 Call this meeting of the Durham City Council to order at 7 o'clock on Monday night, March the 15th, and I certainly want to welcome everyone here tonight. My council colleagues, our wonderful staff, and all those members of the public who are with us here as well. As we gather tonight to do very important business, I'll ask you to please join me in a moment of silent meditation. Thank you. Well, instead of our usual Pledge of Allegiance, led by council member Reese, we have a special Pledge of Allegiance tonight, recorded by the Girl Scouts of the North Carolina Coastal Ponds, and we're excited to have the Girl Scouts reciting the pledge tonight. And to the public, for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. That was awesome. Wonderful recitation of the pledge, and I want to thank all the Girl Scouts who participated, and I want to thank the scout leaders of the Girl Scouts of the North Carolina Coastal Ponds for bringing us the pledge. We really look forward to the time, and we'll have scout troops back in the council chambers. I know council member Reese loves to meet with our scouts and before meetings, and get them all ready for the pledge, and we'll be doing that, God willing, before long. Mr. Mayor, if you just want to play that tape every time for our virtual meetings or battle on, they're awesome. They are awesome. Good idea. Good thought. Awesome. Awesome. Awesome. Alright. Madam clerk, would you please call the roll? Mayor Schul. Here. Mayor Pro Tem Johnson. Here. Councilmember Caballero. Here. Councilmember Freelon. Councilmember Freeman. Present. Councilmember Middleton. Here? Councilmember Reese. Here. Thank you. Thank you, Madam clerk. Councilmember Freelon is on his way from an important matter that he's involved and he will be here a little bit late tonight. All right, and now we're gonna move into our ceremonial items. And I'm very excited for the first ceremonial item, which is the proclamation of Robert D. Tear Jr. Day in Durham. And Madam Clerk, I believe that Mr. Tear and Mr. Mike Langeth, the CEO of Raleigh Durham Airport are here with us tonight. Can you make them available to be both seen and heard? I see Mr. Tear, Gray is here. And is Mr. Langeth also with us at this point? I see he is. Mr. Langeth, are you available to, can you be seen and heard? Can you turn on your camera and your microphone? All right, now, can you hear me? Yes, we can. Thank you for being here. Colleagues, we're here on a momentous occasion. I think that we are so fortunate in Durham. We appoint hundreds of people to boards and commissions to serve us and serve our community in so many ways. And I think we have right now more than 150 appointments that people who are appointed to serve us. As you know, most of these appointees serve a year or two or three or sometimes as long as six years. But we are here tonight to, especially on a Rob Tear, Mr. Tear has served our community as a member of the Raleigh Durham Airport Board of Directors for more than 20 years. His father served more than 30 years before him. The whole history of Raleigh Durham Airport has been enhanced by this family in an incredible way. And we owe Mr. Tear a tremendous debt of gratitude for his service. I'm gonna say a little bit more about that. And then we're gonna have the reading of the proclamation and then we're gonna hear from Mr. Tear. But first, I wanted to ask Mr. Mike Langeth, who's the CEO of Raleigh Durham Airport and a great friend of our city, if he would like to add a few words about Mr. Tear. Thank you, Mayor Schuyl and good evening, council members and city manager Paige. It is my privilege to recognize Mr. Rob Tear for a service in the Raleigh Durham Airport Authority Board of Directors for 20 plus years of service. While I know Mayor Schuyl will share with you today all of the physical infrastructure that Mr. Tear as a board member helped get developed, I wanna share with you the impact Mr. Tear has had on people's lives. Mr. Tear has always been a strong supporter of diversity and inclusion and that was evident by his support for the development of the authorities, minority, women, and small business program. His program is focused on ensuring all of our spinning includes MWSB goals, not just construction projects. He would constantly remind staff that all people should benefit from the work that we do at the Authority. He's also strong supporter of men and women in uniform. Mr. Tear felt it was important, the Authority supported the USO's mission of serving military personnel, transitioning through RTU. And finally, we're the people of RTU. While Mr. Tear was always focused on ensuring we had the infrastructure to support our growth, he was the first to ask how his decisions would impact the staff. Mr. Tear was a man who cared about more than the development of infrastructure, but more importantly, he cared for all the people who worked there. From all of us who work at RTU, we salute Mr. Tear for his 20 plus years of service. Thank you, Mayor Schuyl. And I hope the city council has a wonderful evening. Mr. Lange, thank you so much. We appreciate you being here to offer that testimony and praise for Mr. Tear and his great work. I am now going to read the proclamation and then we'll hear a few words from Mr. Tear himself. This is again, a man who has given incredible service to the city of Durham, above and beyond what most of us can imagine. Proclamation, whereas Robert D. Tear Jr. was appointed to the Raleigh Durham Airport Authority Board in 1998 by the city of Durham and has served admirably for 22 years. And whereas in 2009, Mr. Tear became chairman of the RDUAA Board and served in that role for two years. And whereas Mr. Tear is a second generation RDUAA Board member his father, Robert Dillard Tear, represented Durham on the board for 31 years, including seven years as board chair. And whereas Raleigh Durham Airport changed dramatically during Mr. Tear's years of service from the construction of terminal two through the dynamic growth over the last decade that led to record-setting increases in passenger traffic. And whereas Mr. Tear's foresight can be seen in Vision 2040, the airport's master plan and in the recruitment of RDU's nonstop flights to London, Paris. And whereas other notable accomplishments during Mr. Tear's tenure on the RDUAA Board include the recruitment of new airlines, establishment of the USO at RDU, terminal one redevelopment, winning USA Today Readers Choice Airport Awards and bond refinancing, which saved the authority $88 million over 17 years. And whereas although Mr. Tear was a champion for responsible airport growth and development, his steady hand also helps steer RDUAA through the COVID-19 pandemic and historic plunge in air travel in 2020. And whereas RDUAA in the entire community, the airport serves have benefited greatly from Mr. Tear and his father's contributions to the RDUAA Authority, their leadership and vision will be sorely missed, yet the Tear legacy will continue through the many accomplishments achieved through their combined 53 years of service. Now, therefore, I, Stephen M. Shul, Mayor of the City of Durham, North Carolina do hereby proclaim March 15th, 2021 as Robert D. Tear Day in Durham and do hereby commend its observance to all residents of our city. Witness my hand, this, the 15th day of March, 2021. Mr. Tear, I wish we were together in person in the council chambers so that your family and friends and loved ones could all be here to recognize Robert D. Tear Day, but we're in the COVID world and we're doing our best, but we congratulate you and we'd love to hear some remarks from you, Mr. Tear. Thank you, Mayor Shul. Let me cut down my volume. All right, that should be better. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, council members and city staff. Raleigh Durham Airport Authority has been a significant part of my family's life. My father and I enjoyed every minute of the 53 years that we served. I appreciate the recognition and honor tonight. The Raleigh Durham Airport Authority is a major economic engine for the city of Durham, terms growth and success. The airport is one of the best in the United States as noted by the survey firm of JD Power. When I was a young boy, I saw the airport beginning and evolving. I had no idea it would grow and have the effect on our region that it has. I hope you all will be proud of the airport and think about its management and employees, particularly during this turbulent period of time we're going through. I wanna thank you again for allowing me to serve. Mr. Tear, again, thank you so much. On behalf of a grateful community, we salute you and we appreciate you. Thank you so much. And Mr. Lange, thank you so much for being with us tonight. Gentlemen, good night, and we will see you on another occasion. Thank you. Thank you, everybody. You have a great night. All right, colleagues, we will now follow that happy occasion with the second one. And this is the proclamation for March for Meals Month. And I'm gonna ask the city clerk if she could make Jason Pease, Executive Director of Meals on Wheels, available to be seen and heard. And then I'm gonna turn the floor over to Council Member Reese. As you all might know, Council Member Reese has been a wonderful supporter of Meals on Wheels. And since his time on the council and will be doing the honors tonight. And Mr. Pease, welcome. Thank you for having me here. Mr. Pease, thank you for being with us. And hopefully we can hear a bit from you after I read the proclamation. By the way, I hope I can get an invitation to that Swank Library you've got there. That is, you are living large, my friend. That is awesome. I'm gonna take my 12-year-old daughter. She loves libraries like that. So we're coming over. But you'll have a chance to speak as soon as my reading of proclamation is over. I'm excited to celebrate this month. And I'll go ahead and read the proclamation now. Whereas on March 22nd, 1972, President Richard Nixon signed into law a measure that amended the Older Americans Act of 1965 and established a national nutrition program for seniors 60 years and older. And whereas Meals on Wheels America established the March for Meals program, March 2002, to recognize the importance of the Older Americans Act nutrition programs, both congregate and home delivered, and raise awareness about the escalating problem of senior hunger in America. And whereas the 2021 observance of March for Meals celebrates 19 years of providing an opportunity to support Meals on Wheels programs that deliver vital and critical services by donating, volunteering, and raising awareness about senior hunger and isolation. And whereas Meals on Wheels of Durham has served our community admirably for 46 years. And whereas volunteers for Meals on Wheels of Durham are the backbone of the program. They not only deliver nutritious meals to seniors and individuals with disabilities who are at significant risk of hunger and isolation, but also carrying concern and attention to their welfare. And whereas Meals on Wheels of Durham provides meals to seniors throughout Durham County that help them maintain their health and independence, thereby preventing unnecessary falls, hospitalizations, and or premature institutionalization. And whereas Meals on Wheels programs in Durham provides a powerful social connection opportunity for seniors to help combat the adverse health effects and economic consequences of loneliness and isolation. And whereas Meals on Wheels of Durham deserves recognition for the heroic contributions and essential services they have provided amid the COVID-19 pandemic that we'll continue to provide long after it is over. Now, therefore, I, Stephen M. Schulmayer, the city of Durham, North Carolina do hereby proclaim March 2021 as March for Meals Month in Durham. And hereby urge all residents to honor our Meals on Wheels programs, the seniors they serve, and the volunteers who care for them. Witness my hand this 15th day of March, 2021. Mr. Peace, that is your cue. Well, thank you for having me tonight. And on behalf of our clients, our staff, our board member, and most importantly, our volunteers as well. I would just like to say thank you, Mayor Schul, and thank you city council members for this honor and recognition. I'm like you just mentioned, March for Meals Month is this month of March and it's a month long nationwide campaign to bring awareness to seeing your food and security in our community. So we just encourage everybody here and everybody who's at home listening to get involved and get engaged. It's best way you feel possible, whether that's through volunteering, whether that's through advocacy, whether that's through a financial contribution, whichever way you feel most comfortable supporting and bringing recognition to senior food and security, we very much appreciate it. And I think Mayor Schul will say, we'll tell you we had a good time today delivering some meals to a couple of our clients. And so I really feel honored and privileged to be able to get back to our community in this capacity. So like I said, I would just encourage anybody to get engaged at the level they feel most comfortable with. But thank you again for this honor and recognition. Thank you very much, Mr. Peace. Thank you council member Reese for reading a proclamation. I did enjoy my time today. Mr. Peace and I went out and made some deliveries. And I'll just say, Mr. Peace, you have come in succeeding a very excellent director for many years, Gail Adlin, and by all accounts, you've hit the ground running and we appreciate you and congratulate you for the work that you're doing. Let us know how we can help. Thank you very much, I surely will. Thank you so much. All right, colleagues, I don't believe that council member Freelon has been able to join us yet. Is that correct? Yeah. Let me ask the attorney before we move on a question. Council member Freelon does not have an excused absence. He's planning to join us. If the council has a vote, is his vote recorded as a yes? I believe so. If you have not excused him, yes, Mr. Mayor. All right, thank you very much. Thank you. All right, colleagues. We'll now move from the ceremonial items into announcements by the council. I have tonight an extremely important announcement. Mr. Mayor, I have a point of inquiry of the, he hasn't asked for an excused absence and we haven't granted one or, we obviously know he's not just AWOL, but we haven't granted an absence, but he still would be recorded as a yes, although we've taken no action. I believe so. I believe and the attorney can double check herself, but if you don't have an excused absence, I believe that your vote is counted as a yes, but let me just confirm that again with a city attorney. Mr. Mayor, if you'll just give me a second, I'm gonna pull up the procedures just to be sure. Okay. Tell you what we'll do. While we're waiting on that, I'm going to ask my colleagues, I have an important announcement in a little bit, but I'll first ask my colleagues, you may have important announcements as well, and I'll look forward to hearing in announcements that people have tonight. Are there other announcements, the announcements by members of the council? All right. No one wants to steal your thunder. Mr. Mayor, I'll just quickly shout out the students, faculty, and staff in Southwest Elementary School. Had the great pleasure of joining my fraternity brothers there this morning to welcome those scholars into the building. So I want to shout out Mr. Ratowski and the great staff over there for the warm welcome they gave us, but mainly how awesome the kids were getting off the buses and just feeling their energy. So not only the Southwest, but everyone in our school system. I know this has been a challenging time, but to all the students, faculty, staff, people that drive the bus, serve food, whatever you do around our kids, our prayers and our energy and strength are with you. So I just want to shout out Southwest today and all the DPS. Thank you, and thanks for being out. That's great. It was awesome. All right, any further announcements while we're waiting for the attorney? I think I will then go ahead and I'll begin next by, we'll come back to the announcements and I'll go through the consent agenda. I don't know, the priority items. Oh, madam attorney, go ahead. Hi, Mr. Mayor, I think I stand corrected. So if a member is physically present and abstains from the clause, that is counted as a yes. Simply not being present in the meeting is just a non-vote. So you would have six votes in the meeting, as best I can tell. All right, thank you very much. Thank you for checking that and thank you to council member Milton for the question. All right, I'm trying to think about the best way to do this. I think we'll move next to priority items by the city manager. We'll come back to announcements. Madam manager, welcome. Are there any priority items tonight? Good evening, Mr. Mayor, Madam Mayor Pro Tem, I do have some priority items for you this evening. Agenda item number five, interlocal agreement with Durham County to expand Bull City United. Attachments number one and two were updated to reflect the change in staffing composition as recommended by Cure Violence International and Durham County Bull City United staff. Agenda item number eight, contract for construction of city-owned traffic signals in Durham, pursuant to council's request, additional information has been provided in attachments number six and number seven. And finally, agenda item number 23, consolidated annexation, Olive Branch Reserve, attachments number 10 and number 13 were updated. The effective date in motion number one was updated from May 31st, 2021 to March 31st, 2021. Those are the priority items this evening. Thank you very much, Madam Manager. And now I will ask if there are any priority items. I'm sorry, Council Member Rees, did you have your hand up? Oh, I didn't know if we needed to move the manager's items. Not tonight, yeah. Madam Attorney, any priority items tonight? Good evening again, Mr. Mayor, Madam Mayor Pro Tem and members of City Council, it's good to be with you all. The Attorney's Office does not have any priority items this evening. All right, thank you very much, Madam Attorney. Madam Clerk, any priority items tonight? Good evening, everyone. The City Clerk's Office has no priority items this evening. All right, thank you very much. Colleagues, I'm now going to move to the consent agenda and we'll just hold on to announcements for a while. Council Member Freelon will be with us in about 15 minutes and it'd be good if he was here. For the consent agenda, these are items that have been previously discussed and worked on by members of the City Council. And the consent agenda can be approved by a single vote of the Council. Items which are removed from the consent agenda can be removed from the consent agenda by a member of the Council or a member of the public, in which case they are held until the end of the meeting for discussion and action. Under the consent agenda, item one, Durham City County Appearance Commission Appointment, item two, Durham Workers' Rights Commission Appointment, item three, Participatory Budgeting Steering Committee Appointments, item four, Durham Affordable Housing Implementation Committee Appointment, item five, Interlocal Agreement with Durham County to expand both City United, item six, Families Moving Forward of Durham FY 2020-2023 Subrecipient Contract for Case Management Services Using Community Development Block Grant Funds, item seven, Urban Administries of Durham FY 2020-2023 Subrecipient Contract for Case Management Services Using Community Development Block Grant Funds, item eight, Contract for Construction of City Owned Traffic Signals in Durham, item nine, Academy Road Waterline Extension Construction Award of Construction Contract of JF Wilkerson Contracting Incorporated, item 10, Asbestos Cement and Continental Drive Waterline Replacement Award of Construction Contract of JF Wilkerson Contracting Company, ink, item 11, Tar River Land Conservancy Cape Heart Watershed Protection Project Authorization to Fund, item 12, Extension of the Ordnance to Promote Equal Business Opportunities in City Contracting, item 13, Acquisition for Replacement of Celeste Circle Lift Station, item 14, Acquisition for Replacement of Given School Lift Station, item 15, Professional Engineering Design Services with John R. McAdams Company, Ink for Federal Transportation Project, EB 5904 Durham Beltline Trail, item 16, Proposed Acquisition of 0.289 Acres at 814 Carroll Street in Fee Simple from Bewell, LLC, item 17, Human Relations Commission 2020 Annual Report, item 18, Bradford Circle Drainage Improvements, SD 2021-01, item 19, Bradford Circle Drainage Improvements, amendment number one, item 20, Contract Amendment Number Two for SW 49C Consultant Project Manager. Colleagues, you have heard the consent agenda and now I'll accept a motion for its approval. I moved. Moved by Council Member Reece, seconded by Council Member Caballero that we approve the consent agenda. Madam Clerk, will you please call the roll? Mayor Schuyl. Aye. Mayor Pro Tem Johnson. Aye. Council Member Caballero. Aye. Council Member Freelon. Council Member Freeman. Aye. Council Member Middleton. Aye. Council Member Reece. Aye. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Clerk. The ayes have it and the motion passes six to zero. We're now gonna move to our general business agenda public hearings and we'll first move to item 22, Consolidated Annexation of the Gillings Tract and we will, it looks like here from Mr. Cahill. Hey, good evening, Mayor Schuyl, Madam Mayor Pro Tem Johnson, Honorable Council Members, Alexander Cahill with the Planning Department and to make that fan go away. I was kind of enjoying it, Mr. Cahill. Were you? Okay, well, we'll stand with it. I would like to state for the record that all Planning Department hearing items have been advertised and noticed in accordance with state and local law and that affidavits of these notices are on file in the Planning Department. We did receive a request for an annexation utility extension agreement and a zoning map change from Stephen Zorn of Lenauer Corporation for about 21 acres of land. This is located around 4001 Page Road. This site is presently zoned residential rural and it's being proposed to be rezoned to a PDR Plan Development Residential 4.447. The applicant has proposed developing up to 90 townhouse residential units on this site. The property is currently designated industrial on the future land use map, as you can see in Attachment 3. The proposed Plan Development Residential 4.447 zoning is inconsistent with this designated future land use. If the proposed zoning is approved this evening, the flum will be re-designated to low, medium density residential, which is four to eight dwelling units an acre to ensure consistency with the zoning. This change would take effect concurrently with the zoning map change ordinance and does not require a separate motion. And if approved, this request would become effective on March 31st, 2021. The zoning map change request has been reviewed by staff and determined to be consistent with the UDO. And the summaries of these commitments and access of UDO requirements may be found in the Development Plan and Attachment 11B. Staff would like to note that in Attachment 11E, we believe the incorrect school impacts are listed. The proposed rezoning would add an additional two students to Durham Public Schools from the existing RR zoning. We just want to make sure that clarification was called out. The Planning Commission by a vote of 12 to zero at their January 12th, 2021 meeting recommended approval of this request. This case is an example of how different stakeholder and advisory groups can work together to make a project stronger. The applicant did take feedback from the Planning Commission. Staff and the community members were to incorporate this into their proposal. Staff does recommend that the City Council approve the voluntary annexation petition, utility extension agreement, zoning map change request and consistency statement. This recommendation was based on the contiguous nature of the proposed annexation, the minimal or limited impacts to existing city services, the commitment to protecting the environmental features on the site and the strong text and design commitments found on the Development Plan. Just a reminder that there are three motions required to approve this application. The first is to adopt an ordinance annexing Gillings into the city of Durham and entering to utility extension agreement. The second is to adopt an ordinance amending the unified development ordinance by taking property out of the residential rural and establishing the same as PDR. And the third is to adopt a consistency statement as required by the law. Staff and the applicant are available for any questions this evening. Thank you very much, Mr. Cahill. Colleagues, you have now heard the report from staff. I'm going to declare this public hearing open. And I'll first ask, are there any questions for Mr. Cahill by members of the council? Any questions at this point for Mr. Cahill? All right. Then we will now move to members of the public. There are four members of the public who were signed up to speak on this item. Mr. Neil Gauch, Mr. Charlie Yokely, Jesse Hardesty, and Stephen Dorn. These are all proponents. Let me just check in the participants list and see if I see anyone else signed up for item 22. Is there anyone else who would like to speak for item 22? If you would, please raise your hand, your virtual hand, or please let us know in the chat. I'd also like to check on if Deborah Joy is here. I don't see Deborah Joy, Madam Clerk. Mr. Mayor, Ms. Joy is not here yet. And I believe she's here for number 23. 23, thank you very much. Okay, I appreciate that clarification. I just want to tell everybody that the clerk does a tremendous job behind the scenes before these meetings, doing a lot of work to get this us ready for these hearings. And it's complicated and it's detailed. And Madam Clerk, I just want to thank you for that. It's a, it's invisible work, but it's important work and thank you. All right. Mr. Gauch, are you speaking for the team of proponents? I am. Are the other members here also speaking? Are they here to answer questions? Here to answer questions. All right. Mr. Gauch, how much time do you feel that you need? Like three minutes. That would be great. Go ahead. We're happy to, happy to have you, Mr. Gauch. And good evening, Mayor Shul, Mayor Prokim, Johnson, members of the city council. My name is Nile Gauch. I'm an attorney with the Morning Star Law Group, which is located at 112 West Main Street in Durham. Tonight I'm representing Lenar on this application. I believe we have Mr. Stephen Dorn and Charlie Oakley from Lenar with us tonight, as well as Ryan Akers and Jessie Partacy from McAddle. Let me start first by thanking Mr. Cahill for his presentation and his hard work on this case. This project went to the planning commission twice and ultimately they voted unanimously to recommend approval of this case. We think this is because in addition to these strong design commitments, this case represents an obvious and logical change to both the future land use map and the underlying zone. The underlying zoning currently is rural residential, which is inconsistent with the current underlying industrial future land use designation. We are proposing to change the plumb designation to low-medium density residential, which is consistent with the requested PDR 4.447 zoning district. At base, this project would implement a more sensible land use in an area currently slated for industrial. The properties across Page Road, mostly have been developed for residential. The property to the south has an approved site plan for an educational use. And the rear of the property contains a 265 foot wide power easement, which permanently will separate the rear of this property from this residential community. Ultimately, this project makes better sense within the context of the area than would a project consistent with the existing plumb designation. I know you all have a full agenda, so I'm happy to stop my comments here to receive your questions in common. We thank you for your time and hope to have your support tonight. Thank you, Mr. Ghosh. For the members of the public who are in attendance, is there anyone else that would like to be heard on item 22, the confine annexation of the Gillings tract? Is there anyone else who would like to be heard on that item? All right. Colleagues, I'll now ask if there are any questions for staff or the applicants at this point. Any questions for staff or the applicants? All right, then. I'm going to declare this public hearing closed. I have my hand up. I'm sorry. I do not declare the public hearing closed. I'm sorry, Mr. Reese, council member, go ahead. Thanks, Mr. Mayor. I appreciate that. I want to thank staff for their presentation of the item and Mr. Ghosh, thank you for that very expeditious summary of where we're at. Appreciate your concern for our agenda. It's definitely warranted. Just I wanted to say I didn't have any particular concerns about this project. I agree with the, in large part, with the remarks made by planning commissioner Miller. And so if folks are curious why I'm going to support this tonight, you can read that. I don't need to belabor that, but I did want to, I'm sure go straw you and the applicant's attention to what has to be one of the most amazing examples of street art I have ever seen in my entire life. I have had, I've seen some of this with here in Durham and other places I've lived, Los Angeles, New York. But I don't think I've ever seen anything quite like what I found on the site in the Gillings tract about a week and a half ago. Put a link to that in the chat if people want to see what I'm talking about. It is a glorious piece of art that someone spent a ton of time working on that actually kind of creeped my daughters out, but I thought it was awesome. All of which is the same, Mr. Ghosh, if you can relay my hope. It's painted directly on the brick of the abandoned structure that's on this property. So there's no way to preserve it, but if they would consider bringing in someone who knows how to take better photographs than I took with my iPhone, I think it would be a benefit to our community to preserve that. That's all I wanted to say, Mr. Mayor, I appreciate that and tend to support the item. Thank you. And thank you for that, Council Member Rees, that is some awesome artwork. Thank you, Council Member. Any other comments, colleagues or questions? All right. I'm going to Council Member Middleton. I wish I had Councilor Rees when I used to draw on walls when I was a kid. Not too late. Direct me to your extant work and I will praise it as well. Doesn't even approach that, believe me, buddy. All right, colleagues, I'm now going to declare this public hearing closed in matters back before the council. The first motion would be to adopt an ordinance annexing the Gillings track in the city of Durham, effective March 31, 2021, and to authorize the city manager to enter to a utility extension in the North Carolina's LLC. That moved. Second. Moved by Council Member Rees, seconded by Council Member Middleton. Madam Clerk, please call the roll. Mayor Schuyl. Aye. Mayor Putin-Johnson. Aye. Council Member Caballero. Aye. Council Member Freelon. Council Member Freeman. Aye. Council Member Middleton. Aye. Council Member Rees. Aye. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Clerk. The motion passes six to zero. Second, we will need a motion to adopt an ordinance amending the UDO by taking property out of residential rural RR and establishing the same as plan development, residential 4.447. Moved as read. Second. Moved by Council Member Middleton, seconded by Council Member Rees. Madam Clerk, please call the roll. Mayor Schuyl. Aye. Mayor Putin-Johnson. Aye. Council Member Caballero. Aye. Council Member Freelon. Aye. Council Member Freeman. Aye. Council Member Middleton. Aye. Council Member Rees. Aye. And I've never seen that happen ever. Welcome, Council Member Freelon, skated in just in time. Thank you. We're glad to see you. Sorry, I'm really late. It would be to adopt a consistency statement required by NCGS 160D-605. So moved. Second. Moved by Council Member Rees. Seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Johnson. Madam Clerk, will you please call the roll. Mayor Schuyl. Aye. Mayor Pro Tem Johnson. Aye. Council Member Caballero. Aye. Council Member Freelon. Aye. Council Member Freeman. Aye. Council Member Middleton. Aye. Council Member Rees. Aye. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Clerk. The ayes have it. The motion passes unanimously. And thank you, Mr. Goshen, your team. Good luck to you. All right, colleagues. I'm now going to move back up to the announcements portion of our agenda for a very important announcement. It is my pleasure. It is my privilege. It is my honor to let our staff, our city employees and our community know that the council has voted in closed session and will soon again vote in open session to appoint Wanda Page as the new city manager for the city of Durham. This is an incredibly important decision as you all know. There's nothing that we will do as myself as mayor, all of us as members of this council, nothing more important than to appoint a new city manager. This, as you all know, we started a search process for the city manager while Wanda Page was appointed the interim and we knew that we were excited that she would be our interim city manager. We knew she would do a wonderful job. But as she began to do that job and we got to watch her do that job, we saw a person we knew as a great deputy city manager and a great finance manager step into this job with incredible, incredible initiative, transparency, responsiveness, creativity and really took the job on in a big, big way. And we as council members were privileged even though we had started our search process for a manager to watch Ms. Page in the interim role, take on the role and become the manager that we all knew that we wanted. At the same time, Ms. Page, I believe was discovering that in herself that she also wanted this job. So this became a happy, happy meeting of the minds. I will just say a few more words and then we are going to have a vote to officially hire manager Page. And then I'm going to ask our city council colleagues if they would like to say some words as well in addition to Ms. Page. But let me just tell you a little bit more. And I'm going to do this by just quoting a few people. I will say that one of the few people to know this ahead of time because she had to prepare a press release was Beverly Thompson. And when I told Beverly the news that what the council had done on the phone, I would describe her reaction as a shriek. She was so excited and just talked about what a fantastic leader manager Page is and how excited that she was. When I asked Kim Rayberg, our city attorney how would, before we made the decision how would you feel? How would you feel working with manager Page as our city manager? And I'll just say some of the things that Kim said. First of all, she said, I would be elated. She said that manager Page is organized. She follows through, she follows up. She's detail oriented. She's empowering people to really do their jobs and be responsible for things. She's wide open. She's not defensive. She's collaborative. She's approachable. She's the consummate professional. She's a terrific partner. She's proactive and she's decisive. Wow. While our city attorney was saying that you can see I was frantically taking notes in anticipation that I would have to give this speech. And I couldn't have said it better and I won't try to say it better. Those are indeed the qualities that make Wanda Page such a great choice for city manager for the city of Durham. I'm gonna ask Ms. Page to please put her camera on now. And colleagues, I'm going to ask first for a motion that we approve the appointment. I should add one more thing. We have negotiated a contract with manager Page. The contract has been approved by the council and we now need to again, approve this in public. And I'm gonna now ask for a motion that we appoint Wanda Page, the city manager for the city of Durham. So Mo Mo Mo. Second. Moved by council member Freeman, seconded by council member Freelon and I know by all members of the council. And Madam clerk, will you please call the roll? Mayor Shul. Aye. Mayor Pro Tem Johnson. Aye. Council member Caballero. Aye. Council member Freelon. Aye. I was so excited. I missed the button. Council member Freeman. Aye. Council member Middleton. It's an honor to vote aye. Council member Reese. Aye. Thank you. Thank you, Madam clerk. The ayes have it. The motion passes unanimously. And I know we're all thrilled that we have a new city manager. So what I'm going to do now, Madam manager, I'm going to ask you to say a few words and then I'm going to ask my council colleagues to I know they each want to say a few words on this very momentous occasion. So Madam manager. Thank you, Mayor Shul. Mayor Pro Tem Johnson. Members of Durham city council, my fellow city employees and residents of Durham. I'm honored by your vote of confidence to lead this municipal corporation at such a critical moment in the history of our nation and our city. A great community that is expecting a permanent leader who is experienced, capable and willing to lead and serve during the challenging times ahead. As we enter together an extended period of recovery from the effects of the year's devastated global public health and economic crises, I respectfully accept this appointment with the unanimous support of this elected body. Despite my extensive experience in local government leadership, financial management and my past career accomplishments. I don't come packaged with the solution to every issue we face, every innovative idea or perfect partnership destined to transform our organization and our community because these solutions, these ideas will come from the more than 3000 employees of this city of Durham and those yet to be hired who bring dedication, passion, creativity to local government service every day. These breakthroughs reside in the residents we engage as we listen to their voices and center their lived experiences and we implement policy that embeds racial equity, provide excellent and relevant service and build and rebuild a community where all residents thrive with power and purpose. These discoveries will be revealed as we work collaboratively with nonprofits and foundations, community organizations, other governments, educational institutions and the business community to bring together the best minds, the best technology, the most efficient processes and most importantly, the most caring hearts to the difficult issues we face. Many of these the result of racial, social and economic inequities that have persisted far too long. Durham is one of the best managed cities in the United States. It's evidenced by numerous national awards, unique programs and the highest bond ratings. This is not by happenstance. It is the result of the hard work and the sacrifice of a long line of elected and appointed leaders and employees. I pause in appreciation of their service. I embrace this leadership opportunity. I accept it for my family who is always by my side supporting me, supporting my dreams. I accept it for my ancestors who looked down upon me tonight with pride and joy. I accept it for those coming after me who will be inspired to be trailblazers of many races, ethnicities, gender identities, sexual orientations, cultural backgrounds and styles. Today begins a new journey for me as Durham's city manager. I began it with a team filled with great leaders and contributors. We will strive more earnestly for excellence as we progress towards the important goals we have set together with you, our elected leaders and our beloved community. I know that the challenges ahead of us as an organization and a community are great, but our vision, our courage and purpose is greater. I look forward to working with you, our residents, our community partners and city staff executing your policy direction with a spirit of transparency, inclusion and accountability. Thank you. Wow. Thank you for that awesome speech. I'm excited for the new WAN division. Yes. All right. Colleagues, you have heard from our new city manager. Don't you like the sound of that, our new city manager? It's a great day. And now I'm gonna ask each of you, anyone who would like to say a few words and I'll open it up to whoever would like to go first. I'm not seeing a hand. I see Council Member Rees. Council Member Rees. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. First and foremost, I wanna say congratulations to city manager Wanda Page. That's got a great ring to it, I have to say. I apologize. I think I got a little emotional there. I might not be the only one with that has a little dust. I found the room a little dusty there. I will, let me just say I've known Wanda for my entire service as a member of the Durham City Council. I was sworn in in December of 2015 and I have known Wanda to be one of the most capable and steadiest leaders in city government during that time. I was really excited that she agreed to serve as our interim city manager because I knew that she would be the perfect kind of bridge between the long-serving Tom Bonfield and the new person we were gonna bring on board. And cards on the table, hiring a new city manager is probably the most important reason I ran for reelection two years ago because as the mayor said at the very beginning of this, there's nothing more important that I can do as an elected official on this body than hire the person who's gonna lead the city administration. I think it's also fair to say that none of us went into this process, Wanda included. None of us would have been in this process thinking this is where we would end up. But that's mostly because I didn't think that Wanda wanted the job. And I suspect she didn't think she did either. The great news is over the months that we have worked together, I think all of us came to realize what an incredible asset she could be in the main job. And I think as Wanda's desires became known to us and we kind of talked amongst ourselves about the amazing person that we had in the job already, it became clear to me that this was the right thing to do and the right time to do it. I'm just so excited, not only for myself because I get to do the thing I really want to do, but mostly for the people of this city who I think have known Wanda Page for a long time as a capable administrator, as someone who was a great leader within city government and will now come to know her as the incredible city manager we all know that she will be. I have found over the last months working with you, Wanda, I have found you to be so enthusiastic about the job. You have inspired me to be enthusiastic about the job during a time in all of our lives when it's been really hard to be excited about a lot. Your enthusiasm has been infectious as well as your desire to get in and solve problems and combining that with your eagerness to advance the agenda that this council sets and also the vast storehouse of knowledge that you bring as a long-time city employee, we could never do any better and I don't want to even try. So city manager Wanda Page, thank you for agreeing to do this incredibly hard but amazing job and I really look forward to working with you in the years to come to make Durham a city that works for everyone. