 Good evening, we'd like to call the Durham City Council meeting to order at 7 o'clock p.m. Monday November the 7th and certainly want to welcome all of you that are with us this evening. We could just take a moment for a silent meditation please. Thank you. I'll ask Councilman Davis to introduce. Thank you Mr. Mayor. We are privileged to have some wonderful Cub Scouts from PAC 495 from the Parkwood United Methodist Church to join us and to lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance. I'd like you to ask them to come forward and if we can follow their directions. Okay, let's rise please. The United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Very good. Good job Scouts. Madam Clerk would you call the roll please. Mayor Bell, Mayor Pro Tim Cole McFadden, Councilmember Davis, Councilmember Johnson, Councilmember Moffitt, Councilmember Reese, and Councilmember Schuhl. A special resolution that the Council has adopted and I would ask Councilman Schuhl if he would go to the podium and present it please. Thank you very much Mr. Mayor and could I ask Theo Lubke, the son of Paul Lubke, and all of Paul's friends who are here to honor him to please come forward and stand around this microphone. As many of you all know, Representative Paul Lubke passed away about a week ago. We have here with us Theo, Paul's son, my godson, and Adele Rose, Dorello Lubke. Come on up right up. There you go. Paul's granddaughter and we have Sherry Kanoy, Paul's partner, we're Sherry, and we have many other wonderful friends of Paul. I do want to single one out in particular who was friends with Paul for 53 years, Mark Hellman. Mark and Paul met in college in dormitory. They met at a meeting about civil rights in 1963 and I'm so glad that Mark is also here to participate in this. The Mayor had asked at our last work session that we pass a resolution honoring Paul and that's what we're going to be doing tonight. I'm going to, this is the pretty copy, which Theo will get, but I'm going to be reading this copy and then I'm going to ask Theo just to say a word or two. Resolution of the Durham City Council of Remembrance in honor of Representative Paul Lubke. Whereas on October 29, 2016, Representative Paul Lubke passed away, at which time Durham lost one of its favorite sons in the state of North Carolina, an unflinching progressive champion. And whereas Paul Lubke represented Durham in the North Carolina General Assembly as a member of the State House for 25 years, including several years as Senior Chair of the House Finance Committee, and whereas during his time in the General Assembly, he was a staunch defender of Durham's interests and a fierce champion of poor communities and communities of color across our state, whereas Paul was known for his unwavering integrity and his principled progressive stance, even if this sometimes meant standing with a small minority or even fighting on alone. Whereas Paul's greatest legislative achievements, excuse me, were in the area of tax fairness, as he believed that poor and middle class North Carolinians paid too much while wealthy citizens did not pay their fair share. And this deep belief led him to fight successfully for repeal of the sales tax on food and to support a progressive income tax to finance our state government rather than the aggressive sales tax. And whereas Paul held a deserved reputation among progressives as a superb strategist and eager collaborator with grassroots groups working for change, and he worked with these groups over the years to support a woman's right to choose repeal of the death penalty, the Racial Justice Act, community alternatives to incarceration, strong environmental regulation, the expansion of public transit, marriage equality, well-funded state universities and public schools, full funding for North Carolina Central University and other HBCUs, the removal of all barriers to voting, effective gun control, driver's licenses for undocumented immigrants, and the right of working people to organize and to be paid a living wage. And whereas in addition to his legislative career, Paul had a distinguished career as an academic, graduating from Valparaiso University, obtaining his PhD from Columbia University, teaching for four years at Tougaloo College, a historically black college in Jackson, Mississippi, about which we're going to hear more in a moment, and then becoming a professor of sociology at UNC Greensboro, a post he held for the past 40 years. And whereas Paul Luke's book, Tar Heel Politics, published in two editions, remains the authoritative work on North Carolina politics, and whereas Paul deserves immense credit for the progressive, diverse, welcoming nature of Durham, serving as one of the chief architects of our city's current political culture, especially as a founder in 1976 and longtime leader of the Durham People's Alliance, and whereas Paul's most enduring legacy is as the father of Theodore Lukey and the grandfather of Adele Rose Dorello Lukey, both of whom he loved very deeply. Now therefore be it resolved by the Durham City Council that this city council pauses in a moment of silence and memory of Representative Paul Lukey, which we will do in a moment, that the Durham City Council expresses to the family of Paul Lukey our great sadness at his loss and our profound appreciation for the many contributions he made to Durham and the state of North Carolina, especially to those without voice, without power, without privilege. That November 8th, 2016, Election Day, be declared Paul Lukey Day in the City of Durham in honor of his life, of service to this city and its people, and that this resolution be spread upon the official minutes of this governing body and a certified copy of this resolution be presented to his son Theodore Lukey. So now can we have a moment of silence in honor of Paul? Thank you. And I'm now going to turn the microphone over to Theo, and actually before I do, before I turn over to Theo, I'm going to ask Council Member Eddie Davis, who has something special about this to say. Thank you very much, Steve. We, everybody in District 30, all the people in District 30 are saddened about the loss of Paul Lukey. He was someone who reached out to people of all classes, all races, all genders, all orientations, and did lots of wonderful things. I believe that some of that came from his experiences working at Tougaloo College outside of Jackson, Mississippi. There at Tougaloo he came under the influence of the renowned sociologist, Dr. Ernst Boritzky. And he was a colleague, he also was a mentee, and they both worked in the sociology department. Here in Durham, two people who reside in District 30 are here with us today, and they are graduates of Tougaloo College, and they are here with us. They are Reverend Richard Jones and Mrs. Eleanor Jones. They could stand for just a moment, and we can receive them as people. Reverend Jones served as the chaplain at Tougaloo at one point, and the paths of Reverend Jones and Representative Lukey just barely were able to avoid each other by just a few months. It's my understanding that Reverend Jones left the chaplain ship at Tougaloo in the summer, and Representative Lukey came to Tougaloo to teach that same fall. So they worked in the same areas, and they got a chance to meet some of the same people, and they did lots of good work. Tougaloo College produced wonderful graduates, and they did wonderful work in terms of the civil rights movement. So Paul Lukey gained a lot of his experiences there on that Jackson, Mississippi campus. So thank you very much for allowing Reverend and Mrs. Jones to be here. And Mrs. Blackman here, I'm sorry, is there another Tougaloo person? Oh, I'm sorry, there are two more. Thank you very much. We are so glad to have you. Thank you so much, Council Member Davis, and now I'm going to present this to Theo and ask him if he would like to say a word. I just want to express the gratitude of our family and our friends here in Durham to the City Council for this resolution and to all of you in Durham and across North Carolina and across the nation who have shared such wonderful memories and kind words with us in the past week. I think that those memories will live on, and they will live on in the work that all of you do here and that all we do here in Durham and across North Carolina, and that I think makes me happiest of all. So thank you very much. I believe we certainly appreciate your presentation and your remarks and drafting of the resolution on behalf of the Council. Let me go out of sync. We have a resolution at the end, which is in support of that. This item 26, the manager tells me. So in any event, I entertain a motion for the adoption of that resolution. So moved. Second. Madam Clerk, will you open the vote? Close the vote. It passes seven to zero. Thank you. Let me ask, are there announcements by members of the Council? Recognize Councilman Gillian Johnson, Councilman Moffitt in that order. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So in addition to the Boy Scout troop that's here, we are also excited to have some Girl Scouts visiting with us this evening who are hanging out there in the back. Can y'all wave? So tonight we were excited to give a tour to the girls from Girls Scout Troops 21, 4227 and 4887. And these girls are from two new, brand new troops formed just this August by so-do-parents posse. They range in age from five to 12, and they are all working very hard on a number of service projects already in our community, including a Halloween blood drive where they raised enough blood to save the lives of 130 people in our community, a neighborhood food drive to benefit children in their own schools. And tomorrow they will all be participating in the election by volunteering with kids voting Durham. So they came to City Hall to get a tour to learn a little bit more about our city government and how government works. And we were really excited to have them here this evening. Thank you for coming. Recognize Councilman Moffitt. Yes. Three things very quickly. The first for you Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts that are here, the plan for the meeting is called the Agenda. It's kind of long, but don't worry. Most of it will come really fast in what's called the Consent Agenda. There will be one vote and a lot of things will get passed. The second, I really want to acknowledge the adults that are here with the Scouts, because as we know it is the participation of people like our adults in the lives of children that make a huge difference. And so as an Eagle Scout, I'm happy to see the Scouts, but I know the importance of the adults here as well. So thank you. And finally, today I'm wearing red, white and blue, because tomorrow, in my opinion, is the greatest day in the life of any democracy. It is election day, and it's the day when we exercise our will and let our country and our world know how we want to see the future. So I urge everyone who is here, everyone who is watching to get out. If you have not voted yet, please do so. Every vote counts, and every office is important, so be sure you know what's on the ballot and you're ready to vote. Thank you. Thank you, Don. I recognize the Mayor Pro Tem. Good evening, everyone. I was able to attend an event held by the Mayor's Committee on Persons for Disabilities. It was actually an awards event, and one of the most touching things that happened was an award that was given to one of our department heads, the Director of Public Works. Is he here tonight? But it was one of his employees who talked about how kind he was to all of the employees, especially to her, because she has a child who has a disability. I was at the point of tears when I heard this story, but we have so many employees who are compassionate and care so much about the children. Is the Assistant Director here? Tasha, could you just share a little bit of what the employee said about if you can remember? I just can't remember. Good evening, Tasha Johnson, Public Works Assistant Director. Unfortunately, I don't remember offhand the exact language, but she spoke highly of his kindness and willingness to assist any time that a request was made for participation with the Mayor's Council for Persons with Disabilities in terms of funding and some of the programs that were being run. So let's give Marvin Williams a round of applause, because I'm always saying when I saw the sign, love, trumps, hate, and we just bless him for his compassion. Thank you. Are there any more comments by members of the Council? If not, recognize the city manager for the priority items. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. Good evening, everyone. No priority items. Likewise, City Attorney. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, no priority items. Likewise, City Clerk. No items, Mr. Mayor. We'll proceed with the agenda as Councilman Moffitt indicated. The first item is the consent agenda, and those items can be passed with a single vote unless an item is pulled by a member of the Council and a member of the public. At the appropriate time, we'll discuss that item, and I will just read the heading of each item under consent agenda. Item one is the Mayor's Nominee for Appointment, Durham Convention and Visitors Bureau, Tourism Development Authority. Item two is the Street and Infrastructure Acceptances. Item three is the Stormwater Performance Audit, September 2016. Item four is the Request to Carry Over Funds from 2015 to 2016. The physical year 2016, 2017 budget, and other budget grant and capital improvement ordinances. Item five is the Resolution Supporting Durham's Muslim Community, and we'll pull that item for comments before we complete the consent agenda. Item six is the Contract from Consulting and Technical Assistance Engagement, Phase Two, Between the City of Durham, and Enterprise Community Partners, Inc. Item seven is the Big Jump Project. Item eight is the Bid Report, September 2016. Item nine is the Amendment to Assignment Agreement for the Durham Athletic Park Operating Agreement. Item ten is the Proposed Acquisition of Property Interest from Wiggins East Durham, LOC for the East Durham Outfall Project. Item 11 is the Downtown Durham Smart Vision Plan Update Report. Item 12 is the Amendment No. 4 to the Professional Services Agreement for Fire Station 9 with Garner and Brown Architects, PA. Item 14 is the Contract with Spring Buck for Help Analytics. Item 15 is the Contract with Made in Durham to Support Business Engagement for Youth. Item 16 is Utility Extension Agreement with East Durham Land Company, LOC, and Ref 2 FH NC Sierra LOC to serve Fendall Farm Subdivision, formerly known as Dot-Nickels Subdivision. Item 17 is the Contract with Harvard Associates, PA for the Consultant Project Management of Design and Construction of Sidewalk Projects. Item 19 to 24, items that can be found on the General Business Administration's public hearings, and entertain a motion for the approval of the Senate General with the exception of Item 5. It's been proper to move to the second, Madam Clerk. We open the vote. We close the vote. Passes seven and zero. And I'm going to recognize Councilman Schuhl on Item 5. We have two persons that have signed up to speak on this item, and I'll pass this over to Councilman Schuhl. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This resolution is regarding the Durham's Muslim community and welcoming that community and making sure that that community feels safe and welcome here in Durham. And this was on the consent agenda because we knew that our colleagues would all support this and that it would be unanimous, but we had a couple people who said they would like to come speak about it before we do pass it. And so I'm going to call them up. First we have Mr. Jihad Shama. Mr. Shawa, can you go to this microphone over here? And Mr. Shawa, you have three minutes. Wow, that's too much. Okay. If you can do it unless we like that too. Just give me a sign that, you know, three minutes is over so I could stop. Oh, great. Mr. Mayor, Mayor Bell and the Honorable City Councilor, I just knew about the resolution this morning. And to be honest, I'm not one of the city members, so that means I don't live in the city. But this city is great. And it just made me cancel everything I have tonight and come to say thank you. We are adding a name for Durham. Durham has the name of city of medicine. Durham is the bold city. And now I will call Durham is the city of justice, city of love, city of tolerance. My name is Jihad Shawa. I am a highway equipment engineer with North Carolina Department of Transportation and I've been working for the state for the last 24 years. Whatever you're going to tell me about this country and the way Muslims are treated, there is no place like the United States, whether someone like it or whether someone don't like it. At the end of the day, justice has to be done. And I wanted to thank all of you. It's not because you have passed this resolution. You've done your job. This is why you are there. This is why the mayor is successful and has a reputation. This is why, forgive me, I'm not going to go and call your name. It's my time. So either one, either each one of you has done great. It hasn't done it for the Muslims. It hasn't done it for Jihad. And it hasn't done it for the Muslim people who live on this city. You have done it because you believe in the American value. These values that they are living with us for hundreds of years. And I hope that it's going to stay living with us. So you have a job, not only passing the resolution, it's just standing behind this resolution. And thank you so much. I still have 50 seconds. You see, I didn't even write anything here to prepare myself just to say whatever it is. I wanted to tell the mayor something. Listen mayor, thank you so much for having such a wonderful staff. There's a lady I called her this morning. Her name is Sheila. She is with the city clerk. Please thank that lady. I told her she's going to be here tonight. I'm going to give her a big hug. But she's not. So Mr. Mayor, would you promise me and the audience that you're going to do it? Promise you. All right. So Sheila is wonderful. I still have 11 minutes. Sheila told me you cannot do it. And I just kept asking questions and questions and questions. And then she said, Mr. Shaw, your time is over. She is lovely. And you are great. Thank you so much. Mr. Shaw, thank you. I'm personally looking forward to seeing the mayor give Sheila a hug. Perhaps at the work session. You know what? Get his email address. We'll get the hug and send a photo to you. Great. I love it. And now we have one other speaker. I'm sorry. I'm not sure how to pronounce this name. Khan Ghanayim. How did I do? Great. You have three minutes, sir. Good evening. My name is Dr. Burhan Ghanayim. I am one of thousands of the Muslim residents of Durham. I lived in Durham since 1983. I am a retired environmental health scientist and currently a business owner in Durham. And I am proud of being in Durham. I am also the chairman of the Board of Trustees of the Muslim American Public Affairs Council, which is a North Carolina organization that promotes the empowerment of Muslims and the involvement of Muslims in the political process. In recent months and during these unusual elections, it became fashionable to be anti-Muslim and anti-immigrants. This is all instigated by the presidential nominee of one of our major political parties. During these elections, being a racist anti-Muslim has been normalized. Let all those who oppose racism begetry unify and stand up with Muslims and all those who are being disfranchised. Let us all make sure that our city, the city of Durham, takes the lead in North Carolina and in the U.S. in rejecting racism and bigotry and anti-Islam. I urge you to promote the city of Durham to become a leader against racism, Islamophobia, and bigotry. And I thank you for adopting this resolution. Thank you. I didn't entertain the motion on the resolution. It's been probably moved to second. Madam Clerk, we open the vote. Close the vote. It passes 7-0. Thank you. We move next to the General Business Agenda, Public Hearings. Item 19 is Comprehensive Plan Amendment for South Point Trails 2. I don't see any body moving, but there are seats over to the left for those of you who are standing. If the staff is moving, there are seats over to the left if any of you care. We can go ahead while they're... Good evening, Kyle Taylor with the Planning Department. A prior presentation of tonight's case is I can affirm that all legal notice requirements have been executed in accordance with state statutes and local regulations for all Planning Department public hearing items that have been submitted to David's to that effect or on file in the Planning Department. Case Z-16-003 and A-16-00-002 are a zoning map change and Comprehensive Plan Amendment request for 34 parcels comprised of 27.1 acres, generally located at 8512 NC 751 Highway, on the west side of NC 751 Highway, north of Stagecoach Road and south of Mesa Chapel Road. Subject site is presently zoned, Plan Development Residential 5.500 and designated as low-density residential for dwelling units per acre or less. On the future land