 I was on a senior high, you know? The Vice President is not wearing a T-shirt. Hey, you're on a senior high. Do we have you? Yeah. You can get in the booth. You can get in the booth. You get in the booth. You're a senior high. You go around all day. So I could just... I don't think I have this for you. Do you call me, what else, on Friday? No, you're probably the person I call you. No, you're the only person I call. You didn't say anything to anybody? I didn't say anything to anybody. It's like, it's filled out in the mailroom, and someone found it. Anyway, I guess it's better than never. It is online. Yeah, so from our website, there's kind of a searchable version. There's a PDF version right now. I think I'm building up. Yes, I am. Well, I thought I'd look into it. Well, then she said one day she was like, oh, I'll share it up. What's working yesterday? Oh, man. What are we doing wrong? Good afternoon. Welcome to the Durham Planning Commission. The members of the Durham Planning Commission have been appointed by the City Council and the County Board of Commissioners as an advisory board to the elected officials. You should know that the elected officials have the final say on any issues before us tonight. If you wish to speak on an agenda item, please go to the table to my left and sign up to speak. For those wishing to speak, please state your name and your address clearly when you come to the podium. Please speak clearly into the microphone. Each side, those wishing to speak in favor of an item and those wishing to speak in opposition to an item, have 10 minutes to present each side. The time will be divided among all persons wishing to speak. If you are here opposing the rezoning tonight, you should be aware of what's called a protest petition. A protest petition can be very helpful to those residents who live in the rezoning area. Please consult the planning department staff for any details on the protest petition and they will be happy to help you. You should also keep in constant touch with the planning department as to when your case will go before the elected officials for a final vote. Finally, all motions are stated in the affirmative, so if a motion fails or ties, the recommendation is for denial. Thank you. Can we have a roll call? Commissioner Bealon. Commissioner Boyd. Commissioner Davis. Commissioner Gibbs. Vice Chair Harris. Chair Jones. Commissioner Huff. Commissioner Lamb. Commissioner Padgett. Commissioner Smusky. Commissioner Walters. Commissioner Whitley. We have excused absences from Commissioner Beachwood and Commissioner Wonders. Commissioner Huff emailed me today. Also, we can add that to the minutes. Do we have any adjustments to the agenda? Good evening, commissioners. Pat Young with the planning department. We do have one adjustment to the agenda, item 7A, which was a resolution in honor of former commissioner Teji Kimball. We'd ask that that be referred back to staff and we will reschedule it for November. A former commissioner called us today and indicated that he had a conflict with this evening's meeting. Thank you. Also, if I might quickly certify for the record that all public hearing items before you tonight have been advertised in accordance with the provisions of law and we have affidavits to that effect on violence department. Thank you, sir. Can we get approval of the minutes? It's been moved in property second. All those in favor of the approval of minutes, let it be known by raising your right hand. Minutes has been passed 11 to 0. We'll move down to item 5, public hearing for plan amendment, Murray Field Commercial case A120015 and zoning case Z120026. Good evening. I'm Laura Woods with the Durham City County Planning Department. I'll be presenting the plan amendment, Murray Field Commercial plan amendment case A120015. This proposal by four of its associates would change the future land use on 1.85 acres in North Durham from low density residential to commercial. This is within the suburban tier. The site is located east of Guess Road, north of Horton Road and south of Victory Boulevard. To the north, it's a place of worship and low density residential. To the east, low medium density residential. To the west, vacant. And to the southwest, medium density residential. To the south is commercial. According to the applicant, and this is the most crucial point of the applicant's justification, the proposed flume change is consistent with the existing zoning on the property. It would remain so should you approve the rezoning request that is associated with this plan amendment. There are four criteria that staff use to evaluate these reports. Is the proposed land use consistent with adopted plans and policies? Is the proposed land use compatible with land use patterns existing in future? Does the proposed land use create substantial adverse impacts? And is the site of adequate size and shape to accommodate the proposed land use? Staff has reviewed the proposal and concluded it is consistent. It is compatible. It does not create substantial adverse impact and it is an adequate shape and size. Therefore, staff recommends approval. That concludes my report. Good evening. Amy Wolfe with the Planning Department presenting the zoning map change report for Z1200026. Merefield commercial. The