh this this kind of density is not appropriate because it's not transit oriented.

We've heard a lot about transit tonight. The staff report I think is an error. It says that the nearest transit stop is8 miles away. That's not true. The transit

28 miles from this development. It is not transitoriented and as you well know it there's no transit now and there's no transit proposed in the long range Durham plans to provide transit. So I'm afraid even though we've heard about transit tonight, it's not appropriate. The second thing about the staff report that I really take exception to is the closeness to a park.

2 miles to Lee Park and it's actually almost two and a half miles. you have to drive. There's absolutely no way for a pedestrian or a bike to get across the Interstate 40 um interchange safely to get to that park. Without a park and with this kind of density, maybe 6,000 people leaving these 2,300 uh uh units, we need to have open space on this tract. And I've sent you a map to suggest 5% open space, similar to

actually less than the adjoining apartment project in April. Thank you, >> sir. Thank you. Time is up.

Next, we have um Haley Shin. >> Hello. Um my name is Halley Shin and I am speaking as property owner at 6008 Crescent, which abuts the project on the souththeast corner. Um, I echo a lot of the same concerns as the speaker in front of me.

Um, this this project, we know it's it's been in development for a while. It made a lot more sense as a transportation opportunity area. when the light rail was predicted to be coming right through here. Um now where it is, it will be con contributing to more sprawl in Durham with the density

that's proposed on 80 acres. You all just recently saw the gateway at Brier Creek that had the same density spread out over 300 acres. Um, I know they said they're going to do peace meal traffic impact analyses, but what we saw that roughly the same number of units would provide 3,400 car trips. Um, that's what the gateway at Brier Creek was estimating.

So, we can estimate that this transit island, because there's no transit here, can reasonably contribute 3,400 car trips. Um I am also concerned about the environmental impact with this being watershed for um Jordan Lake. This area will be developed at some point. I feel that this plan has a lot of work to do to meet with the with the personality of the neighborhood and what is there. It is a residential area and yeah it's

it's coming. But this this could use a lot of work. Not to mention the impacts on the local schools. Jordan is already over um over capacity for students and certainly a 2,000 unit development will contribute to that stress on DPS.

Okay. Thanks. >> Thank you. >> Those that are on the Zoom, please use the raise your hand feature.

Um if you're on Zoom, raise your hand if you are if you've called in. Um, hit star 9 and I'll begin calling on people on the Zoom. There's no one else in the galley that like to speak. It's here.

No. Okay. Uh, first we have Ryan Stewart. >> Hi. Yes. I'm Ryan Stewart and I am calling as a resident of Chapel Run and I am actually currently our community's

HOA. So, I will be speaking on my behalf as a resident as well as my fellow residents. Um, I'm going to probably reiterate a lot of things that have already been said. And a big the biggest concern that our community has is that this development simply does not align or conform with the surrounding area and current use. Uh Macy Grove, Celeste Circle, Crossland, Chapel Hill Run are all compromised of lots that are a tenth of an acre to half an acre for residential use. George King Road has multiple residential homes and some rural areas including horse property and also a UNCC diminish uh a lot of our enjoyment of our current community and that this massive development is simply not going to mirror what the surrounding area currently dictates.

Some of our additional concerns include a series of loss of our privacy, traffic, infrastructure, safety, property values, as well as the environmental impact. I have to say that I feel that residents surrounding this development will suffer a great loss and the developer simply is trying to overuse this land and not for their benefits. Thank you. >> Thank you, >> Brian Sugg.

>> Thank you. My name is Brian Sugg and I live at 304 Drive in the Oaks Villas community that's just inside the western boundary of Durham County. Our neighborhood is within half a mile of the proposedly village center. I am against this development in its current form primarily because of the high level of density that is composed with upwards of 2200 plant units. I would like to direct

the attention of the commission to the western boundary of this project that learns along George King Road. Directly across George King Road has been stated the majority of this boundary is the upper foul empoundment. This is federal property that is leased to the state and managed by the North Carolina Wildlife Commission. As such, it is also open game land that is available for public hunting.

Anyone, myself included, who lives within a half mile of this land can attest to hearing the regular sounds of gunfire during hunting season, especially this time of year as we approach October and November. It's common place for us to be awakened by this with thousands of residents being proposed directly adjacent to a waterfell empowerment that is used for public hunting. It's really hard to comprehend. I don't think it's fair to the future residents of such a dense mixed development to be subject to the regular sound of gunfire during hunting season and it can be very unsettling for those of us who already live in the area today. That said, I would encourage the

planning commission when considering zoning around not only for Lee Village Center but for other future developments to please pay close attention to the management of residential zoning in relation to how neighboring wetlands are utilized for recreation. To me, it would seem more logical to maintain denser development closer to the interstate and transition with lower density to single family homes approaching waterfell empments such as this. Thank you. >> Thank you.

Next we have Tim Carter. >> Go ahead. >> Uh, can you hear me? Yes.

Thank you. Thank you so much for allowing me to speak. In addition to all the concerns that have been raised previously, I want to point out that there are a lot of very mature trees in >> Sir, uh, please state your name and your address. >> Oh, I'm sorry. Tim Carter, 220 Macy Grove, Chapel Hill 27517.

Uh, in addition to what's already been said, I want to point out that um there are a lot of very mature trees um in that area that are going to disappear and there are already significant water runoff problems extending down George King Road into the Chapel Run area and through Celeste Circle. um those problems are probably going to increase once you have more impermeable surface in the area of Lee Village Center and I don't see any real acknowledgement of that runoff problem and how it might address be addressed in the current proposal documents. Thank you very much. >> Thank you.

Is there anyone else on the Zoom wishing to speak on this case? Please use the raise your hand feature. Is there anyone else in the audience here in person?

All right. At this time, the applicant uh can come back up and address the community concerns. One more. Oh, sorry.

Sarah, sorry, Patrick. Uh Sarah the Hi there. Can you hear me? >> Yes.

>> All right. Perfect. Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm Sarah Thelen living at 11:05 Doc Nichols Road in Durham, North Carolina.

Um, so there was talk about shortages uh and impact to the education system and the previous um meeting there was talk about impact to the fire and EMS. My question for folks is is where you expect firefighters and and teachers to live? Um the median salary of a firefighter is 66,000 a little over 66,000 which means they would have to give about 47% of their monthly salary to live um in some of these homes that are that are being proposed. Um a teacher is even lower 56,000 55% of their monthly salary. So, some of

these denser town homes um town home developments um that have been proposed would actually be affordable for some of these folks. I just want to keep have people keep that in mind. >> Um something else that >> um I'm sorry, Sarah, are are you are you uh commenting on Lee Village or on Sage Brook Townous? >> Oh, Sage Brook.

I'm so sorry. >> Okay. Yes. This is this yours the next case.

Thank you. >> I'm so sorry. That's right. All right, back to the There you go.

Back to our regular schedule appropriate. >> Yeah, thank you, Madam Chair. Again, Patrick Biker for the applicant. Very briefly, uh I didn't mention it because it's a UDO requirement.

There is a 5% public open space requirement in the compact suburban design district. So, my friend Mr. Post who referenced 5% uh public open space. While we're doing that because the UDO requires it, also wanted to address um some of the

environmental concerns and introduce Dan Juul to talk about native plantings as a way to address that issue. >> Thank you, Patrick. Dan Juel, Thomas and Hutton, 1025 Gloria Avenue in Durham. Um so, we've had some conversations here over the last day or two about some of the environmental issues.

Uh we'd like to offer uh an additional text commitment tonight that 50% of the required plant materials will be native plant materials. I think many of you heard me say before there's not enough native plant materials grown in a three-state area to provide a project of this size, but we'll commit to at least a minimum of 50% of the plant materials will be native plant materials. Uh secondly, I've actually had some uh email conversations with with my friend Phil Phil Post about the uh natural heritage inventory area that might be there. Um uh and um I think if we could

pull up the map that shows the street network. I don't know if we have that anywhere. There you go. So the um if you can see the cursor here, I just like to explain the u the collector road plan that Mr.

uh Selby referred to uh does in fact show George King Road swinging around and coming down in this location here. Uh what it does is it it cuts off this triangular portion of the the property. And and this property, by the way, there's a house right here. Okay.

That was the uh am I out of town time for rebuttal? >> Yeah. >> Okay. All right. I'll I'll cover that later during the Q&A period. How's that

sound? Okay. All right. Um, the public hearing is now closed and we are now open for commissioner discussion, questions.

>> No. If you do you have a question, >> Commissioner Montes? >> Yes. >> Yeah.

I have I have just one question either to applicant or staff. Um, on the staff report, says rightway dedication or reservation. The Falcon Bridge Road extension shall have a rideway >> talking to the microphone. >> I'm sorry.

>> Yep. Um that the Falcon Bridge extension shall have a rideway of 110 ft wide. Is is this for some reason implicating that we're extending right away from Falcon Ridge and even looking at is is that a mistake by any chance that we're looking at the wrong road here? Is that meant to say Huntington Bridge? Huntington Bridge

place. >> The Falcon Bridge Road is a little roundabout across 54. So >> it becomes a new north south collector road. >> Okay.

