00:01 [Music] good uh evening we are uh we're going to recess call the meeting to order we're going to recess for a quick five minutes let everybody get get settled just for for looks on the camera that was calling the meeting back to order good evening everyone welcome to the Durham Planning Commission the members of the Durham Planning Commission are appointed by city council and the County Board of Commissioners to make recommendations to elected officials we emphasize that elected officials have the final say on any 01:58 issue before us tonight while this meeting is being conducted in person it is also accessible using the zoom virtual meeting platform in the virtual meeting platform public participants do not have any ability to talk or be seen on video by default in order to maintain meeting to Quorum and a discernable record of the meeting the chat function has been disabled for those attending in person if you plan to speak on an agenda item tonight please go to the table to my left and sign up to speak when speaking 02:30 please state your name and your address clearly when you come to the podium please speak directly into the microphone if you are attending the meeting virtually you will be given the ability to speak at the appropriate time if you have pre-registered your name will be called so that you can make your comments just like an in-person public hearing you may also call in during the meeting tonight by diing 1301 715 8592 if you call in during the meeting you will need to wait until the particular public hearing you are interested in 03:07 starts after all of the pre-registered speakers have shared their comments I will ask if there is anyone else wishing to speak at that point you will need to digitally raise your hand by pressing star n on your phone and when recognized state your name and address before making your comments the applicant has a total of 10 minutes for presentation each speaker after the applicant has 2 minutes to speak Commissioners um I have a engagement I have to leave for 8:30 so we're going to limit everyone to Five Minutes tonight for Q&A 03:46 and we don't have a vice chair today so um rather than appoint someone we'll try to get out of here and um so Commissioners have 5 minutes and will be called upon to speak a second time after all other Commissioners have chosen to speak for a first time please have your thoughts and questions organized as a reminder after the public hearing is closed you obtain the floor by being recognized by the chair commission members please remember to share that you share this time with your fellow Commissioners please keep your 04:15 comments and questions py and don't repeat topics that have already been discussed or questioned the time to make all public statements is before motion is made once a motion is on the floor further discussion regarding the motion must come after a second all motions are stated in the affirmative so if a motion fails or ties the recommendation is for denial Commissioners if you are not ready to move a case forward please indicate a such one question finally I ask that everyone here and on the zoom 04:45 the commission members the staff the public to conduct themselves in a courteous and respectful manner if someone fails to act in that manner the chair will ask the offending person or persons to leave the room or to be muted on Zoom until such time they regain personal control if the quum fails to be restored the chair chair will recess the meeting until a genuine commitment to act respectful and courteous is observed after each case you are after each case you are here for inss please be courteous I'm sorry now I'm speaking to 05:19 the audience here after the case you are here for ins please be courteous and leave this room quietly until you have exited um and have your postc case discussions out there in the hallway please close the doors as we continue to uh um address the remaining business on the agenda item thank you and may we have the roll call please chair Cameron here commissioner cutright here commissioner chowski here commissioner Gregory here commissioner hen commissioner copc here commissioner mver here commissioner 06:08 Williams commissioner woke here a quorum has been established thank you there are no adjustments to the agenda we'll move on to the approval excuse me approval of the minutes in the consistency statement we have a motion to approve so moved second it's been moved by commissioner copac and seconded by commissioner cutright to approve the minutes and the consistency statements all in favor please say I I I any opposed the eyes have it we'll now move on to public hearings initial zoning map changes we have one 06:54 case on that item tonight and that is case Z24 quadruple 05- bdg 24 quadruple 03 2613 Placo residence palano residence sorry PLO palano mix it up my vows all right good evening chairwoman Cameron and commission um I am Payton Burgess a planner with the department and I will be presenting Z2 245a and and bdg 243 um so this is a request for an annexation and a translational zoning at 4873 Stanley Road um so the existing zoning is residential Suburban 20 there is no proposed change to that zoning district and then it is also in an 07:48 established residential Place type um with a zoning overlay of Falls of new storden Lake District B Watershed protection overlay um and they are proposing a single family dwelling unit so as you can see on the zoning context map that is that rs20 zoning there is no change being proposed to that it's also surrounded by that district and then you've got the aerial map um to give you a little context this site does back up to the swans Mill neighborhood um and it's just Slightly North of Sandy Ridge Elementary 08:24 School the place type map shows that it is established residential as with the surrounding properties a neighborhood meeting was not required for this request um and there were no Derm resoning Explorer comments that staff received in relation to this case the proposal is consistent with the place type designation of established residential and the proposal is consistent with all five applicable comprehensive plan policies and staff is available to answer any questions also one more thing to add I 08:58 forgot to ask Payton to uh add this uh staff can certify that all uh notification requirements have been conducted for all cases tonight in accordance with state and local laws and affidavits are on file in the planning department uh we have nobody signed up to speak on this case tonight thank you do we have any questions from well let me see nobody signed up but I is there applicant here to speak anyway nope no committee members want to speak no one on Zoom all right I'm going to close the public hearing and we are now open for 09:46 commissioner discussions and question discussion and questions any questions none already ready to move this case forward may I have a motion chair as it relates to case z245 a annexation bdg 24003 palanco residents I make a motion that we move this case forward to city council with a favorable recommendation second it's been uh moved by commissioner cutright and seconded by commissioner Gary um to move case Z24 quad 05- bdg 24 quad triple 03 2613 panle residents forward with a favorable recommendation may I have the 10:38 roll call vote please chair Cameron yes commissioner cutright yes commissioner Gregory yes commissioner Wen yes commissioner copac yes commissioner mver yes commissioner woke yes and I missed commissioner chowski also yes thank you sorry about that the com the motion passes 8 to zero thank you next we have our first zoning map uh changes case for the evening that is case z 2351 dbdg 23 tri0 33 Mariah Ridge may we have the staff report please thank you Andy Lester of the planning department there is a request for an 11:50 annexation of 15 Parcels of land totaling 16837 Acres located between Anan Road and mount Mariah Road and crossing the Orange County and Durham County Line the properties located in Orange County are outside the aan growth boundary historically um there had been a consent judgment that had prohibited the town of Chapel Hill and the City of Durham from an annexing this area within either jurisdiction the town of Chapel Hill and the City of Durham recently amended a consent judgment to allow for these 12:23 Orange County Parcels to petition the city of Durham for annexation the current zoning of the parcels in Orange county is rural transition and in Durham County is residential Suburban 20 the applicant proposes to change the designation of 13 Parcels totaling 155.0 acres to plan development residential 7.34 to allow up to 1,000 Apartments town houses and single family dwelling units with up to 2500 um building square footage of office used without drive-through facilities uh the applicant is seeking an initial 12:58 zoning uh of rs20 for the remaining two Parcels totaling 12. 327 Acres any use within the rs20 uh zoney district will be allowed by right on those two properties the zoning context map shows the existing RT and rs20 Zoning districts changed to the PDR 7. 348 District if you look to the right of Mount Mariah Road beneath the proposed PDR 7.34 zoning dist District you can see the proposed rs20 initial zoning um into the city of Durham the aerial map shows the general location of the project Mount Mariah 13:42 bisects the site the Western portion of the site is bounded by uran Road the site is surrounded by mix of undeveloped land large slot single family and multif family further south is the New Hope common Shopping Center the properties in Durham County are currently designated mixed residential neighborhood and Recreation in open space on the place type map the properties in Orange County are not designated the place type however the town of Chapel Hills future land use map designates them as rural 14:14 residential the proposed plan development residential 7348 Zoning for the parcels within Durham County is consistent with the designated Place type for the parcels located in Orange County consistency with the dur Place type map cannot be evaluated as the comprehensive plan does not include these Orange County Parcels at the proposed zoning is approved staff recommend designating two of the Orange County Parcels east of Mount Mariah road to the mixed residential neighborhood Place type uh there would be no um change to 14:52 the place type map for the parcels currently within Durham County in addition staff recommends uh mixed residential neighborhood for the One Orange County parcel east of Mount Mariah Road identified by pen 9890 94949 um proposed for rs20 as it corresponds with the adjacent uh Durham County parcel for additional backgrounds um in 1949 Chapel Hill extr territorial jurisdiction was authorized by the state in 1986 a consent order was given to settle an annexation dispute between the town of Chapel Hill and the City of 15:28 Durham the original order established an annexation boundary where neither jurisdiction would accept or process any petition or annexation of land initiate or process any unilateral annexation of any land and take any of the steps you Annex land in 1994 there is an amendment to the annexation boundary on April 26 2023 uh the town of Chapa Hill approved a resolution to direct the town manager and her Town attorney to collaborate with the city of Durham to amend the existing consent judgment on October 19th 2023 the city of Durham 16:03 approved a resolution to authorize an amendment to the consent order on November 14th 2023 the consent judgment was amended again uh the result of the second consent judgment is the new annexation boundary lines the