applicant is Horvath Associates. It is within the city's jurisdiction and the request is to change the existing zoning from commercial neighborhood with the development plan to the same district. Although modifying the development plan and removing it from its current development plan which includes a larger area. The area is 2.95 acres and the proposal is for 8000 square feet of non residential development. The site again is at 1439 Victory Boulevard with frontage on Gas Road, south of prison camp road and north of Horton. It is in the suburbant here. It is in Eno Bee Watershed Protection Overlay District. And just as a note, this site is larger than the plan amendment site because the plan amendment just proposes to change the northern portion of the site. The recreation and open space designation will remain the same. The request does satisfy the minimum standards of the commercial neighborhood district as shown here. The existing site is part of a larger development plan PO327. You'll see here that it's proposed for, well the pattern shows residential development. It is proposed for residential use. And on this particular map north is towards the top of the screen. And so the site here is just a portion of that existing zoning district. Removing this parcel does not change impact any of the commitments of the existing plan. And the proposal shown here with north to the left of the screen is the site. There's a number of commitments on this site. It does show a building area here, which is a little bit more specific than we typically would see with parking along the frontage of Gas Road and Victory Boulevard. What this request proposes to do, the existing plan had two access points that would cross this stream. This plan shows one access point here. There are a number of things that have changed as well. The proposal is also increasing the intensity of the site by 3,000 square feet. And there's some modifications of the use outlined in your staff report. But essentially it will be commercial and or office with some limitations to that. The, again, 8,000 square feet of commercial building area, one site access. The impervious surface maximum is less than 20%. This is in a watershed protection overlay, which would allow 70% for reference. Tree preservation is 13.07%. The graphic commitments or access points, the tree preservation areas. There's a trail easement, which is off site, which is on the existing development plan for the parcel. And there's a committed uses for office and or retail and or restaurant without a drive up window. And the Eastern Project Boundary, which is where the existing access points would be, they're proposing to do an on and off site project boundary buffer there. There's a number of text commitments. Again, location of the building with specification of parking areas, intensity of the site and the prohibited uses are daycare bars, night clubs, gas. Gasoline pumps or restaurants with drive through windows and the stream buffers are committed to be undisturbed. Dumpsters facing commitment, loading docks. Not permitted air ventilation restrictions and a finished floor elevation restriction. There's design commitments associated with this request. I won't read it all, but they do address the architectural style roof lines, building materials and any architectural features of any proposed building. The request again is not consistent with the future land use map. You heard that report. It is requested to match the present and proposed zoning designation of the site of commercial. And it does satisfy the policies or meet the policies of the comprehensive plan that apply to the site. And staff determines that should the plan amendment be approved, this request would be consistent with the comprehensive plan and applicable policies and ordinances. And that concludes my report. All right, thank you. We have two people signed up to speak. Ron Horvath and Janice Mitchell. Each one of you will have five minutes each. Chairman Jones, members of commission, Ron Horvath Horvath Associates, and I'll stand back from this a little bit. Sorry. I'll be very brief tonight. The request is really the main focus is the deletion of two driveways across the stream and enter the residential street to the east. That was the original concept the developer had at the time. Unfortunately, during the 2005, 6, 7 and later recession, the developer lost the property. Lenard Holmes took over the town home proportion from the bank. And another developer picked up the commercial portion. And it was pretty much agreed upon that running commercial traffic through the residential development was not highly desirable. So we he opted to allow me to bring the rezoning forward to have a single driveway access on the victory and leave the complete 100 foot buffer behind the stream to buffer the neighborhood from the uses. That is the main reason tonight. We did add daycare to a list of exclusions over the other exclusions that we had in 2003. One of the reasons where the land use amendment is before you is in 2003 with a zoning change, we didn't require or the city didn't require land use plan amendments to be upgraded. So the zoning was changed the neighborhood commercial. And now when I come back again, we had to now go through the