use map, the applicant proposes a zoning destination of Plan Development Residential 5.500 and a Plan Amendment designation of low-medium-density residential 48 dwelling units per acre to allow for the reduction of a townhouse unit to count previously approved from 149 to 148 and add one single family home. The Development Plan Associate with this request commits to the following, providing a contribution of $15,000 per affordable housing unit for a total of five units previously committed to and approved in the original zoning request, constructing a northbound and southbound turn lane with adequate storage and appropriate taper on NC 751 for the site entrance one, constructing a south red-hand turn lane with adequate storage and taper on NC 751 at the site entrance two, constructing a median, constructing a four-lane divided highway, providing four feet of additional asphalt for a future bike lane, constructing a six-wall-foot tall masonry wall with stucco finished along the tree coverage boundary in the southwest corner, installing a fence along the property line adjacent to NC 751 and purvey service maximum of 55%. Two-site access place, trees, preservations, project boundary buffers, building and parking envelope, and location of a Greenway that has already been, Greenway easement that has already been recorded. Planning Commission recommended approval by a vote of 12 to zero on both cases on July 12th, 2016. Staff determines that their proposal meets the requirements of the Unified Development Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan and recommends approval of the Plan Amendment based on consistent consideration of adopted plans, compatibility, impacts, and site dimensions. Thank you. Could I ask you to say a minute? Could you please clarify again the, one of the early comments you made about affordable housing just for the record? I think you made a mistake there. So they provide a contribution of $15,000 per affordable housing unit for a total of five units previously committed to and approved in the original zoning case. In the original zoning case, they were said that they were going to do five units. Now they're doing $15,000 per affordable housing unit. That was previously committed to. Clarify. Steve Medlin with the Planning Department just to make sure that we're clear here. The original rezoning, actually, the developer did commit to provide five affordable housing units within the development. The current application before council is removing that commitment of providing the five units, but instead asking to make a commitment, a financial commitment of $15,000 per unit for the five units. A contribution you're talking about to the affordable housing trust fund. To the city of Durham for the city to use those funds for affordable housing. That is correct. Okay, this is a public hearing. You've heard the public hearing from the staff. Let me first ask, are there questions, comments by members of the council to recognize them. I have a question. Anyone who was at the Planning Commission meeting, because I'm not clear on Commissioner Freeman stated the initial profit of affordable housing was insufficient. What does that mean? Was anybody there who could share light on that? I hope, maybe it's the typo if it is, it needs to be corrected. And something else about the... I'm sorry, Mayor Furtian. Good evening, Grace Smith of the Planning Department. The written comments that are included in your packet, is that better? The written comments that are included in your packet with each item are actually the written comments as written from each Planning Commissioner that serves on the commission. We don't edit their comments. So that's exactly how it would have been written. That's not making sense. I wish I could clarify that for you, but I'm not sure what she meant by that. Okay. Yes, ma'am. Okay, now it's Councilor Maurice. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I just wanted to let Madam Mayor Pro Tem know that I believe that is an auto correct mistake and that Commissioner Freeman meant to say the initial proffer of affordable housing was insufficient in that it failed to have a certain time, a length of time for which units would be available. It failed to set a commitment for what level of percentage of adjusted median income would be supported by that affordable housing commitment. And I believe that in that context, that makes sense to me. So I believe it was supposed to be proffer, the initial proffer. I believe that's what that's supposed to be. I suspect the word processing program, she simply didn't know that word and turned it into profit, but that's my guess. Let me ask again, are there other comments from members of the Council? If not, we'll proceed to comments from the public. Let me ask first, I have two names, three names that have signed up this week. George Stancell and Ken Spalding as proponents and I have finished a couch this year. I got a car. Are you a proponent or an opponent? I need to know so I can say opponent, okay. In that case, let us initially start off with 10 minutes for each side. Call on George Stancell or Ken Spalding, whichever. Good evening, Mr. Bear, members of the City Council. My name is Ken Spalding. I represent the applicant in this matter. I do want to say that staff did a very good report there. That's basically what I was going to say. As you recall, a few years ago, this particular project was approved for rezoning, but the comprehensive plan was not. This gives it a chance to make it consistent now for the comprehensive plan to actually be consistent with the rezoning. I also want to point out that this project was approved with the five affordable housing units, and we have been working all the way up to about 3 or 4 o'clock today with Mr. Stancell and the owner of the property to try to come up with an even better presentation to you as it relates to the amount that we will be proffering so we can have a win-win situation for both the city and your affordable housing trust fund and what the developer is trying to do at this time. I do want to say that we did get a unanimous vote at the planning commission. I think DeGreana did vote for it, but I think one of the things she was pointing out was back at that time, and we were pointed out as well, back at that time the city really didn't have as much specifics on how we would handle something like this anyway, and I think that you all are better prepared today, but I think it's an ongoing project that the city of Durham is trying to do to create the toolbox and the tools for affordable housing, and that's one of the reasons we are moving forward with making a profit tonight for a commitment in lieu of. So thank you very much, Mr. Stancell. We'll take over the rest. Good evening, Mr. Mayor, members of council. George Stancell, president of Stewart, and I live at 115 Cofield Circle in Durham. A couple of things I wanted to clarify, actually, Ms. McFadden, in what you just read, the original proffer actually did say 80% AMI. I just wanted to clarify that. Yeah, but the proffer, yeah, yeah. Also, I just want to point out that, again, the density remains the same. The open space and tree cover remains the same. This project's under construction. Most, if not all, of the road improvements have already been, off-site road improvements have already been done, and there are units being built. I do want to read a substitute committed element related to our proffer. And as the staff read, the original proffer was $15,000 per affordable unit. And we would like to, I should read the entire thing, because it's not in there. Okay, so the new proffer is, and the planning department has seen this and has approved it in terms of language and that kind of thing. The developers shall provide a payment to the city of Durham of $30,000 per affordable housing unit for five units, previously committed to and approved in the original rezoning request dated July 10th, 2012, for the purpose of affordable housing. The first affordable housing unit payment shall be paid prior to the recording of any plat recorded after November 7th, 2016. Additional payments of $30,000 shall be made prior to the recording of each subsequent final plat. No plat shall contain more than 25 lots. So what we've done is we've increased that commitment from $15,000 to $30,000 per unit, and we've included in this commitment a schedule of payments. So with that, I will answer any questions. Thank you. Let me ask you a question. I remember the council, if not this time, recognize Fennesee Couch. Good evening. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. My name is Fennesee Couch and we live next to the project. We've been here throughout the years with regard to this project and I don't know when you say whether we're opponents or proponents. Tonight I stand to bring our concern for my family, some of who are here tonight about this project. We've talked to the engineer about it and it has to do with sheer safety. We're not able to get in and out of our driveway without road construction signs that look this way when you're standing and sitting in your driveway and they look this way when someone is approaching you. Now we talked about it because when we were here looking this way trying to get out of our driveway, my husband was nearly killed because cars crashed into him in the driveway and we're concerned about the traffic. We came here in July and we talked to the attorney and his client and we were sure that everything was going to work out fine. We were given the name of a gentleman who was supposed to work here for the city to express our concerns to but unfortunately it wasn't known at the time that he had already retired. I come tonight because I'm not sure of our concerns of being heard but it's a dangerous situation when only the construction crews are there putting the signs up in ways that are not lawful and we haven't even gotten to the 167 units that at some point would be fully people with whoever knows how many people and how many cars so I think we'd like to ask the city, we've already reported this to the North Carolina Department of Transportation but we're here to see if the city can do any type of traffic study to make it safe for the residents who've been there over the years notwithstanding the new construction and certainly all neighbors are welcome but it's time to do something that makes the people who are paying their taxes now safe getting on and off their property ingress and egress is threatened and it's not safe so we're not here to say anything bad about the project but these are the facts that are affecting the quality of life for us who live there at this time. Thank you very much. Finesse, let me ask someone from the staff comment on that? Yes, Bill Judge with City Transportation. Thanks to the first I've heard of these particular concerns but I will follow up with the citizen. Moving the sign is certainly a very easy fix and then it sounds like there were some other concerns that our department can investigate. Bill, could you make sure you give her your card before you leave? Thank you. You're welcome, Finesse. Let me go back a long way so that you understand. Let me ask again, are there other persons that want to speak on the side of this item being a public hearing matter? If not, I'm going to bring the matter back before the council. I'm not going to close the public hearing yet. I want to make sure that council has an opportunity to speak if they choose to speak on this item. If there are no further comments, I recognize. Okay, we've got four. Councilman Schuhl, Councilman Johnson, Councilman Moffitt, the mayor approached them in that order. Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. I just wanted to clarify. When this was one of the very first, if not the first proffer that we had from a developer in terms of affordable housing units and I agree that with what Mr. Spaulding said that I don't think that we... Well, I'm glad we did it and I agree also that we really didn't have the best system to make it work. And so what we have here is a situation where the affordable units, affordable at 80% of AMI will only be affordable for the first people to live there and then they can resell them for at market rate, is my understanding. And so I think that it makes sense for us to take an in-loop payment. I guess the question I have is what should the size of the in-loop payment be? You know that our Karen Lotto from Enterprise Community Development has said that it would take about $50,000 to subsidize a unit and so that's more than $30,000. And so I'm wondering if you had a number in mind anywhere between $30,000 and $50,000. Mr. Stansy, I'll... George, let me take this. Let me just say that's what we were working on this afternoon. Trying to get it up, as you know, we started at $15,000 a unit and we had sent out, I think, George had sent out last week about $25,000 because we had gotten back with the developer to let him know that if there's any way we had to go past that $15,000 and try to get up as far as $25,000 and then the day I talked with him and said that at least we could go there with a position of saying we doubled what we did is that any way you could go with that. And he went through a pretty long discussion about costs and all and he's a single developer and that type of thing and he's not a large national developer but we did get him to commit to that $30,000 commitment that's being proffered. I'm trying to go around in a circle trying to find some way and I don't want to go beyond too much of what he was saying so I'll just lay it out there because I know you don't want to negotiate back and forth. He did say that if the $30,000 won't work then $35,000 or something like that so it looks like what you're saying isn't as good as the $35,000 so I would just like to say that we would like to profit that. George, I'm pretty much stating it right on it. I don't want to be the only one out here on the limb when we call our client and tell them about it but I do hope that that would be because I'll tell you he has been and I've been writing out this to check and see and I know what Finesse was talking about the signs and what's going on with the construction traffic but he's had some additional headaches in regard to that project and some more expenditures and things that have gone on based on road improvements and other aspects there so we want to make it a very successful quality project for Durham that we can all be proud of and at the same time for him to be able to make sure he can fulfill every obligation that he makes to you so I would respectfully request your serious consideration of that amount. Thank you. If you don't have anything else Councilor Schull, I'll recognize Councilman Johnson. Thank you Mr. Mayor. Yeah, I've had the same question as you know, can we get any closer to 50? I want to thank you for increasing your offer I think that 35,000 per unit is much closer to what we need to replace those units and I just want to comment that there are the way that we are moving forward on structuring our affordable housing commitments from developers I think we're moving in the right direction in terms of dealing with these concerns upfront that weren't dealt with with this development to not allow folks to buy the house and then flip it at market rate and that we are working on an affordable housing plan for the city that would that would use commitments, you know, deed restrictions or land trusts or other mechanisms to make sure that this doesn't happen again but given the fact that we do have a commitment for affordable housing that I don't think would be successful, I think moving forward with a payment in lieu is reasonable in this case. Thank you. I recognize Councillor Moffitt. Yes, I'd like to start by trying to understand the timing mechanism I understand payments approval of site plan, I understand payments when certificate of occupancy are issued but I didn't really follow the whole plating thing so could you let me first ask are there lots already plated? Would you tell us how many lots are currently plated? Robert Schunk with Stort I believe there's 32 downhomes plated currently. Okay. So then if I understood this right then there could be some extended period before the next set of lots are plated and at that time they'll make payment one of five payments, is that correct? Correct. I guess that answers my question, I don't know if you have anything to add to that. No, I think that as a fair representation Council Member Moffitt I think as with all committed elements we struggle to come up with mechanisms to ensure that we can actually enforce and collect those and I think the mechanisms that have been proposed to the council are one that we as a staff can enforce through the planning department because we are the department that actually processes final plans for sign off so we can put all the necessary security checks and balances in place to ensure that those funds are collected and then deposited into the appropriate account with community development. I'm struggling a little bit because when we had Pulte who's here in the room tonight when they were working on the Cornwallis Road project they proffered $25,000 and then agreed then they came back and proffered to double that to $50,000 if they said we're going to build these units but hey if we don't we'll pay you $50,000. Now I understand the argument that the committed element itself the proffer that was made is perhaps not as valuable as we would like but I'm struggling with the idea that that there's going to be a payment schedule that's going to be stretched out over a considerable amount of time that's going to be less and I will say let me make it really clear that if I do vote for this tonight it'll be the only time I ever vote for a project with a payment in lieu proffer as low as this so I'm more troubled by the fact that there's 32 lots platted we have no idea when the next 25 might get platted or how long it will take before this relatively in the cost the total cost of this project relatively small number. Now I know the developer if he's watching tonight is probably thinking I'm naive and have no understanding of the cost of development but total amount here is $175,000 I know he's planning to build a single family residence so you know that's probably going to be more than the proffer for this affordable housing could you speak a little bit to the schedule the importance of stretching it out over such a long period of time when the zoning was first approved there wasn't a timing mechanism proposed in the original commitment during the site plan approval process is when we work with staff to work out the timing mechanism and during that site plan approval the timing mechanism was a payment to build a unit at 30 prior to the 60th unit, prior to the 120th unit and then so on all the way up to the 149th unit so the intent of this commitment was to mimic that schedule so prior we were going to do the 15,000 times 5 units with the first site plan approval but being that we are increasing the amount we went back to mimic the schedule of how the site plan is currently approved we also chose to to limit the maximum amount of units could be recorded per plat if there wasn't a limit to that the developer might come in and say I'm going to plat 100 units and then plat 5 at a time but this way we felt we were compelled to limit the amount of plat such that incrementally the city would receive those payments so I understand a problem that he might have a problem of cash flow but selling 32 units before he has to make a single payment is probably right now I can't support this tonight and it's over the schedule can you give me a sense of what would make you more comfortable what makes me I can't by law but I can tell you what makes me uncomfortable is spreading this payment out over a long period of time and starting the first payment after in some period in the future that we don't know even when that will be well we're happy to commit to making a first payment I'll be waiting for site plan approval I mean we can we're not trying to not pay this I mean I will tell you that the review fees development fees to the city to date is approaching a million dollars he's made a very significant commitment already he's spent the money to do the offside road improvements it's all being done we're happy to make a payment for instance at site site plan approval which we have coming up soon we can make a first payment then beyond that I have to ask Steve for a little help here because it's when we make payments has to do with how they can enforce them that's for instance why we went from CO's which the planning department doesn't regulate to Plats which they do so from just the application perspective sorry Steve Mettlin with the planning department speaking strictly from the application perspective if the applicant wish to make the first payment prior to site plan approval that certainly is something that is possible to do and then subsequent payments before approval of final Plats that have no more than 25 units on them until they make the full commitment is that more comfortable I guess sure that's more