>> There. Yeah, they have new collector roads in there. >> Okay, that makes sense then. Um, >> that clarifies.

I I was looking at I was looking at the map just across 54 and it looked like Falcon Bridge Road was um simply a like almost a roundabout. But um yeah, I I don't have any questions. I would just want to want to state that knowing um as as the applicant said that this is an owner um who is applying for this case and looking at the affordable housing incentives that have been put forward 60 um and 80% and up to 100% AMI uh for 30 years is is incredibly I mean that's impressive. That's more than what most

developers would do. Um so I I commend that. Um, and then like the only other question I had, um, the I understand the development plan is an exhibit and, you know, it's it's just meant for, um, more or less a description of what it's going to be. The greenway along the left side along George King Road, it just seems to meander across what would be a collector road and across George King.

Um, is there any form of thought and I understand the TIA is going to come later. Is there any form of thought of just addressing the crossing there if it does cross that that you know there'll be a pedestrian crossing or something along those lines? >> Okay. >> You want to state that in the microphone, Dan, for so everyone watching can hear?

>> Yes, we're we're currently working with NC DOT. In fact, we have a call tomorrow to start this conversation. But yes, there would be a uh we would we would uh advocate for a pedestrian push button

crossing at that location for that. >> Great. Great. >> That's all I got.

Thank you. >> Thank you. Commissioner Copac, do you have any? >> You anticipated that I had questions.

>> I can read body language. >> Yeah. Yeah. Um so, a few questions.

First of all, I'd love to just address where you were going uh around this kind of triangle parcel on the southwest corner and what your thoughts are about how that can be managed um how that intersects with the national heritage uh federally protected sites to the west. Uh and and I have some follow-ups, but first I just love to hear what you were going to say. >> Uh sure. If there's a way to bring uh I don't know if there's something I can do to bring this screen back up again on the monitor.

Oh, >> very good. So, this triangular piece of property down in the extreme southwest corner, uh, a portion of that is in the potential natural heritage inventory area on the map. Uh, none of the rest of

the property is within that zone, at least based on the map that the uh, state sent us about a year ago showing where these areas are. Uh so uh right now in that inventory you have George King Road, the gravel road that was mentioned. Uh you have a house that's about 45 or 50 years old. Uh but that what I'll call remnant parcel we have no intention of building buildings or parking lot or roads or anything like that on that.

And uh we are happy to commit to that property being uh used only for open space and potentially for some storm water management. But we would commit that the storm water management be in the form of a constructed wetlands. And if you've seen a constructed wetland area, it's you know marshy has plants that live in there, that sort of thing. And uh just as a reminder, the in the the core area, the Army Corps of Engineers wildlife

area is a constructed wetland built in the late 70s and early 80s. So we will make a commitment that the uh the only type of development in that corner and we can work with staff to describe that would potentially be a constructed wetlands to assist with storm water management for the project because again we're committing to managing to a hundredyear storm. So, does that help answer your question? >> It does.

Yes. And and that leads to a question for staff. Um, there were some of the policies were shown as inconsistent because of a lack of management because of the tiny sliver uh in that parcel. Um, would this approach address those inconsistencies?

>> Most likely, yes. Sweden might need to look at what the final language is and review that against our policy, but it certainly goes much closer to meeting those policies than having no language whatsoever. >> Okay. All right.

Uh, thank you. So, next question is around affordable housing. I I do appreciate seeing the commitment to

the 9% when it comes to the multif family uh as well as the the 3% for the town homes. it's a little bit hard to evaluate without knowing what the plans are for total number of units particularly for tan houses. So I wonder if you could speak to that. Mhm.

>> Um also um uh you know typically under policy 40 we look for that 30-year commitment which you offer for the single for the multif family units but not for the town homes right >> uh and is that something that can be uh offered and I will just highlight that while it is a stronger commitment that we see for most cases and I do acknowledge that for TOA areas um you know in the comprehensive plan the ambition is to have 20%. Um but but I'll just leave it at the questions around units regarding town uh homes and the 20 years versus the 30 years. >> Um yeah, thank you for that very thoughtful question, Commissioner Copac. The only the townhouse only go S2. Generally, they'll be located in the S2. Um you know, if you figure 10 units an

acre, 100 town homes maybe. Yeah, probably about 100 town homes. Just spitballing that number. Um so, you know, that would set aside some of those.

Um that tenure for for sale product has always been a challenging policy discussion. Um, certainly speaking for my family, the way we built wealth was to buy a house in Durham 31, 30 or 31 years ago and and see it appreciate it and then be able to use the equity there to to help our children. Um, the longer you have a tenure requirement on a forale product, the less equity families have in order to build generational wealth. Um, I'm happy to talk to our um um our client team to see what they think about going from 20 years to 30 years, but I think that's a very

difficult policy discussion, Commissioner Copek. And that's why we pick 20 years for the town houses and 30 years for the apartments. >> And I I realize my time is up, but I'll just say it sounds like a philosophical question, but the plan does really push us to look for that 30 years. Right.

And >> it seems like this will be the smaller percentage of the overall affordability that's being provided. >> Uh and so I just wanted to make sure to to to raise that and push on that. >> We'll certainly think about it. Um keep in mind this is um this area is not in a qualified census track for low-inccome housing tax credits and so that makes construction of affordable housing very expensive in this location.

Um so uh your point's well taken. We'll certainly deliberate about it going forward and we may be able to increase that. I just referenced that for discussions that we've had in uh the home >> Commissioner Richie. >> Um I just want to turn to Mr.

Post's note about transit opportunities. It does seem like it would be a missed opportunity if this weren't a really robust opportunity for transit in Durham. >> Um you all talk a little bit about site

plan um discussions with Go Durham and Go Triangle. Can you talk about those a little bit more? And then are there any areas where you can make more direct, more sustaining commitments that would enable um uh a sort of commitment to transit moving forward? >> Yeah, the the commitments for transit infrastructure again go with each site plan and and that's um I'm glad you raised that.

Uh it's important to look at at how our transit system has evolved over time. Um, when I was chairman of the Durham Area Transit Authority, people thought we were crazy to run route two all the way down an Anger Avenue to this area that people were talking about that was going to be called Brier Creek. Well, you know, 20 years later, that looks like it was a good 25 years later, it looks like that was a good investment because that's where the the Raleigh and the Durham Transit systems connect and obviously Brier Creek is uh an important u retail hub for for that part of the triangle. I think the same would be true

here, sir. " Um, and I think these transit systems are just like the road networks that evolve over time. 0, this this what we're looking at right now is is like equidistant from those two enormous employment hubs. And so I I personally believe that that Go triangle and and go Durham will u take the advant take advantage of of this text commitment in order to provide service here so that people have they have they'll have benches, they'll have shelters, they'll have all the amenities that they want in order to make transit a viable option to go to UNC and to go to uh RTP. So I I hope that answers your

question. I certainly see that playing out over the next >> go back to Dr. Shelby um uh comment about collector street planning. Can you tell us what it would take to connect to 54 directly as opposed to going through uh residential streets?

Uh my understanding is that that would just use existing rights of way that that would just be a connection that would happen uh largely through uh the existing rights of way that that have been um um on the city of Durham or the NC DOT road network for for many years. that collector street plan that we uh have referenced uh here um that's been in place for 20 years >> and and we are following that plan. Uh the transportation department made sure that we followed that plan religiously in terms of appointments. So I understand uh Mr. Selby's concerns u but this plan was first developed in 2005 through a lot of robust public input was

adopted in 2007 and that's exactly how it's supposed to connect to NC54. You know, I can understand that neighborhood still has concerns over that, but you know, we are thinking long range based on decisions that uh conversations in Durham have led to the comprehensive plan and the future land use map and the place type map that we have today. >> Thank you, >> Vice Chair Shagaras. Yes, it's probably for Erlene Thomas.

Um, along with the collector street question, is George King Road going to be completely rerouted to connect to Crosslands or is the George King Road, the gravel road that exists there, going to stay and then the paved road is going to connect to Crossland? Do you know that yet? >> So, Elene Thomas um planning and development. So yes, the uh George King road realignment, it will be the pave

connection to Crossland, which is following a collector street plan. >> This is better. Um so the George King Road realignment will be the paved connection that connects over to Crossland and I imagine that um the existing gravel dirt road will remain in some form or fashion with that realignment. Um >> yeah cuz it shows I don't know I mean is it the gravel road is that's where the waterfall empoundment access point is so that will maintain the gravel road and then the main road will be the paved >> correct >> to George King realignment.

>> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. Commissioner Woke. >> Hey. So, with a project of this size, um, it looks like you're calculated to

add $429 students to the school system. 3 million in annual operating costs for that. Um, and I know one of the comprehensive plan policies is to do some type of mitigation for schools and so I was wondering if that's something that you might consider. >> I'm glad you raised that, Commissioner.