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you so much council member. All right, who would like to go next? Council member Freeman. Thank you, thank you, Mr. Mayor and thank you council member Reese for noting just how wonderful our new city manager, Wanda Page is and I have to speak for myself and saying I already knew that Wanda was who we needed and she just needed a whole lot of nudging and support to see that she was who that person should be. I think it's important to note that Durham is a native of, I mean Wanda is a native of Durham and she's been a strong leader in this community not just on the city side but also as a member of so many organizations and volunteering and just engaged in so many ways. And I just wanted to say that I know that many of the employees feel like she's a strong advocate for them and she's a great resource. And I also want to note that, I mean with over 30 years of experience with Durham and where Durham has been, I couldn't be more excited about a vision that I hope that Wanda will set. I'm mindful that as a black woman, it's important to support other black women and knowing that she's in this leadership role and there are so few city managers that are black women across the country and especially here in North Carolina there might be maybe two or three. This is exciting for me and I am holding this up for my daughter to see and acknowledging that we can be in these roles. I mean with the win of the Biden-Harris administration there's a momentum building and I'm really honored to serve on a council that could see a black woman in the seat. And I really want to just uplift that. I won't say too much, but I know my colleagues will cover a lot. I just want to say thank you. I want to say thank you for believing that that you could, you can hang in there with us at this very activist council and you can manage this city. You definitely have got this and I'm here to not just lead, I want to support because I know it's also about being a leader is about being supportive. So thank you. Thank you very much council member. Mayor Pro Tem Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I am just so excited tonight to have made this decision and to have the opportunity to keep working with you Wanda the last six months of being able to work more closely with you as a city manager have just been so incredible, I leave our meetings excited and inspired by the work that we are doing as a city to move this community forward. And when we learned that you were in fact interested in the job, I was just like, well, that's it then. We're never going to find anybody better than Wanda. It's just a done deal. You know this community, you know this work, you care so much about Durham and about the work of the city and really making a difference in the lives of our residents. And I am just so excited to have the opportunity to continue to work with you and to learn from you and to continue to implement the policy priorities that we know are going to are gonna make our community stronger and make the lives of our residents better. And it's just so clear to me every time we have a conversation how much you care about Durham and the people of this town and that you've dedicated your entire life to public service and to making life better for our residents. And I am so inspired by that and by you and by your work and I'm just really looking forward to continuing to move this community forward and to learn and to work with you. For years to come, I was super excited to have you as interim city manager and I'm even more excited to have you as our permanent city manager. Thank you for taking on this job. I know it is not easy, it is a lot of work. It is hard and it is intense and Durham is a special place and we are just so, so lucky to have you. So thank you so much. Really super excited about the next few years and what we're gonna accomplish together. Thank you very much, Madam Mayor Pro Tem. Council Member Caballero. Thank you, good evening. I wanna thank all my colleagues for their wonderfully warm words. I agree wholeheartedly. Wanda, I'm so excited to continue working with you and also I just wanna say thank you for saying yes and thank you for being open to this challenge because we all know it's gonna be a super challenging. You know, we're not done with COVID, we know what we're facing still and just so much gratitude. And I will say I absolutely got emotional when you were speaking and it's just a historic night for our city and I have so much faith in you as a leader and I look forward to continue to work with you. Thank you so much, Council Member. Council Member Freelon. Thank you, Mayor Shull and I just wanna echo everything everyone has said. Javier, I was thinking the same thing just thank you to Wanda. You could be chilling with your feet up somewhere next year, retired, like all the way retired. You have done the work and made the sacrifices and served us so well and that you're still willing to step up is very humbling and I'm filled with gratitude. When you hit the video button and your camera came on, I saw the flags in the pen, you just looked so poised and I really got overwhelmed. My heart was swelling with emotion and you nailed it, city manager page. I can't call you Wanda, that's just, you my elder, you my OG. So I gotta say Miss Page, city manager page. You nailed it when you said, the caring hearts and that's something that I feel a lot from you. It's the empathy and the other things are great. Your commitment to race equity I love, your background in managing finance and budgets, your sharp, intelligent, hardworking. You over stand the nuances of municipal government more than anybody, that much is a given but for me, it's the love for me. It's the unconditional love for me and you said another thing that really resonated when you mentioned the ancestors and I believe strongly there's this West African idea called Sankofa, you need to look back in order to move forward and I know coming from Durham, and you look back, you know, you know the history of Black Wall Street, you know what happened with 147 and you know that what our ancestors, the sacrifices they made to make opportunities for us having come up in this community to be able to move forward. And so that is really important to me and I loved hearing you say that. And for me, from my part, when I think about my ancestors, my grandmother, you know, Queen Mother Frances Pierce, I was randomly looking at her some photos from her funeral yesterday. She was laid to rest at Monument of Faith Church. My dad passed away here in Durham and I feel both of their spirits in you when I'm sitting down with you in our one on ones, the care, the, you know, the energy, the vibe and the high level, the excellence, you said it. My grandmother used to say excellence is a standard and I know that's the case for you. It has been, we talked about that. Behind closed doors, we talked about you Miss Page and that was a consistent thing that everybody mentioned is your commitment to excellence. And so yes, thank you for coming through for us at a time of great need where we really need some steady leadership and I know that we have that in you. So I've said enough, but I could not be more happy and proud and excited for Durham. Thank you very much. Thank you so much, Council Member. Council Member Middleton. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Pierce said all the way retired, a whole retirement. Madam Manager, good evening. It's a great pleasure to call you that. Confession, a few weeks ago when I asked if what would happen if a strong internal candidate emerged and what that would do to our search process, it wasn't really a question, it was a prayer. Thank you, God. So thank you for accepting the offer. On tonight, I can't help but think about that line, that incredible thunder that opens up their eyes while watching God. Azora Neale Hurston's great work. And there's a line in that opening paragraph that says, now women, forgive me if I get it a little wrong, women remember everything they don't want to forget and forget everything they don't want to remember. The dream is the truth, then they act and do things accordingly. And you have been acting and doing things accordingly for years in the city and doing it with excellence. I don't need to underscore all of the superlatives and qualities that you bring to this job that my colleagues have said. I associate myself with everything that they've said. But I do want to say that this is an incredibly, I think historic time, it's laden, it's pregnant, it's full of all kinds of symbolism. How wonderful it is that during women's history month that this council would achieve a trifecta. And that is all of the shops that report to us are headed by women. And it was completed this month. You know, there's not a, other than the outrageous amount of money that they pay us is really not a lot of perks to this job. But for history and circumstance to have conspired and come together in this way, to be able to be in one of these chairs at this time, at this point in history to do this and to see this come about is just deeply and personally gratifying. I'm really grateful on a personal level to be in this position. I want to make a commitment to you tonight because I think the council manager forum of government works, but it works if we don't put more work on you than you already have. You already have an incredibly hard job in and of itself managing the city. So I want to commit to you that I will try and leave as many variables, not leave as many, too many variables, unsubstituted, whereas you don't know and you have to do your job and our job. And I will try my best not to leave a whole lot of room for improvisation, where you got to kind of figure out what the vision is. Your job is hard enough as it is. So that's my commitment to you tonight to make this form of government work by making sure you're not guessing. Your predecessor, he sainted Tom Bonfield, said, I remember in the conversation, he made a distinction between manager and leader in the city and he pointed to the importance of us providing vision and direction and he and his team, now your team, managing it. And I thought about that tonight because there were a couple of times where Tommy not necessarily agreed, but once the decision was made, he saluted and carried it out with excellence. And that's the beauty of this system, this council manager form of government. And I think we've got to preserve and defend that tenant as inviolable for our governing contract, our governing covenant here in the city. I know that whatever the decision is made, when the decision is made, that there's no better person that will salute and take it and make it happen with excellence. We owe you our commitment, we owe the city our commitment to make sure that we substitute the variables and fill in the spaces and not make your job harder than it already is. So on this night, I'm just incredibly grateful. May God bless you and your family as we gently tap your shoulder with this sword and invest you in this office and may God bless our city. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you, council member, manager Page. There're not gonna be a lot of nights when you hear this many good things said about you. So I hope you will hold all these things in your heart. I hope you'll play the tape a few times again. And when you have moments of difficulty, which will come that you will remember this night and the faith and confidence that we all have in you. This wasn't just unanimous. This was incredibly unanimous. And you should know that you have the absolute full faith and confidence. You do know of every single member of this council and of our community. All right, Madam Manager, any final words before we actually move on to the rest of our business? My final two words are just thank you. And I do see it recorded. So I'll keep that in my bag pocket. But thank you. Thank you for your kind words and for your confidence. You know, you've done a special thing when you hear the speech that long from Mayor Pro Tem Johnson. I really, you got everybody going tonight. Beautiful words, colleagues, beautiful words and genuine sentiments. So I really enjoyed everybody's comments tonight. They were really wonderful. Thank you. I'll also say that already my cell phone is buzzing with texts. I just got some big exclamation points and a hallelujah from former council member, Diane Catati. And I expect some of the rest of you all here from people too. So this is a big night for Durham. All right, colleagues, now we will, as we do in the city of Durham, we move on with our business. And we are now in public hearing mode. And we will be moving to item 23, Consolidated Annexation, Olive Branch Reserve. And we will now hear from, it looks like Mr. Culture's with us. Welcome, Mr. Culture. Thank you. Good evening, Mayor Schull, Mayor Pro Tim Johnson and city council members. I'm Danny Cultural, the representative planning department. And I also would like to give a nice congratulation to no longer interim, Ms. Page. This is a request for voluntary annexation, utility extension agreement, future land use map or flume change and zoning map change have been received from Tim Cybers of Horvath & Associates for 113.579 acres located at 1607 Olive Branch Road and 802 & 830 Virgil Road. The site is presently resumed, residential rule RR and falls Jordan Lake Watershed Protection Overlay District B or FJB and is located within the suburban tier. The applicant is proposing to rezone the property to plan development residential 3.220 or PDR 3.220 for up to 350 single family and townhouse residential dwelling units. The property is currently designated for a very low density residential of at least, at least two, at less than two dwelling units per acre on the flume. Proposed PDR 3.220 zoning is inconsistent with the designated future land use. If the proposed zoning is approved, the flume would be re-designated to a low density residential at less than four units per acre to ensure consistency with the zoning. This change would take effect currently with the zoning map change ordinance and does not require a separate motion. If approved, these requests would become effective on March 31st, 2021. The zoning map change request has been reviewed by staff and determined to be consistent with the UDL requirements. There are many commitments in excess of UDL requirements and also transportation commitments resulting from a required traffic impact analysis, all which can be found on the development plan cover sheet in attachment 9B. There are also monetary profits are included to the affordable housing fund and urban public schools. The planning commission by a vote of zero to 13 at their November 10, 2020 meeting recommended denial of this request. There are three motions are required for this application. The first is to adopt an ordinance annexing Olive Branch Reserve into the city of Durham effective March 31st, 2021 and entered into a utility extension agreement with MF Development LLC. The second is to adopt an ordinance amending the unified development orders by taking the property out of rule. A residential rule follows Jordan Lake Watershed Protection District B, FJB County jurisdiction and establishing the same as plan development residential 3.220 PDR 3.220 falls Jordan Lake Watershed Protection Overly District B, FJB city jurisdiction. And the third is to adopt a consistent statement as required by NCGS 160D-605. Thank you very much and staff and applicant team would be available for any questions. Thank you very much, Mr. Kaltra. Colleagues, you have now heard the report from staff. I'm gonna declare this public hearing open and I'm gonna first ask if there are any questions for staff by members of the council. Any questions for staff by members of the council? I do have one question, Mr. Kaltra. We've talked previously in the council about small area planning for this area. And I am sorry to say that even though I know I've been told this three times that I can't remember the schedule for that work and was wondering if you or perhaps Ms. Young were able to tell us what the plans are for that. And again, I apologize for not remembering. That's okay. And to be honest, I cannot remember the schedule of that. I would actually like to defer to Ms. Young to answer that question for us. Good evening, mayor, members of council. Sarah Young with the planning department. We actually launched the first public engagement exercise for the Southeast Durham focus area, which is what we're branding, kind of this little sub plan of the comprehensive plan. We launched that last week. So we are working this month and next month with the community to kind of put that together and that should be coming forward probably towards the end of summer beginning of fall. So it's hard to give you exact kind of date because we're really condensing things. And so when you really condense things it's really hard to give a specific date, but we're looking at a, probably when you all come back from your summer break. Thank you, Ms. Young. I appreciate it. And has a, is there a sort of a fixed boundary that you all have determined this area is comprised of? Yes, we're looking at the area. It is generally bounded south of 98, west, east of Sharon Road, excuse me, west of Carpenter Pond and north of US 70. Great, if there's a map of that or is it going to be a map of that, it would be great to get it. We can send that your way, no problem. Thank you so much. Thank you, Ms. Young. Colleagues, any other questions at this time for staff? Okay, we have Council Member Freeman. Thank you. Just one question, just for clarification, I realized that the order in which these cases move forward come from the planning department. Is there any conversation, I guess, with the Joint City County or Joint City County planning in the process as well? Just to make sure that I understand your question, are you asking about the cases at Joint City County or the small area, kind of focused area of work? The cases that come forward. So Joint City County does not review the cases. We are going to be putting together as a new initiative for the JCCPC. We're going to be launching a way for them to see cases live in real time as they come through. A long time ago, we used to do these summaries, but by the time the information was compiled, they were already a little bit out of date since the JCCPC does not meet monthly anymore. So we are working on a new platform where information will be available to all elected officials on cases in real time as the case moves through the process. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member and Ms. Young. Any further questions for staff before we hear from members of the public? All right. I see three people signed up to speak on this item. Michael Foley and Neil Gosh are listed as proponents. Stephen Canill is listed as an opponent. And I believe the clerk said that Debra Joy is also planning to speak on this item. Let me just see if Ms. Joy has joined us. And Mayor Schultz, Ms. Joy is a member of our team, just so you know. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Gosh. All right. Let me then next ask, is there anyone else who I did not name? And I'm looking through the attendees now who would like to be heard on this item that I did not name? Is there anyone here? If so, could you please put your name in the chat? Mayor, this is Tim Syvers. I'd like to speak as well, sir. All right. Thank you, Mr. Syvers. I'm sorry. I didn't know you were here. And is there anyone else? Okay. So, Mr. Gosh, are you leading the presentation for the proponents? I am. All right. Can you tell us a little bit about your presentation because we have an opponent here as well? This one's a little more dense than the last one. I'm gonna say I'll need 10 minutes, but I probably don't need that one. Well, that include Mr. Syvers and other members of your team as well. So, Mr. Syvers is available to answer questions. I don't think he's planning on presenting separately, but we all will be available to answer questions. And Mr. Foley is also a member of your team. That's right. He's with the applicant. All right. Thank you, Mr. Gosh. You have 10 minutes and we're glad to have you. Go ahead. And good evening again, everyone. For the record, I am Neil Gosh, attorney at the Morningstar Law Group, 112 West Main Street in Durham. This application is brought forth by Michael Foley of Humabil Home, who is with us tonight. And also Mr. Tim Syvers, who I think you all know very well. He's the engineer on this project. And Ms. Deborah Joy, who's been a separate consultant on this project, particularly on the cemetery, who's here and able to answer questions. If you guys have some. And thank you, Mr. Kultra, for your presentation. As he mentioned, this project is proposed on about 114 acres in the Searles Basin. We are proposing a maximum of 350 units, which equates to an overall density of about 3.220 dwelling units per acre. This is in line with the types of densities that have been approved for other new projects in the area. This council approved densities of 2.944 for a project to the Northwest, 2.999 for a project to the North, and 3.236 for a project to the South. So this project is right there in the same mix. This project is contemplated with a mix of town homes and single family detached homes, with a minimum of 20% of each home type required in the overall mix, with at least 30% of the town homes limited to one car garages or less. The builder is planning on hitting price points in the mid-200s for the town homes and the mid-300s for the single family. The development plan commits to certain active open space amenities and an average block length of 600 feet. You probably would not realize it, so I thought it would be useful for me to point out. There's a small section along the northern property line, where we have committed to a 30-foot wide buffer rather than the required 10-foot wide buffer, and that was because the neighbor there expressed a desire for some additional buffer in that area. The developer also has committed monetary contributions to both the school system and the city's affordable housing plan. This project required a TIA, and the developer has committed to providing all the recommended road improvements identified through the study. This traffic infrastructure is critical to the successful growth of this area as the city continues to grow and projects incrementally are improved in this area. In addition to adding dedicated turn lanes at all the proposed entrance points, this project also commits to adding an exclusive eastbound left turn lane offsite at Carpenter Pond Road, where it intersects with all of Branch Road. The project also includes the construction of a section of an important east-west collector road through the property. There also are several other road improvements which will be required of this development if they are not implemented by other projects in the area when this one goes to construction. So those commitments kind of overlap with other projects. Finally, I did wanna address the comments we received from the Planning Commission, which recommended denial on this case. Though we did not have any neighborhood opposition at the Planning Commission meeting, the Planning Commissioners offered several points of concern which we have tried to address to the best of our ability. When the case went before the Planning Commission, the wildlife corridor was committed at 150 feet wide. We have revised that so that it's the full width 300 feet which is recommended in the East Durham open-stace plan. Even still, there was some concern about the limited uses the development plan would allow within the corridor which include infrastructure, stormwater control measures and open-space amenities. One of the specific concerns that Planning Commissioners mentioned was a second stream crossing that is shown on our development plan as a utility crossing only. Since getting a vote from the Planning Commission, we have continued to study our ability to remove that utility crossing. And if it is something Council desires, we are prepared to commit to removing that tonight. The other stream crossing of course cannot be avoided on account of the need for the East-West Collector which is shown on Durham's adopted transportation plan for this area which this project is implementing. One Planning Commissioner expressed a desire for a second access point to the Northern Property Line which we have studied and have added a graphic commitment. And the last thing I wanted to touch on was the grace site. One Commissioner expressed some concern about disruption to the grace site. And while we understand the nature of the concern, it is important to know that the family involved has been consulted with and actually wanted the grace site move rather than retained in place in the middle of an active community. To be clear, the applicant has consulted with 27 descendants who collectively decided it would be better to relocate the family grave to nearby Maplewood Cemetery where the matriarch of the family and one of her sons currently are buried. The family is excited about the move and several of them plan to attend on the day's family members are reunited at Maplewood Cemetery. This aspect of the project has been carefully thought out and we did not want you to think otherwise. I think that's probably enough. And I wanna thank you for your consideration of this case. Our team is available to answer questions and we look forward to your feedback and questions and your support tonight. Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Ghosh. I just wanna make sure if there are any of the other proponents that would like to be heard at this time. Mr. Cybers, I know you're, Mr. Ghosh said you're here mainly to answer questions but just wanna make sure that you don't wanna be heard at this time. Yes, this is Tim Cybers. I'm available for questions. Thank you there. Thank you, Mr. Cybers. All right, we will now hear from Stephen Canill. Mr. Canill, are you here? Madam Clerk, can we make sure that he's able to be heard? I'm here. Great, thank you. We're glad to see you and we welcome your comments, Mr. Canill. How long do you think you'll need? Two minutes. Okay, that'll be fine. Please go ahead. Thanks for the opportunity to speak. I'm representing the Leesville Coalition which is comprised of residents from Carolina Arbors, Fendall Farms, and the Courtyards of Andrews Chapel in Southeast Durham. My comments are actually about both this development, Olive Branch, and Sharon Road. Since September, Council has greenlit almost a thousand new homes in the area that is part of, and Mayor Yusul, you just touched on this, the Southeast Durham Focus Area Study that Scott Whiteman is actually leading. With these two added, that will reach 1500 new homes. And if the Olive Branch development is approved, that means you will have greenlit about 1300 new homes on that road in 15 months without a master plan. It's interesting if you read the comments from the Planning Commission on the Olive Branch one, they voted zero to 13 against it unanimously. And their common comments were that the city leadership is working reactively versus proactively in determining the future of this area. And in a previous meeting, and I'm sorry, I don't remember which one of you said this, but one of you said that it was important to not allow this area to be developed as randomly as Briar Creek and Wake, but that's kind of what seems to be happening. I've just learned that there's another 850-plus home project going through the planning process on the backside of Brightleaf which will only add to the traffic issues that are already starting to show themselves. The focus area project is slated to be ready for council review. And according to the letters that we've gotten from Scott Whiteman, that's supposed to happen in June. Sarah just said end of summer, so I hope they can sort of figure out what their timing really is. There's a lot of residents watching this more every day, kind of looking to the city leadership to provide a comprehensive approach that benefits everyone from this small area study. So as such, I'm asking council tonight to put a moratorium on approving all new residential developments in Southeast Durham until the focus area study is complete and approved as a master plan for the area. It's a three-month delay according to what Scott said, essentially a blip in history and the stakes are simply too high to not do that. Thank you very much, Mr. Kinnell. We appreciate your being here. Colleagues, I'll now ask if there are any other members of the public who are here who would like to be heard on this item. So anyone else that would like to be heard on item 23? I don't see anyone else, but I just, okay. All right, colleagues, you have heard from the proponents and opponents of this item. And I'd now like to hear if there are any questions that you have or comments. Council Member Freeman. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I think I wanna start with Mr. Kinnell's comments and just acknowledging that this has been an ongoing concern for myself and acknowledging that we allow ourselves to be reactive and follow the developers in how we're planning the city. I've raised the concern a number of times and I know that the plans have been approved, but I just wanna make sure that folks understand that this is why I have not been a vote for removing, like removing rural residential land and just making it city without a plan in place that would actually cover that area of the community and ways in which I know that I'm seeing in almost, in other parts of the city. And so the care and the kind of direction that we're going in feels, it feels overwhelming. I know we've had the conversations around transportation and making sure that the roads were able to carry the load. And in this case, the things that rise up in that, I mean, the kind of context where you're weighing, moving your family's graves in order to receive or to make a sale of a property or what have you, just seems, it's just where we are right now and I get it, but I just feel like we could be doing so much more. 114 acres of the county being planned by the developers for the city. It just doesn't feel right. And I'm trying to figure out how to support this, but I cannot, I can't see it. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member. Other questions or comments, colleagues? Council Member Middleton. Thank you, Mr. Marin. And thank you, Councilor Freeman, for your remarks. You know, Mr. Conell said something that really kind of jolted me when he mentioned the word moratorium. And I've used that term a couple of times in our discussions because, you know, when we're, because we sit in these chairs, we don't really have the luxury of these being academic conversations. We actually have to make decisions. And the reason why his allusion to moratorium kind of struck me is because on the one hand, we talk about the plans that need to be developed. We speak aspirationally, which we should as leaders. But on the other hand, we're making right now decisions. And my concern and my fear, listen, systems don't work if there's not, obviously each, each decision is a case by case basis. I'm not suggesting that one decision in one case should necessarily pre-determine what we're going to do in another case. But, you know, there's a reason why so many of us rail against disparities in sentencing for the same types of crimes. You know, there's a reason why we point to the system doesn't work or have credibility if there's not some degree of predictability, some degree of standard. And what I'm concerned about is as a body, not as personally, but as an institution, appearing capricious when in some cases we will approve cases. And in other cases, which at least by my reading have similar, not to the point, but you know, down to the last note, but similar variables in them don't approve others based upon an aspirational kind of vision of what we should be doing without actually ever doing that plan. So if we're going to act in a de facto sense like we've got a moratorium on certain nights, but not other nights, I would be in favor of having the discussion. And actually, if that's what we need, if we need to give ourselves breathing room, if we want to telegraph that to the rest of the country, that for a time being, germs shutting down development until we decide what we want to do, then I think we need to do that. Or, you know, for the sake of the integrity of our institution and for the sake of the integrity of us as a body, we understand we have these aspirational views and what needs to be done in each area. And again, I know it's case by case, but what I'm hearing is we need to have a plan or we need to come up with a vision that will govern, you know, and we already have one in the UVO but conference of plan, but it sounds like we need a better vision or it needs to be more clarified. And if we need to do that, colleagues, perhaps we should just make the hard decision to do that or else I think we run the risk at least of having, you know, being accused of being capricious from time to time. So I'll put that out there for whatever that's worth. I didn't want to ask Mr. Ghosh a question if he's still on air with us. I am available. Neil, good to hear you. Hope you're well. How did you find out or what steps did you take to discover the family members of the deceased that are buried on the acreage? So I think Ms. Deborah Joy on our team would be best suited to answer that question. But before she began, I did want to clear something up. Councilwoman Freeman suggested that the family would like to move their members so they could make the sale. The family which stands to make the sale of the land is not the same family who would prefer to have their family members reunited at the Maplewood Cemetery. That's where the cemetery is sure, but they're not the one selling the land. And I did want to make sure everyone knew that. Is Ms. Deborah Joy available to talk about the process for the, well, to talk about the process about how the 27 descendants were located? Can we make her available to speak? Mr. Ghosh, I don't see Ms. Joy in the queue. Okay. That's when I can move on if she should come in the interest of time. I'll just ask my next question. Mr. Ghosh, was it your sense that this was an ongoing and pre-existent desire of the family to have their relatives move? Or did you present it as if this is approved, we will do this for you? And then they got with it. What sense did you get? I think it is a kind of a win-win. My, our sense is that the matriarch and one of her sons has buried at Maplewood Cemetery already. The family would have preferred to have the rest of their family members bury there as well, but could not afford to do so at the time and had a family grave on property that they otherwise owned. So, I think their plan was to have a family tomb, so to speak, at Maplewood Cemetery, which is something that this developer would provide as part of this project. That's a separate process, just so you know, something that the county ultimately approved. But that is, as part of this project, because they would like to work around, not I'm sorry, because they would like to build in the area where the grave is, this opportunity has presented itself to the family members. So the, and I don't want to belabor this. So the family represented to you that, hey, this has always been a desire of ours, and this is for two of this that you guys have come along and offered us the opportunity and were it for, but finances, we would have already done this. Was that your sense? I don't know that I would put it quite that way. They, the family members were, had to be sought out. And, you know, so once they were located, we were able, and I was not a part of this process or conversation, that was Ms. Deborah Joy, but once they were able to locate family members, they were able to speak with them and, and, you know, certainly develop the history of this family to figure out where their other members are located and talk about the history of this family. And, you know, I can't say that they necessarily thought this was for two of this, I think is the way you describe it. I don't know that I would describe it that way, but it's not something that they oppose. And the site, the graveyard on site has kind of like a gate and iron gate, which is something that will be preserved and moved over to the Maplewood Cemetery, something that they wanted to stay with the family throughout the process. Ms. Marial, you'll be back at this time. I'm interested in hearing questions from my colleagues. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Rosha. I just want to make sure, yeah, okay, good. I see in the chat, I was going to ask, perhaps could Ms. Joy, would she hear as one of the phone numbers and looks like that she is? So, Madam Clerk, can we make Ms. Joy available to be heard or is there something she particularly needs to do with her phone to be heard? She needs to dial star six. Great. Ms. Joy, can you please dial star six so we can hear you? Looks like you did that. Okay. But now it looks like maybe you're muted again. Can you unmute? Great. Ms. Joy, have you been listening to the conversation about the grave sites? I have. And I'm going to ask Council Member Middleton to ask his question again. And so we can all hear it and you could answer. Ms. Joy, good evening. Thank you for joining us. This is Council Member Middleton. I was asking about the process of discovery, how you uncovered the identity of the folk in the grave and the family and the anatomy of the approach and the overture to the family. Right. Well, it's a, we had some marked headstones out there. So that's where we started with the Wiley Jackson May and went online and with census data, marriage records, death certificates, we were able to find his family, his wife's name and their children through time. And that's his death certificate and a few death certificates for some of the other family members. And then following his children's lines, we were able to see who they married, who their children were and just kept following that line as far as we could up until present day. And then we had some names of people who were still living and went online and did a search to see if we could find out where they lived and any contact information. And out of those people, we were able to find 27 individuals with contact information who are living descendants. Were you involved personally with the discussions with the family about moving their beloved to Maplewood? I was the one who sent them letters to inform them of what was happening and gave them my contact information. A few of them got back in touch with me and they were interested in, a few people were interested in going out to the cemetery while it was still where it was and taking another look at it. There was some discussion about moving them to Maplewood because that's where Wiley Jackson made, wife was buried and one of their sons was buried out there. So that pretty much was my involvement with any discussion on where they would be relocated. I appreciate that. You said there were some discussion. Who raised the prospect of the possibility of moving the family? Did the family raise it or did you guys raise it? That was from us, yes, to relocate the burials so they would be in a perpetual care cemetery and they could be, the family would have access to the burials. So just to be clear, this was not identified as a quest that the family, did the family make any representation that they would have done this, save for financial hardship? Was that representation ever made? Oh no, no. They don't own the property. There's no financial compensation. I'm sorry if I wasn't clear. Did the family represent that this had been a desire on their part to have all of their loved ones buried in the same place? At any point, did the family express that to you or did you guys just recommend, hey, we can move the family for you? No, as a matter of fact, many of them didn't even realize where the family was buried. They had no idea whatsoever. There were just a few of them who had some memory that they were out there off of Virgil Road, which wasn't what the road was named at the time. So a little confusion there, but anyway, they knew there was an old family cemetery out on the old family property that had been sold like from the family, like in the 1920s. Mr. Gouche, are you still on? I am. Where did you get the representation that this was something that the family wanted to happen? Oh, that they wanted the family to be buried together? Yes, that one. So that is based off of the fact that they have a plot, a family plot in the Maplewood Cemetery where the matriarch and a son are buried, while the rest of the family is not there. So that plot in, I mean, the property ownership for the Wiley May family goes back to 1869. I don't know that any of the current living descendants even, I mean, obviously they would never have met Wiley May. That'd be weird. So I, and I'm sorry, it just, my sense from your earlier representations was that this wasn't, and if I'm mischaracterizing, of course, you'll correct me, my sense was that the sense I got was that this was something that was welcome and desired by the family, but they just didn't have the money to do it. No, no, no. So this is something that is welcomed by the current living family members. The assumption is that when they had the family plot in Maplewood Cemetery, they were not able to bury the rest of their family members with the mother and the one deceased son. Not in the 19th, you're not talking about in the 19th century though, obviously. Oh, I don't actually know when those members died. The ownership of this land goes back to 1869. I don't know when the people were buried in Maplewood Cemetery, if that's what you're asking. All right, final question. Did you hear Ms. Joy say that the current family members didn't even realize? Didn't know that, you know, did you hear that? Didn't know that they're part of it? Yeah. I'll yield back, Mr. Mayor, I'm done. Thank you, Council Member. Other questions, Council Members? For the applicant or staff, Council Member Freeman? Thank you. I just wanted to track back to the comment that Council Member Middleton made around the moratorium and just check in. I don't think that Mr. Neal mentioned a moratorium for all of development. He just mentioned it for a specific area, which has seen a heightened increase of approvals over the last year. And so I just wanted to ask him if he could just be specific about the area he was speaking to. Madam Clarke, can you make Mr. Neal able to be heard? There we go. Am I am? Yes, you are. Well, thank you. The area that I'm talking about is the exact area of the Southeast Durham focus area that I think Sarah Young explained, the periphery of. And I think Olive Branch and also Sharon Road, which is coming up next, are in that area. And the numbers that I quoted before and are all developments that have been greenlit in that specific area over primarily since September. And I think there's another one that was greenlit a while back on Olive Branch, which was 500 some homes, may not be exactly correct. But specifically that area, since you're going ahead to do this big study, that's like the strategy, right? And then developments are like the tactics. And it's kind of, you know, you do the strategy first and then you kind of approve the tactics based on the strategy. And it seems like right now there's no strategy. It's just a lot of tactics and they're all not connected. So that was my comment. Mr. Mayor, if I might, since Councilor Freeman alluded, I'm sorry, Councilor Moon, will you stop? Forgive me. I was just gonna ask. I'm sorry. I'm so sorry. The clarity from Director Young, because I know that the comp plan was supposed to be updated last year and it was pushed back a few years. And so the comp plan we're working on is out of, is essentially out of date and not kind of in line with where we are. And so I just wanted, I know we've been making adjustments to the strategy and a little bit of how we operate. But if you could just say when the comp plan will be updated, I just wanna make sure I have a timeline in place in mind. Sure. Our original plan for the new comprehensive plan, it's not an update. We're throwing the whole old one out and doing a brand new one. Yep. The original plan pre-COVID was to have that finished probably mid-year 2022. And I will tell you that obviously due to having to change the way we work this year, that's caused a bit of a delay. So we're looking at the end of 2022 for completion of a full new plan. End of 2022. Thank you. And do you guys in the planning department have any guardrails I guess or any kind of, you know, absolute moratorium of this sort? You have something in your office that could allow you to hold off on moving forward on cases like this where it's like rampant development occurring all at one time in one area. So we do not by law, if an application is submitted, we are bound to process it. Property owners, there's a little thing called due process and they're entitled to move forward under a process unless there is a legally adopted moratorium in place. I will tell you that part of our strategy with a comprehensive plan to not have to wait until the very end, some of you all may remember that we said early on that we would be seeking kind of adoption in chunks so that we could get at least some guidance kind of on the books and adopted that we could use with zoning cases as they were moving through without having to wait the full till the very end of the project when it was fully complete. We expect that the goals and objectives which will be coming to you all and the county commissioners hopefully in just a few months will be that first line of defense. We will be using that as our new criteria for zoning cases. And so once again, you will see a change in our staff reports. You probably have already noticed a change in our staff reports to include a lot more information than we used to before. But that is the only guardrail. As you said, council member Freeman that we would have is just a different lens through which to look at these cases. Thank you. And I think I'll just try to make sure. So in your assessment, would you feel like a moratorium would be helpful or harmful in just the way that you've laid out that you're trying to work through the chunks and everything as we're moving forward now and acknowledging that you're in between with COVID and all of these things. I just want to make sure that I have your opinion. I think in terms of, you know, there's pros and cons to a moratorium. They, I will tell you that and certainly I will defer to our legal team in the city attorney's office, but there's very specific requirements and general statutes in terms of the duration of the moratorium. So a short moratorium, I think would be doable in that I know the timeline we're seeking to follow where a lot of jurisdictions get themselves in trouble with moratoria is because they are supposed to be time limited if the project or whatever they're waiting for doesn't wrap up in that amount of time, then they're, it's problematic. I don't think that would be an issue here. I think some of the potential pros would begin the community, you know, a sense that they were being heard, that we were pausing to make sure that we had the right mechanisms and regulations and long range plans in place to handle this. So I think there's pros and cons and I'd be happy to explore it further if that's the will of the council. And just one additional question. If there were a conversation around moratoriums to move forward, would that stop the plans that were already moving in the new process or would that just be for new applicants? In all honesty, I would have to check the general statutes and see how they say that we deal with that. I don't know off the top of my head. Sorry. That's all. Thank you very much. Thank you council member, council member Middleton. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, very quickly. And I apologize if I were out of order earlier. Well, the exchange that council Freeman and Ms. Young has had is, that's what I was talking about. Whatever the parameters of the moratorium is since the word was in both, I wasn't advocating for moratorium on all development but in so far, whatever we're talking about that's what I'm talking about. Whatever the scope or the reach of the moratorium is, my concern again is just that if there's a prevailing and burgeoning sentiment on this council to the degree where we're going to start behaving as if there's a de facto or at least in the de facto sense as a moratorium that we might as well declare it if that's where we're trending and that's where we're going. So that's all I wanted to say. Whatever the scope is, that's what I'm talking about not the universal shutdown unless that's what y'all were talking about. I'm talking about whatever we're talking about. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you council member. Council member Caballero. Yes, I have a question for Sarah for director Young as well just real quick because we started down this path on moratorium so just out of clarification if, and I know there's a lot of openness like around state statute and whatnot but if in fact there was a moratorium we figured all that all out, would it then extend the capacity for staff because they're not processing applicants in the Searles area, would it potentially speed up the timeline on when our small area plan for that part of the city would be complete? That's a very good question and I'll be very honest and say that the staff that are working on the comp plan are not the same staff that process these cases. We do have a ton of these cases and so that would free up some staff time but I'll also be really candid and say that the staff that processes these cases right now is completely under water and I'm having to find other resources to patch the whole. So I think what it would do is it would restore the case levels back to a normal range where the staff that I currently have managing land use cases would be able to not have to work till 11 o'clock every night which I know I and the staff would appreciate. So I'm just being very honest as to the reality that I don't know that it would speed up the comp plan but it would definitely return some normalcy to our workload. Can I continue down this questioning, Mayor Schultz? I just meant for the small area plan. I did not mean for the comp plan in its entirety. So just to clarify on my end. Okay, just I am still undecided how I'm gonna vote on this case. I spent a fair amount of time out in this area today and if what I am interested in knowing is if we continue this case, I would like to understand more about what does it do to staff capacity if we think about a moratorium? Does it actually get us to completing the small area plan faster? Which I think in the long-term suits us better. I know that there's a ton of projects in this area and I'm just sharing with my colleagues where my thinking's at. I wanna say to our resident, Mr. Neal, I mean, part of the reason, you know, driving out there, I took Leesville back home and the area has been booming for a while and I will say that the Domino effect was around because of neighborhoods like Carolina Arbor's because it made an area really, really popular. And so I caution residents who have benefited from the growth of Durham to encourage no more growth. So that is just one caution I have for our residents. It's hard when we're a growing, growing city when I was driving around this afternoon. I grew up a lot of my time in Charlotte and I definitely remember seeing the farmland getting swallowed up, definitely lived out and when we moved out to the house that I grew up in, it was surrounded by farms and now none of that is farms. So I know what urban sprawl is, I think a lot of us can relate and we do have to be really, really careful. I also know that we have a crazy, crazy housing market right now. And if we don't increase our inventory in some fashion, I don't know what we're gonna do around the housing cost, it will just get worse. So these are the tensions that I'm holding whenever zoning cases come before us. I think it's the tension that a lot of my colleagues are holding when we say no, there is a consequence. I understand there are other consequences when we say yes, but there is a deep consequence when we say no to more housing. Thank you so much council member. Mayor Progem Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I also had a couple of questions for Director Young. Hey, thank you. So we've talked a lot about like this small area plan process for this area and other communities have started coming and asking for small area plans for areas that are experiencing increasing development pressure. I'm wondering if you can give both us and the community a little bit more context as to what a small area plan includes and doesn't include. Because I feel like there's not really a shared understanding of what we can and can't do through that process. Sure, and that's a very common question we've gotten a lot lately. And I'll say that a small area plan is whatever it is that we decide it is. There is no specific definition in the realm of land use planning, but typically they involve, you could look at uses kind of what goes where. You could look at environmental issues. We have some small area plans that are focused just on open space. We have some that are focused on historic preservation. We have some that are strictly just a land use analysis. So the breadth of what it covers can be tailored and usually is tailored to the specific area, not all areas experience the full kind of gamut of planning issues. And so our idea behind the focus areas in the comp plan is because so many neighborhoods in our whole Durham city and county community are experiencing similar types of issues, right? These planning issues are common. They're sprinkled throughout but there are multiple neighborhoods that are experiencing the same types of pressures that we would do essentially a sample. I'll use that term lightly. Focus area for the different types of issues that we're having. So one is greenfield development, right? What happens in Southeast Durham is something that is transferable to the area just north of it, which is also on the cusp of experiencing the same things and potentially some other areas on the far western side of the county. We also are seeing a lot of neighborhoods that are really struggling with urban infill and how does that look in these folks that already have some services and some infrastructure but maybe it's not sufficient or not modernized. And so a different issue. So a classic one is kind of the Braggtown community. So we're working with them on a focus area to deal with those issues. And as we identify perhaps a few more, our idea is to have kind of a handful of these sets of issues focused focus areas. Wow, that was redundant. In the comp plan, the benefit of doing them in the comp plan as opposed to standalone plan is that then the policies that come out of these are in the comprehensive plan for all the neighborhoods that experience the same thing and are applicable across the county as opposed to having to do a specific plan for every neighborhood in every community, which will take us a lot longer time. So I know that's maybe not as specific an answer as you were looking for Mayor Pro Tem, but it's completely customizable. But our idea is to work with a few kind of representative communities of our biggest issues to work on their area as kind of a sample and be able to pull out policies from those exercises that are applicable countywide. No, that was really helpful. Thank you. So in this area in particular, I know when we had a conversation about doing some small area planning in this region, there were a couple of, there were a couple of not necessarily concerns, limitations that were communicated by staff that made me feel that low density residential development in this area was that it was reasonable to proceed with granting the allowing low density residential in this area. And those were because we, because the area was environmentally sensitive enough that y'all didn't think that higher density residential or commercial uses would be viable. And that delaying all of the cases, not allowing them to move forward would put additional pressure on the overall housing situation in Durham. So those are kind of what I see is like the cons to waiting to do a process particularly in this area because it seems very likely that even if we were to go through a process that low density residential, that low density residential is what we're gonna get. But on this specific site, do you think it could support something other than low density residential development or forest or do you feel like this specific site falls into that overall limitation that you communicated during that earlier conversation? That's a great question. This site is what I would call deeper into kind of the center of this area. When we talked, for instance, about supportive services that you would find so people don't have to travel very far, you're kind of limited in terms of the, realistically where they're gonna be located up at 98 and back down at 70 and on the edge of the Wake County along with the Briar Creek. So this to me is really going to be developed as residential. And I think one of the challenges is realizing that this, while we'd love to think, and I know I think I said this at the presentation that you were mentioning, the world does not end at our borders, right? And so there's a lot of supportive stuff very close to this area, just minutes away. What's really missing in this area, which will be built out little by little as development happens, are a lot of the kind of roadway modernization amenities, sidewalks. One of the big things that we have to address is, in my opinion, public open space, not just a homeowner's association playground that is essentially private property, but where are there recreational opportunities in this area? Because an area that is laden with a lot of natural resources, sensitive areas like this, it's actually a really good place for some really awesome natural open space. That could be a really big amenity. So I think the opportunities here are different than they are in some other parts of town, but this particular quadrant, as it gets kind of deeper into that kind of core isolated rural area of the Southeast Durham focus area, I think it is going to be residential. I think that's the reality. Thank you. And do you think this density, like would a higher density on this property be reasonable or is this as good as it's gonna get? That is a really tricky question. So I will tell you that, and I'm probably not the most popular planning director because I'll be honest, I do see that there is a need for a spectrum of variety of densities across our entire city and county. And so this area out here to me a PDR of 3.2, that to me seems appropriate in an area that does have a fair amount of environmental features on it and near it. So I also like to remind folks as scary as sprawl may be, Trinity Park was sprawl when it was built, right? And so we are filling in between us and our neighbors. The trick is to plan for how we fill in so that that is a sustainable fill in with some of the things that I've talked about, like road monetization, real open space amenities and making sure that folks have access to services. Thank you so much. I don't want to take up too much time, but I could ask a couple more questions to the developer. Please take as much time as you need. Thank you. Hey, Neil, could you talk a little bit about the price point and the single family versus townhome numbers? Well, sure, yes. So this developer believes that the townhomes would be in the mid 200s and the single family would be in the mid 300s. There is a zoning commitment on there, which says that at least 20% of each housing type would be required within the whole community. So the mix ultimately could be under the zoning 80-20 with the 80 being either townhomes or single family. That is technically allowed under this zoning. There's an additional commitment that 30% of all the townhomes would have one car garage or less, which is meant to be kind of a proxy for price. The units with fewer garage spaces are typically cheaper than single family homes or townhomes with two car garages. I think ultimately the mix is probably going to end up about 70-30. I'm gonna ask our engineer, Mr. Cybers, to weigh in on this and give his opinion because I know he's been looking at this a lot more closely than I have it on the layout. So I assume he can give us a better indication of what we think is gonna go out of here. I'm assuming Tim is available. Yes, sorry, thank you. Tim Cybers, Horvath Associates. Yes, we're probably in the 70% single family, 30 townhomes, 70-30, 60-40 range. Thank you. And could you also talk a little bit more about in addition to the wildlife corridor, any other open space or walkability features that you're including in the project? Absolutely. So one thing, and I mentioned this earlier, I don't know if you all caught it, the development plan currently shows two stream crossing. One is for a east-west collector road that is on Durham's transportation plan. That's something that this project would be building. There's another one that's north of that which is shown on the development plan as a utility stream crossing. So that would be a crossing for essentially sewer. That is a crossing that if this council is interested in, that's one that we have studied and now believe that we can get rid of. And so while it's shown on the development plan right now, if this council, like the planning commission, would be more comfortable with fewer stream crossings, that's one that we could get rid of. We believe we can make the site work with just one stream crossing for the east-west collector road. In addition to that, there is a zoning condition which does require this development to have some active open space elements. I believe it is commitment three. A minimum of three of the following shall be provided at the time of site plan, a dog park, a tot lot, disc golf, soccer playing field and natural trails. Additionally, commitment 10 and 11 speak to Greenway. So commitment 10 basically says we would give the city a 100 foot wide Greenway easement or we would actually build the Greenway at, I think it's 30 foot wide. Let me make sure I'm telling you correctly. That's correct. This is Tim, sorry. Yeah, that's correct. Okay. And then condition 11, which says a new shared facility with a 10 foot minimum width will be constructed to connect to the future Martin Branch Creek Trail. So this community is committing to providing trailhead, possibly Greenway and some active open spaces in the community. Thank you. That's all really helpful. And I think I might have a couple of more questions but I'm gonna yield for the moment and see what other folks have to ask. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you, Madam Mayor Pro Tem. Council Member Friella, did you have a question earlier? I did, thank you, Mr. Mayor. I was just really intrigued by Mr. Nils' suggestion of a moratorium and the kind of probing questions of my colleagues. I've really got my wheels turning around that idea. I'm just thinking about one of the issues that I've really noticed since I've joined council is that there's this a big, I guess, perception of kind of development-led development. There's another redundancy for you at the expense of community and also elapsed in communication and transparency. And when I think about the cost-benefit analysis of like a three-month delay, it's not permanent. It could be contained to a specific amount of time. That gives us an opportunity to engage folks and try to rebuild some of that public trust. Also, playing director Young, while she said to Council Member Caballero's question that we won't be able to get the small area planet any sooner, she did say that they were underwater working to 11 overwhelmed and just, you know, what sounded like an unsustainable kind of situation. Maybe that's another conversation we have to have about getting them some more staff members or something like that. But in any event, it sounded like the three-month delay would offer them an opportunity to go from treading water to actually being in a stable place, which is just another benefit. The other side of that scale would be, you know, how might the delay kind of impact the ability for growth or whatever we wanna have happen happen. And I just, I don't know, I haven't heard it. Maybe Mr. Nell or someone, both Nells, there's Mr. Steven Nell and then Neil could speak to what extent a three-month delay would be, you know, to the detriment of anything that's happening on there. And I don't know, I'm just trying to better understand pros and cons here for pursuing this moratorium, which is an interesting concept. Thank you, Mr. Gosh, would you like to comment? I will need to consult with my client on that. If I understood the question correctly, Council Member Freelon is asking, essentially, how do we feel about a three-month delay? Okay. I think that's what he's asking. All right, and so let me consult with my client on that and we can return to that if that's all right. Sure, thank you. Are the questions Council Member or comments? Well, I did see Mr. Nell has his hand up as well and I'm kind of curious, I mean, I guess I already know what you think about the delay, you suggested it, I'm a fan, but I'm curious to hear what he has to say. Sure, Mr. Nell, would you like to comment? Can you hear me or do I need to be? Okay, I wanted to say just really quickly that I don't think that our group is opposed to new development at all. I think what we're kind of drafting off a little bit is things like during one of the earlier sessions where you greenlit something, Mayor Pro Tem said, you know, it would be great if these communities, and this was a comment about Olive Branch, would have some retail in the middle of it where people can walk to get milk. You know, we have transportation challenges in this area that it's pretty much you drive a car or you don't get anywhere. There's no sidewalks. The roads are pretty unsafe to ride a bicycle on because there's no bicycle, whatever. And this is an area that, you know, I think you can go right ahead. And if you're gonna use this as sort of a focus area, you can start thinking about how those things get added along with the development rather than afterward. And I think that that's the concern that people here have. And it's not, and I think Councilman Caballero said, well, you know, it's all Carolina Arbor's fault because it was cool area and everybody wants to go there. And I don't think anybody here has an issue with building the area out, but I think when you build it out, you have to build out the other pieces too, too, along with just new houses. And it seems like all that's happening is we're building houses, we're building houses, but there's no green space, there's no transportation, there's no sidewalks, there's no roads, there's still two-lane country roads with thousands of homes on them. So it just seems like there's not really a plan overall. And if you could get a little bit more toward a plan before you go to the individual developments, it would probably work better overall. And you've also got the 885 thing coming in, which is gonna tear up a lot of this as well, changing 70 into a highway with feeder roads. So that's gonna happen by 24. So even that has to kind of fit into this somehow. But thank you for letting me speak so much. I didn't expect to. Thank you. We're glad to have you again. Mr. Nell, thank you. Appreciate you. Council member Reese. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Been doing a lot of listening tonight. I know that's shocking to my colleagues, but perhaps to the applicant's attorney and our staff, pretty much anybody. But this is a lot of deja vu for me, just to be totally honest. It wasn't that long ago that we first considered and then second considered a much larger project across the street and slightly north of this. And by a vote of four to three, this council ultimately approved that project that will eventually build a north of 600 homes, just north and west of here. This project would build another 350 homes, some mix of townhouses and single family detached. So we're looking at somewhere in the neighborhood of a thousand new homes in this area in the near future if this is approved tonight. There are a lot of interesting things to talk about when we consider the possibility of a focus area and what planning in a focus area like Southeast Durham might look like. But I wanna make sure that all of us understand that at the end of whatever process our planning department is doing, at the end of the creation of the focus area or small, whatever comes out of the focus area, let's call it a small area plan for now. The developers will still come to us with this kind of project. This kind of project is not allowed on this piece of property today. That's why they're here. If we were to approve a small area plan that discouraged this kind of development there, developers will still have to come to us and ask us to do this. So I support small area planning. I support the focus area model. I think it's a great way to get community engagement that's rooted in actual concrete examples and not just ideas about what you think you might want in some misty place that is not your neighborhood. I think it's fantastic. But it's not gonna solve our problem here. And the problem is developers keep wanting to build single family homes in places and along roads that we don't control, can't upgrade, and that if we continue to build out piecemeal, we will have many, many thousands more of these, which means many, many thousands more cars on our roads, which will be a complete torpedo to any kind of sustainability goal this community hopes to achieve in the next 20 years. There are lots of good things to be said about consistency, about the idea that developers need to understand what the rules are and how they're gonna apply. And I think that's an important consideration. I try as best as I can to be consistent and I'm gonna try that again tonight. I don't think it's a good idea to annex this property into the city and build 350 homes. I don't think that's a good idea. And whatever we decided at some later meeting about deciding to pause development in this area while we figure out what we want there, that's a whole other conversation. But the question that I see on our agenda is are we gonna annex this property? Are we gonna let this developer build 350 homes there? I don't think that's a good idea and I'm gonna vote against that. That's not really a question, Mr. Mayor. So too bad, but that's all I had to say about that. Thank you. Thank you. Questions are not all that are allowed. All right, other comments and questions, council member Freeman. Thank you. I just had just a couple more questions for the applicant and just acknowledging every time we talk about the price point I had someone ask me a question and I didn't know the answer. So I just wanted to make sure I asked. And that price point that was mentioned for the mid 300s for the single family and the mid 200s for the town homes, does that include flooring cabinets and all of the amenities? Like is that really like a, the max or is that like the minimum in that conversation? Well, I'm not, it's a turnkey home. That would include appliances and cabinets. Yes. Thank you. Thank you, council member, council member Middleton. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I don't want to belabor a point that I've already been made, but I really appreciate councilor Reese for really kind of the snapback to reality. This is why we're a deliberative body at the end of the day and why we got a vote and kind of we each have to reach our own conclusion. He's 100% right that whatever plan we come up with whatever we name it, so we're going to come back and ask us to, make consideration and essentially do our job and make decisions. So that's why we're a deliberative body. So I want to thank him for that, for kind of giving some clear relief to what we do or what we would be doing tonight. I also want to say that, if we were to, if we, if moratoriums were going to be on the table or we were going to talk about small area plans, now there are a number of legacy black areas in this city that have been asking for small area plans for a long time. Braggtown, one to one to the Haytai community, Merrick Moore, there are some, there are some legacy communities in this city that want us to do precisely what we're talking. This is not full disclosure. I live in Southeast Durham. So, so I'm, I'm sitting in Southeast Durham right now in a house here. So, so yeah, I'm best at what happens in this area, but there are many of our constituents that have been asking for this type of consideration of the legacy areas in this city for a long time. And, and, you know, if we were going to go down that road, there's some other communities that I think would, you know, go higher up on the list for me, even higher than the one I live in. I just want to put that out there. And the price point, I was going to ask about the price point, but the price point question was already asked. I guess what's challenging for me is that I'm really kind of on the fence for this one, but the reasons for not voting for this particular development tonight, I guess what I struggle with is if those reasons are compelling tonight, then they're going to be compelling on any other night and any other development that kind of falls into this kind of category moving forward, which is fine because that's why we're deliberative. That's where we are as individual leaders and decision makers are. I think, you know, that's why we deliberate and vote and that's why four, three, or whatever carries the day, the majority vote. So, yeah, I say a lot to say that I'm still listening. And if we're going to go small area plan, way that there are some other communities we need to be talking about as well. So that's it for me on this subject matter. Thank you on this particular issue, Reverend. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you, Council Member, Madam Mayor Pro Tem. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I thought of one more question. What gets built here without the annexation and rezoning? Mayor Pro Tem, are you posing that to us? Yes, please. I mean, I will say, yeah, our client would not be interested in building here if the property was not annexed and resumed the current zoning on the property, I believe would allow for more like one unit to the acre and obviously if you don't annex it, it would be on well-incepted. So we get, so what would be built here without the rezoning by, if not by your client, by anyone else's homes on one acre lots with well-inceptic? Yeah, that's, I mean, I'm saying that's what's allowed to be built here. Okay, thank you. Yes. Thank you, Madam Mayor Pro Tem. Other questions or comments? Council Member Middleton. And Mr. Mayor, yes, I'm sorry. Just one final question to staff has the, has the, and forgive me if I missed it in the packet, has the offer to move the grave sites, has that been codified? Has that actually been formally proffered and captured in the development plan? I believe that question is for Mr. Kaltra. Yeah, just one moment. Let me look at that, look that up one second. It is not in a text commitment that I see. I think it is shown on the development plan. Now forgive me if I'm not remembering. Take your time, Mr. Kaltra. I think it's shown on the existing condition sheet. I remember that correctly. That's right, Danny. It's on the existing condition sheet. Is there a lead, an era with the leaders, which says grave sites to be removed. That's on, I guess, page two of the development plan. B001. They are, it does show grave sites to be relocated. And that would have to be done by state statute, state's requirements. Thank you, Mr. Kaltra. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'm sorry, you'll bet. One other point. This is Mike Foley, the developer. We also have to get approval from the Durham County Board of Commissioners and we're scheduled to go in front of them in a few weeks. Approval for what? Relocation of the grave site. Yeah, we've got hearings actually in one way. It's on the 22nd, I think. You're right. Thank you. All right. Other questions or comments, colleagues? Council Member Freeman. Thank you. Just so following up, how long has this property been vacant or just the one house? I don't think I heard that. Council Member Freeman, are you asking how long has essentially the property not been used? Yes. Tim, do you know? I actually don't know the answer to that. This is Tim Sivers. It's unclear. I will say that the one family home that live that's on Aloe Branch Road, they are residents, they do live there now. Obviously aware of the proposal. I will also state that the majority of the site is a wooded, which has mature trees. So it's not necessarily an old farm that's been used as pastures or anything like that. I don't know if Ratler clarifies, but to give you a number, it is unclear. Would five years be in the right? I would believe so for 80% of the site on the Virgil Road side. And again, the resident, the house that does have the driveway in front of Aloe Branch, that resident does live there today. And just checking back with Mr. Ghosh on the three months delay. Yeah, so we were talking about that. And it's unclear what the three month delay, like what would come of that. And then additionally, there's a concern that the three month delay would end in July, which would end up being a four month delay, which is the material for, for the applicant given that reasonings become effective once per quarter in Durham. So I think this month is an effective date. But I think after that, well, actually I believe the city's undertaking to do annexations effective for the next two months. But after that, after June, the next effective date would be September, which is more than a three month delay, is I guess what I'm saying. And just another, just thought the, the three, I'm sorry, just aside from that, the site, no, if there were to be an open space plan or open space opportunity for open space, how open is the applicant to setting aside that area for that? Do you mean like for the Greenway? No, more than a Greenway. So less having the private dog park and private property for dog parks and, you know, toddler parks. Yeah, so unlike most developments that are proposed in Durham, this development actually has, and Tim, correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe there's an impervious, the development plan shows impervious of 50% here. Most development plans would approach 70%. And this one is already preserving, you know, additional, there's additional tree preservation on the site and was required in the UDO and a lower impervious. I believe there will be plenty of open space on the property. If the suggestion here is that the city would like to come in and use that open space for kind of a public area, is that what you're suggesting? That's what I'm asking. I don't exactly know how that will work, but I don't think my client would be opposed to it. Yeah, I wouldn't be opposed to it. I just don't know what it looks like, hard to say. So just in acknowledging that it might be possible, I think that if we could set some time to kind of review, or at least to give staff the time to review, that might be helpful. And if, Mr. Mayor, if it's appropriate, I would like to just kind of suggest the delay just to allow that. The suggestion's always appropriate and we'll keep talking here and see what the will of the council is short. All right, colleagues, other comments? I have some questions. Ms. Young, thinking ahead about the period of time, let's say that the late summer, early fall is the realistic date for the small area plan. When you think about this area, how many, can you give us a guess about the number of homes that we might be looking at as potentially going into this area? That would come to us in rezoning, requesting that they would go into this area. So I think if I recall correctly, the numbers that I had tabulated for the presentation I gave a while back had somewhere probably around 3,000 that had already been entitled since about 2000, the early 2000s, with about another three to 4,000 kind of in the pipeline at the time. Does the pipeline mean in some sort of, does that include, is that include what we have coming to us in terms of rezonings or is there another sense in which you mean in the pipeline? In the pipeline, I mean pending a rezoning action by the council. In the Searles area or in this what you're now calling the South Eastern focus area? Yep. Is that contiguous with the boundaries of the Searles area? Yes, they are, I believe the identical boundaries. Okay. Once a small area plan is completed, so it might talk about open space, for example is one thing you mentioned. Open space would have to be something that would have to be purchased or donated by a landowner or, and the city has limited funds for open space purchase right now. We significantly use that money to purchase land that's upstream from our, through our water fund. It's upstream from our reservoirs or protecting like Mickey, that kind of thing. But we don't really have other open space funds. We could budget some. But if we budgeted some, is it? Well, let me add to state, it's not my sense that the first place we would use that money for purchasing open space would be in this area. We would do it as our friends in Equa and other places recommend, much more likely in a place like the Merrickmore neighborhood. Something closer to town where there's not much open space. There's actually a lot of open space out here, like a whole ton. Like if you drive this area, what you see 90% of is open space. We know that there's gonna be pressure on that for residential, but I drove every single one of these roads in the last few days and yeah, it's open space out there. But I'm making the point that I don't know if the Small Area Plan recommends open space out here, how do we get that? So that's one question I would have and I would assume it have to be donations by developers. Not sure what the other way's gonna be, but any thoughts on that? Yeah, it can also be a change in the text of the Unified Development Ordinance to require a higher percentage of open space to change what the standards for what the open space would or could contain. It could be several different things. It could be an overlay. We don't often use zoning overlays, but it could be an open space overlay that imposes different requirements. That could be a tool that could be put down in several other places that we may wanna take a similar approach. So we do have some options there to have private development contribute to that. I think one of the biggest challenges is that typically in these residential developments, the even the recreational open space that the ordinance requires is typically held by an HOA and it's for the private enjoyment of their residents. And so it's not really open to the public. So it could be that some amount of open space would have to be publicly accessible. So those things that we can investigate and look into as part of the recommendations that may come out of this. And then there's the problem in these developments that open space is the enemy of density. Is that true? There is definitely a tension and a balance. And I think the trick to planning the million dollar question is where is the right mix, right? So the balance in an area like this, depending on the type of character that we might be trying to preserve or the amount of natural features that we may be trying to protect is gonna be different than in a place, further in town in our more urbanized areas. That was a great way to not answer your question. Yeah, I appreciate that. I think there's a, I can think of at least a little precedent. We required the developers across from Durham ID to make that open space there publicly accessible as part of, I can't remember if it was a rezoning or a... It's required of the design district zoning there. It's a requirement of the base zoning. Yeah. But in this case, we did something else where they actually had to move the open space outside of their, whatever they're planning to building internal there into an outside public park sort of on the outskirts of their property. So let's say that the small area plan made recommendations about transportation and sidewalks. Thinking about Olive Branch Road and Shin Page Road and Leesville Road. And what would be, well, let's just take Leesville and Olive Branch. How long would it be before we could anticipate any changes out there, given the constraints that Council Member Reese mentioned? So I'm gonna defer to my colleague, Bill Judge, and give him time to get his camera on and join us. But I will say that, the big challenge is that these roads are state roads. And so the city doesn't control them. It's when a developer proposes development for their frontage, we can require that they meet our standards. But there's a lot of gaps in between, right? And if those gaps aren't annexed and thereby giving the city an avenue to do something with them, then there's really no way to bring these up to speed. I will tell you that on the wake side, what Raleigh ended up doing as it grew on Leesville Road is once it had enough critical mass of neighborhoods, the same exact thing happened, they actually passed a transportation bond and did an incredible work modernizing Leesville Road. There is a marked difference when you enter the city of Raleigh limits on Leesville Road. But that's how they were able to do it. It took something large like that to effectuate that change. But I'll defer to Mr. Judge. Thank you. Bill Judge, transportation. Can you clarify exactly the question again? Sorry. Sure, Mr. Judge. So if we're doing a small area plan and it might recommend some transportation, strengthening of the transportation network, you know, could recommend improving the roads, could recommend adding sidewalks. And when I think about Leesville Road and Olive Branch Road, I'm wondering what is a reasonable timetable that you could expect work like that to be done after a small area plan was approved? Yes, so as Ms. Young indicated, I think one of the challenges would be the city limits and the annexations and piecemeal. So certainly as developments are built, they're required to build along their frontage, but it leaves those gaps. Assuming we're able to resolve the issue of completing or completing those gaps and bring them into the city limits so that the city could construct and maintain those sidewalks, it's typically gonna take probably about a minimum probably close to five years, three to five years to go out and do the engagement with the community, do the planning, design, right away, construction. So construction could start on the early end that at about three years, but more like closer to five before they'd be completed. So then we had all the funding and we're ramping forward, trying to get that done as quickly as possible, which is obviously a big assumption. And the funding would be, and so how does it relate to the fact that it's a state road? The, I mean, I'm assuming that this would be either a local area administered project that either the city would be funding it if we're waiting on NCDOT to fund it through a roadway widening or complete streets policy then obviously the funding can be even more challenging. There's gonna be very few opportunities to get funding through NCDOT for this type of project. So timing is not that much different but just the funding sources much more scarce. Thank you. Yeah. And then, and maybe this is from Mr. Kaltra. Planning commissioner Miller had comments about the open space corridor and placing amenities and storm work facilities in the open space corridor. What are our usual practices in that regard? Well, this is an interesting one because we don't see this very often. This area of East Durham is one that has these wildlife quarters within it and a lot of natural heritage areas. And the East Durham open space plan it does put into place that those areas should be protected and that there should be limited types of activity placed in those. It does identify that greenways can be placed within those stream profile corridors. It also talks about if there are transportation crossings they should be designed in ways so that the culverts could be built to allow for wildlife movement through those but there's very other little language to dictate that other types of improvements should be placed in those quarters. They talk about a 300 foot wide corridor on either side of the stream bank so that those areas are protected for wildlife. Ms. Young, did you wanna comment on that? I did, I just wanted to kind of put a plug in for a project that we're also working on simultaneously along with the COMP plan which is one of the challenges that we have with current open space plans is that they were never implemented in terms of ordinance requirements. So we have this really important kind of policy but no concrete rules about how it gets implemented. And so where you all will actually be seeing hopefully later this year a series of text amendments to essentially codify and put in practice the things with clear standards that are identified in open space plans such as this one. So that's the reason why we don't have clear standards because they were never developed. So we're doing that now. I just wanted to explain and give a little framing behind that. Thank you. And so will those text amendments, how do you anticipate those upcoming text amendments would treat an open space corridor with stormwater facilities and other amenities? It's more than open space, it's a wildlife corridor. Yeah, and I will say that one of the things that we're gonna be looking at is kind of comparing. So these are what I would consider enhanced corridors, right? They're beyond typical stream buffers. I will say that typically in stream buffers there are some minor intrusions that are allowed. And so one of the big tests that we have to do is to go back and kind of double check these plans and see if these are areas, if we still believe, because they're in this area, I don't think there's been a lot of degradation of the natural environment, but in some others there may have been because there's been some other areas with sensitive features that have had a lot more development than this. So double check the integrity and then see if we can have kind of a set of one size. It's all regulations or if we need to have different ones depending on how much degradation has happened where we would allow some intrusions versus not. So my guess and not knowing kind of where we'll land yet is that the purpose of this type of preservation is conservation, it's to be conservative and likely we would land in a more conservative place than we are today. More conservative in the sense that we would be more limiting of what could be the wildlife corridor. Less intrusions, yes. Thank you. I'm sorry to keep asking these questions that make you conject, make you, is that a word conject? Project out into the future, but appreciate your attempts to make your best guess. Thank you so much, more than your best guess, your best predictions. Okay, yeah, I'll have a few comments and I'm not really sure yet exactly where I am. It's a five minute drive from 920 Sharon Road, which is the next item on our agenda. To 1607 Olive Branch Road. And my strong expectation, the Planning Commission approved that 920 Sharon Road about 11 to one vote. My strong expectation is after we take a pause, after this item, we will probably come back and approve that item. It's hard for me to imagine saying that we're gonna put a moratorium on when we're about to approve that item five minutes away. And the one we just approved in many ways has very similar circumstances to the one we're talking about now. It's smaller, you mean the big difference is size here. I do think that the issue of, do we have enough staff in our planning staff is we just got a new city manager and we're gonna have to throw that one at her. I don't think we solved that by deciding about whether or not a moratorium is a good idea. But I do think we hear you. And we got a thumbs up from our city manager. So yeah, that's a whole other issue and a very important issue. We don't want you to work till 11 o'clock at night, although it sounds like tonight you're making us work till 11 o'clock. I am troubled by the stormwater, by what's going to be in the wildlife corner. And I think that that is an important concern. I think that waiting for the small area plan won't really, it will be good and it will help guide us but what's gonna happen as a result of the small area plan much of what can happen isn't going to happen for a long time. Sidewalks, street improvements, those kinds of things. And that no moratorium is gonna last that long for the years that that's gonna take. I think that's just a reality we face. These are state roads. And also colleagues, I would ask you if we pass an equitable and sustainable infrastructure bond, would the first place that we fund sidewalks be Leesville Road or Olive Ranch Road? I get that that's what Raleigh does but I don't really think that that's what Durham does. I've felt satisfied by the applicant's answers about the graveyard. It would have been, I'd be happier if someone from the family was here to tell us that. I am a bit troubled by that, so still a little torn. And I thought the Mayor Pro Tem, Council Member Caballero were making good points and asking good questions about what this area is going to be like, what is suitable here. And what I heard from Ms. Young is that this is an area where even after this plan would be completed, this is an area that will probably be best suited for those entity residential. And that's also important for me. I weigh that against the fact that we are putting a whole lot of housing out here and the infrastructure is not great. But I'm driving out there and, I've driven out there, I really made it my mission this week to go out there several times and here's what I see on those roads. I wasn't out at rush hour. Well, actually that's not true. I was out at rush hour one time, but here's what I see, no cars. I don't see any cars there. It's just, you know, it's not, I know that there are times at rush hours when I'm sure that those roads are pretty stacked up. That's not, we don't have tremendous traffic problems on those roads right now. Not at the times I've been out there, not in the past and not this time. So I'm weighing all these things and look forward to hearing any final comments from my colleagues, Councilman Frim. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, your line of questions just made me think of a few more questions before. I just wanted to know if on the side of having a small area plan in place, if it was possible to expand in specific areas a sidewalk plan or a sidewalk kind of requirements so it wasn't limited to the frontage because of a specific small area plan acknowledging that there were gaps in the development that was occurring. So I'll ask Mr. Judge again to join me, but my understanding, you know, the city has a sidewalk plan. Again, part of the issue is whether or not a street is a city street or not that we can apply our plan to. But there are also some limitations in terms of state law and case law about not imposing on a private development the cost or the burden of infrastructure, for instance, things like sidewalks that are not directly related to the development that they're doing. So that's something that we have to be careful with. But Mr. Judge, if you have anything you'd like to add? Yeah, Bill Judge Transportation, Ms. Shun covered most of that. I mean, we do have sidewalk payment and lieu funds. Occasionally where developers are unable to build sidewalk that we could look at prioritizing to areas like this. Unfortunately, those funds are relatively limited. Usually if they're not constructing sidewalk, it's primarily because there's major environmental features or other costs associated with it. So often even the payment and lieu funds aren't adequate to sort of fill in those gaps, but beyond that, it really just comes down the prioritization with the limited sidewalk funding we have, whether that's through city sources, state federal sources where we get a lot of the federal funds for a lot of our sidewalk projects, where to best prioritize those across the city. And then just one additional question in that same context. If there was open space that was donated or made available for public use, is there a way to define that use to like a rec center or a childcare facility or a pre-K facility? And that's something that could be part of a committed element on a development plan if it was proffered as part of a development plan. Thank you. I just wanted to make sure that my colleagues were clear on just how much could be added with a small area plan. And I appreciate your sharing. Thank you. Thank you, council member. Other questions or comments? Mayor Schultz, this is Neil Gaucho. I was wondering if there would be an applicant to address the council. If there would be an opportunity for the applicant to address the council again. Sure, Mr. Gaucho, go ahead. So now would be the appropriate time. Sure. Yeah, so a couple of things that we've been listening to the conversation and discussing on the side while we can do to address some of this. And one of the things we heard is that there is a need for open space out in this area, specifically public open space. So one of the things the applicant would be willing to do here would be, because the current commitment is for the applicant to dedicate a hundred foot wide easement to the city for a greenway or to construct the 30 foot wide greenway. And the applicant in this case will be, if it is important to counsel, which seems like it is based on the conversation, we'll be willing to just commit to building the 30 foot greenway, which is a public greenway on the, I believe it's on the open space and recreation plan for the city. So that is something that the applicant would be willing to do. And I also wanted to just revisit the grave site item from earlier. There isn't any family members here, or there aren't any family members here that can speak to it. But I will say, I wanted to, I think I, what I said earlier, I think was a little bit confusing. And I didn't mean to imply that the family ever suggested that what they were trying to do was put all the family members together. The research that we do have on this topic indicates that there are certificates which suggest that the people are buried in the May Family Cemetery. It's unclear which one of these two locations will be considered the May Family Cemetery, because both of them are plausible. I also did misspeak earlier. I said that the matriarch and one of her sons is buried at the Maplewood Cemetery. It's actually the matriarch and six of her children are buried at the Maplewood Cemetery. And there are six known grave sites at this location on this property. So the idea would be to move the six known grave sites from this property to the Maplewood Cemetery with the rest of the family. The current family members that have been consulted with are, I mean, there's no other way to put it. They don't know the people who are buried. They are far removed from those family members. But they were in agreement with the suggestion that it would be better for these family members graves to be in a graveyard which is permanently maintained. So I hope that helps clear up the discussion around the grave site. Mr. Galsh, what about, what is the level of necessity for the developer to keep the stormwater facility and other amenities inside the wildlife corridor? Oh, yeah. So that's another thing that we did discuss. The stormwater facility, I'm sorry, not amenity, stormwater facilities inside the wildlife corridor. And I can let Tim speak to this, but they don't actually pose any harm to the wildlife at all. And in fact, the stormwater facilities are used by wildlife as habitat and for, that is an area that they can travel across. So the stormwater facilities don't exactly pose any kind of threat to the ability of that 300 foot corridor to remain a wildlife corridor. That having been said, I don't think, well, I'll let Tim speak to it because he was looking into what it would take to move the stormwater ponds outside of the 300 foot wildlife corridor. I'm gonna make another suggestion and I'm gonna ask my colleagues how they feel about this. Sure. You all have been, I don't wanna do this, that's what we're doing right now on the fly. I think these are important matters that need to be addressed. I know that would be important to me as I make my decision on this and I'm not interested in hearing some kind of quick and dirty solution to it. I'm gonna suggest to my colleagues that we keep the public hearing open and that you all come back to us in a period of time, a month or whenever the manager or Ms. Young would like to suggest. I think we'll wanna pick a date certain tonight but that would be my preference. I wanna, first though, before we do that, ask my colleagues how do you all feel about that? I see a couple of thumbs. I think we have mostly, we got all thumbs. So Ms. Young or manager Page, would you all like to suggest a date that in the area of a month when this could come back to us? I would suggest in terms of working with the applicant and having time to turn the materials back around at least a two-cycle delay, preferably a three-cycle delay would work even better. Give us just a little bit more time to work with to get agenda items updated and back in the system. All right, a three-cycle delay then would put this to the first meeting in May, is that correct? Yes. Okay, so we will, I'm gonna keep this public hearing open and we will plan to deal with this in the first meeting in May and we'll plan to deal with it in not quite as long a fashion as we dealt with it tonight. I'll just say, for the applicant and for Mr. Nill who was gracious enough to come here tonight as well, I'm measuring the need for housing which is a tremendous need. The fact that the planning director believes that this is an appropriate place for this level of density and that it's most likely that a small area plan will identify that. And the fact that I don't think we're gonna see improvement in these roads out here for a long, long time because they're state roads and that I don't think a small area plan that we hear in a few months will change that even though it might recommend it. And that, so those are important to me. I also think though that I am concerned about the, some of the other issues have been raised tonight around the gravesite, the wildlife corridor and others. So any of those things that the applicant could, yeah. And this hearing will be continued to Monday, May the third is the exact date. So this public hearing is kept open. Yeah, and just one final comment. I am very appreciative of the fact that people that live out there now don't want more housing out there, but we need more housing. And the 3,000 units that have been out there already, it's important that other people be able to move to the city and to be able to live in similar circumstances. So those are my thoughts. I know that not everyone shares them. Won't be the first time not everyone shared them. Okay, we are gonna continue this hearing to May the third. I wanna thank the applicant. I wanna thank Mr. Nill and we'll look forward to hearing from all of you all. We're now gonna take a break for our closed captioners. It's 1004, we'll be back at 10 minutes after 10. We'll take a six minute break. Thank you everybody. And remember, we're still on camera, so mute. All right, good evening again, everybody. It's late, but we persevere. And we're now gonna move to item 24, Consolidating Annexation 920 Sharon Road. And we will first hear the report from staff. Thank you, Mayor Shull. Danny Kulture again for the planning department. This request for a voluntary annexation, utility extension agreement and zoning map change I received from Jared Edens of Eden's Land Corp for two parcels totaling 7.67 acres located at 920 and 922 Sharon Road. The site is presently zoned residential rule RR, residential suburban 20 or S20 and falls Jordan Lake Watershed Protection Overlay District B or FJB and is located within the suburban tier. The applicant is proposing to rezone the property to plan development residential 7.171 or PDR 7.171 for up to 55 townhouse residential dwelling units. The property is currently designated low, medium density residential on the future land use map or flown. The property, the proposed PDR 7.171 zoning is consistent with the designated future land use. The zoning map change request has been reviewed by staff and determined to be consistent with the UDL requirements. There are several commitments in excess of UDL requirements which could be found on the development plan cover sheet and attachment 9B. The planning commission by a vote of 11 to one at their January 12th to 2021 meeting recommended approval of this request. There are three motions required for this application. The first is to adopt an ordinance annexing 920 Sharon Road into the city of Durham effective March 31st, 2021 and enter into a utility extension agreement with the Eden's Land Corp. The second is to adopt an ordinance amending the unified development ordinance by taking the property out of residential rural, residential suburban 20 and falls Jordan Lake Watershed Protection District B County jurisdiction in establishing the same plan as planned residential development. Development residential excuse me 7.171 falls Jordan Lake Watershed Protection overlay District B city jurisdiction. And the third is to adopt a consistency statement as required by NCGS 160 D dash 605. Thank you very much. Staff is and the applicant team would be available for questions. Thank you very much, Mr. Kaltra. Colleagues, you've heard the report from staff. I'm now declare this public hearing open. And I'm going to ask first, if there are any questions for Mr. Kaltra for members of the council. Seeing none, I'll now move to public comment. We have one person who's signed up to speak on this item, Mr. Jared Eden's for Mr. Eden's begins. Let me ask, is there anyone else here present who would like to speak on item 24? Anyone else that would like to speak on item 24? If so, please put your name in the chat or raise your virtual hand. Okay, Mr. Eden's, are you available to be heard? Yes, sir. Mr. Eden's, how much time would you need? I just a couple of minutes, Mr. Mayor. All right, thank you, Mr. Eden's, go ahead. Yeah, good evening, Mr. Mayor, members of the council, Jared Eden's with Eden's land. I appreciate your time and your attention this evening and you've had a long agenda so far. Appreciate Danny's help on this project. I'm just going to highlight a couple of points. I first want to point out this project is not in the Searles Basin, in case it was an item for discussion. We're on the west side of Sharon Road, so we definitely sewer in opposite direction. I thought I would clear that up before I even begin. I thought that would make sense. But as we're proposing 55 townhomes on Sharon Road, it's a very popular area, really nice part of town. I've lived out there a long time. But the one thing you'll notice when you look at aerial maps and things in this area, it's just single family city. It's a single family neighborhood on top of single family neighborhood. And we happen to have a large pocket of area here. It's about 1800 acres that Durham has designated for a little more density at 48 an acre. And this would be one of the first townhome projects to come there. So I think the alternate housing choice would be good for that area. We have plenty of capacity as far as roads, schools, and utilities per the staff report. We conform to the future land use plan, as Danny mentioned. We did add some tax commitments to the planning commission meeting. I just want to highlight a couple of them. Tried to add some specificity to the project a little bit. We did clarify sort of what we'd have in the active open space. We committed to a little bit larger open space than is required. The two conditions I really like is we're limiting the size of the units. It's hard sometimes to artificially to tell you what the market's gonna dictate that a unit cost, but it's much easier to predict what the per square foot cost of a unit may be. And I think that when you can limit the sizes and the width and the square footage, you're in a way, you're limiting how high of value that house can be. So it does tend to keep it more affordable. I do want to add two proffers this evening. We'd like to make a payment to the Durham, the school's fund for $3,000. That would be for the six additional students at $500 per student. And we'd also like to proffer a payment to the affordable housing fund. That would be $8,250. This is based on 55 units and $150 a unit. That's a rate that we've used on seven or eight projects. Now, both of these would be due prior to the first final plat. We did bet these with planning staff earlier today. And finally planning commission did approve the project 11 to one. We don't have opposition that I'm aware of. I'm glad to answer any questions you have. Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Edens. Is there anyone else that would like to be heard on this item? All right. Thank you, colleagues. Any questions or comments for applicants for the applicant or staff? Council member Reese. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I want to thank Danny or excuse me, staff for bringing this forward for us. Mr. Sivers, I have a question. What used to be on this property? I think you mean for Mr. Edens. I'm sorry, Mr. Edens. I'm sorry. Long night. Sorry. It's an improvement over what I normally hear. It's owned by the Sharon families, the Sharon Road, the Sharon family. And there was a home on it that was relocated recently, I think, to a parcel very nearby that they owned. So it was originally just one or two homes with a cleared area prior to this. That's all I wanted to know. It definitely once bore a couple of structures and now it's mostly a dumping ground. So this would definitely be an improvement over that for sure. Thank you, Mr. Reese. All right. Other questions, colleagues? All right. Mr. Edens, thank you very much. Thank you. I'm gonna now declare this public hearing closed matters back before the council. The first motion necessary would be to adopt an ordinance annexing 920, Sharon Road to the city of Durham, effective March 31st, 2021 and to authorize the city manager entered to utility extension being with Edens Land Court. Move is read. Second. Moved by council member Middleton, seconded by council member Reese. Madam Clerk, we'd please call the roll. Mayor Schuhl. Aye. Mayor Pro Tem Johnson. Aye. Mr. Member Caballero. Aye. Council member Freelon. Aye. Council member Freeman. Council member Middleton. Aye. Council member Reese. Aye. I think because we're virtual, that I think that is a vote of six to zero. Thank you. And now we'll move to motion two to adopt an ordinance of many of the United Unified Development Orders by taking property out of the residential rural, residential suburban are 20, Falls Jordan Lake Watershed Protection Overlay District, County jurisdiction establishing the same as planned development residential 7.171, Falls Jordan Lake Watershed Protection Overlay, District B, city jurisdiction. Move is read. Second. Moved by council member Middleton, seconded by council member Reese. Please call the roll Madam Clerk. Mayor Schuhl. Aye. Mayor Pro Tem Johnson. Aye. Council member Caballero. Aye. Council member Freelon. Aye. Council member Freeman. Council member Middleton. Aye. Council member Reese. Aye. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Clerk. The ayes have it, the motion passes six to zero. Motion three to adopt a consistency statement. Move to adopt consistency. Second. Thank you. Moved by council member Middleton, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Johnson. Madam Clerk, will you please call the roll? Mayor Schuhl. Aye. Mayor Pro Tem Johnson. Aye. Council member Caballero. Aye. Council member Freelon. Aye. Council member Freeman. Council member Middleton. Aye. Thank you. Council member Middleton. Aye. Council member Reese. Aye. Thank you. You're muted, Mr. Mayor. Thank you. Madam Clerk, thank you. The motion passes unanimously. Thank you, Mr. Edens, and good luck to you. Thank you, everyone. Well, now moved to zoning map. I'm 25, zoning map change, 4523 Hope Valley Road. And we'll first hear the report from staff. Thank you. Danny Kulture again for the planning department. This is only requests map change been received from Tim Syvers of Horde Bath and Associates for one parcel land totaling 3.44 acres located at 4523 Hope Valley Road. The site is presently zoned residential suburban multi family with a development plan or RSMD and Falls, Jordan Lake Watershed Protection Overlay District B, FJB. It is located within the suburban development here. The site was zoned previously with a development plan P9379 to allow for up to 21,900 square feet of floor area and for a congregate living facility. The applicant is proposing to rezone the property to the same residential suburban multifamily development plan, RSMD zoning designation to allow for up to 32,000 square feet for a congregate living facility. The use table and unified development ordinance, UDO 512 requires congregate living facilities proposed within residential districts to receive a minor special use permit or MSUP in order to allow the use within the district. However, UDO paragraph 3.5.6d10 eliminates the use permit requirement when the zoning is approved with a development plan where the use location, access, building height, and size are defined. The applicant has elected to rezone the property in order to eliminate the required use permit. The property is currently designated medium density residential in the future land use map or FLUM. The proposed RSMD zoning is consistent with the designated future land use at the density proposed on the development plan. The zoning map change request has been reviewed by staff and determined to be consistent with UDO requirements. There are several commitments in excess of UDO requirements which can be found on the development plan and cover sheet in an attachment five. The planning commission by a vote of 12 to zero at the January 12th, 2021 meeting recommended approval of this request. There are two motions required for this application. The first is to adopt an ordinance amending the unified development ordinance by taking the property out of RS, residential suburban multifamily with the development plan RSMD and falls Jordan Lake Watershed Protection Overlay, FJB and establishing the same as residential suburban multifamily with the development plan RSMD and falls Jordan Lake Watershed Protection Overlay District, FJB. And the second is to adopt a consistency statement as required by NCGS 160D-605. Thank you very much. And staff is available for any questions. Thank you very much, Mr. Caltra. Colleagues, you've heard the report from staff. I'm now going to clear this public hearing open. And I want to ask if there are any questions for staff by members of the council. All right, seeing none, I'll ask now if there are anyone here to speak on this item. We actually have four people signed up. Tim Cybers, Elisa Peterson, Rick Paquette and Kelly Agee. Elisa Pat Peterson, I'm sorry, is signed up as an oponent and the others are signed up as proponents. So let me first ask Mr. Cybers. Mr. Cybers, are you speaking for the developer? Yes, sir. Are the other two people that I read out, members of your team? Yes, as well as Eric Morton, he's signed up and ready to speak as well. Are you all planning all to speak or are they there to answer questions? I will have about four minutes presentation and Mr. Morton will have about two minutes. Okay, that's great. And then Ms. Peterson is here in opposition. Madam Clark, could you make Ms. Peterson available to be heard? Ms. Peterson, are you with us? Yes, I am. All right, good. Ms. Peterson, we're gonna hear first from the proponents and then we'll give you an opportunity, okay? Certainly. All right, thank you very much. Okay, first of all, Mr. Cybers, go ahead with your presentation for yourself and Mr. Morton. Thank you, there was a PowerPoint presentation that was provided if that can be brought up, please. Good evening, Mayor Schull, Mayor Pro Tem Johnson, members of the city council. My name is Tim Cybers with Horavath Associates, located here in Durham at 16 Consulted Place. We do have multiple members of our team connected virtually this evening and will be available for any questions you may have. Next slide, please. The primary intent of this rezoning is to allow additional building square footage from the current development plan allowances. With that in mind, I do wanna clarify a few items. Yes, the current zone is RSMD and our proposed zone is RSMD. There's no proposed change to the future land use map. The current building shown on your screen has 32 units containing 52 of the 60 beds that are permitted. The development plan allows a maximum of 48 units to allow all 60 beds to be used. The difference and reason for this rezoning is to allow an increase in the building square footage of a maximum of 32,000 square feet. Currently, a site plan is under review for the building expansion located at that northeast corner of the existing building. This expansion is not visible from NC 751 but will architecturally coordinate with the existing building. Next slide, please. A summary of our key text commitment and design commitments include maximum of 48 units, 32,000 square foot building area maximum, tree coverage area representing 20% in three different locations surrounding the existing building, project boundary buffers, right away dedication. We are doing a construction of an exclusive southbound left turn lane on 751 which will also include the widening for a five foot bike lane along the site frontage. Next slide, please. Prior to and during the planning commission hearing, additional design and landscape buffer requests were made from the planning commission members as well as the neighbors. This list in front of you contains the updates that were made prior to the planning commission vote for approval. The maximum building height of 40 foot in one story, landscape buffer opacity was increased and the material be installed prior to the first building permit inspection approval to help minimize construction visibility and noise to the adjacent landowners that are. The also, we also removed vinyl siding as an optional building material and added five or cement siding to match the existing facility. The commitment was added to confirm the building expansion will contain similar architectural materials as the existing building. And during our site plan review, city stormwater required an analysis to demonstrate that we will not increase the outflow from the existing stormwater pond. They also required an analysis that during the 100 year storm event, we will not increase the water surface elevation of any downstream properties. Those reports have been provided to and approved by the city stormwater department through the site plan. I do request that you follow the recommendation of the planning commission and vote in favor of this development to allow the existing congregate facility to expand and increase their level of service to their residents. Thank you for your time. I'd like to hand the presentation off to Mr. Eric Morton, the co-founder of Navion Senior Living for a few words. Yes, thank you very much, Tim. We're, thank you so much to the Durham city council for the opportunity to be heard here tonight. We're really excited about this project and the opportunity that it creates to expand our ability to offer badly needed senior living options in Durham. As many of you may or may not know, there has been a shortage of housing for senior, seniors with dementia and Alzheimer's in Durham and the broader triangle. This building was constructed nearly 25 years ago by a different company. It has a 60 license beds and only 32 rooms. So many of our residents are in double occupancy. This project is an opportunity to add additional single rooms that our residents strongly desire. And we're excited about the opportunity to deliver the living options that our residents will want. In addition, we're adding a great deal of common space to the community and upgrading what is existing, making more wonderful spaces for our residents. So, you know, overall we think this project is going to have an incredible impact on the quality of life of our residents and the availability of high quality senior care options that we need in our community. Thank you very much for your time. Thank you, Mr. Morton. Alrighty, we'll now hear from Ms. Elisa Peterson. Ms. Peterson, are you available to be heard? Yes, I am, sir. Great, thank you. How long will you need for your presentation? Just a few minutes. All right, thank you. We're glad to have you here. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The, I am for the project. I think it's a great idea to help the elderly. I am approaching that age as well. So I may one day need to use the facility, but my two concerns, fortunately, Mr. Severs did connect on the opacity that they did increase that. And so he has addressed my concern about that. The other one is the stormwater. I disagree on the stormwater situation simply because right now we still deal with their stormwater issues, which has eroded areas of our community at the back of the property line. And I have sent pictures to Mr. Severs and to also Commissioner Tom Miller at one point. I also forwarded them to whoever sent me this link to attend the meeting. So now we're going to be adding, we're taking away trees and we're adding more building, which is going to cause more stormwater or rain issues. So I just see this as a concern. And I think the direction of how this water is let off of the storm pond goes directly into our building. If you walk behind their building, which Commissioner Miller did and I have done, it shows it leads right into our property. And I think this needs to be rectified. That's my only comments. Thank you. Thank you very much for being with us, Ms. Peterson. Is there anyone else that was like to speak on this item tonight? I believe that there's no one else actually attending. So I think that would be it. Okay. And now I'll ask colleagues, are there any comments or questions for the applicant, staff from Ms. Peterson, council member Freeman? I just wanted to just get some feedback from the applicant on Ms. Peterson's questions about how would it be addressed if there's already a current stormwater concern. Thank you. Cybert, could you comment on that please? Yes, sure. Thank you. Again, we did review the pictures that Ms. Peterson sent. We appreciate those during a specific rainstorm. We don't know what rainstorm that was or the date of that time. So that could have been a slow storm. It could have been a very fast storm in the amount of water that was provided. We do, we did meet and discuss this concern with the city stormwater during their reviews, which is what during the site plan review, which is why we provided those extra reports to them and they have subsequently reviewed and approved those reports and analysis to not increase that the issues that are downstream. And in addition, as the council is likely aware that the city and county do require annual inspections of these to make sure they are operating correctly to make sure that there is no increased impact downstream. Thank you. If I could just get a response from staff on the last time an inspection was done, because if Commissioner Miller and Ms. Peterson, I can say I have not walked behind the building, passed by and checked out the frontage and around, but not behind the building. I just wanted to know if the last inspection did show whether or not there was some water running towards their property, towards Ms. Peterson's property. Council member Freeman, that's information that I, as planning staff, we do not have, but we can follow up with stormwater services and get that information to you all, since they would be the ones that conduct those inspections. And just in light of that, I would just ask my colleagues if it might be possible to hold off on moving forward with this item, acknowledging that if the developers opportunity to present a solution to Ms. Peterson's question is now and if we move forward, that kind of dissipates. Council member Freeman, this is Tim Syvers. I can answer that question, actually last fall, there was an inspection that was completed. It was done in November. And at that time, the city asked the property owner, Naviance to just simply clean out. There were some leaves and a little bit of debris that were in it in the facility. So they did a little bit of cleaning. And that was the extent of the inspection and the items that were requested at the time. But it was in November of last year. So simply just four or five months ago. Thank you. I would just ask Ms. Peterson, if you noticed the difference after they did clear it out, I just wanna make sure I do pause and nuke that with climate change and the rapid shift of how our weather has been changing, it's likely to have more fast and slow occurrences of rain that could create more problems. And issues like this are going to become more pronounced. And if there's a way to kind of rectify it beforehand, I definitely wanna do that. But Ms. Peterson, if you could just share whether or not that helped in November, I guess they're saying that there was a clean out of leaves and debris. It's the position of the pipe that's coming right towards our fence line. So it's the positioning of the last pipe where the water comes out of. So it was, I don't know if there needs to be a curve put in the pipe to push the water more another way. We ended up having to put in rock and a drain in order to release the water and bring it out to our storm pond in order to alleviate that water coming in to our area. So I have not, it does not affect me directly, but I'm the HOA president. So I don't see when a rainstorm is happening, like the rain that we've had lately. I guess I would, I don't know if it's gotten better. I mean, I know when we get downfalls, everything floods anyway. So I don't know what else to say. I'm just trying to watch out for our community. I appreciate that. Thank you. I think you're, you made the point that it's definitely not just the debris and the leaves. So thank you. Thank you, council member. So the, I might understand that the site plan, what's the state of the site plan review at this point, Mr. Kultrup? Mayor Schuyl, the site plan is actually in mid review. It cannot be approved until of course the development plan is approved. Sure. But I guess I'm trying to refer to something specific, which is what Mr. Savers said about the stormwater approvals. Can you speak to that at all? I can't actually, that site plan was under my purview and since I moved to the land use group, it's no longer under my purview. So I don't know everything going on with that site plan anymore. Okay. All right. Thank you. Mayor, would you like me to clarify that? Yeah, I would, Mr. Savers. Thanks. Sure. So Mr. Kultrup is actually 100% correct. The site plan's current status is that it is ready to be stamped and signed off as soon as the rezoning is approved, if that's the view of the council tonight. So all comments have been addressed and all departments have been approved it. It's just simply waiting for the approval of this development plan, if so approved, that the site plan can then be stamped off potentially tomorrow, if that answers your question. Thank you. And can you describe again the stormwater, one of the stormwater standards that you've got in the site plan? Sure. They required the stormwater department required the analysis to demonstrate that will not increase the outflow from the existing pond. And they also required an analysis to showing that during the 100 year storm event, we will not increase the water surface elevation of any downstream properties. They've reviewed that and accepted that as existing and approved it based on the site plan. All right. Thank you, Mr. Savers. You're welcome, sir. Thank you. Any other questions or comments, colleagues? Council member Freeman. Just a note that I just want to be clear that in the previous work session, we had a similar situation where we had to come back and spend money to buy a property where there was a mist. I want to be clear, like this should probably go to our stormwater staff for review so that they can make sure and certified because I don't feel comfortable. I love the project. I think it'd be a great to have the additional single rooms for a senior living facility, but I don't want to negatively impact a residential neighborhood with this development plan, acknowledging that it's been brought to our attention here in this meeting, that it's already creating downward flow, like downflow. Council member Reese. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I want to thank council member Freeman for raising the important issue of stormwater. Also want to thank the president of the HOA for being present to make sure that this development doesn't negatively impact the folks that she represents the homeowners and property owners there. I think it's important to remember that the issue with stormwater is not, does water flow from one property to another? Because that happens. The question before us today is, will this development increase the flow of stormwater onto these people's property? And according to what's been represented to us, it can't or the site plan won't be approved. Council member Freeman wants a review from our stormwater staff. Could be wrong, but it sounds like they've already approved that. That's why the site plan is in the situation that it's in. And I see our cleaning director nodding her head vigorously because it wouldn't get up to that point without that. So I'm not sure what an additional review would accomplish except to say that I totally get the concern. It makes a lot of sense. I have been behind the building of this property. Took my 12 year old there a couple of weekends ago because it's never too early to learn about stormwater retention. And there is an existing facility back there. It actually looked really good to me. It's not like the one down by, anyway, I'm not gonna slander another stormwater pond. That's wrong, that's wrong. But it was one that Mayor Bell used to complain about all the time in Southern Durham at any event. This was not that, but it's smaller because that's a smaller building and footprint. But I'll just say that if the site plan is up to that point, and the obligation of the developer is to make sure that the stormwater protections are even greater than they are now and that's what the commitment in the development plan is. I'm comfortable at this point moving forward because that all makes some kind of sense to me. So that's all I had to say about that. Thank you, Council Member. Any Council Member Freeman and I'm hoping this will be our last comment. Thank you. I appreciate your comments, Council Member Maurice. I think specifically what I'm raising the question on is whether they reviewed it based on the information that Ms. Peterson shared this evening, acknowledging that it's not just the increase but also where this already the water's running off. And so I hear you in saying that we're not responsible for addressing that, but I'd like to think that we could take the time to at least try and see if maybe a curve and a pipe versus nothing would be helpful. That's all. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member. All right, anybody else? Okay, I'm gonna now declare this public hearing closed and the matter is now before the Council. The first motion we would need would be to adopt an ordinance admitting the unified development ordinance by taking property out of the residential, suburban multi-family with development plan and falls Jordan Lake Watershed Protection Overlay District B and establish the same as residential suburban multi-family with development plan and falls Jordan Lake Watershed Protection Overlay District B. So moved. Second. Moved by Council Member Reese, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Johnson. Madam Clerk, please call the roll. Mayor Schuhl. Aye. Mayor Pro Tem Johnson. Aye. Member Caballero. Aye. Council Member Freelon. Aye. Council Member Freeman. Aye. Council Member Middleton. Aye. Council Member Reese. Aye. Thank you. Thank you very much, Madam Clerk. The motion passes six to one and now we'll move to motion two to adopt a consistency statement. So moved. Second. Moved by Council Member Pro Tem Johnson, seconded by Council Member Freelon. Madam Clerk, please call the roll. Mayor Schuhl. Aye. Mayor Pro Tem Johnson. Aye. Council Member Caballero. Aye. Council Member Freelon. Aye. Council Member Freeman. Aye. Council Member Middleton. Aye. Council Member Reese. Aye. Thank you, Madam Clerk. The motion passes six to one. Mr. Severs and Mr. Morton, good luck to you all. And Ms. Peterson, thank you very much for being here with us. I appreciate and we all appreciate your advocacy for your neighborhood. And Mr. Severs, I hope you will, I know you will take the stormwater considerations seriously. Thank you. All right. We're now going to, before we adjourn, Council Member Middleton. Mr. Mayor, thank you. I just wanted to take a quick point of privilege. I just want to give a word of commendation and thanks to our incredible city attorney, Kim Rayberg. Very often I'll raise points of parliamentary inquiry. And I just want to state for the record that a question of parliamentary inquiry is not necessarily a question of jurisprudence. And having a JD does not necessarily translate to acumen or expertise on parliamentary procedure. So she's actually mastering, we've got a whole, another set of books and she does it wonderfully. So I want to thank her for not only what she does for questions of jurisprudence, but how we've kind of, maybe I've kind of made her our parliamentarian as well, which is a beast unto itself and a separate skill set unto itself apart from her incredible demonstrated acumen and jurisprudence. So I just want to thank her for abiding us and for being the great city attorney that everybody in the state knows that she is, but we got her. Hear that, Charlotte, we got her. So thank you very much, Councilor. And I just wanted to put that in the record. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you, Council Member. Colleagues, I have one more Madam Attorney. I just wanted to say thank you to Council Member Middleson. I appreciate that. I learned so much from you all the time. It's the constant process of learning. And I also want to give a shout out to other department directors, particularly Ms. Young who helped me along the way because they've been through so many hearings and they know how processes unfold and they're just really wonderful and gracious at pointing things out to me. So thank you to all of you for all of your support. Thank you, Madam Attorney. Colleagues, I just want to raise one other issue. And I'm sorry that I haven't gotten around to individually call each of you yet. I'm in the process. And this is that you all charged me with polling the Council on when we thought we would like to come back in person. And for the folks that I have talked to, which is a bare majority of the Council at this point, most folks are saying they would like to come back after our summer break. My thought is to, and the manager page has asked me about this as well. And they would feel comfortable with that timeline. My thought then, and we can have thumbs on this in a minute, is to ask our staff to prepare the protocols for us to come back after our summer break. Yeah, if things really improve, if everyone gets vaccinations, if we're all feeling good, of course we could change that and move it up some. But that that be our target. And so, as I say, I'm sorry I haven't been able to reach all of you yet. Not that I haven't been able to reach you yet. I haven't tried to reach all of you yet. I was going to plan to do it, but then I realized I thought it would be just, let's go ahead and talk about it for a minute. And I wonder, is everyone have a pretty high comfort level? Yeah, and Council Member Caballero says that's just for council, not boards of commissions, right? Yeah, we're just talking about council right now. So can I just hear if folks have a high comfort level with that schedule? Okay. Council Member Freeman, are you good with it? Okay. And Council Member Ruiz, I don't know if I saw your thumb, but I think you are good. Okay. So we're going to ask our staff then to be thinking about that timeline. As I say, we don't have to, that doesn't have to be written in stone, but let's, we'll know that that's what we're aiming for. Okay, thank you. So if I haven't called you yet, please don't expect a call. This was your call. Okay. Thank you all so much, colleagues. I think we've done it. And I'm going to now adjourn this meeting at 10.50 p.m. with another congratulations to our fabulous new city manager, what I'm talking about. Awesome. And we're all very excited. And we'll see everybody, we'll see everybody on Thursday. Thursday. Congratulations. Good night, y'all. Good night. Bye.