comfortable it does accelerate a little bit so it is more comfortable I mean are you looking for one payment not no I've never heard a proffer that started with an uncertain date and I wanted to find something that was a little more date certain so we're fine with a first payment at site plan approval which is just around the corner I'm not sure what the date is but in the next few weeks probably and then the subsequent payments related to the Plats are the other comments by members of council on this item if not I'm going to close the public hearing and as a matter of fact for the council I'm sorry you're going to restate that restate the committed element so what staff has noted is the developer shall provide a payment to the City of Durham of $35,000 per affordable housing unit for a total of five units previously committed to and approved in the original rezoning request dated July 10th, 2012 with the purpose of affordable housing first affordable housing unit shall be paid prior to the approval of the site plan and each subsequent payment will be made prior to the recording of final Plats and no final Plats shall contain more than 25 lots and the fee is $35,000 per unit I move the item with the understanding that the traffic concerns will be taken care of excuse me I apologize council will probably remember that we are moving towards a consolidated hearing process for those items that have multiple pieces I would simply like to remind council that you have to take separate actions on the plan amendment and then on the zoning and then on the consistency statement so as you're doing that it will require three motions okay are we staring on an amendment now what is your motion yes the first second the plan amendment there's further questions on that if not Madam Clerk we open the vote close the vote it passes 7-0 Mr. Mayor I'll move that we approve the application for the rezoning it's been properly moved the second Madam Clerk we open the vote close the vote it passes 7-0 it's been properly moved the second Madam Clerk we open the vote again it passes 7-0 item 1 is item 21 is the zoning map change for Barini Drive assemblage good evening again Kyle Taylor planning department case Z-1500039 Barini Drive assemblage is the zoning map change request for 83.31 acres this project is comprised of four parcels located on Barini Drive and I-85 the subject site is presently zoned residential suburban 20 with the future land use destination of low density residential for dwelling units per acre or less the applicant proposes a zoning destination of plan development residential 3.735 development plan associated with the request graphically commits to the following general location of site access points tree coverage areas project boundary buffers the textbook was acquired that the removal of existing transmission towers maximum number of units within the project will not exceed 300 maximum unit number of town home units will not exceed 100 provided main activity recreation area install a traffic signal at coal mill road and Barini Drive subject to NCDOT approval and construct site access 1 and 2 with one ingress and one egress recommended Nile by vote 11 to 0 on June 14th 2016 staff determined that this request is consistent with the comprehensive plan and other adopted plans and policies thank you again this is a public hearing I'll declare the public hearing to be open would ask first other questions by members of the council on the staff comments if not we're going to proceed with the public hearing and in order for me to set some time I need to make sure that we have these yellow cards we have more persons that sound to speak in opposition to this item so I'm going to call the names and if your name has been called let me know Francis Mock Carolyn Eckhart Brian Sharrick Elizabeth Lambar Bonnie Flynn Laura Christensen Terry Selinger Raymond Pierce Raymond Pierce, Chris Drops, Lewis Bowles, Jim Delbridge, Chris Drepps, Charlie Barker, and Brian Parker. Now is there anyone named who is in opposition to this item that name was not called and wants to speak? Okay, I have a Brian Parker and Chris, is that Baker? That's me, blame it on me, but that's you. Okay, yeah. All right, we have 34 people that want to speak in opposition. I'm going to allow three minutes for person. So Madam Clerk, you can do the math. Did I say 34? Oh, I'm sorry, 14. No, 14, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 14, 14. Thank you. Got it. Mr. Mayor, I think you got all flustered by the idea of having to give a hug to the city clerk. Okay, we got the right number. So I'm going to recognize the proponents first, and they have the same amount of time. Patrick Beiker, Neil Gosh, Randy King, Bob Zumlock, Josh Allen, and Lyle Overcats. Now is there anyone else who is a proponent whose name I did not call? Not to recognize Patrick Beiker. Good evening, Mayor Bell, Mayor Pro Tem Cole McFadden, members of the city council. My name is Patrick Beiker, I live at 2614 Stuart Drive. I'm an attorney with Morningstar Law Group here in Durham. With me tonight are our traffic engineer, Lyle Overcats with VHB, our stormwater engineer, Josh Allen with McAdams, our landscape architect, Bob Zumlock with McAdams, and also Bob Anderson and Randy King with Pulte. I'll try to be brief with my initial comments this evening, and to start off, I do want to touch on three key points, consistency, buffers, and traffic. However, at the outset, I would like to respectfully ask the council to consider a deferral of this item. I want to highlight that our team has worked very diligently with the LRB Creek Watershed Association, and we started on that right after the planning commission. It was a very complex undertaking to come up with a stormwater plan for this development that in my opinion, and our team's opinion, is second to none. I do want to recognize everyone who came tonight, and certainly we were able to meet with Ms. Mock and Mr. Sherrick last Thursday, shared the components of this stormwater plan and recognize that even though everybody worked really hard, been very diligent, we had worked with the LRB Creek folks, we had run it by city stormwater admin, city stormwater services, and also discussed it with the Plain Department. We regret that there hasn't been enough time to really present what we think are constructive, strong responses to the neighborhood concerns. So I do put that forward for the council's consideration. I'd like to touch on three points, and then we'll reserve the balance of our time for a buttle and open it up for questions. I do want to emphasize this proposal's consistency with the future land use map, which designates this property for low density residential, up to four dwelling units per acre. What we've discussed with the neighborhood and submit to the Plain Department is actually reducing the density to 3.41 units per acre. Again, below four units per acre matches what the city envisions for this area of Durham. The UDO states that the PDR district is intended to promote high quality design and to provide a variety of dwelling types. The plan before you tonight will include townhomes, single-story detached, and two-story detached. So this will provide a variety of housing options for this community, and also a variety of price points so that we can have an inclusive neighborhood with mixed incomes and mixed ages. Next, I want to touch on buffers. It's incumbent on any proposal to provide appropriate buffers for current and future residents. As shown on Pulte's development plan, there's a 30-foot, I'm sorry, yes, 30-foot 40-percent opacity buffer along the south side of Barini Drive, and then also a 100-foot undisturbed buffer along Interstate 85. Also, based on a meeting with residents of Bentgrass Lane, we agreed to a 50-foot buffer along the lots adjacent to our site that are located on Bentgrass Lane. This will achieve 60% opacity with new plantings and existing tree coverage. We believe these buffers are a benefit both to this project and to the existing houses nearby. Finally, I want to touch on traffic. In regard to traffic, it's important to recognize the hierarchy of the street network. We have freeways which carry heavy traffic, thoroughfares which move traffic on and off of freeways, and then collectors which transition vehicles to or from local streets. In this section of Durham, east of the Orange County Line, south of the Eno River, one finds I-85 and NC-147 representing the freeways. Coal Mill Road then is the thoroughfare that transports traffic from the collectors to the freeway. Barini Drive serves as the collector to take traffic out of the neighborhood to the thoroughfare. According to the City Transportation Department, Barini Drive, a two-lane road, has a capacity of 10,700 cars per day. Today, it carries... I'm sorry, that is the City Transportation Department number, not the developer's number. It carries approximately 1,500 cars per day, which means it is operating at 14% of its capacity. As you can see in the staff report, Coal Mill Road is functioning at approximately 60% of its capacity. So the infrastructure in this area is equipped to handle more traffic. Nevertheless, if this development is approved, Polti will cover 100% of the cost of a new traffic signal at Coal Mill Road and Barini Drive. That will greatly improve access and safety from the current conditions today. You may hear from persons tonight that the traffic study for this project was incorrect, because it was done when school was not in session or for some other reason. I can assure you that is not true. Our project's traffic engineer, Lyle Overcash, has on numerous occasions personally served as the traffic engineer for Durham Public Schools. He is well versed on how to conduct traffic studies, particularly in Durham. Moreover, if there were any mistakes in the traffic study, they would have been noted in the Plain Department staff report, and none are. Of course, no one wants to see more traffic in their neighborhood. As I'm sure you've all seen on many times, traffic is almost always a concern with new development. And just as the area residents are concerned with traffic, Polti is too. So, having heard those concerns, we have worked with the staff. We would like to propose additional traffic measures if we're able to meet with the neighborhood and ensure that we address their concerns regarding traffic, potential traffic cut through in the neighborhood. Again, we believe we are making these responses, these changes in direct response to their concerns and making this a stronger proposal for everyone involved. In conclusion, long story short, Durham is growing. As Durham grows, we have some decisions to make. Through these decisions, you as our City Council are instrumental in shaping our future. To accommodate growth, we have infill on one hand and sprawl on the other. This project is an infill opportunity. It makes use of existing infrastructure while at the same time adding to it with improvements like a traffic signal. This new neighborhood is conveniently located to our major employment areas. We want newcomers to Durham to love Durham just as much as we all do, rather than dreading their daily commute going all the way across Durham or worse from Cary or Apex or someplace even further away. So, with an eye towards the future, Durham needs to move forward with infill development like the proposal before you tonight. So, for all these reasons, we respectfully ask for your approval. We reserve the rest of our time for a buttle. However, again, we would welcome the opportunity to meet with the neighbors one more time, share the improvements we have made to the development plan, which I have to go over in detail if the Council would like. We would like to revise these text commitments to present them with more detail to the neighborhood and then hopefully bring back a proposal that you all can support. Yeah, we do have the commitments on the next slide. We'll be happy to share that with you. I'll be happy to provide copies to the planning department. We did share this with them last week. But again, this is our request would be for a deferral to share these in more detail and do as good a job as we possibly can to explain the improvements that we've made for traffic and the environment. Our team will be happy to answer any questions again. All of our engineers are here to answer stormwater or traffic related questions. And we'll reserve the rest of our time for a buttle, but we're happy to answer any questions if you have any right. Well, not withstanding your request for a delay, which obviously this Council has to make a decision on. Yes, sir. I'm just wondering, is it something you might want to share with the Council as a party of presentation that you'll be sharing with the neighborhood? Yes, sir. Sure. Why don't we put up our next slide, Mayor Bell and members of Council? Again, these are the revised text commitments that we have been working on. Again, it was a very complicated process to come up with a stormwater management plan that met the concerns of the neighborhood and the concerned parties involved, most notably the Ellaby Creek Watershed Association. And so to address those, I'd like to briefly go over these changes, the maximum number of units, again, sorry, commitment number two, maximum number of units will not exceed 274. That's almost a 10% reduction from the original proposal. Going down to item six, the maximum pervious surface area will not exceed 70%. The ordinance allows will not exceed 50%. Just for information, the ordinance allows 70%. Then an item seven we'd like to read this stormwater devices consisting of either wet ponds, bioretention basins, level spreaders, or stormwater wetlands subject to City's stormwater service approval will be provided to limit the post-development runoff in the 1, 2, 10 and 100 year storms to pre-development levels at points of discharge from the site and at the upstream limit of Lake Swannanoa. Next, provide on-site treatment for nitrogen reduction to a level of 2.6 pounds per acre per year. Last, provide on-site treatment for phosphorous reduction to a level of 0.4 pounds per acre per year. Next, item eight, in order to provide a transition to the adjoining developed R20 neighborhoods, all lots located immediately adjacent to the property lines containing buffers B and C that's on the south side of Barini Drive. On the development plan will be a minimum of 10,000 square feet in size, and that would be the lot size that would be allowed under the azebrite zoning. Last, temporary sediment control ponds subject to approval by the Durham County sedimentation and erosion division will be provided with twice the storage volume required by section 12.10.4e of the Durham Unified Development Ordinance. Again, we've done our best to address environmental concerns, traffic concerns, and listen to the neighbors and provide a project that'll have a diversity of housing products of housing types for our diverse population. Again, our team would be happy to answer any questions. We'd like to reserve the balance of our time for a buttle, and that's our initial comments for tonight. Mayor Bell, members of council. All right, thank you. Let me ask first of the council the questions of the developer before we move to the public. Councilwoman. Yes. Rhys and Mayor Pro-Demir. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So am I wrong in thinking that this matter has been delayed for our consideration a couple of times as a result of a publication error at a local newspaper not to be named? That is correct, sir. Okay. So maybe you can help me understand why it is that these changes in your proposal came late last week and why they weren't available to be shared with the neighbors before that given the realty delay that we've had in considering this matter. Yeah. Thank you, councilmember Rhys. I'm glad you asked that. It was because we had a three-way conversation taking place between our engineering team, primarily with the McAdams Company, the representatives of the Ellaby Creek Watershed Association, and also the City of Durham Stormwater Services Department. We wanted to make sure we were all doing our best to be on the same page in regards to the stormwater measures that would be taken with this site. We all recognize this as a very sensitive area with Ellaby Creek. And so we wanted to come forward with what is in my opinion, I could be wrong, but in my opinion this is the strongest stormwater management plan I've ever seen for a project in the City of Durham. Now I don't want to represent to these folks wishful thinking. I want to represent commitments that I know will be achievable and enforceable. And so I apologized when I met with them on Thursday that it took a long time. However, that was not due to lack of diligence on the part of anybody in this effort. Everybody rolled up their sleeves, worked hard, and came up with these commitments. And it's a complicated, all I can tell you is it's a complicated process. It's complicated. I'm sorry it took as long as it did. Yeah, if we had been here a few weeks ago, if there had been no publication error, then we would not have had the level of specificity that we're presenting here. So I appreciate your point. It's well taken. I apologize to the council and again apologize to the neighborhood representatives when I met with them. But it was an ongoing dialogue that was lengthy and detailed. And I think everyone negotiated in good faith. And at the end, this was the best that our team could do. And we want to present something that we knew was enforceable, and would hold us accountable. So again, sorry about the delay, but it has Bill Belichick would say it is what it is. All right, recognize the mayor project. Have you finished Councilor Maurice? Yes. Recognize the mayor project. Well, after I learned that the neighborhood had not had sufficient time to absorb the changes. I was really concerned because tonight is not the time for them to have to grasp all of this. And I would much rather see them have time to look at all the changes before we even make a decision on it. We appreciate that. If that's what they want. We appreciate that point because I think it's unfair for them not to have the whole picture. Sure. Are there other questions by members of the council? If not, we'll move to the public. And for those of you who speaking, if you come to the podium to the right, we have a clock over there. Three minutes. I'll call your name so you can start lining up. Francis Mock, Carolyn Eckhardt, Brian Scherrick, Elizabeth Lambar, Bonnie Flagon, Laura Christensen, Jerry Slinger, Raymond Pierce, Trish Drops, Lewis Bowles, Jim Delbridge. I called Trish Drops twice. Trish Drops, Chris Barker and Brian Parker in that order. Again, if you just state your name and address. Good evening. My name is Francis Mock. I live at 14 West Haven Place. Since Pulte proposed this change to the rezoning request almost a year ago and proposed to almost double the or more than double the density of our neighborhood, we have been unified in our opposition to this request. We have presented you with signatures from 257 citizens here who have opposed this rezoning request. Many of them are here tonight. If you oppose this rezoning request, please stand. Thank you. The Planning Commission also has expressed unanimous opposition to this planning rezoning request, voting 11 to 0. And we hope that you will give their decision great weight. Brian Scherrick and I have met with Pulte three times to express the concerns of our neighborhood. We documented our concerns to Pulte in a letter that we sent to them and that's included in the packet that we've provided to you. That letter in the Planning Commission hearing was five months ago and we received no response from Pulte until last Wednesday at five o'clock when they requested to meet with us. We met with Pulte, they have been informed us about what their changes are, but their request to pose phone and continue this proceeding is merely a waste of your time and our time and the fact that they have waited for five months to make these requests is simply unacceptable. The changes they're proposing do not address the two primary concerns of our neighborhood. One is the density of this development and two is the impact on Burini Drive and that traffic. But really the best way to express our concerns is in the PowerPoint presentation that I want to show you. This request is governed by the UDO which says that you are obligated to protect neighborhoods and prevent their decline and that any development must be compatible with existing patterns of development and this one simply is not. So here's a satellite view of our neighborhood and the proposed development and you can see the old growth forest and the density of our neighborhood. This is the Durham City zoning map and as you can see in yellow that's all RS 20 and the 10 areas are RS 10 but as you can see those RS 10 lots are essentially the same size as the RS 20. All those lots are point two point I mean a half acre or larger. This is a satellite view of the one of the main entrances they proposed at Burini Drive and Kimball and you can see the old growth and the density of