Um, speaking for both um, Mr. Form public schools and by all means we will reach out to him because in this compact suburban design district, schools are a permitted use. Uh, there's no special use permit required and so yes, we will have that conversation. Uh the Harris family has authorized us to do that.

Uh and I if if Mr. Davis were still there at DPS, I think we would would have had the conversation there by now. Uh but unfortunately there was turnover. Uh there was a vacancy for a while. But now they have a person in that position as a facilities director. We're happy to reach out to him and see if there's any interest in a school site within Lee

Village Center. >> Any commissioner Chakowski. >> Thank you. Thank you, Chair.

Uh, is the applicant willing to provide any additional commitments for minimum square footage for non-residential uses? >> Um, I don't think so. We don't have any we don't have any way to gauge what demand will be for office, retail, commercial, life science, all those types. It's very uh unfortunately that's uh we live in a time period right now that has tremendous uncertainty in the market.

Um it used to be we could look at mixeduse projects like Davis Park for example on Davis Drive and Hopson Road. We could give you a pretty good guesstimate on on retail office and residential when markets were a lot more stable. right now. Um I think demand for office is how

much retail would be would be demanded based on the uh range of residential there. So uh that's what made the compact suburban design district so appealing is that it allows for flexibility u with um responding to market demand. Uh and of course what's what's great about it is that the uses would all be interconnected by pedestrian bicycle infrastructure. Uh but we're not able to commit to minimum square footages for non-residential uses at this time.

>> Thank you. >> Appreciate it. >> Okay. Thank you.

Anyone else in commissioner? Do you have more questions? >> Just wondering more about the the the traffic impact assessment. So I definitely see advantages to it being phased. Um typically for a project of this size if it were done all at the outset uh it wouldn't reflect then the the the changes in other traffic over time. So I see the merits

of that but I just want to understand perhaps this in for future I'm educating myself here. It' be a better question to ask staff before the meeting instead of during. So thank you and thank you chair. Um but just understanding why it is that the project of this wouldn't need the TIA at the outset even if then there was a phasing over time to provide a better assessment.

So perhaps it's a question for Thomas transportation Thomas again planning and development. So for this particular application, we aren't able to assess the traffic impacts because we don't have commitments to um exact uses and intensity of those uses. Each type of use generates, you know, trips based on um what the use is. And without that, we don't have an a means to assess the traffic. So we don't need to know at this stage the uses and the density and because of

that we don't have the information required in order to do the TIA at this stage. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> So we would then do it at the site plan stage.

>> Okay. All right. Thank you all. >> Just as a reminder, this is a owner applicant, not a developer.

So this is not the developer. >> Yeah. So that's why we don't have those specific uses and those um that's why we don't have the Yep. Any additional questions?

Are we ready to move this case forward? >> Yes. May I have a motion to move this case forward, please? >> I was going to write out a script for this.

>> Sure. >> I don't know if I have this right. Uh motion to >> say, chair, I move. Chair, I move to approve um >> to move case >> move case Z to 300042 Lee Village Center

>> with a favorable recommendation. >> With a favorable recommendation >> to city council >> to city council >> to city council. >> Second. It's been moved by um Commissioner Richie and seconded by Chair Shagaras to move case Z23 Triple042 Lee Center Lee Village Center forward with a favorable recommendation to city council.

May I have the roll call vote, please? >> Chair Cameron, >> yes. >> Vice Chair Shaggeras, >> yes. >> Commissioner Bailey, >> yes.

>> Commissioner Capers, >> yes. Commissioner Chicowski, >> yes. >> Commissioner Hunter, >> yes. >> Commissioner Copac, >> yes.

>> Commissioner Montes, >> yes. >> Commissioner Ninker, >> yes. >> Commissioner Richie, >> yes. >> Commissioner Woke,

>> no. >> The motion passes 10 to one. >> Thank you. Next up, we have Z24 Triple040 Sage Brook Town Houses.

May we have the staff report, please? Oh, there it is. Okay. Madam Chair, Madam Vice Chair, Commissioners, Erin Kane again with the Planning and Development Department.

This is case Z240040, Sage Brook Townous. This this application is for a little over 17 acres um off of Burton Road near Chadwick Place. The current zoning is residential rural and residential suburban 20. The applicant is requesting plan development

905. The existing place type is mixed residential neighborhood and the proposal is for up to 120 town houses. As mentioned earlier, the exist the current zoning is residential rural and residential suburban 20. As you can see on the map, it looks like it's all residential rural, but there is one very small, very thin parcel along the northern and eastern edges of the site.

That parcel is RS20. The rest of the site is RR. It is primarily Oh, it is primarily uh residential suburban 20 to the east of the site and residential rural to the south and west. The aerial map shows the general location of the project. It is situated east of Burton Road north of Cheek Road and the CH uh Chadwick Road uh

eventually dead ends into it on the north. It is the place type map shows that it is mixed residential neighborhood surrounded primarily by existing residential on the place type map of primarily single family home homes across Burton Road is additional mixed residential neighborhood. The applicant has included several textual uh commitments in its development plan, including prohibiting mass grading, um up to 10 or 10 income restricted units at 80% AMI for 30 years, a contribution of $60,000 to Durham public schools. Required plantings be native species. Uh residential buildings will meet Energy Star standards. 5% of the site, limiting imperous surface to 38% and a limit on impacted steep slopes to

4%. On the development plan, two access points are shown. One from Chadwick Chadwick Place, the other from Burton Road. As you can see, ST stream buffers will need to be impacted to access the majority of the site from either of those two locations.

The 100 ft buffers that are shown are required and the predominance of the tree preservation will be within those stream buffers. Since the site is next to existing residential parcels and commits to not massgrading the site, no project buffering boundary buffers will be required. Neighborhood meetings were held in accordance with the neighborhood meeting guidelines on November 21st, 2024 and July 22nd, 2025. No comments have been received by staff through the Durham Reszoning Explorer on this case. The proposal is predominantly single family.

The proposal is consistent with 23 of 27 applicable comprehensive plan policies. staff and the applicant are available to answer any questions. >> Thank you. >> At this time, the chair is opening the public hearing.

May the applicant please come forward and present. Um, thank you, Mr. Kaine, for your presentation and good evening, Chair Cameron, Vice Chair Shagaris, and members of the planning commission. I'm Neil Go, an attorney at the Morning Star Law Group at 700 West Main Street here in Durham. And I'm representing the owners of this property uh on the request for resoning. To me, this is an interesting project because it's an infill project that I

think is consistent with the spirit of the comprehensive plan. at almost seven dwelling units per acre represents the densest development in the area. I know some people may view that as a bad thing, but the comprehensive plan is aimed at densifying within the urban growth boundary to stop the proliferation of further sprawl. Now, this is not a huge project.

It proposes a maximum of 120 units on about 18 acres of land. And this is a really efficient use of land, especially when you consider some of the significant profers that they've made. Um first they have limited the maximum impervious to no more than 38% of the site. They also have committed to limited impacts to uh the existing steep slopes on the site.

There is another significant uh commitment the the importance of which might not be readily apparent. We have committed to no mass grading on the site which means that this site will be developed in phases where each phase disturbs less than four acres at a time. What is important about that is that under the UDO, projects which do not

utilize mass grading are not subject to tree coverage requirements. But we have treated this project as though it were not exempt from tree coverage requirements. And in fact, we have committed to more tree cover than would be required in that scenario. Tree coverage limit.

We also have made a significant contribution at DPS considering that the project is calculated to result in only two additional students over the base zonings. Um I I double check just in case make sure that 60,000 contribution wasn't a typo. I check with my client. It's not a typo.

Uh and they've committed to green building standards. They've committed to using native species and they've committed to controlling the hundredyear storm. They also have addressed the comments from the bicycle and pedestrian advisory committee. uh having committed to a multi-use path and raised crosswalks at the entrances.

Also, they have a strong affordable housing commitment for a project of this size. They've committed to 10 affordable units in the project. And I want to point out that their commitment is not a

percentage of the final units. It's 10 units regardless of how many units end up on the ultimate site plan. if they are able to achieve 120 units on the site plan, 10 units is more than 8% of the of the overall units uh which is more than most projects and definitely high for a project of this size. Uh based on the UDO requirements for PDR zoning, the site plan has to show at least 96 units overall.

So 10 units out of 96 is over 10% of the units. Now before I leave the lectern, I need to touch on the history of this project. While this is a brand new application, evidently this project has been through the ringer. It was started initially by the same owners, I believe, but but with a different attorney.

The original project, I I think was submitted sometime then I believe it went to council in October of 23. Uh at that council meeting, the item was referred back to staff to work out a few kinks. The item came back to the council in January of 24 where the applicant asked

for a continuance and it was heard it was taken up by council in February of 24 uh where the council sent it back to planning commission. Uh it went back to planning commission in April but there was some miscommunication. The applicant was not present at that meeting and sometime after that the application expired due to inactivity. Now I'm not here to speculate on why any of that happened.

I was not involved in the project at the time. I simply do not know. But at one of the neighborhood meetings, neighbors brought up that at the last council meeting, the previous attorney for the project committed to no blasting. I was uh caught off guard by that.