original annexation boundary line was the county line with the amendment everything east of the new line is property that can be annexed into Durham all the parcels requesting annexation are east of the new line and are able to request annexation into the city of Durham and with the proposed annexation 16:44 and resoning uh the applicant has included graphic and text commitments in their development plan some notable commitments include 50 affordable dwelling units um a $20,000 profer to Durham Public Schools various design commitments undisturbed Wildlife Corridor height limitations a maximum perious surface of 55% cre building standards for single family homes a series of plan and connected Open Spaces to include publicly accessible walking and biking trails um a rectangular rapid flashing Beacon and crosswalk installed at the 17:19 site access one in sunlight drive an electric charging station and um Native species to be planted uh this is the full extent of the proposed project it extends from the New Hope Creek to the east to urin road to the West with Mount Mariah bisecting the site the site does contain natural heritage area the natural heritage area located on the East will remain undisturbed the natural heritage area located on the southern portion of the site is provided additional protections with a commitment to locate tree preservation at that 17:58 location the development plan does indicate that streams located on the west side of Mount Mari Road will be impacted by The Proposal as you can see the applicant has extended the proposed building and parking envelope over the Western streams to develop that area uh with buildings and parking area the applicant will need to submit a stream determination at the time of site plan if the stream determination concludes that there are no nonexisting streams in that area then the will be able to develop 18:31 there these streams reflect the location of streams found in the soils map in the US uh topographical survey the Derm unified development ordinance requires uh streams and water sources to be shown based on these sources of information the portion east of Mount Mariah road is bound by Tex amendment number nine that states states that all land east of Mount Mariah Road including the New Hope Corridor Wildlife protection area shall remain undisturbed other than what is required to construct any required roadway improvements or 19:08 future Trail at the Western fridge of Fringe of the New Hope um Creek flood plane no access point is proposed for this portion of the site as the intent is to have it remain undisturbed any potential disturbance is located outside the flood plane west of Mount Mariah road is where the proposed 1,000 units and limited commercial would be located three access points um along Mount Mariah Road and one access point along Iran Road are Illustrated on the Plan Three development pods are indicated these 19:46 pods dictate where uses can be located pod one is generally located between pod two and pod three and would allow partments tow houses and non-residential uses to the north pot two would allow Apartments town houses and single family to the South uh pod 3 would allow Apartments town houses single family and non-residential uses as stated earlier the town of Chap Hill approved a resolution to work with the city of Durham to amend the consent judgment it is important to note that the city of Durham is not bound by the 20:21 contents of the town of Chapo resolution the city of Durham is only Bound by the city's resolution and the amended consent judgment in the Chapel Hill resolution there are five elements of The Proposal that were were requested to be included in the project The Proposal is consistent with four of the five elements The Proposal will provide 50 affordable units as defined by the Derm UniFi development ordinance provide a mix of housing types commits to establishing a series of plan connected um open space areas utilizing 20:56 walking and biking trails with Public Access and will bring utilities to the town of Chap Hill tra in an effort to construct affordable housing on the town of Chap Hill site there is one element of the resolution that is found to be inconsistent uh the proposal donates only a portion of parcel 98907 4792 uh which is the panhandle parcel uh touching Iran Road and not the entire parcel the remaining parcel portion of the parcel is used as access to urin road while staff acknowledges that Exhibit C in the resolution illustrates 21:35 a road going through the parcel and connecting to inin Road the specific text indicates that the entire parcel should be do donated to the town of Chapel Hill uh three neighborhood meetings were held um on November 16 2023 December 13th 2023 and November 20th 2024 as of December 10th 2024 there are 12 comments for this proposal on dur on the Durham res zoning Explorer the proposal is generally consistent with the place type map designations a mixed residential neighborhood and Recreation in open 22:19 space located within Durham County but the remainder of the pro proposal lies outside the area covered by the Durham comprehensive plan if this city council approves The Proposal staff recommends designating two of the arch County Parcels east of Mount Mariah road to the recreation Open Space Place type and the parcels west of Mount Mariah road to the mixed residential neighborhood Place type there would be no change to the place type map for the parcels currently within Durham County staff also recommends a mixed 22:50 residential neighborhood for one Orange County parcel east of Mount Mariah Road proposed for rs20 as it corresponds for the dur parcel if the proposal is approved the comprehensive plan would be automatically amended to extend the urban growth boundary to incorporate the Orange County uh parcels and establish the Suburban tier for this area thank you fre your time and uh staff and the applicant are available for any questions thank you at this time the chair is opening the public hearing may we have the 23:26 applicant to the podium please good evening chairwoman Cameron members of the Planning Commission I'm Patrick biker I live at 2614 Stewart Drive I'm an attorney with Morning Star Law Group and I'm here tonight representing MI homes for this agenda item I'm joined tonight by Erica leam the vice president of Mi our traffic engineer Earl lellan with kimley horn our chief land planner Bob Zumwalt with BGE as well as our affordable housing uh development partner Ted hurn of Kelly development uh Ted will speak briefly 24:17 after I do in regards to affordable housing at this location members of the Planning Commission the strong majority 75 to 80% of the 168 Acres we are discussing tonight are located in Orange County while that may seem odd it was about 10 years ago that I worked on an annexation and a resoning of over 60 Acres in Wake County at the intersection of Glennwood Avenue and Alexander Drive the city of Durham annexed that area and now it is developed with apartments and a Harris Teeter anchored shopping center most 24:47 people associate Brier Creek with Raleigh but this section of Brier Creek is in the city of Durham similar similarly a significant portion of the metamon development in the town of Chapel Hill is is in within dur County as Mr Lester described during his presentation there was a lawsuit back in the late 80s and early 90s and there was a consent judgment that was entered about 30 years ago that Chapel Hill could not Annex into Durham County and the City of Durham could not Annex into Orange County in regard to the assemblage that 25:19 we are discussing tonight it's very important to note that the city of Durham has water and sewer located in the mount Mariah Road directly adjacent to the assemblage uh this Water and Sewer was uh installed in connection with the flats at 5512 apartments that are built about 20 years ago when our team first looked at this acreage in Orange County it was in the extr territorial jurisdiction of the town of Chapel Hill however and this is a big however due to the construction of Interstate 40 it is impossible to provide water and 25:49 sewer from Orange Water and Sewer Authority to this area the reason for that is there were no conduits for water and sewer lines installed under State 40 when it was built back in the 1980s since this section of Orange County can only be served by the city of Durham The Chapel Hill Town Council and the Durham city council both unanimously approved the amendment to the aforementioned 30-year-old consent judgment to allow Durham to Annex and provide utilities to this acreage long story short that's the background 26:18 information that relates to attachment H and attachment J in your staff report and I appreciate Mr Lester going over that as well the size of this acreage allows Mi to move for with three types of homes housing types within this development Apartments tow houses and single family detached homes this is a fine location for new housing since it is proximate to Water and Sewer infrastructure and Commercial Services at New Hope Commons accordingly if one BS if one looks beyond the arbitrary location of the orange Durham 26:49 County Line County Line it is an assemblage that warrants inclusion in the urban growth boundary again it was the consent judgment that precluded consideration of this site being in the urban growth boundary back when we were going through the process of adopting our comprehensive plan and developing the place type map this assemblage this assemblage that we're discussing tonight allows us to fulfill the aspiration we often can discuss during the comprehensive plan adoption process the vision to create a 15minute city that 27:20 was often referred to during those public hearings to that end I walked from the oh sorry I walked from the southern end of of our assemblage at Sunlight Drive down Mount Mariah Road uh to the front door of the Walmart in New Hope Commons and that walk took 13 minutes took less than 13 minutes to facilitate bicycle connectivity I trust the Planning Commission noted the bike and pedestrian infrastructure that's committed to with this development plan and that also will facilitate connectivity with New Hope Commons in 27:51 addition there will be strong pedestrian connectivity within this assemblage as well which is one of the unique attributes fairly unique attributes of this development plan moreover the development plan also has strong environmental safeguards most notably the preservation of all the acreage on the east side of Mount Mariah road which is approximately 25 acres to augment the preserved area around the New Hope Creek Corridor likewise the development envelope on the west side of Mount Mariah road is outside of any natural 28:20 heritage area as it as is described in detail on page four of your staff report in fact the comprehensive plan consistency score of 27 out of 33 applicable policies demonstrates how carefully this development plan has been crafted to meet the goals of our new comprehensive plan of course with any residential project there are always two overriding considerations which are the educational needs of school children and then the affordability of housing for hardworking families who are below our area's median 28:51 income in regard to school education it is vital to note that the vast majority of the households in this assemblage are in the Chapel Hill Bar City Schools district this section of Orange County is districted to Ephesus Road Elementary Philips middle and East Chapel Hill High all of which are within three miles of this assemblage and what was surprising to our development team is that the student