the houses. Here's another shot of the cul-de-sac at Bent Grass which would be to the east of the proposed development. Magnolia walk is a development that Burini finished a couple of years ago and when I met with Bob Anderson he told me that their development at Burini would be exactly the same same lot sizes same house sizes. This is what that looks like with the same scale that I just showed you our neighborhood and this is also after landscaping has been installed. You can see the tiny little bushes around the houses and this is simply not consistent with our neighborhood. So I'm going to let Caroline Eckhart tell you more about this. I'm Caroline Eckhart. I live at 908 Kimball Drive. I'm going to continue with the slide presentation that Francis has started. This slide shows the intersection of Burini Drive and Kimball Drive across from one of the proposed entrances to the new neighborhood. This is Bent Grass Lane which will connect to the east side of the new development. Notice how the dense vegetation makes it almost impossible to see the homes. This is what Magnolia walk looks like the single family dwellings. I understand Pulti says there's a diversity but this is what the single family homes look like compared to the single family homes in the existing neighborhood. Notice the lack of architectural diversity in the single family homes all have a front porch a shape room over the garage two windows up top same roof line. The developer told us the new development would be like this. Notice that all have front facing garages as Commissioner Miller has pointed out Durham has an anti monotony plan. We don't want to see all houses look the same and with all front facing garages in particular. Again here's a compare and contrast. This is a another shot of Bent Grass Lane which will connect on the east side of the new development. This shows the distance between the homes in the existing neighborhoods that abut the new development. This is a slide of the distance between the homes in Magnolia walk. The gentleman underneath the red arrows there is five foot eleven compare and contrast existing neighborhood proposed new development not consistent in the single family homes in a summary Pulti's plan has mostly point one six acre lots which essentially doubles the density of the surrounding neighborhood from what the surrounding neighborhoods have. It makes most of the lots a third the size of the surround of the neighboring lots. They've proposed up to a hundred town homes which will be closest to interstate eighty five with only a berm for noise abatement that that puts the highest density where the traffic impact is the most severe this is not acceptable. In conclusion this neighborhood is we don't feel as consistent with the surrounding neighborhoods. We want you to protect our neighborhood. Durham can do much better than this. Please vote no to the rezoning. Thank you. Mr. Mayor council members my name is Brian Sherrick I live at three West saving place I'm a local commercial real estate developer initially I was optimistic that Pulti had developed a plan that would positively impact our neighborhood and our community. A year later I feel that Pulti's proposed plan does not better our community and in fact I believe Pulti's intention should be called into question. For example on the rezoning plans Pulti initially cut out a parcel that a butt stock redrive proposed presumably to avoid the possibility of connecting to it. This intentional action seems odd. Pulti has abandoned the possibility possible use of a nearby right away because it was too costly did not provide the grand entrance they desired. Pulti will avoid using the right away to save themselves money while surrounding property owners will see a decrease in property values due to the increase in traffic. Pulti is very proud of what they're calling unprecedented storm commit unprecedented storm water commitments. You will hear later from the as we hear later from the LB creek water association I'm president and might be might also include questionable storm water modeling and calculations. Please remember a storm a stream redesignation was point zero five points off from officially recognizing existing streams on this property. I hope or hoped that Pulti would have elected to protect these areas that were in question. They've elected to masquerade them. As mentioned before in July 9th we sent Pulti a letter outlining our concerns. Pulti did not respond to a letter until five days before this meeting and in that response it was a meeting with their legal counsel. I think that is a message that they are no longer willing to work with us the community. They rather send their lawyer to talk to us. Alone these actions mean nothing collectively and paired with Pulti's recent lawsuits they raised major red flags. There are a hundred plus of us in this room tonight opposed to the rezoning with the correct approach to development. I believe we'll be here in support of redevelopment council members may or hope you hear us loud and clear when I say trust us the natives the neighbors the citizens we've tried to work with Pulti to make this a positive development for our community. Pulti does not have our best interest in mind. They simply do it simply does not fit their business model or their profit goals. Voting against this proposal proposed rezoning will send in messages that Durham will be developed in a manner that is thoughtful safe and beneficial to our community. Thank you. Good evening Mr. Mayor council members. My name is Elizabeth Lumbar and I live at 700 Duluth Street. My biggest concern about the proposed rezoning request that would clear cut the trees significantly increase the density of houses and result in 50% impervious surface continues to be the effect this would have on stormwater runoff and ultimately the health safety and well-being of Durham residents. The developer is asking to nearly double the density that is currently allowed but only making moderate efforts to manage stormwater runoff. Although not able to attend the meeting tonight Mr. Staples the owner of Lake Swannanoa which feeds the northernmost headwater of Ellerby Creek asked that I speak on his behalf. He expressed to me that he and his neighbors are extremely concerned about the disastrous effects a high density development immediately north of them could have for both city-owned and private properties along the portion of the watershed much of which lies in the FEMA declared floodplain. Currently a significant rain event raises the level of the lake as much as three feet inundating the Lake Spillway and Ellerby Creek. Here in the pictures that I'm showing in the powerpoint you see that Lake Swannanoa at Spillway on a normal day to the left and then after a strong rain on the right and those are the city water lines there that it runs under. It goes under the lake of it goes under the bridge of Shockary Drive and then feeds into the Ellerby Creek. This is the northernmost headwater of the Ellerby Creek and you can see the flow after a heavy rain on the right in those pictures. Out of curiosity on the day of the when the hurricane was off the coast recently Hurricane Matthew I stopped by to take a look and saw this I wanted to show a video to you but saw raging waters I was just my mouth was open looking at the force of this water I couldn't believe it and even with that the owner said to me well this is after a steady rain all day you should see what it's like when it's in a fast hard rain in a two to three hour period he stated that it was much worse. It is notable that the Planning Commission voted unanimous against Polti Homes plan in June with six members specifically stating their concern about the impact this would have on runoff and or water quality and although Polti has made some last minute changes to their plan I agree with the Ellerby Creek watershed Association's assessment that these changes are not sufficient considering how important it is to protect the already overly polluted creek both during construction and in the future because of these concerns it is crucial that a request to rezone this land follow guidance provided by the Ellerby Creek watershed Association to safeguard the city's assets and residents I please vote no to the request to rezone this land good evening mr. mayor council thank you for hearing us my name is Bonnie Flynn I live at 800 Kimble Drive Deborah Jackson is a realtor in our neighborhood who has researched the effects of traffic and noise on property values and she's asked me to read this for her she lives at 41 14 Burini Drive she's my neighbor highway noise kills home values there is a very small buyer pool willing to purchase a home with highway noise these homes must be discounted sales time is longer near highways and that along the noise works negatively to bring additional price reductions our homes along Burini Drive and Bentgrass Lane especially won't have the soundproofing of extra thick windows and foam sprayed into walls to mitigate the sound we will be left exposed to the noise when the trees are torn down and the space clear-cutted having a traffic signal light within ISO eyesight of your home also reduces property value due to the noise and the smell of the exhaust from the idling cars at the red lights traffic lights back up traffic and this impacts visual impairment of homeowners and blocking of driveway this would happen to our homes on Burini should a light be installed Burini by nature was and is a small feeder road the city traffic department has put speed bumps in and our current speed limit on Burini is 15 miles an hour this was never meant to be a road a throughway an appraiser told the realtor Deborah a similar home in a quiet street in the same neighborhood that would sell for 200,000 would be reduced from 10 to 12 percent if it is a high traffic street my husband and I are reliant upon what our neighborhood was when we bought our home as I think most of you are we rely on the present zoning of our s20 to maintain our home's value Deborah says I but I'm going to change it to we are not willing to acquisits to a national builder coming into our precious neighborhood and negatively impacting the biggest investment we've ever made I urge you to vote no on this rezoning request thank you good evening I'm Laura Christensen I live at 4118 Burini Drive right about at the access point suggested for this rezoning whatever it is this is a picture of Burini Drive there are four speed bumps in less than four tenths of a mile the city put them in to help control traffic as you can see the speed limit is 15 miles per hour it's been a long year it's been a long year we have had over 31 meetings of our core group we've had two community meetings we've invited the planning department to come to one of those community meetings to tell us how it worked and we have all these fine people here tonight in opposition to this you know I work for 27 years as a health care provider I work 60 or 70 hours a week I know a lot of people have done the same and I have a nice home that I've bought on a street that has a thousand car trips a day that they want to increase by another 2050 a day that the city transportation department says could handle 10,000 I don't know what handle 10,000 means does that mean the infrastructure is not going to fall apart you know certainly the change from a thousand car trips a day to 3,500 car trips a day is not what I'm reliant upon I am reliant upon what was there when I bought my house across from property that is uh zoned to have two houses per acre that's what I'm reliant upon Poldy is is suggesting lots that would for many many many of the houses be point one six acres this is totally inconsistent with our neighborhood this land as you could can see on the on the map that you saw before is almost totally surrounded by RS 20 lots it is not a gradual procession from the dense very dense urban to the urban it's like an island and it is surrounded by the RS 20 lots I wanted to remain that way we want it to remain that way I am not willing to have an extra 2050 car trips on the street in front of my house and I don't think any of these other people are either um boy I talked fast um oh one last thing I have talked to a couple of developers from from Durham who express great interest in developing this property at the present level local developers with local residents in mind so for these reasons I urge you to vote against this rezoning thank you very much good evening mr mayor council members my name is terry sea linger I live at 1025 Kimball drive with my wife Nancy Bernstein and I'm sharing the words of our neighbor glenn walters who lives at 1015 Kimball about traffic capacity analyses of barini were done based on the posted speed limit of 25 miles an hour this was justified because traffic speed measurements were taken by vhb and came in pretty much around that speed however the report didn't indicate where on barini those speeds were measured we're guessing it was done in the section that runs past the churches down closer to cold mill as we all know the effective speed limit through the speed bumps is closer to 15 miles an hour if a thorough study were done looking at actual capacity of barini the section is limiting as traffic flow increases therefore citing barini capacity based on a 25 mile an hour speed limit significantly over states the capacity of this road pulty has proposed mitigation in the form of a pork chop access at barini and Kimball this presumably is designed to prevent drivers who are exiting the new development from crossing straight over to Kimball or from turning left onto barini this con this concession implies acknowledgement by pulty that they didn't take into account the actual traffic patterns in our neighborhood and here are the concerns about this as typically implemented these measures don't really work look at the parking lot entrances off of sparger road into the food line plaza or the harris teeter entrance off horton road i would add the target entrance at the upper corner of west gate road drivers routinely ignore the limited curbing structures and do almost u turns into these entrances even at enhanced pork chops such as the new exit from hillandale elementary school it is still possible for drivers to turn left in doing so they are executing more dangerous maneuvers than if the control was not in place the new residents of this community will be members of our neighborhood they will go to the same schools stores churches as we do they will also continue to see Kimball drive as a convenient way to avoid having to turn left onto coal mill road in order to get to rows of Sharon as such there will be strong incentive to overlook the traffic control when it impedes their ability to use Kimball as a pass through or go to other destinations within the neighborhood even if this measure works it will then transfer the shortcut down to coalwood if it's morning rush hour i'm coming down barini i will definitely cut over on coalwood or Kimball to get to rows of Sharon rather than wait for the left turn at Kimball at coal mill i haven't seen any subsequent traffic studies assuming none were performed why are they proposing this mitigation according to their own study there should be no need for it once again their approach is disingenuous to say the least if they're willing to offer this concession to mitigate impacts that they claim won't exist what else are they trying to obscure thank you good afternoon mayor members of city council my name is Raymond pierce and my wife and i dine we live in 912 Kimball drive and we thank you for a long or some time today the people who preceded me i think have spoken very well to the to the issues facing this this development and quite frankly it's just not a property a piece of property that's convenient for this type of development but i don't want to touch on that one thing i do want to touch on is it's simply this we've been engaged over a year with with this developer on this matter and i just have to say i'd describe it what was seen what i find so unfortunate is that the engagement has been somewhat distasteful now we've seen good public private partnerships throughout this country this is just not one of them it's just unfortunate it's a good piece of property and it could be a good development but the tactics that we have experienced over this year you know the give and take you know the last minute documentation you know almost like discover this is a kind of complex commercial litigation or if you're too corporation not been involved in that when you go back and forth or there's a bit of a hostile takeover we're a neighborhood we're you know we just live here you know we we cut our grass and raise our families and send our children to school we're you know we don't feel that we should be engaged in and some type of you know intense legal matter with with the developer that wants to operate in our neighborhood and and and where they seek to just define the minimum that they have to do i mean every time you know we get somewhere then they come up with something else and it's just this minimum and it's just a bit distasteful um Durham is fortunate as a blessed neighborhood to to be an attractive place for people to come um we don't have a gun to our head where we have to accept any developer that comes in here and you know wants to force this upon there's a lot of good developers out here that don't have the reputation of this developer and you know and that the reputation is well documented and and to say that well you know developers all around the country have the you know lawsuits vowed against them or compliance you know problems to say that that's common amongst developers that's that's an insult to good developers you know we've got good developers here throughout the country and in this state we don't have to accept this so you know with all due respect to my my friend Patrick biker um and you know Patrick you said you know Durham has to look to with an eye towards the future i absolutely agree we have to look with an eye towards the future but not using tactics of the past that put pit the community against the developer it's develop a good public-private partnership and work together to come up with something that works for everybody where you can make a dollar you know you got to make some money on this deal but also it's consistent to some degree with with the with the livelihoods of the people this town if we digest this and we take this on it will become a precedent for the future and that's how business will be done in the city and we don't need that thank you mr mayor council members i'm chris drepps the ellaby creek watershed association and we urge the city council to reject the rezoning request as you've heard a lot tonight we've been talking with the owners uh well you haven't heard this tonight but we've been talking with the owners of the property uh to try and protect this special place for several years and we own a preserve just downstream not very far from those pictures you saw of the lakes want to know however at eighty thousand dollars an acre we've not been able to protect the site and we understand that it may be developed so we're not here against all development but pulty homes approach is right out of the nineteen nineties clear cut the trees masquerade the soils pipe the streams deny the site's wetlands by calling them man made build fifty percent impervious cover add a couple of stormwater ponds plus one by a retention area to give the feel of innovation we have met with randy king at pulty on october 18th and while we appreciate his willingness to meet with us pulty never answered some of our most important questions which ought to be a concern to you uh first for compliance with water quality rules pulty's nitrogen and phosphorus models we believe are simply wrong creating a false impression that their impacts on water quality will be much lower than they actually will be i've given you some details in my write-up to help explain that i'm not going to go into detail i don't have time second even if we believe the model their proposal still doesn't meet the nitrogen and phosphorus standards so they pay a mitigation fee to pollute lrb in falls lake while someone outside of Durham will see the benefits of that mitigation third it's very unclear whether pulty's hydrology model is based on falsely assumption faulty assumptions because they haven't clarified their model assumptions with us or with anybody that i understand um or whether they're considering the effect of the existing pond on their site on the stormwater runoff these things matter it's the devil's in the details fourth pulty will not provide or has not provided some simple calculations to show whether this proposal can protect downstream channels at r20 there is a chance to achieve Durham's low impact development stormwater standard which is the only approach that we believe can meet the water quality standards why not ask pulty to meet the low impact development standard pulty's approach would build even on seasonally wet soils ill-suited to development this will surely lead to lots of french drain system by lots of unhappy homeowners