It was surprising to me, but I told the neighbors I'd followed up with the team about it, and I did. It is true that the previous attorney made a commitment to no blasting, but of course, council never voted on that u on on Yeah, they never voted on that or on the project with that commitment. Now, there's a key difference between the project now and and the project then, and it's that since then, we've acquired the one- foot

strip, that parcel that was mentioned that goes along the north and along the south, um north and the east. um and that that parcel previously blocked our access to existing Chadwick drive. Now that the project includes that strip, we have frontage on Chadwick and we're required by the UDO to make that connection. So the current version of the project is improved with this connection, but the infrastructure requirements uh make that the infrastructure requirements to make that connection are exactly the type of thing that give us pause about committing to no blasting because the layout of the land uh that area will be the lowest side.

So that's where the sewer will be the deepest. Um which means that that connection is exactly where we have to dig the deepest. It is possible we may hit rock. We're hopeful that we will not, but because of that, we're not in a position to make that same commitment. I felt it was important to state that on the record because I told the neighbors that I would look into it with the team and encourage them to make the commitment again. But I

think you've heard where we're at. The project is slightly different, definitely better, but different enough that it would be unwise for us to make the commitment this time around. We just don't have enough information about whether we will hit rock, and we don't want to make a commitment that we don't know we can keep. I hate to end on that note, but I owe it to the neighbors to highlight that that does not change the fact that it's a very well thoughtout infill project with significant environmental commitments and contributions to both DPS and affordable housing.

>> I just can't. All right. Now, we will have um members from the community come up. First, we have um Pamela Pam Williams.

Okay, you're just gonna You know the drill, right? >> Awesome. >> Okay, just don't forget to speak into the mic. Make sure you move that thing there around so everybody can hear you.

>> Uh Aaron, I don't see it up here. Oh, wait a minute. I do. Okay.

Yeah, I think so. Okay. This thing is short. Okay.

Okay. I'll just switch it. Thank you. My name is Wanda Allen.

I live at 2111 Rodeo Road in Durham. I'd like for you to look at this photo here. Uh take a uh take a look at the slide. Look at the photo.

The residents are already experiencing flooding from a development over there on Carpenter Road. We are asking this developer, it's a must that they make environmental commitments. We as taxpayers cannot keep carrying the burden of cleaning up the lakes and

streams. 3 million. grassing the developer to sample the water released from the temporary construction ponds before they're released into the creek and the river. So what's happening now?

They're automatically releasing the water out of these temporary ponds and they got tubidity in it. And this is a law that they're doing in Virginia and is the best uh EPA practice. So they can do it here in North Carolina. We're asking that the hund uh year permanent and temporary uh basins and uh be done and so the temporary pond can also is where we're having major problems. We're asking that the stream buffers be 100 foot undisturbed natural buffers for the federally protected species and our wildlife. Tree preservation preserve

over 30% per phase of the development. Avoid clear cutting to to the edge. Minimum of 30 foot buffers with a zero point capacity. And you know, most importantly, no varants or waiverss on the tax commitment because what's happening is the developers are coming back and saying, "Oh, we need to get a variance.

" And we are asking that we want no blasting. There's over 150 homes at risk. So basically a development is supposed to bring enhancement to a community, not to destroy the community. >> Thank you.

>> Good afternoon. My name is Pam Williams. Um tree preservation. 5 tree preservation, but the uh trees in the uh stream buffers is over three acres, almost four acres, just the uh trees in there. So really, it's they're not

giving anything anywhere else in the uh community. Um we are uh asking for a commitment of 30% tree preservation. We also asking, as Wanda said, no variances and everything. We think tree preservation is critical and it should be included in each and every phase.

Uh buffer boundaries. Yes, he's uh they mentioned that they're mass grading. So no buffer uh buffer boundaries are required. We these people lived out here in this community for ever since 2005 when the zone last zoning was done.

It is still zone residential rule and that's what they bought their property for. 9 dwellings per acre. Uh the least they can do is provide a 30-foot buffer around the property with 06 opacity. One tree every 100 foot around this property is not adequate.

10-ft buffers. Do we want this in that neighborhood? No. It is not the character of the neighborhood. We need it to be be trees

and privacy for the uh families and the people around who bought and and been living there with uh 2 acres. I mean two dwellings per acre. This is not within the character. Um commit it to undisturbed uh stream buffers.

If it's not undisturbed, then they can cut a 70 ft of the uh of the 100 ft and in that 70 ft they can provide uh degrading sediment ponds, retaining walls, sewer easement, drainages, 100 foot buffer. So we're asking for undisturbed stream buffers. Um thank you. >> Thank you.

Good evening, uh, Chair Cameron, vice chair and planning commission staff. My name is Gary Mlean. I live at 4712 Jimmy Rogers Road in Durham, lifelong resident, about two two miles from where

this uh, development is going to be. Um, want to talk about the flooding. Uh the neighbors already suffer from flooding issues in the area due to mass grading and cutting all of the trees down. 381 acres cleared and direct discharge from imperous surfaces will increase the flooding problems.

Uh it's a resident's house on Burton Road and flooding uh flooding over drive after Carpenter Falls construction was started. That's the center picture. Um, we also would require a 100red-year storm war basins for permanent and temporary, but the temporary basins are causing issues because the the muddy water, the turbidity, and the sedimentation going into Falls Lake. We're just continuously having this problem. And I know we've been up here before and I know y'all heard the um the the uh talk about the uh tomato soup that's going into the Falls Lake. It should be I mean we keep

going over and over and over this thing you know so but um the next thing is commit to no blasting. Uh blasting does cause well damage, permit violations, home damage, foundation damage, and groundwater damage. Um there someone Durham County residents was pleading for city water over on Junction Road which is probably about four miles from this area. If blasting occurs over 50 homes are at risk and we have no recourse.

The um this is based on several residents who hired structural engineers to assess the damage to determine if blasting caused it. And the reason the answer was blasting definitely caused the damage. Um blasting has affected the underground aquifers causing >> Thank you. >> Can I finish my sentence?

>> Finish your sentence. Yes. uh causing underground a aquifers um causing the residents to lose drinking water. They

have to pay to have new drills sunk or whatever. And sometimes they try to get onto the city water, but that doesn't always work. And picture yourself if you don't have any water. That's an essential thing that we have all got to have.

Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Is there anyone else here in the audience that would like to speak? All right, we're moving on to the Zoom.

First, we have Penny Mazize. >> Go ahead. >> Can you hear me? >> Miss Maize, are you ready?

Yes. Can you hear? >> Yes. >> Okay. My name is Penny Mays. I live at 3622 Gu uh in Durham and I'd like to

address the concerns about traffic. Um I can refer you to slide nine, slide 10 on the preserve rural Durham um uh in the PDFs. I'd also like to um point out that there's no proposed infrastructure for improvements in this area. Uh currently um with traffic is increasing on the Burton Road and Cheek Road area and I live right right down the street from that on Guer and Red Mill Road.

We're having increased traffic, particularly in the mornings and in the late afternoons. Traffic backs up on 85 in that area and in the mornings it backs up on Gear Street. This is this is just going to add more traffic to the area. And so I'd like to know um what

the developer is planning to do about traffic um except for the left turn lanes that are in the proposed development. Thank you. Thank you. Next we have um Dr.

Angelo Burch, Senior. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Um into the commission. Um most of what I wanted to say has been said and I'm hoping to appeal to your common sense.

Um, I'm hoping that you do not push this thing forward. Uh, especially with the annexation, as it is, and you all know well, the city doesn't have capacity to take care of what it has now. Annexing our area to increase it to the city, taking it out of the county hand does not help anyone but the developers. I did not

move out of the city to be annexed into the city. I enjoy being under the county. I enjoy being away from the city. I don't understand why the county why this commission is even considering because when developers know they're in the county and then all of a sudden even if back when talks are going on, you want to move into the county but now you want it to be controlled by the city.

You knew you were building in the county when you came here. Those of us that moved out of the city, we did it for a purpose. Not to be introduced back or annexed into the city. No.

And I'm praying and hoping that you will not push this forward. And the $60,000 to our school. Uh, anybody knows better than that. What is that going to do for Durham public schools? I noticed on the application they said no wildlife corridor. I guess they don't consider deers to be wildlife

or any other animals because we see them out here and they will be disrupted as well as our community. Thank you, Madam Chair. I hope you all understand that we do not want this. Thank you for your time.

>> Thank you, >> Donna. Stain back. >> Good thing back Rogers Road. Um I'm about two miles from this development.

I'm a lifelong resident of this community. Right now we are experiencing significant amount of development growth in southeast Durham. Um in the watersheds for Lake Creek, Little Lake and Fire Creek and Panther Creek. We've had from 2020 to now over 20,54

new dwellings approved with additional population of 46,25 and that has increased our vehicles per day to 155,135. We've got new developments pending uh that will bring the total dwellings to 22374 and will increase the population to 51,461. That's near the size of Rocky Mount right here in just southeast Durham. And that increases the vehicles per day to 170 feet 73,000. We This is going on while we're considering a lack of infrastructure in this area for fire, EMS, call centers, police, sheriff's, medical and hospitals, the lack of emergency staff

and facilities, school capacity and transportation, roadways, local and interstates. You know, this has got county roads that are maintained by the state with little shoulders. Electrical grids are strained. I got a uh a letter from Wake saying that they're going to be working on helping to alleviate this problem, but they recognize it's a big issue for existing customers.