population in the Chapel Hill caror City Schools district has decreased by 1,000 students over the past four years our 29:24 research could not find any charter schools in southern Orange County that would have taken these students and the St Thomas Moore Catholic School which is kindergarten through 8th grade only has 359 students accordingly it seems to me that the lack of new housing inventory and constricted supply has priced out families with school-age children from The Chap Hill carboro City Schools district it is also important for the Planning Commission to be aware that the dedicated property tax that is paid for Chapel Hill City 29:55 Schools applies to this section of Orange County for the Orange County portion of this assemblage that tax amounts to 19.8 cents per 100 of assessed value for the average $393,000 home referred to in the staff report this property tax for the Chapel Hill schools amounts to approximately $775 per year to summarize then there's a Confluence of factors that we hope will guide this commission to recommend approval of this development plan strong compliance with the comprehensive plan implementation of our goal of creating a 30:30 15-minute City construction of bike and pedestrian infrastructure solid environmental stewardship and building new housing in a school district that needs an influx of children I also want to highlight the discrepancy that Mr Lester referred to our perspective is that this development plan aderes to all five requirements of the Chapel Hill Town council's resolution to be frank we don't understand how there was a confusion on this issue if you look at at the bottom of this slide that's before you which is the Chapel Hill Town 31:03 Council resolution approved on April 26th of last year you can see the applicant will donate a portion of the property which is identified as pin I'll read it for the record 9974 0792 that parcel is 200 ft wide the road right of way to connect this assemblage to Irwin Road will be approximately 60 ft wide leaving about 140 ft that will then be dedicated to the town of Chapel Hill to be recombined with property that the town of Chapel Hill owns directly adjacent to the South and so for all those reasons we respectfully 31:39 ask for your approval and now I will turn it over to Ted hurn the principal of Kelly development to discuss affordable housing thank you good evening chair Cameron and uh the rest of Planning Commission uh my name is Ted hbr I'm the principal of Kelly development company we're an affordable developer active here in Durham uh this will be a surprise to none of you we are tickled about the opportunity to build litech on this site we um with the exception of a small handful of projects like this where we 32:11 get pulled in by a market rate developer it's rare to find access to real estate where we can build litec in parts of the city where affordable housing is not typically built um and the access to the amenities and the retail and the Walmart uh newo Commons is unique walking distance access to amenities uh elevates this site by nchfa scoring criteria but a number of others that we work on in the city none of that is news to any of you at all I think everyone on Planning Commission recognizes that 32:41 there is a important need to get affordable housing into corners of Durham like this what I want to speak to tonight has actually more to do with the market rate units in the project which we have nothing to do with our group does um most of the work that we've done in Durham over the last few years has been up in the bragtown community and we're going through the effort now of reaching out to neighbors to prepare folks to be on a list server we can communicate and get folks income qualified to get into our bragtown 33:09 affordable developments there are a significant number of folks that we started working with four five years ago that no longer live in bragtown they had to leave they couldn't afford to continue living in lower income areas across the city where housing costs are lower um the reality is Durham is short thousands and thousands and thousands of units and you don't see that play out you know in Hope Valley and other higher incar the city you play you see that play out in Walltown and bragtown Amic 33:35 Moore and heai and all the communities that the city invests so much time and effort and money for good reason trying to protect so the Thousand units of housing that are out here and the market rate units of housing that are in this development which I think Patrick mentioned we see it as rare to have a project that's going to have Town Homes single family and LTE and affordable apartments thank you y all have used all 10 minutes thanks very much all right um next we will um have members of the 34:09 community uh let me see I have a signup sheet lose my space uh we have Wanda rhen it's a reminder everyone has two minutes please come up to the podium state your name and your address two the timer is right here my name is Wanda rhen I live at 5311 Mount Mariah road which is in the heart of this project my my um the my home and the home next door to me is surrounded on three sides by this project I have lived in my home for 50 years and have no plans to leave it until my death or incapacitation when this project I have 35:00 no positive options only negative the increase in traffic has already forced that's already occurred is it forced me to have to turn around in my yard to even get out onto Mount Mariah at a 100 units to that then I will not be able to get on to even get on the street to drive the foot traffic that will be that will be increased will only allow for will allow for the people within the project as well as any nefarious people that might be walking up and down Mount Mariah to just be looking for targets including my home where I live 35:40 alone my safety is in question with that the proposed 30 foot 10 yard boundary between my property and the construction which they they have graciously offered to add foliage and trees that I can can choose or at one time they even offered to put a solid fence there for me around my property to discourage the traffic I appreciate that there's many other areas and I would suggest that the zoning if there's going to have to be this project if there is need for the affordable housing if there is need for all of these extra 36:19 houses this 100 units property I would I would like to suggest a resoning that is a less density and use the property with multif family units to be in line more with an R2 type zoning and single family at R20 thank you your time is up had Daniel next we have Skyler gliber Gober my name is Skyler Gober and I live at 7:30 Rutherford Street Durham North Carolina 27705 uh first I'd like to thank the Durham Planning Commission for holding this hearing to allow the public comment on the uh rezoning of these Acres along 37:19 Mount Mariah Road as you may be aware the triangle connectivity collaborative and the National Heritage inventory have documented a rare species species of tree in this area known as the big shellbark Hickory also found in this area as the white nymph tree both species are classified as critically imperal within the state TCC has identified the tree the trees up and down the New Hope Creek where they have been permitted to survey and believe that the streams themselves play an important role in how this species is 37:50 able to thrive in the area TCC has not been permitted to survey the Orange County side of these parcels where streams head toward New Hope Creek and Dry Creek the applicant is only committing to a minimum amount of tree preservation in the area where the resources are abundant and likely contain the unique environment in which these rare species are present the bulk of the tree preservation is across the street on the east side of Mount Mariah these properties have been committed as undisturbed rightly so considering the 38:22 sensitivity pre tree preservation serves many purposes including heat island medication which is in part caused by hot impervious surfaces such as roads more roads lead to more hotter runoff that would be detrimental to New Hope Creek Durham County and City residents such as myself value the tree cover cover and flood mitigation that accompanies the rural transition designation I would like to advocate for a tree survey to be conducted on the Orange County side of the at this review stage so the boards 38:52 have an opportunity to assess neighborhood development as appropriate before approving a request additionally a request has been made to the applicant to increase the total tree preservation percent above minimum Udo requirements thank you next we have Joseph Herman Hearn may it please the members of the commission my name is Joseph her and I live at 5205 Mount Mariah road which is uh the parcel immediately to the north of this proposed project uh while I'm opposed to this project I am not vly opposed so however I do believe that on 39:33 its face that this has the appearance of spot zoning uh basically when you look at uh the adjacent properties and the properties on the middle to me this appears to be a textbook case of spot zoning as to me personally there has been I believe a lack of communication with the developer and those adjoining property owners such as myself other than the minimum meanss that were required I understand the highest and best use of this property is necessary and the property immediately Jason to mine has become at times an attractive 40:06 nuisance for The unsheltered Who happen to Panhandle at the intersections of 15501 and mount Mariah with that said I do believe that some development of this property is warranted however the degree of density to which this is proposed I think is unreasonable giving uh the fact that mount Mariah is a two-lane St State Road I was previously construction Council for ncdot and I've reviewed the traffic impact analysis and I've also looked at the tip proposals and I have not seen any sort of um plans in the tip 40:41 for expanding this roadway other than what the developers propose for turn LS with that said my concerns are basically three-fold with respect to my property number one some sort of privacy fencing along my my boundary secondly some sort of had into my driveway as I get turns now and with construction traffic that'll even be increased and some sort of signage with respect to my property that my property is not part of this subdivision nor is it part of the development for construction purposes with that said I would ask the 41:16 commission to deny this request and if not deny this request at least consider a lesser amount of residential use thank you acreage thank you next we have Mike goodford hello and name is Mike goodred I have property on Mount Mariah Road there I think this is a wonderful development here they need the housing and it's a low traffic area in mi homes is a great homebuilder they care about the environment they put in Greenway paths everywhere the houses have uh plugin chargers for their cars they wire them pre-wire for the solar 42:07 panels for the roof and they care about the community and they will just make the city of Durham a better place by having this development in there and then also you have the affordable housing in there which we need so desperately also this is a winwin for everybody the city of durm would be proud to have this included in their city thank you thank you Malcolm Eisley now good evening I'm Malcolm Eisley I live at 2011 Old Mill Place here in Durham but probably more to the point I represent Jane Eisley my mom who 42:51 owns 2881 Mount Mariah which is the two Parcels