land amendment change just to keep everything concurrent. That occurred, I believe 2005, 4 or 5 when that policy changed. Be glad to answer any questions you might have and I appreciate your endorsement in this project. Thank you. Hello. My name is Janice Mitchell and I am a resident at Murphill Village. My home is directly next to where this property, commercial property is. When our former developer foreclosed on the property, all of the homeowners we met and we learned that this property was going to come out onto Nicholas Drive. Nicholas Drive is a part of our community and we really didn't want that. So we were actually pleased with Mr. Horvath also did not want it coming into the residence because we have so many houses now. It's going to be 96 houses. That's a main street. So in order for all that traffic to come down that street and a commercial property to come out onto that street, it would be too much congestion right there near the corner. So I'm in favor of this zoning proposal. And also Mr. Horvath has told me that nothing has changed in the plan since he proposed this plan. So we met with him on several occasions to make sure that the plan fit with what our residents wanted to be like. Also, I was happy to learn that the stream there's a stream that comes through that property. And I just heard a young lady said that that stream is not going to be disturbed because my house is in the flood plain. And so if that stream is disturbed, it's going to it could possibly impact all the houses on that side. So I'm in favor of it. As long as like I said that stream, she said it wasn't going to be the street. Hopefully you can make that zoning decision to make that come out onto Victory Boulevard. And then our community was really pleased with the plan. Thank you. We don't have anyone signed up to speak in opposition of it. So I'll close the public hearing and bring it back before the commissioners. This question is for planning. In other cases we've had locations that have had two points of ingress and egress. What's the decision with this one having only a single? Bill Judge with transportation. I believe that goes back to the original development plan that just had the single point of access for the public street. So far as overall to guest road. Their ordinance allows up to a maximum of 90 units of residential development on a single point of access to guest road. So so they would the townhome portions limited to that. But so far as the retail portion changing the two access points across the creek to a single. It's been reviewed by NCDOT and the city and determined to be adequate for that size retail. OK. The reason I ask is that in the original plan it did have other access that would that would have come off Nicholas Drive. So I would have had the two points. The retail component would have had two access points across the creek to Nicholas Drive under the proposed plan. It'll be a single to draw a blank on the name of that road that connects to gas but victory. Yeah. OK. Mr. Horvath you want to David I might be able to help a little bit. The reason there are two points of access. It was going to be a circular drive that served the community as well. One of the intense intended development possibilities back there was a retirement community and they wanted to be able to have golf carts and stuff come through and travel and ease of access for the residents. With the collapse or of that developer and this turning into a full town home project with a separate commercial that was no longer needed. But that's why we had two points of access. I'd love to have a second point on guest road but neither NCDOT or the city will allow that to happen. So one is adequate for this development. OK. I'll just express the general concern about safety on the single point. If no one else signed up wants to speak we can have a motion. Mr. Chair. I move approval of plan amendment a 1 2 0 0 0 1 5. Second. It's been moved and probably second all those in favor. Let it be known by raising your right hand. Motion has passed 11 to 0. And Mr. Chair. I move approval of zoning map change a 1 3 0 0 0 6. Okay. Okay. It's been moved and probably second all those in favor. Let it be known by raising your right hand. The motion is carried 11 to 0. All right. Thank you. All right. We'll move down to item 5 B. Page Park to plan amendment case a 1 3 0 0 0 6 and zoning case Z 1 3 0 0 0 1 7. Good evening again. Laura Woods with the Durham City County Planning Department case a 13 0 0 0 0 6. Page Park 2. This is an East Durham. This is a suburban tier. It's approximately 10 acres and the applicant Lenard Carolinas proposes to change the future land use from office to medium density residential. The property to the north is low medium density residential and vacant to the west vacant to the south and east also vacant. According to the applicant, the proposed designation would address an increasing demand for medium and high density residential land in Durham County. The applicant also states that medium density residential would represent a reasonable transition between the low medium density residential to the north of the site and office uses further south from the site. Again, here are the four criteria criteria that plan planning staff use to evaluate