Um, and this project is not car it is carentric, excuse me, in a non-ontiguous area. It's not 15inute walking distance of stores, jobs and dis and businesses. There is um it is not within the existing community character. It has no business and schools within two to five miles.

It's not near transit route. 4 miles west. No dwelling sidewalks or bike lanes is in the vicinity along Burton or Chi Road. This

is urban sprawl parks. Thank you, Miss D. >> And we did a blow up. >> Your time is up.

Parts anywhere. Thank you. >> Next, we have Vicky King. >> Can you hear me?

>> Yes. >> Okay. My name is Vicky King. I live at 2517 Archley Drive, which is very close to where Sage Brook is proposed.

According to what I have read, there will be blasting on this site with no recourse to current homeowners in the area along Cheek Road, Burton Road, Dinsmore, Farwick, and Arley. How can that be allowed? Most of the folks in this neighborhood have been here for well than well over 10 years. What will the builder do to alleviate flooding caused by the impervious surfaces? There's no curb and gutter in this neighborhood. I have witnessed flooding at Dinsmore

and Burton. That's not the creek. That's Dinsmore and Burton. What will be done about keeping it from happening?

What's the plan for the added traffic to Burton to Dinsmore? There'll be people coming down Barwick Drive and Archley Drive to cut over to get into this development. How's that going to be alleviated? There's no public transportation out here.

There's no grocery stores. There's no infrastructure at all. Please do not allow this property to be further developed or annexed into the city. Thank you. >> Thank you, Christy Gerkin. Gerkin.

>> Hey. Um, my name is Christy Girkin. I am a resident of 2563 Chadwick Place. I'm three houses down from the end of Chadwick where this potential blasting would occur which uh I just learned today would be a possibility.

So I'm very concerned about the infrastructure of my home should that happen things. Um I want to stress the importance of the infrastructure. If you have not been in this area in in a car in the mornings, in the afternoons, you would not know the the amount of traffic that is backed up at the intersection of Cheek and Burton. The the front entrance to this development would be not even a quarter of a mile down Burton Road from Cheek Road and that intersection.

It would be nearly impossible for people who lived in that development to get out onto Burton Road. that would force them down Chadwick. Chadwick is a narrow deadend

street. It is not designed for the traffic impact that would that would happen. Um, as Vicki just stated, you know, people would be cutting through here in order to get out Dinsore to Burton or up to Cheek Road via Arsley or Barwick. Um the other thing with department in this area, there's no plans for infrastructure updates.

Um and with the developments already going on around here and another proposed one larger down the street, it's just this area just cannot >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Is there anyone else on the Zoom that would like to speak?

Um, I think Sarah Thelen, you were giving comments last time. Thank you. You raised your hand. All right.

Next, we have uh Pamela Andrews. >> Good evening. Can you hear me now? >> Yes.

>> Okay. Thank you. Uh, my name is Pamela

Andrews. I live at Wake Forest Highway. Um, good evening everyone. There are environmental commitments that need to be made before approving this parcel.

Everyone, there are environmental commitments that need to be made before approving this parcel. Establish strict environmental monitoring like is done in Virginia, which is a best a best management practice of the EPA, but needs to test the affluent to asssure runoff is not temporary basins. The flooding after rainfalls allows the turbidity uh tomato soup to travel down to Panther Creek which will be impacted by this runoff greatly. There needs to be maintain a 100 foot undisturbed stream buffer as Pam Williams explained which is fedally protected species and to protect our wildlife.

We have lost over 5,000 acres of forest in southeast derm alone. We have been in contact with the NC wildlife commission who has informed us of the following. It is illegal to to relocate many wildlife species in North Carolina including those that are in the carnivore family. Coyotes, foxes,

raccoons, skunks, etc. This is not a viable possibility. When these species have been trapped and causing property damage, they will either be humanly euthanized or released on the same property where they have been captured. High mortality rates occur when these wildlife are removed from their home territory with a low chance of survival.

No variances or waiverss on these text commitments should be allowed. As already mentioned, the tree preservation at 30% has been mentioned. 5% to get an exceeding the tree preservation is got to be a joke. The neighbors deserve more than a zero or a 2 opacity buffer.

A minimum of 30 foot buffer with 6 opacity should be put into place allowing trees as a barrier. The wetlands we have to protect our wetlands which are natural sponges to reduce this runoff not let four be impacted. No blessings to be profered as has already been said. Thank you all for allowing me to speak. Have a great

evening. >> Thank you. >> Hi, this is Sarah Theen from 11:05 Dock Hills Road, North Carolina. So, so sorry about the earlier.

Um, so I wanted to talk a little bit more about the impact um, the profer impact of the education system, fire and EMS and and curious where folks feel like those folks are going to live in this part of Durham. Um, the the median salary for a firefighter is 66,000. The um median salary for a teacher is a little over 56,000 and the Durham uh the average Durham home price is um $434,000 uh $100,000. So just that would be over 47% um for between 47 and 55% of monthly salary for those folks. Um affordable town home options offered by folks here today um would allow those very people

to to live close to where they work. Um, I think a larger question for the commission at large is what what does Durham want to be? A welcoming place or a fearful one. Um, there are projects that have been waiting for approval for two and a half, three years, still not approved.

There are people that are still waiting for housing, still getting priced out of their own neighborhoods with nowhere affordable to go. Um, I I personally know the sting of change because our house is on Doc Nichols Road. um one of the original houses, not the new the new developments. Um and it went from a darn near dirt road to in a quiet little place.

We brought our firstborn um and second born home to but um and and built our little farm to smooth black top sidewalks, busy place, lots of new neighbors, places for kids to go trick-or-treating um and just a ton of development. Not all change. Uh fear of change, I think, is um we can't be afraid of the inevitable change for less sprawl. um more people on less land and more land safe for trees. >> Thank you.

>> Um wishing to speak, please use the raise your hand feature. Would the applicant like to address any of the questions or concerns that the community had? times about tree preservation or tree cover on this site. Um, and I want to be clear, we've committed to no mass grading under the UDO.

If you don't have mass grading, you don't have tree cover requirements. So, the tree cover requirement on this property is zero. So, we're not 5% over the tree cover requirement. 5% over the tree cover requirement.

It is correct that a lot of that is in the stream buffer. that significantly more than what is required. Um I it was hard for me to hear the folks online. I don't know if it was for you guys. It was quite quiet, but I think someone mentioned

something about wildlife, displacement of wildlife. Um and it was unclear to me if they were referring to any specific like endangered species. We're not aware of that. And if that does come up, then I would agree with the speaker that if there is endangered species, I mean that we're going to have to deal with that.

But we're to date we're not aware of anything like that. The environmental commitments on this project in my opinion are actually what make it a a you know very attractive project. They have limited the impervious significantly to I think it's 38%. They've um limited the impacts of steep slopes uh beyond what the UDO would require uh allow I should say.

Um they've agreed to the to handling the hundredyear storm. I mean these are the things that we heard them asking for over and over and we already committed to them. So, I was a little bit confused by some of the feedback. Also, I mean, I've been you guys have seen me plenty. Uh, I think you've seen some of these neighbors plenty as well. This is a project that is committed to no mass grading and yet, which is something that

folks have been asking for. This project commits to and yet it's not enough. And this is a small project. It's it's on uh 18 acres, less than 18 acres.

Some of the projects they're talking about are, you know, I are very large clearing, you know, talking about developing 100 acres, that type of thing. That's not what this project is. This is a small infill project with strong, robust environmental commitments. I it it's it's a little bit confusing to me because we actually have done many of the things that they have asked for on this project in their presentation today, but also just generally on projects in south in this section of Durham.

Um, you know, for for the past years, this project is doing a lot of those things. Um, and so I I'm honestly just, you know, a little bit disappointed that that that hasn't been acknowledged. Um I recognize that the project may not be perfect. I get that. Uh there there there were some suggestions made that

our team will be willing to look into. For example, we have committed to handling the 100red-year on the permanent and I think it was suggested that we should be looking at doing the 100redyear on the temporary. Um just in a brief conversation here. That's something we'll look into.

I can't make the commitment tonight. The calculation evidently is a little different because the uh commentary just is isn't paying attention to what's in the application. We have done more tree preservation. We have done uh we have limited the impervious.

We is from the entrance from Burton Road, but the we're not technically crossing the stream up by Chadwick, but we would be impacting the uh stream buffer at Chadwick for any and that's true of any development on this property, not just this one. Even if it was by right development, it would be impacting the street. Thank you. >> I think the wildlife thing was about deer.