um increasing the runoff way beyond what we're assuming and at r20 a developer could avoid those soils simply and the and the wetlands that they in the seasonal wetlands and streams they contain you heard pulty's representatives say that this is the best we can do well it may be under this zoning rezoning request so please deny i'll live at five duffer's place in Durham with my wife judy and my dog fig um duffer's is in fairway woods and fairway woods uh i like the powerpoint pictures of bent grass because bent grass uh duffers and chippers make up fairway woods so the street that i live on looks just like that street that you saw in the powerpoint presentation a very good one by the way i'm here for once overall specific thing and that is the hundred multifamily homes that are in this proposal i do not believe that they are in any way shape form or fashion consistent with the neighborhood that we live in i've lived in my home since 1984 um if you drive down the entirety of uh marini drive and all the roads offer any drive there are no existing multifamily homes uh i don't know even how much i would be opposed to this if there weren't multifamily in this proposal that's what creates the density that other peoples have referenced i think it would have an impact on our property values and the traffic all these things have been uh mentioned by other people i think the cornerstone of all of it is the is the multifamily uh the pictures of the subdivision that was shown it's already been built are just uh unbelievable for that reason i'm asking that you not consider this proposal certainly as long as it has multifamily in it uh and that's my two cents me and my name chris baker i'm president stony brokage's homeowner's association which uh abuts this project uh towards the coal mill uh roadside i'm a local realtor myself uh unfortunately i'm well versed in city politics since stony brokage is mr mayor you might remember was a failed development back in 2011 and i had to uh i wish there was this amount of people there when we were starting to learn about what failed development was in 2011 i think come to your attention a lot sooner anyways city we got through that um with regards to uh this proposal um i'm hearing the same thing for the burini people tonight like basically our hoa has reached out to poltay over the last couple months and this past week i was given the you know hey we need your support on this we're going to take care of the storm water everything like that and i thought about it for a minute and i went to people live in my neighborhood and at the end of the day they said well why are they changing their verse now about wanting to connect to our neighborhood because that's in a sense our biggest problem is that brook chase lane is a stubhout stubhout to this development um stony brokage is when i was dealing with the city back in 2011 there was no talk about a stubhout and that you're going to connect into 300 or 250 homes whatever it is it's designed for 45 lots which is what it is today um and uh i know bouncing over this and i would i'm not going to take my whole three minutes because i think the amount of people here really talk about um the impact this is going to have in the neighborhood i will say that i don't expect it to stay rs 20 quite frankly but you know if you look at where our development is stony brokage is it's 2.7 zoning when that developer had to uh get that zoning change for rs 20 they took out a there was a pass through into bentgrass lane they had to close that and that developer there never had a problem because they went around and basically asked the neighborhood what would you do to allow us in there or the developer in there who by the way i will say is the only part in that part of town that is has stormwater ponds and is helping protect our creeks um because it isn't you know 2004 built neighborhood uh and i would just want to ask one clarification too um charlie rish you asked a question about the uh delay was twice because of a publication error in the paper my understanding was september the delay was because of stormwater concerns per erin canes the city and then october 7th was because of the publication error so i'd like to get that cleared up and find out exactly what that is thank you park as soon as it's coming forth this is the last speaker does anyone else that that wanted to speak that didn't speak okay here's the last one thank you thank you mr mayor good evening everybody did somebody else wait okay um i'm also on bryan parker i'm at 3809 stony brook drive stony brook cottage us we bought our house uh november of last year uh five bedroom home for my wife and our five kids and um in listening to the development process with this let me first say that i grew up in durham my father's retired builder i grew up building houses my mother was a real estate agent for 25 years i make my living in real estate i finance the homes that you folks want to buy and sell so development is good for me it's good for my family it's good for everybody if it's done the right way and this isn't right if you look at the plans of what poultice presented and what they've tried to spin around they talk a lot about briny drive but haven't given any solutions on what could possibly be a good outlet they've talked about chicory and then in the lonely little corner that he had on the old pdf up here was stony brook cottage us and our subdivision my house sits on point one nine acre from one side of the street to the other measures about 16 feet of asphalt i have about 16 feet from my front step to the road as it is now so if the plan doesn't work for it to go through briny or go to chicory poulti wants to say then let's just take it through this little poldunk subdivision and we're not a poldunk subdivision we have high value homes if i'd have known this when i bought my home last year i might not have bought it because now if this goes through my resale value goes way down especially with the other man's concerns regarding multifamily housing so i thought i heard it said at the beginning that poulti was going to make this happen or they were going to give durong $50,000 was that correct no not correct because if it is take their money and send them on their way okay they had every opportunity to propose what they needed to propose to have a last minute change if you raise your concerns with earlier tonight and we still not have an answer for it you just need to say no that's all i have to say thank you for your time who's the gentleman that wanted to speak yes sir well that's fine because i had 14 but that's because chris signed up twice so you did call my name uh i was mayor i'm jim delbridge i live in 715 clarion drive i would just like to reiterate again i think uh i don't think that these delays have been properly handled as has been said by several other people i don't think that the barini drive was ever intended from the start it's been there for a good number of years and was never intended to carry the kind of traffic that these gentlemen are trying to argue that is realistic i live in clarion drive which is westward of states and just with a notification process we were acted treated as if we weren't affected by this at all and yet in our subdivision flaming drive and barini are the main exits out of that subdivision to just have another pork chop or whatever kind of barrier to prevent try to prevent out of campbell and try to kind of throw it away from us i don't think is a is an accurate assessment of what really goes on in that community at this time and i totally agree with the water flow i play golf with a lot of my friends at uh right there in hillandale and i hate to see uh what i suspect is going to happen with water flow and and the pollution that might come more than we think uh so i would warn you to at least keep that in mind i just uh really think that uh this is not the proper use of the property i was a builder for a number of years here in this town and i think that there were other good builders here in this community even leaving leaving that property with the same zoning could do a much better job than what's being proposed at this time uh i mean even a park i think would be better in a place like that than it would be some of what what i see coming as potential with their their proposals and i think it's been a lot of delay installing in a typical out of mode is a big builder coming in trying to take advantage i mean i think if several of us as builders would have known when i was active at this property that capital whose has you know had all those tower underships had been available i think had local builders had an option to get it i think they they gained that you know before it really was publicly known that they were really willing to get rid of the towers that are out there that have been there for years uh so again beg that you consider the rejection of this proposal as it stands thank you okay to conclude the persons who were speaking in some opposition we'll go back to the developers for their remaining time if they have comments how much time is that mayor bell mayor pro tem colm mcfad members of city council patrick biker again with morris star law group in response to what you've just heard tonight that the proposed density of this rezoning is too high i wish to highlight that we are only asking for 3.41 units per acre and 3.41 represents the appropriate density for acres that is adjacent to a freeway and is designated on our future land use map for up to four units per acre now while the future land use map that everyone in the development community relies on looks forward i think it's important to take a moment to look back for the generation after world war two from the 1950s to the 1980s it was fairly normal for Durham to develop houses on quarter acre or half acre lots like those lots north of barini drive that mindset started changing in the 1980s with a development in south Durham called woodcroft i find it compelling that woodcroft is owned pdr 3.65 higher than what polte is requesting tonight and i trust each member of the city council is familiar with woodcroft as it's been a very successful neighborhood for Durham while woodcroft has a wide range of homes and lot sizes including townhouses some of those lots are only about 6000 square feet and that's a major shift from the post war generation and it reflects much more efficient and wise land use planning practices nevertheless in response to the feedback that we received from the neighborhood we've committed that the proposed lots along the buffer the buffer along barini drive will be 10 000 square foot lots in order to make an appropriate transition from barini drive to a sidewalk to a 30 foot 40 percent opacity buffer to a 10 000 square foot lot before the lots become somewhat smaller transitioning to the townhouses close to the interstate i'd also like to mention that when i started working in economic development for the Durham chamber of commerce in 1994 we never really thought about Durham running out of developable land fast forward to 2016 it definitely feels to me like Durham is just about out of developable land and we really should think carefully about this because Durham has always been a small county with fewer than 300 square miles so we have to be a good steward of the limited vacant land that we have left and so pdr 3.41 while it does correlate to homes on relatively small lots represents current market trends and sound planning principles again home building has changed dramatically since these houses on barini drive were built no different than how they changed from the neighborhoods such as hope valley to one woodcroft was built again it's important to note that this zoning map change constitutes infill development and Durham's comprehensive plan states quote both urban and suburban infill development become more important as the population of Durham continues to grow infill development including residential non-residential and mixed use are an important aspect of smart growth and will help support transportation alternatives and alleviate congestion related issues unquote in my opinion it would not be wise public policy to utilize the existing r20 for this location given its proximity to a freeway and the need to use our existing vacant land in efficient manner moreover as a textbook example of infill development this site is conveniently excuse me conveniently located with relatively short commutes to major employment centers such as downtown Durham duke university medical center traver corporate park and duke regional hospital i bring up these potential commuting patterns because according to forbes dot com the triangle region has the unfortunate distinction for generating more vehicle miles traveled than any other region in our country in the triangle quote the average household racks up 21,800 miles per year unquote now that is not sustainable we need to do more to encourage shorter commutes in this type of infill contiguous residential development is the way to do just that lastly it's important to look at the public benefits from this proposal first the developer will pay for a traffic signal at barinian coal mill the council has heard a lot about traffic tonight and even though barini is well under capacity this development plan will bring a signal to this intersection which will promote safety and accessibility second the development plan before you has a stellar stormwater management plan based on the modifications that we've presented i've worked on development projects in dorm for over 20 years and i cannot recall any proposal that went so far above and beyond the call of duty in regard to stormwater management dorm has tough stormwater standards and we all support them but this project will spend well into six figures to make this new neighborhood reach a higher standard in stormwater management and to be clear this is a change we made to our plan in response to the feedback we received in order to provide this superior stormwater management polte has engineered their measures to control for the 100 year storm our ordinance only requires treatment of a 10 year storm so runoff from this site today during a 100 year storm event will be the same after this site is developed under the proposed plan under the r20 zoning that has been referred to on many occasions that will not happen and it's more than just handling runoff the stormwater measures that polte's team has engineered treat nitrogen and phosphorus to levels well below the required thresholds again this is in direct response to the neighborhood concerns polte has doubled the required storage volume for erosion control during construction simply put the city of Durham has not ever seen a project with stormwater stormwater measures this good so we have heard concerns from the neighbors and we've worked hard to propose solutions to those concerns again we regret that the process took as long as it did however it was not for lack of effort the real question i want to post tonight is how the city council believes this initial infill property should be developed should you deny this rezoning and allow the property to develop as of right as an rs 20 cluster development we would have approximately 170 homes on 10 000 square foot lots we project we predict those houses would sell for approximately four hundred thousand dollars each if that were the case Durham standard stormwater measures we've sold these houses in other communities and in other parts of Durham for prices that we've shared with you on many occasions unfortunately according to the latest tax revaluation it did appear that several of the properties in this area did go down in value but we think that we think the way to improve that is to inject new housing into this community in addition under the rs 20 cluster subdivision only Durham's standard stormwater measures would be implemented that corresponds to treatment for a 10-year storm and only reducing onsite treatment to six pounds of nitrogen per year furthermore there'd be no traffic improvements such as the signal a marine drive but i brought up the price issue to stress that what polity has put forward is a diverse inclusive community that that provides housing for school teachers and nurses and those making approximately Durham's median income we've shared can we can we please respect the speaker if you don't mind thank you mr mayor again we respectfully request that we use the pdr designation to get a development that creates a mix of housing types and styles and lot sizes and price points so that we have substantial upgrades in our stormwater treatment and improvements in our traffic infrastructure and create a diverse community close to downtown close to duke university medical center and other employment opportunities an important question to ask for any rezoning is who pays and who benefits here the developer pays for a traffic signal as the prolative stormwater management so all of Durham benefits from that when a development proposal follows our comprehensive plan pays for 100 of these public benefits and creates new housing that we need to accommodate our growing and diverse population as a city of a quarter million people Durham needs to move forward with this type of infill development i'd now like to bring up our traffic engineer and our stormwater engineers to answer any questions that you may have and we respectfully ask for your approval thank you excuse me pat lyre of cash vhb 4000 west jace boulevard and ronnie we prepared the traffic study patrick's trying to run a video they took during the morning peak hour on briny drive right now briny drive house about 1500 trips per day on it um as noted before this is about 15 percent of the daily capacity as as established by the city of Durham uh bill judge um this development would increase traffic on briny drive it would take the capacity to about 40 percent which is still quite a bit less than capacity the developers proposing a signal at cold mill and briny and in effort to attract the traffic from going back towards kimball and and and attract it to cold mill and also would serve as a you know amenity for the folks the two institutions churches down towards the intersection at cold mill should be noted a couple changes since we did the tia the trips in the traffic study are 10 percent higher than than what's being proposed now um folks have talked about town home developments town homes per unit actually generate about 60 percent per unit when compared to a single family home so they're actually a decrease in traffic when you're looking at single family homes i think the gentleman earlier talked about the speed limit along briny which is posted at 25 the advisory speed limit which is often confused with the posted speed limit is 15 miles an hour the speed study that we did we took it between the first and the second speed bump on briny drive which is approximately the location of the second asset access point since we did the tia the access point on the eastern end has slid down a little bit further we have investigated turn restrictions at the access number one in the tia which is across from kimball drive in an effort to you respond to the neighbor's concern with the increase in traffic on kimball um should be noted that the tia with no restrictions at the intersection of kimball and access one we only showed 10 to 15 additional cars per hour that would actually use kimball drive um so you're looking at uh not a whole lot of cars and if if we're able to work with the city of during work out some kind of turn restrictions that access the developer is proposing to do that as well i think that's about it on the traffic side good evening mr mayor members of city council randy king with pulty group i appreciate you having us tonight i appreciate all the folks who have come out tonight um this has been a long process and i want to assure you that we have worked very hard um to solve to to develop a neighborhood that we feel really good about um this is a challenging piece of property um is bordered on north by rs 20 on the east by a pdr development with lot sizes of approximately 6500 square feet it's also got i 85 for us to envision a neighborhood that becomes a great transition between these very desperate um surrounding uses was difficult um we worked very hard to come up with the land plan that we have that does in response to comments and questions things we've heard from you things we've heard from staff things we've heard from our neighbors provides a transition along the north next to the larger lots of north of us um and then in the middle part of the development lot sizes more consistent with those to the east of us and then we have added the town homes um next to the 100 foot preserved wooded buffer i think someone earlier said we were building a berm there but actually we're preserving 100 feet at least of the trees next to 85 to help with sound attenuation but that's where we're building the town homes and we feel very um excited about bringing town homes to this neighborhood as mr biker pointed out we're about three miles from duke university medical center um as i look at new home communities in durham that offer