the proposal is the proposed unit is the proposed proposal consistent with adopted plans and policies is the proposed land use compatible with land use patterns existing in future. Does the proposed land use create substantial adverse impact and is the side of adequate shape and size in each case staff has answered that the proposed land use is consistent. The land use is compatible. The proposed land use does not create substantial adverse impact and the site is of adequate shape and size to accommodate the proposed land use. Therefore, staff's proposal staff's recommendation is approval. That completes my staff report. Good evening. Amy Wolf again with the planning department and the companion zoning map change request Z1300017 is for page park two. The request is steward engineering. It's in the city's jurisdiction and the request is larger than the plan amendment area. It includes property to the west of the plan amendment area of residential suburban multifamily with a development plan and office institutional with a development plan to have an entirely zone residential suburban multifamily with a development plan. The site area is 16.875 acres and it's for 124 residential units. It's located at 5310 and 5330 Jessup Street and with frontage also on Crown Parkway which is just north and west of Page Road. There's nine acres in the office institutional and about 7.7 in the residential suburban multifamily currently. The existing zoning of the site PO320 is the case number committed a mix of uses with a general location and this OI portion was shown as office development which is one of the reasons you're seeing this request for residential. The request does meet the minimum criteria for the residential suburban multifamily district. Here's the existing conditions on the site. It's been previously graded. You should see that in the aerial that's in your staff report. It does have a natural heritage inventory on the western portion of the site. Stirrup Iron Creek Marsh and Slows. However, the site has already been graded. I just want to point that out and no further disturbances proposed. There's also a power line through the site. The proposal is shown here. It has a required building envelope and parking envelope. You'll see the access points on the Crown Parkway and a cul-de-sac and access at the end of Jessup Street. There's an undetermined number of site access through driveways along Jessup Street. The tree preservation area. And this committed natural buffer along the western portion, western boundary of the site, which is currently, there's currently trees existing there. Commitments include the number of residential units, 124. The site access points I pointed out as well as the driveways along Jessup Street. Maximum impervious surface of 70%. Tree coverage at 23%, which also includes preservation and replacement areas. And there's a number of graphic commitments, access trees. The internal vehicular private access will connect the access from Crown Parkway and the cul-de-sac on Jessup Street, including the construction of that cul-de-sac and then the buffer along the western portion of the site. There's a number of traffic improvements that may be required of this development. I won't read through them. They are in the staff report and this will be determined at site plan. There are design commitments associated with the site, therefore allowing the site to be developed as a multifamily, not committing to multifamily, but the design commitments are required should that option be utilized, address architectural styles, roofline materials and architectural features. Again, the request is not consistent with the future land use map, therefore consideration of the plan amendment before you. Prior to action on the zoning map change, the remainder of the request is consistent with the comprehensive plan. And staff determines should the plan amendment be approved, this request is consistent with the comprehensive plan and applicable policies and ordinances. And that is the end of this report. All right. Thank you. We have one person signed up to speak. And it's Mr. Robert. Was it Shonk? Yep, Shonk, yes. Yeah, 10 minutes. Thank you. Good evening Chairman Jones and fellow commissioners. My name is Robert Shonk. I am with Stewart. I live at 2627 University Drive here in Durham. I appreciate the staff's staff report and I agree with their comprehensive staff report completely. I would just like to highlight a couple of points and then make myself available for questions. As Amy indicated, the previous zoning for Page Park included 58 townhomes, apartments, office and retail. What we're proposing to do is again just rezone a portion of the existing townhomes and on the office area to all townhomes. Due to market demands, additional townhomes in this area are necessary and when our homes would like to expand the smaller townhome section to provide a little bit larger of a community, the result of this change is equivalent to providing 828 less trips per day. And I'm available for any questions. Thank you. All right. We don't have anyone else signed up to speak and I'll close the public hearing and bring it back before the commissioners. Anyone up here that wants to comment? Commissioner Smoky. Mr. Shonk, do any of these new