That's what I heard that there is a lot of deer there and there was no consideration of deer. Okay. Public hearing is now closed and

we're open for commissioner discussion and questions. >> Commissioner Montes. >> Yeah, I have a few things. Um, moving forward, I think for me, I'm going to talk about the good things real quick, just to highlight that, you know, there there's great things that I'm seeing here.

Um, for one, it it's incredibly hard. Well, it's very hard to achieve a 100-year storm, and I as a developer, I know, um, it goes a long ways. I think public, you know, made it clear that that's what they wanted. So, the project brought that.

I'm happy to see that. Um, there was I just want to clarify for the public. I heard one of the concerns was that there was going to be no curb and gutter. I'm pretty sure the cross-sections are going to have full storm infrastructure. Um the and this is a question for staff that maybe uh Erin you could answer is the report says that the the site is only expected to produce two and a half students yet how is that how do we come

up with that number just so I am familiar? Sure. So, we get the student generation numbers from Durham Public Schools and the formula they use takes two things into account. One, the area of the county that it's in.

The uh DPS splits the county up into five different areas and it tracks student generation rate by those those districts for lack of a better term. It also looks at the uh housing type uh whether it's single family, apartment, townhouse and so forth. And historically town houses have not the vast m uh the highest student generation rate comes from single family homes. So when you have um an area that can only generate say 40 single family homes based on historical data and trends that is going to give you about the same number of students as you would get out of 120 town houses. And that's why you're seeing that um student generation differential so small here

because we historically have have seen low student generation rates out of town houses. uh for whatever reason that is. That's just how it how it's worked out. Uh those numbers and those formulas are updated on an annual basis with with DPS.

Um and we're coming up on that soon. Hopefully about by the end of this month, we'll have new numbers and new formulas maybe by early next month. >> Great. So, I mean, it sounds like we're we're on the right track with that.

And I mean, the fact that the applicants willing to put in $60,000 to the DPS system to me is is again a big plus. I do want to ask there is no mass grading although the site is considerably small. I mean it's not huge. So I would think that you know if we are committing to no mass grading that we're going to do this in a phased out process. Um and considering I could you just speak on that a little bit so everybody's clear is you know it's it's very easy to say that we're not going to do mass grading but doing it is a whole different thing. When we balance a site it is it is a

challenge. uh we have to move clear on the bottom side, you know, and nobody wants to buy dirt and bring it in or haul out. So, what is what is the current strategy to balance the site, clear it without mass grading? >> Yeah, this is a great question.

So, this is something that we looked at pretty extensively so that we would be able to make this commitment. We I mean so that generally yes it'll be done in phases and generally speaking you know what the goal is to keep each phase under four acres so that we're not masquerading it you know ever and you can't move to the next you can't pull the next um land disturbance permit until you have stabilization in the first uh phase. So in order to do that uh what what Tim's group did I would say storm water road infrastructure uh is all going to be upfront that that's essentially phase one >> right >> right and then once that's stabilized then they can start doing some of the um uh I guess vertical construction areas uh to and I think the overall site's

like 18 acres we're at like something like seven acres of of land disturbance something like that overall. So, you know, it's not again, it's not we're we're going to be able to do this, we feel pretty confident, without mass grading. That's why we made the commitment. >> Um, and especially because for a long time that has been something that has had folks quite concerned in this area is all of the quite concerned in this area is all of the grading goes on at once.

Well, this is less than four acres at a time. >> Yep. Thank you. um your SEM is close to there.

There's some exceptions to that. Um and the fact that the applicant is going for 30, you you have up to 70%. Am I correct? And you're going up to 38.

Um is that that seems great to me. The only thing I would, you know, advise if we are I understand there's some grading walls that may happen there. If we could do that, that's very important for the public. As I see storm, we're going to

be controlling the peak flow out. And >> is this a new a new comment? It is. I'm sorry.

I I I just want to kind of point out that with the 100year storm, you guys are reducing the flow less than what it is now to those creeks. Is that right? >> Okay. >> Okay.

Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Anyone else? Commissioner W.

>> Thank you. Um so one of the concerns I heard was the um buffer between the project and the neighbors. Um I was wondering what if you can address those concerns. >> Yeah.

So, we had two neighborhood meetings and we actually didn't get that concern from any neighbors that I'm aware of. I did hear some folks speaking today, but if I'm understood addresses correctly from the speakers, none of them actually are uh adjacent that requested additional buffers like that. the we had planned this um uh with well I would say UDL required

buffers which in this case is I believe is zero in in every place that's the way we had planned this um and well yeah I mean I guess that that answers your question. >> Oh, and just perimeter buffers. I mean, there's there's still a riparian buffer. Yeah.

>> Commissioner, are you done? Okay. Commissioner Cob. >> Uh, thank you, Chair.

5%. I'm curious about the question about where those trees are located. 5%. Or is that just kind or is that just kind of by default? >> A lot of our tree cover is going to end up in the riparian buffer. I don't I couldn't tell you the exact number, but with the the commitment we're at, we do anticipate having traditionally there

are impacts that are allowed in the riparian buffer. I think one of the speakers mentioned it um and Commissioner Montes was talking about it with when it's like storm water infrastructure but also the stream crossings are going through the riparian buffers. So I mean there are ways to impact trees in the stream buffer. That's not what we're >> Yeah.

>> Yeah. And I get like when we look at those percentages it's compared to what's required in the UDO. I think it's also important to always remember what it is compared to what it is now uh and what that that loss is. And it's not just you, it's just generally how we talk about and think about trees in this forum.

>> Um I mean what would be the trade-offs like you know is it possible to hit that 30% um either on roadsides or other parts of the property? Like what would it take to get there? And what would be the the trade-offs you'd face by hitting a higher number >> I'm sorry to hit a higher number of on tree cover?

>> Yeah. Yeah, the 30% that was suggested like what would it take to be able to deliver that? >> Well, I think you're saying 30% overall or 30% per phase. >> Uh 30% overall because I think in as I mentioned earlier I believe you know the disturbed area is something like seven acres.

So uh I'm sorry the built upon area is something like seven acres. So the disturbed area is going to be something greater than that if you did 30% tree cover. But I I just don't I can't do all this math in my head, right? But that there's additional areas that that basically I'm saying we're probably grading areas or grading or doing some sort of land disturbance in areas that would need to become tree cover if we went to 30%.

But the but the ultimate buildupon area is still only like seven acres, right? So it would essentially be trying to fit that in with less grading. And I'm not sure I'm I'm really not at all qualified to

answer if that's possible. Even >> you design and go forward um to see if it's possible to have a greater percentage. >> Understood. >> Yeah.

And and there was just a question from community folks about this um additional testing. Um you know, is that something that would be more at the level of like city policy versus individual applications around like water testing, >> right? I think we would depend on like what kind of testing we're talking about. Are we talking about for tubidity?

Are we talking about for rate? Are we talking about for volume? Um, we'd need more specificity. >> No, is it okay?

Okay. >> Did you want me to speak on that? >> At least we got the response from

any other questions. Any Commissioner Richie? >> This is a question for staff. Um, and this might just be my ignorance here, but it it is concerning to me that this doesn't comply with policy 165 because it's an annexation.

Um but that doesn't really hasn't come up in the staff report much. Does that suggest that there's not significant challenge to the city because this is an annexation? >> So as part of our routine um review with other departments such as solid waste and transportation and others. Um we policy 165 says this is a satellite annexation.

So therefore policy says you should not do satellite annexations. they can cause issues waste um water sewer and others. Um I'm not aware that any of those departments have raised that issue in this case. There are already for example water sewer services in the area and we've not heard from environmental and street services

that this is a particular issue yet um regarding their services. So general that are the general policy is to not do this. Um but we haven't heard specific concerns. >> Yeah.

Um let me let me touch on that. Let me also just touch on the last thing you talked about. What this is a rather unique area in Durham correctly. They're just but they're not annexed.

So this is a this is a kind of a strange location. And the reason I know that is because I represented the property owner at the end of Arsley. I think it's 2717 Arsley who was the last house to be built on Arsley and wanted to connect to city sum water without annexing and they were given the exception because this is a strange place in Durham. So I agree that this is a satellite annexation but the services are in place there already for a number of reasons um you know historic reasons but city water and

sewer is already there. This isn't like they're having to bring city and water uh city water sewer from like three miles away. It's there and people who are living in the county are benefiting from it without being in the city. So, you know, it's a little bit strange um as far as why they're not public.

So, this just has to do straight with liability, right? So, the HOA is this is going to be the amenity space for the HOA. If the HOA opens it up to the public um just for general use by the public, the HOA has to maintain it. The HOA also would be liable for it.

In other conversations I have, not on this project specifically, but in other conversations I have with the city, you know, it's a question of is the city going to take on the liability for that. Um and generally I think the answer has been no on on such a small development. So there are some communities that can have like a 5 acre, you know, um, uh, call it rec center or something like that where there might be more of an

ability or appetite for the city to take on that as a public amenity. But I just in general, I I think it's kind of unwise and maybe unfair to ask a small HOA to take on the liability for inviting the public to come generally at on their playground or whatever if someone gets hurt. I mean that goes right to the HOA which is just the homeowners. >> Commissioner, Vice Chair.