you heard about that are part of the annexation but they're not part of the development project but even though we're not part of the development project doesn't mean that we don't support the project we believe it's the right project for this land um just having moved back to Durham I was born here but I've been away for 17 years um finding the right housing for the right people is hard uh this provides a solution to that it's a desirable area the plan that uh they have here in place 43:19 is solid um and will'll be able to meet price points for many different individuals and families in in this area so while again we're not part of the development project we are right next door to it and we do support this project and I would ask that you approve it and thank you very much thank you Christina lingley after that we have Annette rice and Steve con so you can be ready good evening my name is Christina lingley I'm at 104 Bay Meadows Lane Durham 27705 just right down the road this is morning star's second proposal 44:08 that seeks to abandon The Guiding principles of our city and the comprehensive plan in order to expand City boundaries into surrounding rural communities despite their efforts they have yet to meet all three criteria outlined in policy 168 of our Durham comprehensive plan which must be F fully satisfied to expand the ugb their request was unanimously rejected and the proposal continues to undermine the established goals and objectives of both the city and its comprehensive plan context matters it matters not only to 44:39 the specifics of this plan but also to the broader principles of City growth housing needs and the preservation of our remaining rural environments balancing these needs preservation and planning for growth is the very reason why the ugb and Rural Preservation objectives exists these boundaries were designated to protect key rural areas while guiding sustainable Urban Development the context of growth must be weighed against the potential for Destruction urban sprawl in this area would have devastating consequences 45:11 directly contradicting Decades of planning efforts by the Orange County and Durham County comprehensive plan as well as the New Hope Creek corridor open space it threatens the very values the city reaffirmed through the updated comprehensive plan and the Udo rewrite initiative I urge you to not approve an annexation request beyond the ugb and City Limits and uphold the principles of sustainable growth and Rural Preservation commitments Durham has made alongside its community members like myself who was born in raised here let 45:45 us honor the vision that prioritizes thoughtful planning and conservation for the benefit of current and future Generations thank you thank you Anette rice good evening Commissioners and staff my name is Annette rice and my address is on filed I'm here tonight to talk about Mariah R and water because the water concerns are the very thirsty elephant in this room right now as you've heard aasa has never been able to provide water or sewer to this area because of I40 so basically the developers application for the annexation into the 46:29 city is mandatory so they can water the elephant currently approved annexations within the ugb already exceed Durham's existing water supply and infrastructure to Annex land outside of the ugb and not just outside of the ugb but in another County contradicts policy 118 of the new comprehensive plan whereby we say we don't want to extend Water and Sewer servic and infrastructure outside of that ugb this development is really most sincerely outside of our ugb in 2022 the city of Durham fell short by over 1.1 million gallons of 47:09 water a day think of what Durham has approved and built since 2022 in 2022 the county was short 7.5% of our water needs the town of Cary helped bridge that Gap and the town of Cary in Alamance County helped aasa fill their t % Gap in water it's no wonder that aasa can't and won't be able to supply services to the property because they don't have it either the Mariah Rich Project involves Durham absorbing the water needs of a thousand dwellings located primarily in Orange County and along with that comes 47:45 a commitment to provide roughly 250,000 gallons of water a day presently durm is a lead partner in the western intake project project for Jordan Lake water supply hoping to increase that Supply but other partners in the project have already backed out thank you Steve Co my name is Steve con I live at 1406 Pennsylvania Avenue in Durham I'm the chair of the open space Committee of the Durham open space and trails commission and I'm representing that commission here as the citizen group that ADI advises Durham's 48:29 governments on all matters connected to open space our focus is on the land east of Mount Mariah road which the development plan proposes to leave undisturbed but with no offer of permanent protection for this land this area is in the New Hope Creek Corridor one of the most significant open space corridors in all of Durham County and is recognized by the state's natural heritage program as being of Statewide ecological significance therefore this area has been slated for permanent conservation in numerous plans 49:02 including the city of Durham's Watershed Protection Plan and the New Hope Creek corridor open space plan permanent conservation of areas of this sort is prescribed by the Durham comprehensive plan which calls for permanent protection of open space and describes the land most suitable for permanent protection as natural heritage areas forested tracts and bottom L bottomlands the area east of Mount Mariah road is all all three of those merely stating in a development plan that land will remain undisturbed certainly does not 49:33 constitute permanent conservation there are two standard ways of providing permanent conservation for an open space area one is to donate the parcel to a nonprofit or government conservation entity with open space management experience such as the triangle Land Conservancy or the Durham County Open Space Program which already manages the adjacent land the other is to arily dedicate a solid and thorough permanent conservation easement to an equivalent government or nonprofit entity without permanent protection of this 50:06 Conservation Area the durm open space and trails commission believes this development proposal should not be approved thank you William Carroll name is William Carol I live at 438 Irwin Road my daughter also lives next door at 4:32 um we would like to see the the drive the Irwin Road access Drive moved closer to I40 and Chapel Hill which will create more space between our homes my daughter's driveway will be taken by that road um and she will be left with having to construct a new driveway and I just think that the it's too much 51:05 density we don't want all that driving right by our homes I'd like the density reduced and like I said the road moved further toward Chapel Hill thank you thank you we have Mr Charles Harrison Charles Harrison live at 446 irn Road I'm not against the development I know that we need the growth for our community to to survive I'm with Ricky and that we need to move the road towards 40 not commit to giving land to Chapel Hill to build more properties on um there's 200t wide strip there we're pushing it within 12T of our properties 51:58 so if we split it and put it in the middle or either put it towards the 40 side and not commit to Chapel Hill which has already been done that land the other concern I have is taking un adjoining property the Natural Area or the flood plane across the road and using it in calculating the density currently we're at 2.3 acres per unit and this will change dramatically and I know it needs to for the developer but I'd like to look at the density as a concern thank you thank you Mr Cliff Carroll uh my name is Cliff Carol I live 52:44 at 476 irn road which is directly um adjacent to this development um while I would just assume live beside the forest the rest of my life I know that's not reality uh uh I think this is a good development the developers have been very communicative with me um address my concerns my questions um and I'm in support of this development thank you Mr kin pew how do I find the slides on here he's coming to help you oops there you go and will this click it Forward okay good thank you good evening Commissioners I'm Ken Pew uh 3503 West 53:55 corn Wallace Durham I'm a former registered professional engineer the traffic impact analysis for Mor Mariah Ridge has flaws that hide the impact of the development on Irwin Road and mount Mariah I discussed some of these flaws with the state and city traffic Engineers but they are overworked and underpaid they just don't have the time so in two minutes I can only give a few highlights and you can ask me questions later which is permitted by the rule first the data for irn Road the data collected by the Tia says five out of 54:32 100 Vehicles turn left on Whitfield Road and yet on the traffic distribution it shows that onethird of the vehicles turn left so it's not based on the collected data how do these numbers come up well there's no methodology for the traffic distribution okay no methodology is shown in the tiia I ask the traff engineer and have not heard anything back about methodology so let me just give you a brief methodology we' simply take the development that 25% of the traffic is going toward Durham we'd ask how would 55:11 it get there and we asked Google and it shows it goes along Irwin and then we come up that the traffic currently on Irwin is 12,500 we get an additional 1,800 which brings it to 14,300 and over the limit for L the level of service D turning Irwin into an F but now let's just look at the tias done by the same firm here it says that mount Mariah has 12,500 vehicles per day and here it says that mount Mariah has 5,300 vehicles per day tias done by the same firm differ in Mount Mariah and with the additional 55:56 traffic Mariah would turn into an F as well thank you thank you do we have anyone else in the yes sir you can come up I don't see good evening thanks for uh listening um I'm Rob Linsky I live at 3805 West Cornwallis Road uh I moved here in 2018 I am not against develop I recognize the need to make uh housing available for people like myself newcomers for people who've lived here a long time and for affordable housing but I must state that sadly this developer has been very disingenuous throughout 56:41 the process they put a nice face on the on at their Community meetings with Pleasant young people doing the presenting but behind the curtain sits an aggressive developer proposing a totally inappropriate high density project pays lip service to affordable housing open space protection and other concerns in actuality the plan offers nothing of substance to the community while proposing to totally subvert the comprehensive plan that city government and citizens just invested two years in creating as you all well know the plan 57:12 for the land east of Mont Mariah road which the developer claims to leave undisturbed actually offers no permanent protection would be part of a Home Owners Association which could decide to develop it any time down the road this land is in the new hope Corridor and is recognized as being its vital ecological significance the area is slated for permanent conservation repeatedly including in the Durham City's a Durham city of Durham's Watershed protection plan as others have said a mere statement that land will be remain 57:41 undisturbed is not permanent conservation if the developer wanted to protect the land they'd off donate that parcel to a nonprofit or government