townhomes and the increased density they lend themselves to affordable housing? No, sir. A little bit of market rate. And the question for Ms. Wolf. Ms. Wolf, can you remind me why this segment was left office institutional? Was there a transition area? We've reviewed this whole section before. Why was that left office? The 2003 plan, the existing zoning. There was on that existing zoning, this particular, the office institutional is part of the larger site to the west and the south and this particular portion was designated for office building and a commitment listed on that plan is for the general location of mix of uses and the location of those uses. Okay. All right. Thanks. And on the diagram, there's an entrance on Crown Parkway. Is that a road? Crown Parkway? Yes. Crown Parkway is currently developed. It is a road. There are two arrows. And then there's a line. Does that indicate a proposed road through the development? It's a, it is not a public right away. It is an access easement for the terminology of the city of Durham. So it's not a private street, not a public road, but it'll act, I mean, to you and me and everybody else, it's going to act like a street. And it'll be privately maintained. And they're going to be townhomes on either side of it? Yes, sir. And it's going to connect up with Jessup? That's correct. Essentially, Jessup goes down. Jessup is currently a public right away. And for reference, God, for development from public works, a public street has to end in a cul-de-sac. So we're simply, you know, extending what to the late person will be a street and looping back around the Crown Parkway. But you get prior and emergency vehicles in on that right? That is correct. Okay. Thank you. That's all. Thank you. Any other comments? If not, we'll have a motion. Chairman Jones, I'll move approval of zoning A1300006. It's been moved and probably second all those in favor. Let me know by saying, oh, we're raising it right here. We're on meeting. Sorry. The motion has passed 11 to 0. Mr. Chair, I move zoning case 130017. All right. Thank you. Some moved and probably second all those in favor. Let me know by raising your right hand. Motion has passed 11 to 0. All right. Thank you. All right. We'll move down to item 6A, which is a public hearing zoning map change request for Hope Valley Farms Pod, BB revision case Z130012. Good evening. Amy Wolf with the planning department for our final zoning map change case. This case again is a change in the existing development plan that is attached to the site. Case Z130012 for Hope Valley Farms Pod, BB revisions. The applicant is Greenberg Farrow. It's in the city's jurisdiction. Request is from commercial general with a development plan to commercial general with a development plan for 6.77 acres of non residential development. The site is located in the suburban tier. It's not in a watershed protection overlay. It's at 1051 Martin Luther King Jr. Parkway between South Roxborough Street and Archdale Drive. The present designation was zoned by case 0900007. And there's a proposed change in that development plan by removing a commitment. I will go over those in more detail, but essentially to remove a commitment to prohibit fuel sales. The request does meet the minimum standards of the commercial general district. The existing conditions on the site you'll see here, it is already zoned commercial general with a development plan. There's floodway, floodway fringe, stream wetlands and a power line easement running through the site. And they are all demonstrated here. The proposed conditions of the site show protection of those areas. You'll see the building and parking envelope in the dark dashed line. And I'll go over the change in commitments of the existing designation. This request is for between 1,000 and 20,000 square feet of building footprint. Has the two site access points onto Martin Luther King Jr. Parkway. Pervious surface maximum of 70% with tree coverage at 10%. These are all on the existing plan. Commitments are access point location, true preservation areas. The opacity, there's a committed for a more dense buffer than would otherwise be required. Typically it would be a .6 opacity buffer required. 24-inch hedge along Martin Luther King Jr. Parkway and some grading to accommodate street lights. Also there's some graphic commitments with details at Site Drive 1 and Site Drive 2. These are on the existing plan. And there's a number of text commitments. And these also do are pulled from the existing plan about the opacity. A transit facility along Martin Luther King Jr. Parkway. There's some stormwater mitigation. Specifics about restaurant would drive through and screening with a masonry wall and location of speaker boxes if there's a drive through. There's also a number of improvements at the following locations at Martin Luther King Jr. Parkway and both Site Driveways. Commitments that were removed from the existing plan are conditions that have already been satisfied by recent development in the area. There are design commitments that address roof lines and building materials for any buildings. And the request is consistent with the future land use map and the applicable policies of the comprehensive plan. And staff determines that this request is consistent