new homes with one car garage in the 180 to 200 000 price range i think there are four offerings in all of durham where someone in that price range could go buy a new home with one car garage our mortgage people tell me that for someone to get a 30 year mortgage at that price they need to be making 50 000 a year that is where our statement comes that to provide housing for our teachers nurses folks that that are maybe starting their careers who need an opportunity that's what we propose here with our town home product we set up to 100 my current plan has about 88 because we lost some when we reduced our density from 300 to 274 but we feel very excited about this land plan because i think it is something that is creative that responds to things around us and in exchange for the higher density that we're proposing higher than code minimum what that allows us to do is to when we met with chris reps and when i heard miss lumbar when i heard you speak you all spoke very eloquently about the area downstream of us lake chicory lake i'm sorry swinella thank you swinella lake swinella and lrb creek downstream of us and so yes it has taken a while because we hired mecadams we asked them to put together stormwater for us and the first thing i asked them was tell me that we can control runoff on this site so that we control the 100 year storm at lake swinella tell me that we can review the lrb creek watershed management improvement plan understand the concerns of that and address those and the big things that it points out are one flooding erosion which we understand that nutrient loading and so our first priority with development plan was to treat to maintain the 100 year storm it points downstream of us not just where it leaves our site but downstream at lake swinella below lake swinella and it points just upstream of cold mill road so our engineers did that first and then i said okay now that we've got that plan and chris will tell you the first plan we had actually had a six percent reduction we said in the 100 year storm it'll be a six percent less than it is today that was a big win for us but when we started looking at nitrogen nutrients we found that we couldn't do both so we had to ramp the 100 year storm back up to pre-development levels so we're not increasing that but in doing that we're able to provide nutrient reductions for nitrogen down to 2.6 by rule we could just treat the six and then to chris as he said at the planning commission we could just write a check and it would go somewhere else and we'd be okay but instead we're treating down to 2.6 that's as far as we can get with current modeling that we have chris has pointed out that there are some gaps in the modeling that we have done but it's because we're rezoning we haven't even gotten site plan we haven't got construction plans but we plan to proceed on that path and to solve those problems the commitment I made that we've made with our conditions the 100 year storm the 2.6 those are conditions that stick to us we make those conditions at rezoning and yes during site plan and construction plans we'll work with staff we'll work with the LRB Creek we'll work with you folks to document what the current existing conditions are and then we'll hold ourselves to that 100 year standard and that 2.6 standard that's what we're proposing for stormwater management on this site traffic the same type of things we we look at our traffic study the traffic study was approved by your staff it was approved by ncdot we believe it's a valid traffic study now for me seeing is believing because when I read in the traffic study there's 100 trips per day or whatever it is in the peak hour I like to go out there and see what it is so yeah I was out there Thursday evening from five o'clock until about six thirty to see how much traffic was actually on barini drive it at that rush hour and then I was out there even this morning I was out there at seven o'clock yesterday I same time switch helped me to get there at seven but I was there at seven and I stayed away and I saw the traffic and I could see the peak traffic when it I live on quiet street and I appreciate that there is not a lot of traffic on barini drive I would encourage anyone to go or if it is I haven't seen it or it's not what I consider a lot of traffic your staff says it's 14 percent of capacity so we're confident that our development will not negatively impact barini beyond its capacity however with the development of size we can afford to profit the roughly quarter million dollars is the cost of a signal at coal mill and burini we think that is a safer way for people coming out of burini to make a left turn to go north and coal mill we do believe that that will pull people hopefully off kimberle drive because I would tell my wife go to the signal and make a left when the light changes don't go there on four lane road and take your chances go to the signal so that's why we propose a signal I think it's borderline as well as warranted but we will certainly make the case and we were committed to doing that the concern about a pork chop at the at our drive that would line with kimberle drive that is that's really something that we heard from folks hey we're concerned that traffic is going to go north of kimberle drive what are you doing to stop that I met with bill judge we could offset the intersection or we could add a pork chop we call them no they're not perfect but I think we only anticipate the small amount of traffic goes that way anyway but to discourage it or make it illegal for someone to do it is is something we're offering and we're willing to try to do we're trying to solve problems have we communicated poorly yes have we listened absolutely so I've tried to listen and bring forward solutions with our team that resolve the questions that you guys have there are same questions I'd have if I was sitting in your shoes so we've tried to do that we have communicated poorly if it is council's pleasure we would request a two week deferral I'm happy to have a neighborhood meeting mainly y'all to show you more details about what I've just talked about but for us this is a great project and yes maybe we have communicated poorly but I would say that this piece of property Tom Miller said there's no good property left all the property this left has challenges that actually when I look at this I see opportunity I see opportunity to make sort of a mixed use mixed residential project that serves people from all walks life in Durham yeah the nurses and the school teachers my daughter-in-law is a school teacher she doesn't make $50,000 a year they don't live in town they have to commute because they can't afford to live like that so we need to provide that within three miles of Duke University so that people cannot have to get on 147 this morning I left your neighborhood going to my office and carry 147 backed up from Chapel Hill all the way to I-40 and I don't mean like slow I mean backed up I just kept on going I got one on one 540 and just kept going paid the toll because there's just too much traffic and for someone living in Bright Creek towns which is a neighborhood with townhomes that we develop over near Bright Creek we sold the nurses who get on TWA Alexander go to 147 every day to go to Duke University Hospital and come home every night I would much rather sell them a home three miles from where they live hell I can bike or walk there it's it's the right thing to do for Durham this is an infill project and I would ask you the council to ask yourself if this is the right thing to do I have time and I would just like to say the other option is just go code minimum leave it rs 20 and they're right someone will come in and take it rs 20 make it rs 20 cluster you'll have about 170 10 000 square footlots it'll have the same amount of streets that my neighborhood would have it's just the townhomes will be gone the buffers along Burrini the buffers along the neighborhoods to the north and east will be gone because if I'm going to try to sell a 10 000 foot lot next to I-85 you can believe every bit of buffer that's on that project is going to be next to I-85 because you're right those lots are going to be very hard to sell so that combined with the fact that yeah there's not going to be a lot of money left over because you're right it's going to be hard to get $400,000 for that house so we're not going to have a lot of money to spend for stormwater management so whoever does this is going to give you 10 years stormwater management and yes downstream you're going to see quite an impact and they're not going to do any more than get to six pounds per acre whatever it is and buy down from there there will be no traffic improvements they're going to build 170 lots they're going to put a sign up front they're going to walk away so we've tried to bring a neighborhood to you tonight that is different that is innovative have we communicated poorly probably so would I like another chance to do that better I would but the commitments that we've made tonight stand if we if you're willing to approve this development we stand by the commitments that we've made to stormwater to traffic to a mix of housing types and a mix of lot sizes and and to comply with your other codes such as adequate tree coverage we're not clear cut in sight we have to save 16 acres of trees on this site we've committed we could cut them down and replant them we've committed to save the 16 acres of trees there are other parts in your in your ordinance that don't apply to some of the older neighborhoods but we will comply with all those as part of our development so I've gone on too long and I apologize for that I'm a poor communicator and I apologize for that but I will not apologize for bringing you a project that I'm confident in that I think if I were asked to do the other project I would not feel good so I hope that you will approve our request and we're here to take any questions thank you does that conclude your time I know you've got eight minutes but you have a little comment we're just here to answer questions from here on mayor bell and mayor's remember the council thank you back to the council then see if there are comments or questions by the mayor well let me solve councilman Davis and then the mayor pro town well thank you Mr. Mayor I've been impressed with the items that have been brought forth I think you are correct to say that there has been some problems with communicating these requests these proposals to the neighborhood and for that reason I would think that maybe having some kind of referral so that we can go back over with the next few cycles or next at least one cycle to allow you to have a conversation with the neighbors allows us to keep the options open if the opposition is still as strong as it appears to be tonight you can come back wearing red or any other color you want to wear but you would have had the opportunity to listen to the proposals the council will still have its same options and you can voice your concerns and we would hold the developers to the same standards that they have proposed to us tonight so I would be in favor of allowing that dialogue to take place thank you Mr. Mayor recognize the mayor pro town sir it is so important that you improve communication a major part of the opposition has to do with your lack of what is it finesse or whatever you need to sell your product another part of it though is that it's just not compatible with the existing housing in that area and you somehow need to do more work on the housing types that you're proposing storm waters are big sure as well I know in my neighborhood we had some flooding problems that resulted in houses having to be torn down because of the flood problems and so I certainly think that is a very important concern that this neighborhood has and I've worked with Chris Drepps over the years and low-end low-impact development is something that we really need to look seriously at on this council for not just this development but for future ones as well if the neighborhood wants to meet with you again I will support that but it seems like they have they're all met out I mean they're fed up with you it just seems like they don't want to if they would Durham is a very welcoming place and if you would just consider one more opportunity for them to get closer to where you want them to be I'm not saying that you have to accept what they are doing but one more chance I mean we're like a second chance community and if if you think that would help sir if you're you're if you're able to give up some more give up more than you have I think that's the only way you're going to get the support of this group and when I say this group I'm not talking about the council I'm talking about the neighborhood neighborhoods are very important thank you sir council Maurice thank you mr. mayor I just want to make sure I understand what we're going to how this is going to proceed seems to me and obviously you're presiding the meeting but it seems to me we need to address the developer's request for a deferral and depending on how that resolves then we can address the merits of the proposal before so that is that how you intend to go forward you're talking to me yes sir well you know I always try to speak last but since you asked the question I think it's reasonable to ask for an opportunity for the residents to hear what the developers have to say to have whatever discourse in spite of what I've heard you've met too much I'm surprised the mayor pro tem raised that because I think she was one to one deferral but I think these reasons allow it to happen I you know the fact that we hear where we are it's not in the fault of the neighborhood it's not in for developers for the fact that they didn't get published in a way that's a blessing in disguise because it allowed the developers to spend more time trying to address some of the questions but I'm not saying anybody's mind is going to change but at least they will have an opportunity to have another given exchange on the latest proposals I don't think two weeks is going to deter anyone it's not a you know I think it's a reasonable amount of time so I would be supportive of the deferral and then you know council come back with the intention of making a decision thank you mr. mayor in that case I'll um appreciate that clarification I'll restrict my comments at this time to the request for the deferral in many ways this is not a substantive decision because the the decision to delay or not merely acts in some ways as a penalty to one side or the other the developers ask for a delay presumably to allow it an opportunity according to their their request to present the new revisions to their development plan to the folks who were here tonight the residents who live near this property in the hopes of gaining their support or at least their better understanding of the measures that they have tried to take to improve this plan and so if we were to decide not to delay this matter the developer would not gain the benefit of that opportunity however if we it's my turn you can have a chance you had a chance that's my turn you'll get more time if if that's appropriate um but if we grant the delay that also acts as as a penalty to the neighborhood residents who've been down to this very room repeatedly to express their concerns about this project I will point out to the developer and council that this matter didn't just show up on the city council's docket tonight last week there was a city council work session on october 20th two and a half weeks ago when this matter was on for consideration you could have appeared at that meeting and told us at that time you know we've been working really hard for the last two months since this was supposed to be on the agenda I guess the last month in september when it's supposed to be on the agenda and it we're just not getting there would you mind rolling this over can and by the way we've talked to the neighbors and they're they're willing to meet us halfway to meet with us and talk you were not there and did not make that request instead you come here tonight tonight to ask for for a delay when these folks have been here time and again I don't I can't support that you know I came to your neighborhood two days after I was sworn in in this very room to take the office I hold now and met with a number of folks to talk about your concerns I walked the property I went back with my colleague Eddie Davis earlier this year to look at some of the runoff concerns that lakes want to know so I know that this has been a long a long effort for the folks that live near this property who are seeking to have their concerns addressed in a full manner and I also know that the developer to be fair has done quite a bit of work over the last couple of months to to add more stormwater treatment measures to this proposal to add additional buffers to reduce the density but I don't believe that at this stage tonight it's a it's a good idea for this body to give the developer that additional opportunity to gain the support of these folks when you could easily have done that two and a half weeks ago and spared these folks a night in city hall talking about this yet again and so I intend to vote against a deferral thank you mr mayor recognize recognize councilman johnson and then councilman moffitt is that right okay thank you mr mayor I want to speak briefly on the deferral request and then also to the substantive issues around the rezoning though I do feel conflicted I would support a deferral in this case primarily to give everyone a chance to try to work some things out I think that there've been some significant changes to the proposal and my hope and maybe this is a naive hope but my hope is that that those changes could gain some more community support if the concerns that are being expressed here are truly the concerns that you all wish to see addressed I so I have some good news and some bad news I'm going to try to sandwich it a little bit on the substantive questions of the rezoning I'm not willing to support this proposal as is for two reasons I think there are still some environmental concerns that need to be addressed that this is a sensitive piece of property and that any development here needs to effectively manage the impact to downstream communities I think the developers have done a very good job putting forward proposals and and and attempting to to manage that impact I want to I want to be absolutely sure that that is what is going to happen and we have some concerns from from some environmental organizations that are still pending after even after all the developers changes also I'm not comfortable in general approving a project with this level of neighborhood opposition I believe that you know your community better than I do I want to make sure that your voices are heard in this process but what I'm hoping is that this level of neighborhood opposition could be mitigated by some of the changes but I'm not I'm not sure that is going to happen and that's and that's for a couple of reasons but I'm going to go quickly to the bad news which is that Durham is growing and everyone has to adjust we have three choices to deal with growth in this community the number one don't build new housing cost of existing housing goes up and low-income people and working families are priced out of Durham and I don't think anyone wants to see that happen option two we build out our suburbs and increase sprawl which is more environmentally damaging than any infill development like this that could that we could do and option three is we add density and we manage the impacts of that the best that we can my concern is that if we only add density in communities where people as not as organized are not as organized as the community that we see here tonight where people can't turn out a hundred people to a council meeting on a Monday night or meet 30 plus times over the course of the entire year that we're going to be adding all of the impacts of the growth in Durham on those who are least able to defend their communities which are going to be the people in low-income communities in Durham and that's not how I want to see us grow and I'm sure that that's not how any of us want to see us grow and the truth is that growth is inevitable I'm not going to vote against projects just because they are more dense than the surrounding areas and have the naturally resulting impacts on the surrounding areas like more traffic and more noise people are coming to Durham new neighbors are coming they're welcome in Durham and all of our communities are going to have to adjust to welcome them and that includes suburban neighborhoods like Burini so I think that I want to ask everyone to reflect on the fact that we have to deal with growth that we all have to deal with growth and that all of our communities are going to be asked to accept some of these impacts so I so I would like I think what I would like this delay if we approve it to result in is all of the all of the concerns that y'all have brought to the council the developers are trying to address those concerns and I understand if you then come back and say these concerns haven't been addressed to our satisfaction