conservation entity The increased traffic from proposed development would be overwhelming on one lane roads at capacity as the last gentleman just said the developer will be creating a traffic nightmare for the entire city for their own Financial benefit this plan is so fundamentally flawed in so many requests that the only reasonable option is for the Planning Commission to reject the 58:11 proposal outright and invite the developer to return with a dramatically revised and improved proposal appropriate for the area if the two plus years invested in our plan means anything this proposal will receive a unanimous no vote thank you for your time do we have anyone else that yes sir my name is Daniel kusco I live at 494 Irwin Road I owned the burgeoning blueberry farm on the corner of Irwin and mount Mariah uh during the last neighborhood meeting it was requested of the applicant to increase their 58:53 engagement they wholesale denied this request stating they were all already above the notification radius laid out by the Udo by 400 ft I will remind the Commissioners that in a rurally zoned area 400 ft doesn't go far uh my property is six doors down from the proposal and my household has received no direct communication it's concerning that such a basic good faith effort has eluded the applicant's priorities uh if anyone here is in attendance tonight after having received one of my 300 hand delivered mailers you 59:24 have my sincere thanks the residents of both the town and the city have already expressed their hope for the future of this land in their respective land use plans Chapel Hill envisioned maintaining the rural character the applicant dismissed this concern stating that the decision was made because Town Services would never be available in the etj I find that to be a hand waving assumption that the applicant has no standing to make I've personally attended meetings in both Chapel Hill and Orange County to 59:49 Advocate the etj being dissolved and folded into the RO buffer to maintain its habitat and character as it stands likewise outside the Durham ugb with the rapid pace of building within the extant ugb I question the wisdom wisdom and need to build entirely outside the boundary forc annexation has been disallowed since 2011 this is however thin Comfort when developers are comfortable engaging in such Disney villain Behavior as completely encapsulating holdout properties within their development when asked if the 01:00:22 development would affect their well in public comment the applicant responded well hope not I at this point I'm not certain if the applicant can do better I am however certain that the city of Durham can do better by denying this proposal as it stands thank you for your time thank you anyone else yes sir like the way your son took up for you right there he made sure we saw you my name is Jeff Morris I live at 5305 Mount marale Road and I approve the project I think it be a good thing all right thank 01:01:03 you there anyone else like to speak before I move to the zoom all right moving to the zoom platform we have zad gilled believe you're unmuted go ahead we can't hear you okay um just hold on we're going to go to the next person to see if they we are able to hear hear them we have Alice G hello can you hear me yes hi ma'am uh hi I am Alice Garcia I am the daughter of Sosa Garcia uh she lives at 5231 Mount Mariah um so she I would just like to go on record um I'm speaking on behalf of her just to state that you know um that 01:02:18 she is hello hello hold on hold on um sir uh we couldn't hear you at first so just hold on until uh Miss Garcia gets done speaking go ahead Miss Garcia um she's been muted hello yes go ahead okay thank you um so I just like for it to go on record that she is not part of the annexation process um I think somewhere along the lines there was a paper that stated she was um so just to be clear she is not um she never was and does not plan to be a part of the annexation process um and just something for speaking on my for 01:02:58 myself I don't live there um I live in another city but I just would like for you all to seriously consider you know what you would be approving um if you know you decide to um go through with this plan thank you all right um we're back hi there can you hear me yes we can hear you now all right excellent uh thanks so much for the opportunity to speak my name is z jalad uh my address is on record I live in the Henderson Woods uh development at the intersection of uh Irwin and Whitfield um and uh again as with others 01:03:39 I'm not against development um I do appreciate the character the Royal character of the neighborhood and I'm very concerned uh at the traffic situation and I appreciate the comments of the previous speaker Mr Pew I think he outlined it quite well in my personal experience and the experience of many others the traffic heading nor North on Irwin has gotten quite bad over the last several years and um it does not resonate with my experience the traffic analysis done uh and I really appreciate the analysis that Mr Pew did which 01:04:08 speaks more to what I think uh will be the future of Irwin road heading north uh without additional emphasis on the traffic situation uh for example there needs to be a left turn lane at Whitfield there needs to be multiple lights uh north of the Whitfield intersection I think that the analysis has has to include the entirety of Irwin all the way up to uh uh to 15501 uh because the uh increase in traffic will impact the entire length of Irwin Road not just the circle and the area up to Whitfield so I feel like the traffic 01:04:40 analysis has been inadequate I'm certainly supportive of development I think it should be a smaller development if it's to occur but I would uh encourage the commission uh to decline uh this proposal at this time thank you thank you next we have cath Katherine o o Turk ter hi there uh no worries on the pronunciation of the last name right effort um so I live at 220 Elizabeth Street um right around the road from this proposed development um we residents uh have raised since the first neighborhood 01:05:24 meeting that the development plan is not in compliance with the comprehensive plan ugb and that it is not representative of the growth strategies recently adopted despite the conflict with ugb policies like 118 and 120 and infil strategies like policies 115 and 126 some area residents have made efforts to meet with the developer to express concerns and requested several tax commitments that would increase the sustainability and preservation and reduce the impact to the sensitive resources bringing it more in line with 01:05:59 environmental goals examples are Wildlife impact analysis cluster design no Mass grading and clear cutting solar panels especially on affordable units to lower resident utility costs mitigate noxious sound from I40 light mitigation integrate the remaining rural Orange County Properties more seamlessly Etc this is a thoroughly experienced developer in Durham who is only contributing the minimum and relying on requests and pressure from reviewing bodies before adding commitments we know how this story goes just wait for 01:06:39 feedback from PC to see what you find important they hem and ha on the ability to incorporate feedback before submitting edits to the plan in the final days or hours before a city council public hearing and make a final concession at the meeting to demonstrate willingness to meet Community needs from the start residents have been engaged and communicating their Community needs even requesting a community Advisory board but these Bad actors ignore our requests for novel design focused on preservation 01:07:09 sustainability and limiting impacts of development on the rural character of the area thank you urge them to vote no thank you next we have Kelly McGregor hi can you you guys hear me yep okay I live at 55 or sorry 5315 Mount Mari road so I am um next door neighbors with Wanda who was the first woman who spoke we are surrounded by this development um I just want to note that everybody who has showed um who has said that they are in favor of this development they either don't live here or if they do live here they are selling 01:07:48 their property to the developer so I just want to state that very very clearly that they are not um the only people in favorite are the people who are pro pretty much gaining financially from this um I have also been following along very closely and I want you guys to know that em Holmes I feel like has not communicated clearly with us they actually in a comment um that they had written they said that they had talked to us about a sidewalk being put in front of our house which they in fact had never contacted us directly about 01:08:19 that concern um we also were not made aware of the annexation boundary modification which includes our property as our next door neighbors um we do not want to be annexed to Durham but we were lumped in that um we're very concerned about our well our septic and the foundation of our house and if this development were to go through I we believe that there should be pre inspections done um as well as money and esro to repair any damage that could occur um as Wanda explained there's only a 30 foot buffer between our property 01:08:51 line and where um this development will occur um um we also um another major concern is you know we will be surrounded by Durham city and one thing that we have not um heard anything about is what how will we be um serviced when it comes to uh the fire a fire department if there's an emergency we live in Orange County uh New Hope is our New Hope fire St is who would respond to us but if all of our neighbors are surrounded by Durham city um how how is that going to work especially Miss Garcia who her property is Right smack 01:09:28 in the middle of um all of this property that that is one that wants to be annexed to Durham city I think there are a lot of concerns and I would really urge you guys to not um approve this proposal and to um to really take more time look thank you next we have Aon Coy hi um you know I think I will end up echoing a lot of what others have said but to cut to kind of the heart of the matter I think there's um I'm Aaron KY I live at 101 K Mor Lane and I'm going to speak against this um proposal um you 01:10:10 know I think to cut to the heart of the matter I think the the real lack of participation um and lack of involvement in the of the broader Community rather than those who have a financial interest in this planning process for the developer um I think really strongly um suggests that that you know the Planning Commission should vote no on this um it goes against not just I think the spirit of what's been decided in terms of in terms of the comprehensive growth plan and the ugb um in Durham but also 01:10:39 outside of it I think several of the uh several of the Orange County um neighbors have already spoken out about about and against this um especially those that don't have a a direct Financial um gain from its development so I think I think broadly that's that's one of the things that we really need to look at and most of these development processes what we're really looking for is a fair distribution of of costs and benefits and this doesn't seem to be one that even attempts to to strike that balance um the the costs are all clearly 01:11:09 on the side of those who are uh who want to live here for an extended period of time and the benefits acre to those who are either selling their properties or those who are um constructing the development itself I would strongly urge you all to um ask the developer to involve the