with the comprehensive plan and applicable policies and ordinances. Thank you. All right. Thank you. We have two people sign up to speak. Louis Cheek and Patrick Biker. We have five minutes each. Mr. Chairman and members of the Planning Commission, my name is Louis Cheek. I along with Patrick Biker represent Murphy Oil Corporation. We seek a rezoning of the 6.77 acres essentially across from the new Walmart on Martin Luther King Jr. Parkway. While the property is already zoned commercial, we seek a change in the development plan. We wish to remove the committed element that there will be no fuel sales or convenience stores on the site. Murphy Oil proposes to put a convenience store in four islands with eight product dispensers on the property. Murphy Oil is an international company based in El Dorado, Arkansas. It is fully integrated, engaging in fuel exploration and drilling. It's on the New York Stock Exchange. It has 1174 convenience store sites across the United States. 73 sites with over 500 employees are in North Carolina. This would be the first site in Durham. There would be seven to eight employees at the site. We estimate that the site would create $2 million in tax base. And of course, there would be associated sales tax generation. There will be a number of enhancements and improvements to make this development neighborhood friendly, which Mr. Biker will speak to you about. Traffic improvements will be constructed to mitigate the effects of a modest increase in traffic. There will be no further median cuts in Martin Luther King Jr. Parkway as a result of the project. Staff has studied the project and have you already heard, has determined that the request is consistent with a comprehensive plan and applicable policies and ordinances, and we ask that you recommend approval of this zoning map change to the city council. Thank you. Good evening, Chairman Jones, members of the Planning Commission. My name is Patrick Biker. I live at 2614 Stewart Drive. I'm an attorney with Morningstar Law Group here in Durham. I'm here tonight representing Murphy USA for this zoning map change for 6.77 acres along the south side of Martin Luther King Jr. Parkway, directly across from an existing Walmart. I'd like to briefly introduce the rest of our team that's here tonight in the front row. We have Mr. Wayne Gibson with Murphy USA. And then we have our project engineers, Hamilton Williams and Greg Cistronk with Greenberg Farrow. And then last but not least is our traffic engineer, Earl Llewellyn with Kim Lee Horne. In addition to the reasons given by my friend and co-counsel Louis Cheek, I think there are a couple of important points that show we have accounted for potential neighborhood impacts with the development plan that's before you tonight. First, we will construct a .8 opacity buffer entirely within our property. To provide more detail in that committed element, a .8 opacity buffer means that for every 100 feet, along our side and rear property lines, we will install about 8 to 10 canopy or evergreen trees, 11 to 17 understory trees and about 75 shrubs. To me, that's a lot of planting along 100 feet. We're talking on average about one shrub every 16 inches. As a result, there will be plenty of screening along the property line back towards Hope Valley Farms. Second, based on Durham GIS, it appears that the closest residence to our project is approximately 500 feet away. That's more than one and a half football fields, and that's in addition to the .8 opacity buffer I just described. I happen to look at my personal residence and figure out how far away I live from Nana's Restaurant, and I'm actually closer to Nana's Restaurant than the townhouses in Hope Valley Farms would be to Murphy Oil's proposed convenience store. In addition, we have a committed element to ensure that the drive-through facilities have their speakers oriented away from the residential area that's to the southeast of our development. One last point, the parcel that's before you tonight has been zoned commercial for the past four years. We now have a project that can implement this established zoning designation. We were pleased to host a neighborhood meeting about this project since there was a TIA required with the zoning map change. So we sent out 45 personalized letters to nearby property owners. Only two of those 45 people invited came to the meeting, and we had a thorough discussion with them about the landscape buffer I just described in my comments. We did not perceive either of those two neighbors to be opposed to the convenience store we hoped to build at this location. And so for all those reasons, we respectfully ask for your approval. Be happy to answer any questions. Thank you. I'll close the public hearing and bring it back before the commissioners. We have anyone wishing to speak. Mr. Smushkin. Mr. Biker? Yes, sir. The Topo here and the site has a steep slope that goes down below the grade of the roadway. Is that going to be brought up to the roadway grade? Yes. Okay, so it's all going to be graded. Fair level, correct. Okay, and then it's going to be out of the 100-year flood plan. Absolutely, yes. We will not be requesting a... I've had to request major special use permits for flood plain. We're not going there. Okay, and... Commissioner Whitley knows that very well. A certain McDonald's at Wellins Village was... had to need to have that type of permit. We're not pursuing that, sir. Okay, and then there's going to be protections for the... for the lower level that's left, right? Yes, sir. That's all I have. Thank you, sir. Thank you. No one else wishing to speak, can we get a motion? I'll make the motion. Turn your mic on. Make the motion and we approve the zoning change of Z1300012. Okay. So we're moving to probably second all those in favor. Let it be known by raising your right hand. Any opposition? Motion has passed, 11 to 0. All right, thank you. We're now to item 7B. And we'll have Patrick Young administer the election of officers. Thank you, commissioners. Again, Pat Young. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Quickly before I ask for nominations for chair, I did want to wrap up a piece of business from the last meeting, if you recall. There was some confusion about eligibility terms. The interlocal agreement stipulates that neither the city or the county shall have more than two consecutive terms as chair or vice chair. And what we as staff working in-house are recommending to you all that Mr. Jones' service filling the remainder of Mr. Mons' unexpired term would not count against either the city or county and essentially we start from zero. So either jurisdiction that's represented today could get two full terms. So that's what we recommend based on the interlocal and the rules of procedure. So unless there's any objection to that, we'll assume that all members are eligible and whoever's elected, whether it's city or county representatives, could have two full terms. So I'll be happy to entertain any nominations for chair for the coming year. Mr. Whitley. I move that we that we keep existing chair just nominate him. No second necessary for nominations. I have Antonio Jones. Any other nominations? Hearing none, I'd ask for a vote on another term for Mr. Jones as chair. All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed, same sign. Ayes have at 11 to 0. Congratulations Mr. Jones. I'll turn it back over to you for nominations and election of vice chair. Okay. Can we get any nominations for vice chair? Nominate vice chair David Harris. Second. No need for second. Do we have any other nominations for vice chair? All those in favor vice chair Harris let it be known by saying aye. Aye. Any opposes? Ayes have it. Congratulations vice chair. So we'll move down to item 7C which is any announcements? What do we have for next month? Mr. Jones we have four land use cases scheduled for next month. The question is the election for the month of November is it's the first Tuesday. We did check at the beginning of the year we did check to see if the November planning commission would fall on the November election day and it did not. We didn't take it to account obviously the city council primary but the regular election day we'll not conflict with you next meeting. Okay. Thank you. And Mr. Gibbs you had a question or announcement? No ma'am. Are we still broadcasting by the way? Okay good. Yes. That's good. I wanted to bring to everybody's attention the board, the commission and well the staff already knows about this and any of those who can't find anything else better to watch than a commission meeting. But it has to do with I'm sure you've all heard of the GSS the grade separation studies that are ongoing and there are several places where you can view these hard copy plans and I would and one is in the transportation department in this building but it's some proposals by the NCDOT along with the Durham Traffic and Transportation Department I would encourage everybody to learn as much as they can and to just be aware of once you see the plans and read about it you will become aware of the potential tremendous impact this is going could make from one end of town to the other it doesn't mean that this is something that is going to happen but they're asking for community input and this is probably the backbone of our long range planning is to get input from the public there will be a public comment section session at the city council meeting October 21st so that will give you a deadline to work toward and I would strongly encourage everyone to avail yourself of any opportunity to find out information but that's the information about the GSS the newspaper the Durham newspaper has published several things several articles and if I may I think you're going to help me out here we'll be happy to send you all a link to it because it is online to the transportation department and that link as good as it is I went up to the transportation department here at the Durham traffic and transportation department you can't be looking at those hard copies and being able to flip back and forth but still that information that's online and I do appreciate you sending the link to everybody it's something that we really need to consider for the future because as I said it could have some major impacts on the town thanks thank you any other announcements oh one more is it possible for us to get an updated roster with all the appropriate information on it okay good thank you any other announcements nope all hearts and minds are clear we go ahead and adjourn thank you