>> Yes, I have a um so about the blasting >> and the 150 some odd residents who may be affected by it. So you're saying that these people already have city water and sewer and so they're not on wells and so if there is blasting required and there is damage that's done then the city is going to have to fix their own problem. I think we heard from some folks who said they are on on us well in septic. I was talking about Ardsley specifically

um which is right adj you know near this site I and um so I can't speak to there very well may be some folks in the area that are on well and septic I don't know but on arsley it's city water um and I I would tend to agree with your statement if there were impacts to the city public infrastructure it would fall to the city and likely the developer who who damaged it um for through blasting that's what actually ends up happening. Um, yeah, I mean it wouldn't it would >> anyone else? >> No. Second time around, Commissioner Montes.

>> Yeah, just one last thing. Because Because you guys are committing to no mass grading, does that mean that you guys are committing to no buffers around the perimeter? >> Well, the UDO doesn't require >> Yeah, I understand the UDO doesn't require it. >> Mass grading buffers if you're not mass grading. And in this case, it wouldn't require perimeter buffers because we're residential against residential, >> right? I would just consider even a

small 10 foot, 5ft, 10 foot buffer just because I mean, imagine being a single family house, you're just kind of looking over to a taller two or three story townhouse. um >> we'll be looking into along with um whether we can do more tree cover and if we can also be more specific about the riparian buffer uh protections. >> Any any questions? Are we ready to move this case forward?

One has access to their email right now. I just emailed everyone a script. Oh, sorry. You want to do it?

All right. Go ahead. >> Uh, chair, regarding case Z24004, [Music] uh, I move that we forward this case to city council with a favorable recommendation for approval. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> It's been moved by Commissioner

um, My God, I'm blanking out. Please, >> Chair Cameron. >> Yes. Vice Chair Shagaras, >> no.

>> Commissioner Bailey, >> no. >> Commissioner Capers, >> no. >> Commissioner Chicowski, >> no. >> Commissioner Hunter, just just to be clear, because there was no excused absence for Commissioner Hunter.

To be clear, because there was no excused absence for Commissioner Hunter, she is by by rule rule uh a yes of an approval. >> No. >> Commissioner Richie, >> no. >> Commissioner Woke, >> no.

>> The motion fails 8 to three. >> Thank you. We are at 7:32. Um it is time to take our break. Let's come

back at 7:42. 10 minutes.

We are calling the meeting back to order. I've quadruple 01 East Gear Towns. East Gear Towns. May we have the staff report, please?

Hi, good evening, Chair Cameron, Vice Chair Shagaris, and planning commissioners. I'm Payton Burgess, and I'm here tonight to present Z25001 East Gear Towns. 573 to accommodate up to 22 town houses. Again, the existing zoning is residential rural and residential suburban 20. 573. 360 zoning districts

without the use of stairs meeting energy star standards electric vehicle charging stations with every unit a concrete pad bus shelter to go Durham standards 10-ft shared use path cut off lighting native the proposal is consistent with the apartment and townhouse neighborhood place type by adding ing town houses to a predominantly single family area and the proposal is consistent with 17 of 21 applicable comprehensive plan policies. Thank you. Staff and the applicant are available for any questions. >> Thank you.

At this time, we'll have the applicant come forward. I'm sorry. At this time, the chair is opening the public hearing and the applicant is coming forward. I didn't see I didn't say that last.

>> No. Thank you, Miss Burgess, for the presentation. Good evening once again. uh chair, vice chair, members of the planning commission.

I'm Neil Go, attorney with the morning start on the request for reszoning. Uh this is another infill project, but it is quite different in scope. 5 dwelling units per acre, it is a similar

35 acres for a total of 22 towns. Um I want to tell you a little bit about client here. My client, they're a small team that generally has done home rehabs. Uh, I think there are about four people in that company and as I understand it, this is their first venture into a new subdivision.

Uh, they've been working with the folks at Paps Design to put together a well thoughtout concept. They want to showcase their commitment to doing it right. So, they've made some strong commitments on this project based on other development projects that they've reviewed in Durham. For starters, on this small project, they've committed to handling the 100red-year storm event. As you might expect, that comes at a significant cost of space on such a small piece of property, but they felt it was the right thing to do. They also have committed to some green building techniques like EV chargers and uh Energy Star specs, and they've committed to reducing their impervious to 65% and using native plant species.

Additionally, they've made an effort here to contribute to connectivity. They have committed to a 10- foot wide multi-use path across their frontage and they've committed to providing a bus stop uh if go Durham wants it along their frontage. This this site is along an active bus line. Um and here again I think they've got a pretty strong commitment to DPS this project and they've committed to contributing $5,000 to DPS.

But I will say because of the size of the project they really couldn't find a way to ensure affordable units in the project. So they have instead made a strong commitment at $20,000 to the dedicated housing. Um you know I would say like the last project and and in fact in this case maybe even more so this is the type of smallcale infill development that when done right is going to contribute meaningfully to bringing the ultimate vision of the comprehensive plan to fruition. uh when we can densify within the urban growth boundary and in this case in particular in areas that are already within the city limits, we make better use of our

existing infrastructure and fur which further stems the tide of suburban sprawl. U I'm happy to answer any questions you may have on this project tonight and uh thank you for your time. >> Thank you. Is there anyone in the audience in person today that would like to speak on this case?

We don't have anyone pre-signed up. Going once, going twice. All right. Uh I see there is one hand raised on the Zoom.

We have Mandelin Brady. Please state your name and address and then your comments. >> Hi. Yeah, my name is Maline Brady.

Um I live at 1913 Milan Street. We are just diagonal from the um proposed construction there. Um we do have number of concerns and I'm speaking on behalf of me and my three neighbors. Um we all share a driveway right off of East Gear even though technically we live on Milan. Um and our home right across from

us there's new construction starting which would be three homes and this would be right alongside um those three homes. Um our concern is just with the amount of traffic that this is adding right here. So right where we live um and where this proposed development is is coming downhill on East Gear. And if anybody's familiar with this very particular spot where um construction is proposed, it's really high-speed traffic that comes down this road.

Really dangerous. We just really recently, last month, six weeks ago, had a serious car accident right here. When you try to turn um onto Gear Street, it is like cars come flying. By the time you've like straightened out your car, you've nearly been t-boned.

And so I am concerned about more and more driveways coming out right here. More and more car accidents happening right here. Um so primarily

traffic is a huge concern of ours and then um this construction is right behind um or would be in front of I guess 85 depending on how you look at it. So we are concerned about more noise and light um in our neighborhood. Um also this is area that has had a lot of wildlife. We are also concerned about you know with that wildlife getting forced out of that area becomes an even bigger traffic concern.

um about a half a mile from this project and that will bring a lot of traffic to our area that we really haven't. >> Thank you, Miss Brady. Your time is up. Next, we have Victoria Mazer, Missouri.

Go ahead. Uh she's muted still. >> Can you hear me now? >> Yes.

>> Okay. Um, hi. Thank you. Good evening, chair, vice chairs, and commissioners.

U, my name is Victoria Maer at two Christopher Court. I live in Milan Woods, um, which is off of East Gear Street, sort of tucked in. We're actually around the corner from 210 town homes that are still being built three summers later. So, I do feel for our neighbors.

Um, I'm undecided on this proposal, but there are some aspects that I actually want to um draw your attention to that I think are beneficial. Um, I agree with the previous caller on a lot of the traffic concerns, but I'm going to just speak to the things that, um, I'm in favor of. One of them is the full cutoff lighting. We are in fall migration season for birds now and the city of Durham and the county um board of commissioners are in support of lights out and so this full cut off lighting is beneficial to that migration. Um although as the other um commenters said um clear cutting all the way through possibly to 85 that would be a concern. Um but the text commitment of the full cutoff lighting is a favorable in my

opinion. Um, I'm also in favor of the 10- foot wide multi-use path. Um, this this road is in between uh two bus stops for goerm route 3. The bus stop at East Gear at Midland Terrace.

Um, two East Gear at Landon Farms is a 19minute walk and this would sort of be in the middle of that. It's a dangerous um I wouldn't even call it a shoulder on East Gear Street here. So having something for pedestrians and bike riders, even though this would sort of be patchwork and there's nothing it would connect to, it's a good start. Um I like the concrete pad and bus shelter uh commitment.

I would prefer the bus shelter to the pad because um at Landon Farms those do have proper shelters. But the other um the other bus stop is just a it's in the weeds and I've literally called the city of Durham to ask them to mow because women are waiting in the weeds. It's very bizarre. So a proper bus shelter is preferable to a pad. Thank you. And then finally I am

concerned about >> Thank you. Um your time is up. >> Dang. Sorry.

Next we have Sarah Di. >> Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Um uh I am Sarah Thielen at uh 11:05 Doc Nichols Road in Durham.