community more deeply and to go back to the drawing board on a lot of these pieces thank you thank you next we have Elizabeth Miller hi thank you I'm Elizabeth Miller my address is on file um I had submitted some slides via email um would it be 01:11:46 possible to bring those up could you hold on one second we're uh trying to locate those thank you there's a chance they might have been submitted under um Christine Falcone's Name by accident okay I think they know where those are what was the name on the attachment um Christine Falcone all right I got it thank you start when you're thank you um so the uniqueness of this development Proposal with Chapel Hill surrendering their jurisdiction and development policies is that Durham's policies did not apply 01:12:37 across the county lines during the annexation and resoning review uh Durham County open space reviewed two Durham Parcels Bill Haley with durm stormwater has noted that Durham's review of the reference plan only included the sliver of land currently within durs jurisdiction at the time of subid if the proposal was seeking dur County Land outside of ugb the review would be much more stringent than what has occurred could you go to the next slide please so mi homes touts robust Aquatics review in their ESG but clearly doesn't 01:13:12 feel compelled to disclose this information where Udo policy does not explicitly require them to do so next slide please so mi holes um is not giving the governing body the full picture um there are at least seven streams that Mi homes is admitting um and without this complete picture we're not getting an honest account of the environmental resources of the land the streams running towards New Hope Creek and Dry Creek are of significance and tell a story about the connectivity of these Parcels to their surrounding resources 01:13:49 the information is available the petitioner asked for and received a stream determination report per North Carolina Standards in 2022 and even appealed it could you go to the next slide please um so the applicant is only identified one stream on their application the applicant seems intent on ensuring these boards don't have the full picture of the environmental resources of this land what else isn't being disclosed in the application and reviewed in its totality thank you thank you next we have Mur 01:14:34 Mcall thank you can you hear me yes my name is m McCall and my address is on file as Mr biker noted earlier Morning Star has pushed this proposal in some form for a decade with the state legislation adopted in 22 Chapel Hill May no longer deny petitioning applicants the ability to request annexation into neighboring jurisdictions the town mayor was very upfront about this overruling the ability to deny the request and taking things quote to the next level Chapel Hill has been purposeful about the 01:15:05 placement of I40 and which portions of the Town and County would be serviced by utilities the inability to develop this property with utilities is because oasa does not want to extend beyond the urban Services boundary the future land use map for the etj outlines to preserve the rural character limit density maintain well in septic and utilize rural Design Elements they were purposeful about the annexation boundary established in 1986 and for more than 25 years policy plans and growth goals have maintained the 01:15:36 rural nature for the etj this proposal violates them Chapel Hill is unable to pursue development of their property to the north as they've learned its conservation lands the Chapel Hill resolution intended to capture what they could reasonably expect from Mii homes and Durham in their forced agreement to modify the boundary and permit development council member searing asked Miss leam in April 23 if the east side of the parcels were they were trying to acquire extended towards New Hope Creek concerned over impacts to the wildlife 01:16:08 Corridor any reasonable person would conclude that she was not truthful when she answered no as the parcels directly AB but New Hope Creek and contain Wildlife protection areas as a result Chapel Hill was not provided the opportunity to consider further protections for the environmental resources within their res resolution the applicant misled Chapel Hill and hasn't demonstrated a goodfaith effort and willingness to abide by the remainder of the resolation stipulations and the intent of the Town Durham is not 01:16:37 required by the state legis legislation in any way to approve this annexation request and you shouldn't based on all the information available I urge you to deny the proposal for Mariah Ridge thank you thank you next we have Connor Hartman can you hear me yes thank you very much I'm Conor Hartman at 4406 curly Road uh I want to share the perspective and opinions of community members who are the minority which I would characterize unfortunately in this case is those who are informed as to the very existence of 01:17:19 the project I don't think a consultative process is valid if the parties included don't know about it until the 11th Hour uh first I think any reasonable analysis would conclude that this annexation case requires a very big decision about expanding the city limits and growth outside of the ugb it was not included in the recent comprehensive Plan update as a future growth area and this is highly problematic second Chapel Hill and Orange County residents have not had the opportunity to weigh in on Durham City's growth 01:18:03 across the county lines the ability to Annex the land has been a backdoor negotiation between the two jurisdictions and the applicant who seeks to develop the land while it might be convenient to pretend that the impact is limited to the neighbors within 600 ft we all can agree that it is far from the true and real impact and it undermines the trust between the people and the representatives we have elected to represent us based on conversations with many directly impacted neighbors uh the applicant has made no 01:18:44 effort no real effort to notify impacted residents beyond the most basic neighborhood meeting notification requirements in compliance with policy 7 and the comp plan so impacted residents have had no idea this is even being considered and it's yet another example of Mi homes only doing the absolute bare minimum I also don't think the city of Durham or the thank you sorry next we have uh Barbie [Music] marara thank you can you hear me yes thank you um this is Barby mcera um my address is on file three of the five Durham County 01:19:31 Parcels included in this application request are Keystone repairium identified in the critical areas action plan they are County lands primarily in the 100-year flood plane and the recreation and Open Space Place type seeking annexation and resoning they almost entirely undevelop undevelopable they are sensitive Environmental sources with immediate proximity to New Hope Creek when asked why they were included in the ugb at all the plane Department confirmed that they only look at the at the ability to service the land with 01:20:08 utilities and do not consider the terrain appropriateness or ability to develop the land East Mount Mariah Parcels should not have been included in ugb and should be removed at the next review cycle on the whole sweeping developable and highly sensitive resources into this application is inappropriate and should be rejected as is the sensitive environmental resources of Durham County should be permanently preserved managed by the county along with other portions of new hook Creek and not managed by an 01:20:46 HOA Durham County open space presented to the jcpc earlier this year land that has no functional protections beyond the basic basic development regulations should be considered to have no protection for the purposes of tracking permanent conservation I urge you to reject this proposal as is the Keystone reparan should not be included in the annexation and resoning request please encourage dur County to work with property owners to acquire and permanently conserve the land in alignment with the New Hope quor 01:21:20 open space plan thank you thank you is there anyone else on the zoom that wishes to speak at this time please we have all right Ann ganes yes can you hear me yes yeah thank you for allowing me to speak I I thought I had registered if that didn't go through I apologize um uh my name is Arun Gan my address is on file just have uh two brief comments and again thank you for your time um the annexation of rezoning request seek an exception to current allowance um all properties on the east side of Mount Mariah including 01:22:02 the property not included in the development plan have no indicated use that requires an exception as such there is no justification for an annexation and rezoning exception and um I urge um you guys to reject this proposal that includes properties that do not demonstrate a need for the annexation and rezoning they seek um secondarily I just want to concur with some of the previous statements made about the traffic impact analysis um I'm not a professional like that gentleman that had the PowerPoint presentation um so 01:22:32 can't speak to it from a a data perspective but as someone that has been in this area for a long time and driving um along Irwin Road I live off Irwin Road uh for over a decade um the I the assessment um that um Mi homes has made for their traffic impact analysis it just not does not pass um the sniff test as someone that's really lives and breeds and drives in this area and I just think Irwin Road Mount Mariah Road Whitfield Road a lot of those roads in that area um they're two lane already we've seen increased traffic over the 01:23:04 years um and I just find it hard to believe that um this is that that assessment that they put forth um is credible and and I agree with the gentleman um who showed that data before that seems more concordant with my own personal experience again thank you for your time and I urge you all to reject the proposal thank you next we have Lyn Chang can you hear me yes hi my name is Linn Chang you have my address on file I live in the rural buffer very close to this proposed annexation per the comprehensive plan 01:23:45 annexation into the city limits should only be considered when a substantial benefit to the community can be demonstrated although generalized statements have been made by the applicant in support of the urban growth boundary expansion it has been without any regard for those living in immediately surrounding the area impacted area residents both Durham and Orange County are expressing concern over the impact of the environment the manner this applicant has gone about the proposal the outright noncompliance with 01:24:11 the durm growth goals and urban growth boundary limits and the impact of the rural character of the media and surrounding lands triangle connectivity collaborative and New Hope corridor open space master plan warn against increased traffic on Iran Road pressures this development would have on the wildlife Corridor in Duke Forest are very meaningful because we live here we know firsthand how the wildlife and the environmental resources would be negatively impacted policy 165 also indicates staff would recommend against 01:24:39 development proposals that create doughnut holes and this project creates four segregating and redefining the character of a portion of the etj is detrimental to the surrounding areas of Durham and orange counties and can compromise the Integrity of the limited and sensitive natural resources I urge you to reject this proposal and do not approve a request that compromises on so many commitments durm has made to