but I feel like I'm hearing I'm hearing you all say that they haven't been addressed at all and I think that that's not accurate so I would like for us to revisit this issue in a couple of weeks and see if these changes have made an impact on how you all see this development because I think that if we look at the changes that they have made a difference this is not the same proposal that went to the planning commission that being said I would so I would be comfortable with moving forward with the delay but I would not be voting for this for this rezoning if we vote on it tonight thank you recognize council thank you mr mayor I really appreciate all of the the time and the energy that everyone here has put into this and the fact that you're here working on this when I make a decision on how I vote on rezoning I weigh out what's likely to happen if it's approved versus what's likely to happen if it's denied and I don't always agree with mr biker but he said tonight that this is an unusually this project has an unusual number of proffers on it and I do agree with that in the 10 years that I've worked I've heard rezoning cases I have not heard the kinds of proffers that we've heard here not just to be clear for example the proffer to treat stormwater onsite to a nitrogen runoff of 2.4 pounds annually is an unusual extraordinary proffer what that means is that the water going downstream from the site is treated more heavily than if it's at six pounds and they go by and which would be used somewhere else to mitigate it I have some quick so I want to be clear about a couple things because there's so many people here tonight that are supportive of a denial which would mean in my opinion because there are so many proffers on this I don't think some other developers going to come in and proffer more so I think the likely outcome of a denial is it developed at rs 20 so let's I want to be clear about what that actually means the action of approving a rezoning is a legislative action we can say no that's why you're here it also means that you can ask questions of the developer and if you say we're really worried about traffic on kimble then the developer says can we do something to try to address their concerns we're concerned about the amount of runoff that would come into a lake swananoa developer says can we do something to address those concerns and they do that let's be honest they do it because they would like us to vote for the project so they try to address your concerns rs 20 by right development will be an administrative decision that reason that zoning is already in place so just to be clear the first time you're likely to know that it's being developed in rs 20 is when you see the trees come down you will not get noticed you will not be able to request considerations if they're able to connect to the road in stony burk cottages and they they may actually be mr. medallion at this point i'm going to have some questions for you the road through if i understand i'm sorry if i don't know all the names of the all the neighborhoods around there but the access point in the stony burk cottages and people were talking about is that typically required by ordinance so the unified excuse me the unified development ordinance does require that if a stub out abuts the property that you have to tie into the road network which normally would mean that you would have to tie in however there are some caveats within the ordinance that can be considered at the time of site plan approval that may not require that connection to be made so it's it's possible it's possible that it wouldn't be but that remains to be seen until you get to site plan that's correct okay i have some of the questions for you please don't go away so i understood the applicant to say that if it's developed by right it's likely to be i think i heard 170 homes or something yes but i i think that we're going to find out what the planning department thinks could be done on it so generally speaking rs 20 would allow 20 000 square foot lots which basically equates to a density of roughly 2.178 units the acre gross obviously you don't develop a site at a gross density because you have to take into consideration your infrastructure improvements your roads and so forth so generally speaking in that regard you allow about a 15% leeway which would allow uh something in the neighborhood of about a hundred and well it would be between 180 and 155 units depending on the actual lay okay so we're in the ballpark yeah so there would be so that many homes um would a by right development rs 20 include any requirement for buffers with the adjoining property uh there is no requirement for project boundary buffers for projects that are similarly zoned and the suburban tier so rs 20 and rs 10 would not require any buffers could an rs 20 by right development use mass grading uh in theory any project within Durham can utilize the mass grading provisions provided they uh um if they're doing only a grading only they would have to have perimeter buffer while that's being graded however for subdivisions typically you go ahead and uh define what your ultimate development 10 is and therefore you would not have to have any perimeter buffers okay so um i know you're not stormwater so you may or may not know this but i'll i'll try um does a rs 20 project have stormwater treatment requirements uh all projects inside the city of Durham do have to meet our stormwater ordinance and we do have a stormwater sorry representative here if you would like more detail perfect since they've been sitting here all evening let's give them a chance okay what do you want to know could you introduce yourself i'm jennifer buzzen public works stormwater development re thanks miss buzzen so uh if an rs if there's a project developed here rs 20 yes we just heard from mr medland that it will have stormwater treatment requirements correct you tell us briefly what those treatment requirements would be okay for a uh well remember there's two things water quality and water quantity yes for water quantity they must attain the one year peak flow to pre development levels at the property boundary or at the stream if there's a stream going through the property okay we also would look at the two and ten year peak flows it's they don't um we would look at the analysis and and see how those go but generally they can't increase more than 10 percent the hundred year is not mandated for every project um however in my rezoning comments for this particular project i looked downstream and i saw lake swannanoa i also saw the flood plane which um during the hundred year flood uh uh shockery drive that goes over the dam for lake swannanoa is flooded so i've already told the applicant that we would be expecting a hundred year peak flow analysis now depending on the what what the results of that are we may or may not require a hundred year detention i'm sorry would that be true for an rs 20 development well it's very it's very site specific it has nothing to do with the the development it has everything to do with the location of the development the proffer i would i think i heard that typically a requirement for nitrogen treatment now would go to quality would be six pounds of phosphorus i think we're getting a little mixed up i mean six pounds of nitrogen no okay um the requirement is okay this is in the falls lake basin the requirement for a greenfield development such as this um they have to meet 2.2 pounds per acre per year of nitrogen and 0.33 pounds per acre per year phosphorus 50 percent of the treatment so we're talking the level you have after development without treatment and you're trying to get down to this target 50 of that treatment has to be achieved on site the rest can happen through a buy down off site from a nutrient bank okay so i know i'm trying to figure out how to do the calculus backwards right because what do they have to they're they're committing they're proffering to commit the two let me ask let me just ask you this okay in your experience if they're if they're committing to if their proffer is to treat nitrogen to 2.6 pounds per acre on site yes right is that a significant proffer i would say so i mean i've worked here for seven years in development review i've never seen stormwater proffers like this okay um so that's somewhat unusual um that doesn't necessarily mean they're giving you something way over and above maybe they're just committing to something they'd be doing anyway you just have to consider all the details okay thank you so thank you okay um the and the point that um then i'm i want everybody understand is is that if it's developed at rs 20 if it gets a denial then um we it's not like we don't pick developers like we we we make decisions on have to do with what the zoning with the potential use what the allowed use of the property is and after that see what happens and so therefore um you what we are looking at tonight is the potential development under the requested rezoning or a potential development in my opinion on with its rs 20 and and to me i am i hear people concerned about kimble drive for example but let me point out that with the proposed development the reason i didn't understand until tonight i couldn't understand when i was talking to mismac and she said well we go up people go up kimble to go out rosa sharon you remember i said well wait a minute you would have to turn right and go back down to the stoplight and i didn't realize until tonight it's because getting out of on cold mill with barini is difficult so 170 homes on this site with no stoplight at barini how are they going to get to rosa sharon right so that's the that's what the alternative to the proposed development is so i want you to understand that and guess what this is such a difficult rezoning case for me is that i'm still not entirely certain how i might come down on this and i'm sorry to do that to everybody applicants and members here i'm listening carefully everything it's going on but at the moment i want you to understand just understand what the alternative to the proposal actually is so that's my two cents i'll thank you mr mayor for indulging me quite welcome is there anyone else that wants to comment who hasn't had a chance to comment okay that that being the case mayor bill we have not had an opportunity but you know i have to understand the process and i want to ask you a question about i'm going to tell you understand the process and respect it we have a certain amount of time in a public hearing where the developers have a certain amount of time and the opponents have a certain amount of time once that time has been allocated unless someone from the council goes out into the audience and asks for a question that discussion is over and it's back to the council and that's that's what we're doing now and if someone up here wants to ask a question of someone that's fine but if i let you up i'm going to have to let someone else upset so that's that's the process right well we haven't had an opportunity to address the request for a delay that is the process that is the process man that's the process and it's up to the council's heard your side they've heard the opponent side the council's now discussing it they know what the question is it's up to the council to make a decision let me tell you how i proceed if we choose to do a delay i won't close the public hearing i'll continue it until the next time the meeting is if we're not going to do a delay then i'm going to close the public hearing and make a decision so i would first try to get understanding from the council as to whether or not there is a willingness to delay this until two weeks now or if there's not so that's that's the type of motion i would entertain on that item yes sure so in terms of it i didn't talk about whether or not about a deferral i am i i do find it rather challenging i think the answer to the earlier question was that both were right i think the first there was a i think there was a one cycle or two cycle delay that was requested by the applicant then there was two further delays that were caused by advertising mistakes by a primary advertiser advertising venue so it's been quite a while so in in unless the neighborhood feels like there's benefit to because we know the applicant does feel that unless the neighborhood does i would not support a deferral so with your permission i will ask the representative of the neighborhood for a very brief comment on the neighborhood's feeling about whether or not you're willing to whether you believe there's any benefit in learning more about their proffers thank you for the opportunity to speak and it would be helpful for you to have a little background as you're making this decision as i mentioned we met with poulti three times i personally did we saw i'm sorry that was not my question let me be clear my question was would the neighborhood support would the neighborhood feel like there's any benefit to a further delay i don't believe there is thank you appreciate that the council if not if there is a motion to consider the delay i'll entertain that first recognize councilman davis thank you miss ma'am not withstanding the last answer that was given i don't see that there is any harm in a delay so thus i would make i would move that we delay this decision for the next until the next available cycle no then i would leave that up to the number 21st as long as council continues the item you can hear it at any of your next meetings you just have to specify which meeting you're going to hear so it'd be in 21st yes all right it's been properly moved in second discussion on the motion here and i recognize councilman shul thank you mr. mayor i've appreciated all the comments very much on both sides of this and also for my colleagues who are so smart and care so much which is always a pleasure to listen to them and i i can understand the frustrations of the neighborhood and i certainly understand the points that charlie was making earlier but i don't think that two more weeks will hurt i can understand why you all in the neighborhood feel that's frustrating but i think uh and i can understand uh but but i agree also with uh with what jillian said i think that the proposal does look quite different than when it came from the plant to the planning commission and i think another listen wouldn't hurt i don't know that there'll be a coming together i frankly kind of doubt it but i think it's good to give it another whirl and so i'll be voting for the uh the two weeks there further discussion now i'm going to call a question madam clerk will you open the vote close the vote it passes five to two with councilmember moffitt voting no and councilmember reese voting no thank you so the next this will be heard at our 21st meeting it's seven o'clock and the public hearing is continuing on the public hearing is continuing thank you okay let's let's move to the next item please item 22 is the consolidated annexation for ells road commercial thank you jacob wiggins with the planning departments this is a request for a utility extension agreement voluntary annexation comprehensive plan amendments and zoning match change from else through commercial lp the subject side is comprised of 26 parcels totaling approximately 65 acres located at the northeast quadrant of ells road at the dorm freeway the requested annexation is for one contiguous parcel located at 1354 ren road the remainder of the site is in the city's jurisdiction the applicant has requested an initial zoning designation of commercial general with the development plan the development plan commits to some of the following a maximum 500 000 square feet of commercial floor area 381 upper story residential units excuse me that's a maximum of 381 upper story residential units roadway improvements along ells road including additional asphalt for a bike lane and stream both for entry preservation areas the majority of this site is already designated as commercial on the future land use map however there is a portion of the site which is designated as industrial in the applicant request to change this approximate 15 acre portion from industrial to commercial the budget management services department performed a fiscal analysis which determined that this request would be revenue positive upon annexation and the public works and water management departments also perform the utility impact analysis determining that the existing water and sewer mains have a capacity for the proposed use the planning commission recommended approval of this case by unanimous vote on july 12 2016 and staff recommends that the council approve the utility extension agreement voluntary annexation petition plan amendment and zoning map change and i'm happy to answer any questions you all may have recognize this is a public hearing this city manager you have a comment i just a question jake could you clarify uh the context map shows that southland drive that is kind of in the middle of those parcels it's not shaded is that included in this annexation request or or will we end up with a street that is not in the city limits thank you thank you um just understood my field so that is an air on our end that is included in this area i apologize for that thank you again this is a public hearing uh public hearing is open i would ask so there are questions by the staff on this item any questions from the council and staff recognize councilman shill thank you mr mayor um i just i do want to observe that we have had a couple of well we've had a one controversial rezoning case tonight but in a way this case at least to me is not controversial but it does seem to be by far the most impactful case we have on our agenda tonight so i always think that's kind of an interesting confluence um my question is can you explain the extent of the forelaning of ellis road what will be the endpoints of the forelaning and can you explain in layman's terms and maybe this is for you tim the improvements you'll be making although i guess i'm supposed to be asking staff mr mayor at this point i'm sorry yeah so i'm not sure that maybe maybe this is yeah okay yes bill judge with transportation they would be uh required to improve ellis road to four lanes basically from nc 147 uh to about southland drive there where the main site entrance is going to be into into the site and then from where the main entrance is it'll be a three lane section down to the um eastern property line near the railroad tracks although the council questions if not we this is a public hearing we have uh mr tim silver cybers as the proponent is anyone to speak in opposition to this are you so proponent you have three minutes thank you mayor council tim cybers for vat associates 16 consultant place Durham North Carolina um i uh first like to thank you for your time and tonight and it's been a been a long meeting today and i i only take a minute or two of your time here um you are very familiar with the site it is at the intersection of nc 147 and ellis road the plan amendment is approximately 15 acres the zoning includes approximately 65 acres the site today is a mix of evergreen and deciduous forest there is a current construction access through a residential development to the north of this development we did hold a neighborhood meeting we actually had a good turnout not quite as the turnout we had here tonight well we did have about 25 people come out to our neighborhood meeting and luckily we didn't have any opposition we did contact jacob last week and to date as of that time uh there was no opposition as well so um commercial land use is proposed for this site it is consistent with the policies that the city reviews um contiguous development infrastructure capacity and consistent with adjacent land use patterns in the area um switch into the rezoning we are proposing 500 square foot maximum retail um 381 upper story residential units as a maximum uh there's multiple internal and external improvements as uh mr shul mentioned and there are tree coverage and street buffer uh requirements that we are committing to as a on the development plan um i'm available for any questions if you guys have any um i am willing to answer thank you for your time all right thank you on the questions of the developer recognize council shul thank you mr mayor can you tell me explain to me 381 or less or fewer upper story residential units does that mean so what are we actually talking about here like that would mean a commercial development on the first floor that would be and so would every second floor you know how would how does something like this work exactly um yes you're heading in the in the correct way uh the first floor would be commercial or retail the second or higher floors third fourth um would be would be um residential um the it's mixed use development you're looking at the you know um live and work in the same development is is the potential if if the option was chose to use the upper story residential i just observe again that one of the things i like about this as opposed to some of the other sort of so-called mixed use developments that we get that this really isn't mixed use development and um i like that a lot um and it just makes a lot of planning sense