Um I spoke earlier um and I wanted to bring bring it home one more time um on the record. Uh there are 39 households a day moving into Durham. um uh according to data works NC. Um so the the sprawl that is that is uh kind of consuming this part of of Durham um is is why we need to to consider and um I think prioritize higher density housing projects um like town homes um with more people on less land more land can be saved for trees and farms and green space that we've that we are so happy to talk about. Um I

think it's an an important um point to make that um that these >> I got mine. You want to talk to this one? >> Oh, sorry. >> Apologies.

I'm so sorry. Um, I think my audio cut out there for a moment. Um, all that to say, um, I do think it's important that we prioritize higher density housing projects like, um, like like these town homes. That's all.

Thank you. My microphone is out. The one next to me as well. Are is there any there I think everyone on the zoom I see that um that is on

still as attendees all have spoken and there is no one else in the um gallery here. So I am going to close the public hearing at this time and we are now open for commissioner discussion and questions. Commissioner Montes, >> I think I just have two things here. It's pretty straightforward deal here, but um considering it's town homes, again, I I would just ask the applicant to consider some project I I know that you don't have to have any project boundary or buffers, perimeter buffers around the site.

Um I understand that. I would I would ask just even a 5 foot, 10 foot buffer. not not a lot to ask for there, but simply having single families around the the the development in appreciation of the your neighbors to to hopefully create some kind of buffering there. And I think town home residents would also appreciate that. The other only other thing, um I know this wouldn't show the development plan. Um

it's a text case, but um there is right across the street. Oh, I have the wrong one. Right across the street, there is road Cambi in place. Um so slight concern there with where your entrance would be.

Hopefully, it's right across the street from Gambian directly across. Um I I can kind of kind of see that it's on the right side of the development, so it could potentially hinder some development on the east side there. So, I I'd understand that, but you know, just analy to hopefully create a safe intersection there. >> Yes.

So just to touch on that, um in our preliminary discussions with NCDOT, they have indicated that our entrance would need to be um directly opposite uh uh the street you mentioned, Cambria. Um and uh that it so you're correct that does kind of pinch that side of the development. It also just for what it's worth, that's where the wetlands come in. So because of where the road ESO line, we're going to have to impact the

wetlands in that area. Understood. I'm good. Thank you.

>> Thank you. Anyone else? Commissioner Copek, I'm sorry, Commissioner Wen and Commissioner. >> Hey.

So, I think you just briefly mentioned what I was going to ask about. Sorry, we're having trouble with our microphones. Um, so you're the open space is not um you're not committing it to it in the most environmentally sensitive area. And so, that's what you're just saying.

You're going to have to affect the wetland there. >> Yes. So, I actually think that's something that we can we can look into. Um, because because of where the road comes in, it's going to at least because of where we understand the road preliminary have to come in, which is directly opposite Cambria, it's going to impact wetlands because that's where the wetlands are. But there are wetlands to the east of that that I believe would probably end up being adjacent and part of our open space. So I I actually intend to talk to

our engineering team about that to see if we can actually make a commitment that our open space would include that area. That is not to say we won't impact wetlands because like I said the road as I understand is going to impact the wetland but not all of it. there there will still be some remaining wetland that I think would I mean to my eye which I'm not an engineer right but to my eye that just seems like the appropriate place for open space anyway because it is too it's kind of too tight to develop for like a meaningful uh town home or something like that so it should probably end up being open space which would be exactly adjacent to the environmental area so I think it's a great question I was thinking about that today as well >> thank you And there are I really like a lot of the environmental commitments that you have, particularly the the um the cutoff lights and the EV chargers. Um I'm always going to ask if you can commit to more tree coverage beyond the minimum requirement because that is a

comprehensive plan policy and something we like to see. >> Um so let I I'm going to say I think the answer is probably yes. I need to check with the engineering team and it's probably going to end up in that wetland area. It be more than what's required in the UDO.

Just for what it's worth, I suspect we're going to have tree coverage on this um development. Um but I'll need to check with our engineering team because there are dimensional requirements for it to be called tree coverage under the UDO. If we meet them, then I I mean we might as well make the commitment because it's going to be there anyway. >> Thank you.

Commissioner Cook. >> Yeah. I mean, Commissioner Woke uh touched on my question. So, I'll just say that I want to appreciate that this and the last project both had Energy Star. Uh I don't think we see a lot or enough of energy affordability in the cases that come forward or u generally. And so, I just want to say I'm glad to see those commitments in there.

>> Thank you. Anyone else have any comments, questions? Are we ready to move this case forward? If so, may I have a motion?

I was going to read the script this time. >> Go ahead, >> chair. Regarding case Z25001, I move that we a forward this case to city council with a favorable recommendation for approval. >> Second.

It's been moved by Commissioner Zakowski and seconded by Vice Chair Chagaras to move case Z25 quadruple01 East Gear Town Homes forward to city council with a favorable favorable recommendation. May I have the roll call vote, please? >> Chair Cameron, >> yes. >> Vice Chair Shagaras, >> yes.

>> Commissioner Bailey, >> yes. >> Commissioner Chakowski, >> yes. >> Commissioner

Commissioner Copek, >> yes. >> Commissioner Montes, >> yes. >> Commissioner Niner, >> no. >> Commissioner Richie, >> yes.

>> Commissioner Woke, >> yes. >> The motion passes 10 to one. >> Thank you. >> Thank you.

We are now moving on to our new business for the day and that is election of officers. The planning commission um commissioners elect a chair and vice chair annually. Each one alternates between a county appointed commissioner and a city appointed a commissioner. The outgoing chair is a city appointee. Therefore, the incoming chair should be a a county employee and the incoming vice chair should be a city appointee. Those eligible to serve as chair are vice chair Sarah Shagaras, Commissioner

Henry Capers, Commissioner Zuri Hunter, Commissioner Matt Copac, Commissioner Diana Newkin, and Commissioner Carrie Woke. May I have a nomination for chair? >> I would like to nominate Vice Chair Sarah Shagaras as chair. >> Thank you.

That was that nomination was by Comm Commissioner Copac. Do we have any other nominations? No other nominations. Got to ask one more time for Robert's rule of order.

Are there any other nominations? All right. Hearing none, the nominations are Huh. Oh, do I need a second?

Okay. >> Second. >> All right. It's been seconded by Commissioner Richie to nominate Vice Chair Shagaras as chair.

All right, the nominations are clo vote now and separately or just one slate. >> Okay, votes less. Okay, all in favor of

commissioner or vice chair Shagaras as chair of the planning Durham planning commission, please say I. I. >> Any opposed? The eyes have it.

Congratulations. >> Now we vote for vice chair and that should be a city appointee and those eligible to serve are uh Commissioner Cameron, Commissioner Anitra Bailey, Commissioner Zack Chakowski, Commissioner Juan Monte Ramsey Richie, and Commissioner Corey Pian. May I have a nomination for vice chair? Commissioner Shakowski.

Yes, it is my absolute pleasure to nominate uh former chair Kimberly Cameron to step into the role of vice chair. And I think we would also be remiss if we didn't take a moment to acknowledge your her service to the city and the county of Durham. So, Chair Cameron, thank you for everything that you do. Thank you. >> And uh to just put it in plain terms. You crushed it and uh we'll be lucky to have you in leadership still.

>> All right. Are there Thank you. Are there any other nominations? >> All right.

Is there a second? Second. >> Oh my god. >> I all the city appointees.

>> Hilarious. I'm gonna say that was seconded by Commissioner Anra Bailey. That's who I heard first over here. Um, okay.

Since there are no other nominations, the nominations are closed. All in favor of uh Commissioner Kimberly Cameron as vice chair, please say I. >> I. >> Any opposed?

All right. We're done. >> All right. Are there any uh staff announcements?

>> Um yes, just one. Uh please uh you hopefully all got this email regarding the commission retreat. m. m. We will serve lunch. Um, I

am if you put that yes, you could attend on the doodle poll, I am assuming that as an RSVP of yes, if you have not filled out the doodle poll, um, please let me know if you'll be able to attend or not. Uh, just so we can make sure we order enough food, have enough materials, and so forth, we may adjust those times dependent on what we ends up being on the agenda. Um, but I feel like we're going to have a a jam-packed uh, itinerary for you. Um, also we are uh this does have to be a public meeting.

So we will need to advertise it as a public meeting because hopefully we will have quorum. So we just need to do that. Um, we have reserved the committee room on the second floor. Um, that has been reserved already.

So we will meet in there. >> Can you send us a calendar invite for that? >> We will. Yes.

>> Okay. Yes. I will make sure you all have a calendar invite uh for that. Yes. So, when he sends the calendar invite, make sure you say yes or no, and then that'll help you with your

>> and that'll be a great way for me to keep track of of who is going to attend and who is not. >> Um, just one more thing, just uh I mentioned this to a couple of you already. You've probably heard uh next week's agenda is lengthy. We have seven items on the agenda for next month.

So, uh bring some snacks, bring some caffeine, and we'll we'll enjoy a rolling good time together. >> That's all staff asked. All right. Uh is there if there is no other business to come before this commission, we are adjourned. >> There you go. Well done.