its area residents thank you thank you uh one more uh ask are there any other um community members that would 01:25:14 like to speak on the zoom all right uh seeing none the the public hearing is now closed and we are now opening um the session up for commissioner discussion and questions commissioner cut right no okay thank you chair um I'll get started on this uh with a few questions I'll start in an area um that I I always deem important which is the affordable housing component of this as I'm looking at the um the develop development plan here can you help me understand where on this the affordable housing uh piece will be so 01:26:14 I'm looking at the various pods that you've pointed out one two and three where's the affordable housing uh in relation to this these pods yeah uh we're in the process and we'll be in the January and chfn window of submitting an app for the 50 Lite units uh on the Northern edge of Mount Mariah I'm unclear which pod we're referring to it's uh directly north and adjacent to Kathy Drive I don't know if that's Karen I think Karen excuse me Karen Drive yeah basically the northern Port of the site along Mount Mari Road got it um and 01:27:02 then just for clarity here help me understand the relationship with Kelly development and uh M1 Mi homes and how this will work in terms of the development of the affordable yeah absolutely so we're in the process of going under contract with Mi and they will be deing us the real estate for free which will enhance our ability to get affordable housing built out there um we will be submitting for 9% awards for the next couple years the site is in Orange County so it won't compete with Durham County applications it would 01:27:37 otherwise be coming from DHA uh and other local development groups after a couple years if we don't get um a 9% award uh Mi will be committing to Gap funding a 4% projects so that there's a guarantee that affordable is built out on the site got it underst um is there a a mechanism that limits the number of units to 50 so our challenge is coming up with a profer that we can meet in any combination of scenarios we're going to actually end up submitting a project that's greater than 50 units for the 9% 01:28:15 award um the issue is that the sit's not in qualified sensus track and the Gap funding needs on a per unit basis are relatively significant and so in today's e economic climate and you know obviously there's uh many years until this project would actually break ground in today's economic climate uh it's about 2 and A5 million to Gap fund 50 litech units that are not in a qualified census tract in a 4% deal and so if we start significantly increasing the affordable component of the project we're going to start pushing the Gap 01:28:44 funding requests Beyond uh what would be financially feasible for the project as a whole to proceed understood so I'm clear um market rate developer is providing um what would be the equivalent of roughly $2 and half million doar of Gap funding on the affordable housing component and contributing potentially contributing that 2 and a half million depending on how the litec deal falls out and which are award it and they contributing uh some acreage for Kelly humps to develop yeah correct there's a guarantee that 01:29:16 the affordable units are going to get built out here whether it's in the context of a 9% deal that does not compete with other Durham County projects or a 4% structure so that's uh gives us as the affordable developer a level of confidence to lend our name and you know reputation of this effort because we don't want to be a part of efforts to reone sites where litec does not get built understood all right I appreciate it if I make commissioner cutright in addition M Mi homes has to pay for all the road improvements that 01:29:46 obviously benefit Mr hr's Project as well as the water and sewer uh connections and extensions so there's water and sewer and Road improvements that are all being paid for by Mi homes but will benefit Mr H bur's project got it understood and so as I'm thinking about this in the context of um a percentage allocation roughly a thousand homes we're talking 50 5% here um as I think about opportunities for expanding that are there opportunities to contribute additional land that can be derestricted for future litech 01:30:19 development whether or not it's developed at this time it's another story but if we can restrict another whatever it might be five acres or so to uh affordable um I think that would help this project and go a long way um and you know in the scheme of things that incremental cost is is nominal it's baked into the the already sunk cost of the land just a thought app and and asking for that profer oh yeah we're not able to profer any additional property beyond what Mr h no consultation you're just 01:30:52 that's a that's a done deal that's right minimum of 50 units um a minimum of 50 units obviously it could be more depending on how the uh Housing Finance Agency uh process works out all right thank you L when I mean um commissioner when I'm sorry I thought you something else I'm so sorry so uh on help me understand this so a th000 units of town homes and single family and you're saying the 50 oford units will be completely within the litec project which will be rental apartments there be many apartments it'll be Apartments 01:31:33 single family detached and town houses so there'll be many other market rate Apartments plus the uh Apartments that'll be developed by Mr H's company I guess let me rephrase that question so all 50 units of profit affordable units will be rental within the liac project that is correct that's the only low-income housing credit that's available under the federal um so no profer of affordable town homes or single family is that correct is that right and is there currently projections for a mix in terms of the housing of the 01:32:12 Thousand units what does that look like yeah hi Erica lean with Mi homes um there will probably give or take is 300 market rate units the 50 litech units and then the remainder will be a mix of probably 60 40 Town Homes to single family detached but that that can changes me clear that downhouse single family mix gotcha and then you said the litech project would be competing in Orange County how is that possible if we would be annexing this into us I'm sorry uh nchfa tracks project Awards by County not by city so regardless of 01:33:05 what city this project gets annexed into it's the county that it falls where it ends up competing with other applications for a 9% award so it ends up making the site quite unique because we're both in Durham and in Orange County gotcha and then with uh the litec there's usually a local thing requ you know local Grant or award money required as a part of that so are you foreseeing that any local monies would be no local funding will be a part of the affordable housing for this project thank you and then just to be 01:33:40 clear on the preservation thing I think a few speakers spoke on that so there is no formal conservation easement on the property east of Mount Mariah is that correct at this point in time that's correct uh but we do have a meeting with uh the Durham County uh real estate office I've worked with that office for many years I believe we have a meeting on December 17 uh for them to evaluate uh Durham County uh taking ownership of the property east of Mount Mari Road uh therefore if Durham County would would 01:34:12 own it it would be incorporated into their portfolio gotcha and then on the oh God these policies there's so many of them um whatever the tree coverage one is is uh policy susum from staff if you want to help me out there but uh was greater height considered to decrease footprint of the buildings to increase tree coverage um it's a difficult balance so what we're trying to do is keep the tow houses at around three stories uh the apartment buildings what Ted what what would do your apartment building 01:34:48 Heights 45 yeah about 45 to 50 feet is what is typically what's uh financed with the low-income housing tax credit so we want to make that uniform across the project so it's not like it stands out which is the litech apartments versus the market rate Apartments so unfortunately when you put all those moving Parts together that's why it came out at um at the tree coverage that it did um and so in order to balance that out that's why I referenced the um one of the highest scores I've seen on any development plan 27 out of 33 uh comp 01:35:24 plan policies being complied with by this project I think that's like a 81% compliance rate which I think is quite High um but that is um that calculation that you referred to is exactly what um made us move forward with other commitments to address that consistency gotcha and then I saw a mention of bikeways walkways Etc in the connected green spaces is the applicant proposing to build and maintain those yes sir great and then same with the 30 foot nature trail what is that same thing is that being built by the applicant and 01:36:02 maintained by the applicant great uh blah blah blah blah blah question for staff there was mention of the New Hope corridor plan and that they met six of seven recommendations I was unclear on what recommendation wasn't being met and I'm out of time sure thank you I think the the one that wasn't met was the change to the zoning District I think the intent back in the late 80s was not to change the zoning District so I think there are area D's there's in the component four which is the majority of where the New Hope 01:36:44 quarter open space plan um attends to um the area that you'll see in the plan that's uh labeled D that according to the plan does not in intended to be changed and any change to the zoning District would not be compliant or not meet that intent so that's where that comes from thank you commissioner um if I may make one clarification I just want to make sure I understood you correctly when I was talking about what the applicant will build it's the uh pedestrian infrastructure on the west side of Mount 01:37:16 Mariah I'm not sure if that's what you referring to or not I thought that was what you were referring to I just want to make sure that's clear on the record I don't really know what I'm referring refering to I see in the application a lot of mention of the connected open spaces and within those there's several mentions of bike and pedestrian path within the Open Spaces that's what I'm referring to I I think I think he's referring to those on the east side oh I'm sorry I thought he was talking about 01:37:41 the west side so what I was referring to was the west side where all the homes would be yeah so the answer is no yeah so text amendment number 21 is the one that talks about the establishment of the series of connected open spaces so that would be on the West Side to connect um sort of the Open Spaces that border this project thank yep commissioner copac uh thank you chair I wanted to start just with the disclosure that uh I was leading the birs be Foundation at the time it funded the landscape 01:38:18 analysis for wildlife habitat connectivity at New Hope uh in lit Creek so I make folks were aware of that though was not involved in any of the content or the recommendations uh of the analysis um uh I see a lot of Pros to this development and I can appreciate the proximity to the site and the amenities uh and um you know of course the the housing availability the affordability piece and I can also see having visited uh this morning what the current residents love about the the rural character uh of this of these 01:38:50 tracks as they currently stand um I do