to me so thank you are there are the questions uh let me ask again is anyone who wants to speak on this item either for against uh let's reflect i'm sorry i didn't recognize councilman no that's all right i was waiting to hear from the opponents i thought there might be some so i do i have a question for you uh based on the answer you just gave yes sir um what councilmember shul was asking about was about the upper floors and you said the upper floors would be residential did you mean they could be residential or is every building everything above the first floor going to be residential no it could be it could be correct right so there might be a multi-story office building for example that is correct all right cg allows up to a 50-foot maximum building height right um so they could be all commercial um but there would what what that clarifies is there's that there is no first floor residential yes you could have commercial up to the up to uh four or five floors whatever you can fit in 50 feet but any residential on this site will either be second third fourth and above floors to reach that 50-foot maximum height yes okay so um we know there's a maximum of 381 upper-story units is there a minimum there is not so there could be zero there potentially could be zero yes that that was uh and and jake feel feel free to add to this there was a um communication back and forth with planning staff on that and that was one item that we did clarify through the through the review it is the maximum yes uh the this developer is also developing some of the adjacent parcels um the residential to the north uh the apartments that are under construction right now to the uh to the east um closer towards um Bethesda Baptist Church in that direction towards the railroad uh so so we we didn't want to put a minimum on this considering considering the local development that of residential that is active any other questions if not um the director the director reflected no one else has to speak the public room is closed as a council the property moving second madam clerk we open the vote close the vote it passes seven zero thank you it's been proper property moving second madam clerk we open the vote close the vote it passes seven zero thank you the next and final item is item 24 i've got 20 good you can jake wiggins again with the planning department this is a request i'm looking at seven four two two abern drive and this is a request for a utility extension agreement voluntary annexation and initial zoning map change submitted by robert and usury for one parcel contiguous parcel located at seven four two two abern drive the site is currently vacant if the request is approved the applicant intends to construct a single family of residents at the subject site staff recommends an initial zoning designation of residential role falls jordan b which is an exact translation of the existing county zoning budget management services department performed the physical analysis which indicated that this request is likely to be revenue positive immediately pan annexation and the public works and water management departments determine that the existing water and two remains have capacity for the proposed use staff recommends that the council approve this extension agreement annexation petition and initial zoning request and i'm happy to answer any question you all may have and this is a public hearing public hearing is open i asked first other questions by council of staff on this item if not as anyone in the public wants to speak on this item either for or against let the record reflect that no one else has to speak uh matter of fact put council recognize council shul uh i i'm supportive of this but it it seems a little strange to kind of have this elbow shaped annexation of a single lot and part of a street when there's this whole row of houses there i'm assuming the other house already constructed there outside the city limits get their water from wells is that um no sir so most of the homes on abern drive already have access water and sewer services there are utility services there they have they have water they're on city water yes sir okay okay i see all right thank you i'm going to close the public hearing matter of fact for the council it's been property moving second madam clerk will you open the vote open the vote close vote it passes seven zero okay now to 24 consolidated annexation for copely farm thank you Jacob Wiggins again um this is a request for a utility extension agreement voluntary annexation petition and zoning map change from linar carolinas for property you generally look at the city of london and the city of london and the city of london and the city of london and the city of london and the city of london and zoning map change from linar carolinas for property you generally located at three six three five freeman road along the north side of freeman road and this is directly east of southern high school the annexation involves approximately a hundred acres land contiguous to the existing city limit the zoning map changes a request to rezonic approximately eight and a half acres from residential suburban 20 to residential rural the remainder of the site is current or already owned residential role there is no development plan associated with the rezoning request and if the request is approved the applicant has indicated a desire to construct a conservation subdivision at the subject site the budget management services um departments perform a fiscal analysis which indicated that this proposal is likely to be revenue positive upon annexation and the public works and water management departments determine that the existing city water into remains half capacity for the proposal the planning commission recommended approval of the rezoning request by unanimous vote on july 12 2016 and staff recommends that the council approve the utility extension agreement voluntary annexation petition and zoning map change i'm certainly happy to answer any questions you all may have thank you all right thank you questions of the staff by members of the council if not we have two persons that have asked to speak on this item robert shunk and rico chevus is that anyone else who wants to speak on this item you have three minutes initially one is proponent one is the opponent good evening mayor and members of city council my name is robert shunk 2627 university drive here in Durham we are we will be proposing a conservation subdivision about the 250 units on this location the zoning request is reducing the density allowed on the site we did have a neighborhood meeting attended by plus or minus 15 residents and neighbors of the project all of the access will be on the freeman road i'm available for any questions you might have uh there are questions of the developer by members of the council not at this time recognize mr rico chevus yeah three minutes good evening mayor mayor pro tem it's great to speak to the city council instead of the Durham county since i'm there all the time but i'm speaking to a opposing the reason well not necessarily rezoning but the um what you've submitted is a um i'm reading a letter i have the zoning part annexing because um you're donating the area at least four houses within that zoning that are left out and i know this has happened in the city and the county in the past couple of years hopefully we've corrected it where you don't zone around two or three houses and leave them out and i live at 701 dickens lane i don't face premium meal but their subdivision will hit me 45 feet from my house and my backyard neighbor he has a he owns two lights and then across the street they own a lot but everything else is already city and they since they've rezoned it and they want to annex it they're annexing an area just so they can have a entry into their subdivision which is not a problem the only reason i oppose it is because we'll be we're in a donut you have everything around us and you have maybe four houses sitting there that's in the county and i've seen this happen before and it takes years for the person to come back and uh correct it or and a lot of money to uh even be hooked up and we already have city water we just don't have sewer so why not why are they're doing this subdivision just hook us up at the same time or extend that like all the developers that come in here and make all the concessions they should make the concession and hook the only four houses you're having 200 some houses and we're right on freeman road and then leave the other ones out donut so you have houses all the way around across the street there's a subdivision now it's been there for years is city and that's only like i'll say 20 yards off my property and so and everything else around it would be now totally city and we're sitting there counting that's the reason why i oppose it i don't like paying city taxes but i don't have a problem you hook me up to sewer that's not a that's not an issue that's it i need to see i'm looking at the map here you say you're on freeman road well my house is turned sideways i'm on i'm the only one on the street and it's dickens lane is right here and so i'm turned sideways i'm going north south all other houses are going east west pretty much and so i have a half acre land the person behind me you can see how they've annexed the other homes on the outside of at least four houses and so it's odd and then if you go across the street which might not be on your map that subdivision has been there a while i don't know the name of it but it is city switch line runs down freeman mill road but the engineers already spoken to them i can't tie into that because it's i'm not an engineer but it's not gravity or it's a gravity line or something it's a little more involved but if you look behind my my lot they're going to have a about 45 feet behind me there will be the houses will be there and they're 45 feet away from my line which is very close so if you want to make a nice concession run sewage those houses that are there and annexes at the same time so you don't have a problem they can pay for it it'd be all right with me wait wait let's let me make sure i understand would you would you want to be annexed into the city i would okay that's that's the question i think and another thing that's missing is that when the annex you know we have southern high school there there are no sidewalks most time when you do a subdivision if i'm not mistaken they put sidewalks so they would extend the sidewalk why would you annex on my east side is annex it skips us then it jumps then it's annexed there so would you put a sidewalk all the way from their subdivision all the way to southern high school which there are no sidewalks at this point so you you're asking for a voluntary annexation yeah just like the other developers doing right so can we get a response to what what that involves what's occurred check up with the plane department um staff was obviously when this came in we noticed that it would be creating somewhat of a doughnut hole we recommended that the applicant mr chunk in this case reach out to the property owners to to get a better interest in potentially joining this annexation petition i don't know the results of that but certainly if the gentleman wanted to annex he could request voluntary annexation as well and the gentleman who's living behind me he last year i think came before city council and he hooked his own a sewage lines up because he was only maybe for office property maybe 20 feet 30 feet off so he actually paid for that to hook his up so it probably would only be three properties there would have to be hooked up and so that's the that's all i'm sorry were you going to add something to see i did i was just going to offer to meet with mr chavis and explain the process to him what i was going to say mr medland is i wasn't sure i've mentioned to the mayor what the developer's timing is what's the urgency so that we don't have to have a second annexation petition that will cost those property owners money it's possible it could be rolled into one i believe it would be depending on the timing but i would have to defer to the applicant to speak to the timing issues of the timing of the project is we're looking to have a the property purchased by lennard's looking to purchase the property just before the end of the year just after the end of the year i did did have some communications with staff about the the donut hole i did speak to the people that live just behind mr chavis they were able to connect to the sewer years ago when their septic tank had failed they're paying both city and county fees but they're not annexed in maybe september august i did speak with other residents in the area spoke um we did speak a little bit i also spoke to the person on the other side of dickens lane he could go either way i've spoken to other people on dickens uh on freeman road and they were against uh annexing what was communicated to me with clarification from the plan director was that it was the request was to find out if anybody in that area wanted to be annexed not necessarily to be included in our annexation in conversations with other staff if we annexed they may be tied to the utility extension agreement or may not be and then also if there are annexed and tied into a sewer they would likely have to pay the you know fifty dollar per linear foot and twenty nine dollars per linear foot frontage fees if they tie in so yes there's a fourteen hundred dollar plus or minus fee to annex but then there's a you know several thousands of dollars fee if they want water and sewer i'm gonna recognize don moffin then i'll make them out of the comments thank you uh mr chavis one of the things you commented about was you heard lots of things being proffered tonight all those things being proffered tonight were none of them were things on other people's property the um the applicants can proffered correct me if i'm wrong but i believe that the applicants can proffered to make changes to the property they control but they can't for example proffered to build a sidewalk off-site is that correct nope mr madeline's gonna correct me again it's okay so generally speaking whenever there is a development plan a developer potentially could proffer to build a sidewalk provided that sidewalk could be built inside the public right of way and not on other person's private property right typically the way we will condition that is subject to um well i'm just gonna leave it at that but generally speaking it did typically that the profits that you hear are profits that applicants are making to improve their project not um to provide benefit to people around the product and uh to the personal property the people around the project so it's it's a distinction it may not seem like one but it is a difference between hooking a house up to the water system which might be part would not be part of a rezoning that would have to be something you would just hopefully be able to work out with the applicator itself only reason i mentioned the sidewalk because i saw the gap between uh what's annexed then us you know outside the city and then the annexation and then their subdivision entry and then southern high school that's that's only reason i mentioned that that is when you have a donut it just makes it out of it makes look wacky that's all i could say that's not something i necessarily have to have i mean i just named that because of the donut a question for the developer uh it has the uh the layout for the sewer lines been completed for this development yet uh they're in the works now um we actually have a site planning review and one of the comments from public works was to extend the sewer out into framing roads such that the sewer could be extended further up so that already is in the discussion about what's the best way to service these other properties yes sir yes um mr tavis what did you find out about this process oh i received the i received a letter probably i missed a meeting i didn't get that letter but i received uh i received at least two letters because i asked me i wanted to cut off my road because the road that i'm on ends and uh and if you can see uh it's the back of one of the housing the areas like the phase two and so i received that letter then the next letter i got uh was a plan and i went to the planning meeting but i didn't speak at the planning meeting uh during that time so i've received two letters i'm trying to find out really when did you express interest to either the staff or the developers that you like to be a part of this i received uh my son received a business card so i spoke to i spoke to you and i spoke to him and then i went down talked to the planning office and i talked to the engineers the best route of how to be annexed or uh why did they choose it like this and make a donut and not ask us because i never really was asked if you wanted to sell your property if you wanted to um a tie-in or anything like that because originally it looks like where my road is dickens i'm the only one there that would have been an ideal location to come into their subdivision and they bought the house two houses down from me i think they're using that as their entry into the subdivision one and there's an entry closer to southern high school like we're tracking a football field up on that end if you can see on your layout on your map okay i'm trying to find a way to facilitate the request that he has a lot a lot of people don't if you're not familiar with this whole process you you might not be asking the right person might not be doing it at the right time but the question is how can we facilitate he wants to be annexed he wants the services how can we facilitate that certainly mayor bill jacob wings will play in part i'll be happy to meet mr chevus and walk him through that process i think that would probably be the most expeditious way of moving forward with that for him or possibly might be with the neighbors in addition mr chevus certainly yes is that something you can do fairly quickly yes sir definitely all right is that that i said yes because we already have water the only thing is okay recognize council moth yeah i do want to uh i mr chev i'm looking at aerial photos now and mr chevus issue about the sidewalk where they where this property context freeman road will they be required to build sidewalk so the short answer is um this applicant tonight would be required to build sidewalk along freeman road however the section that is not currently part of the annexation would not be able or be required unless they come in for subsequent development approval which is highly unlikely looking at the lottery pattern so that's just going to be a gap until such time as the city uh ultimately puts in place a sidewalk program out there to fill in the gap it looks like there may be 20 feet between the edges of the property line at the end of the sidewalk i'm just i'm looking at aerial photo so i'm going to ask the applicant then i mean there it looks like about a 20 foot gap between the edge of your are you you know what i'm talking about the sidewalk that runs along the property of southern high school it looks like it ends about 20 feet from the proper from your property line and my question is would you be willing to extend the sidewalk to tie it in so that there's it it looks like it's very little yeah i mean we would likely connect to that sidewalk so just that just to west and then we would install it across our frontage one of the questions about installing the sidewalk i did mr. wiggins had me reach out to the mr. shavis's neighbor to the west uh she was opposed to us us installing sidewalks along her frontage so just in terms of just if if there's any gap here if this sidewalk doesn't end at the property line the property belongs to during public schools correct we will fill that gap in okay is that is that a proffer is that a proffer we we can't make proffers it's not a development plan oh i see okay right okay so all right all right great glad you raised the question thank you for promising to fill the gap perfect good okay are we straight here let's take are you straight all right i'm going to close the public hearing the matter is back before the council second it's been properly moved to the second amount of click we open the vote we close vote it passes seven is zero what else do we have consistency thank you gillian it's been properly moving second will you open the vote close the vote it passes seven is zero thank you uh before we adjourn i went and i'm saying this sincerely i appreciated the conversation we had this evening on this last matter not this last matter but the other marina drive i think it was very helpful i think it was a lot of foresight i think a lot of good questions were answered and uh it turns out it turns out but i i do appreciate all the comments mr mr mayor especially especially councilmember johnson's elucidation of the three options that face our growing city it's critically important that all of us get our heads around what that means okay we're going to adjourn and uh everybody that hasn't voted is going to vote and get all your friends neighbors and all that okay that's off the record thank you we adjourned