have some questions uh and some concerns many of which have been raised by by residents and I wanted to to pose some of those uh you know I'm interested by this conversation around the the um the ugb uh you know the applicant was the applicant correct I'm asking staff that somehow we can know that this would have been included in the urban growth boundary had it not previously been excluded by this other agreement no we don't know that for certain um what we 01:39:22 do know is that the previous consent agenda before it was amended um would not have allowed the city of Durham to Annex into Orange County so when the uh comprehensive when the comprehensive plan was drafted in 2000 in 2023 um it would not have occurred to staff to include the ugb into Orange County because that wasn't allowed by the consent judgment okay I don't think we can say for certain whether um Durham County Commissioners and the city council would have extended the ugb there it just simply wasn't an option at 01:39:55 the time okay thank you um a question for the applicant uh I just noticed in the section with recommendations by uh Durham um bicycle pedestrian advisory uh commission um that in response to their comments the applicant responded noted uh to each of the comments and I was just curious if that means that you plan to do everything proposed or is it mean just an acknowledgement that they had made a comment commissioner copc I'm hopeful that what we put forward in terms of the Tex commitments listed on the development 01:40:42 plan uh which include the um bike and pedestrian facilities uh on Mount Mariah Road and the crossing which is uh highight highight um or provides for that safety infrastructure I'm hopeful that's responsive to their um to their comments when I was reviewing the staff report that was certainly how I took it that what they said matched up with the text commitments that we have uh on the development plan uh itself and so um to the extent we we um you know we're certainly happy to evaluate other options but again I've 01:41:19 looked at many uh development plans this one really does uh um move the needle I think in terms of pedestrian connectivity to meaningful destinations like you know a grocery a pharmacy uh other shopping other restaurants and I forgot to mention uh I walked from the southern entrance of our um of our development and it's only a 12-minute walk to the bus uh bus stop within New Hope Commons so you've got access to Transit you've got access to services and you can see the commitments that are going to uh dramatically improve what's 01:41:58 there today so I was walking on the existing sidewalk and Crossing Mount Mariah Road at the location of our at of our Southern entrance there's no crosswalk there now but obviously that'll be improved when this project is built so what I put forward in terms of real life experience and what our team has put forward in terms of Tex commitments are I think you know again it this is uh we talked a lot over the last few years about the minute City this is the best example I can see of actually implementing it so if you 01:42:29 wouldn't mind just hanging out here so uh you talked about gaps in the sidewalk and the gaps were in part driven by a property owner who's that's Miss Rhoden and and M McGregor um we we went to Red Robin and had lunch with him said please think about do you want us to put a sidewalk on your property I'm 99% sure miss Rhoden said we don't want a sidewalk there and that was I think commensurate with her comments so those are the two Parcels that are internal to the uh site uh the rest of the frontage 01:43:00 obviously you'll have um pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure to take people all the way down to New Hope Commons M okay um so building on uh the questions by my fellow commissioner uh about uh the ownership and the protection of the site permanent protection I know you said you're talking to Durham County about taking ownership um what do they expresses the likelihood of that and have you considered a donation to a nonprofit or the uh conservation easement uh we're going to work with Durham Durham County initially uh 01:43:32 commissioner copac um worked with Jane corus and her team for many years they own the property that's directly adjacent to us so they are The Logical party to acquire it um so we'll evaluate it but I I personally I feel pretty comfortable that Durham County will move forward with it okay my time is up thank you anyone else Mr Gregory okay this this will be quick I promise um so something that I'm still a little bit confused first and foremost I appreciate all of the um environmental considerations that 01:44:05 have been taken into account for this project um something that I'm still a little fuzzy on though is looking at the development plan um there's two options in terms of canopy coverage um based on whether litic is approved as part of the project so I'm just curious where you know what point will you know whether 30% of the canopy is going to be there 20% because it's something like a 16% difference in acreage or a 16 like like gross acreage change that'll be evaluated as we go through the site plan um process 01:44:39 commissioner Gregory I would say it'll be um flushed out within the first or second pH well probably the second or third phase of the of the development as it moves forward um the the the as Mr hurn described the 9% uh low-income housing tax credit is is highly competitive um but again uh our team feels uh very bullish on on our chances of winning one of those um of course there are no guarantees in this life but um that uh I think that will sort itself out um early on in the process we appreciate that it's a 01:45:20 u it's a difficult tradeoff I wish we had more um ability I mean we all want to see higher percentage of tree tree coverage but the reality of how the site lays out with the desire to provide as many types of missing middle housing as possible really just made it um not possible to to increase the tree canopy above what's stated on the development plan um and and to be perfectly honest with you that's what we run into with these tax credit deals it's simply very hard because you've got storm water 01:45:55 control measures eat up 15% of of just about any site that we work on and then you've got the the roadway connections with the the sidewalks and the um bicycle infrastructure again that that reduces the tree coverage just it's just U there it's it's competing values and it's a difficult Balancing Act but I think we've put forward the best development plan we can uh in terms of compliance with uh comprehensive plan policy again 27 out of 33 and providing the opportunity that we discussed with commissioner cutright for the for-profit 01:46:30 developer to subsidize the affordable housing so I appreciate the concerns it's a difficult Balancing Act Mr Zumwalt miss leam Mr halron the rest of our team we looked at it long and hard sir and this was the best balance we could come up with thank you um I just I have one question before I ask my Commissioners if we have any additional questions um I'm still a little bit confused on the count and the mix of the of the um building types uh I know there's a thousand unit units 50% I mean 50 of those throughout the 01:47:15 application and said today will be um affordable through lcome housing tax credits in an apartment Style and then it talks about town homes and single families will there be market rate Apartments as well yeah approximately 300 market rate apartments in addition to what Mr hbr would build on site in addition to that and the design of those 50 affordable and the 300 will match going be as close as possible Madam chair MH they'll be in the same location same more or less yeah more or less the northern 01:47:54 what would be the northeastern segment of the of the assemblage would be the uh uh apartments and then the tow houses and the single family would be the the going south from there okay any additional questions yes hey so I just want to um clarify on so it sounds like the eastern part that part that's going to be protected um has been assessed environmentally assessed has the the western part I know some one of the um public comments was about the streams that were on it but were not identified so has there been any 01:48:29 environmental assessment on that side the Orange County side we've certainly researched everything that's in the public domain soils Maps USGS everything that's done and the process that we go through is similar to really just about most developments that have any significant amount of acreage uh a lot of those issues are are are are decided at the site plan stage when we get into the in-depth engineering and determine what the buffers are if if required uh and so in that regard I don't think this 01:49:00 project is significantly different than many other types of projects that this commission has uh considered um and that have been approved by the city council so it'll certainly be thoroughly uh analyzed at the site plan stage and if if you know and then it's either intermittent or perennial dep that that makes the buffer uh you know obviously dictates the size of the buffer um but that's all evaluated at the site plan um stage and that is um required of of every type of project that we do commercial residential industrial what 01:49:35 have you uh thank you chair yeah so i' just like to ask a quick question related to policy 128 which is to ensure upgrades to the existing sewer system that are required to serve the development are provided by the associated devel Vel ER in the report that was uh let's it is undetermined can you help me better understand what that means and what the timeline for resolution is I I think that's actually more a question for us than it is for the applicant um uh the Water Management is working on the uh what's called a 01:50:14 summary utility develop it's a Suds I can never always remember what sud stands for but I think it's summary utility development statement um and that's their assessment of what the water and sewer requirements are going to be in terms of size of pipe and and Browning and so forth um that's still getting done um it's pretty much done but awaiting approval from water management and so we will have that to uh the applicant as soon as it's ready for water management is uh and that's all I don't mean to interrupt you 01:50:46 commissioner U that's all financial obligation of of Mi homes again that and um any water and sewer upgrades have to be be uh paid for by the private developer and that's a commitment that y'all are able to make of course perfect yeah it's not just a commitment it's a requirement yeah exactly that's it's been the Durham way from the days of Ken Wright to bring bring back an name Water Management staff will tell them what they need to build and they need to build it exactly yeah just one other question uh which is 01:51:13 there are some environmental concerns expressed by the community this evening are there any specific concerns uh from the community members that you'd like to address uh only to address that there are only two licensed Traffic Engineers in the room or on Zoom today and those are erene Thomas and Earl leellen um state law makes it very clear it is not appropriate for anybody to hold themselves out as a professional engineer unless they are licensed by the state of North Carolina um I certainly don't mean to speak for Miss Thomas or 01:51:44 Mr lellan U but based on the staff report uh you saw that there is a u there are appropriate traffic mitigation measures and that handles the traffic generated by this development um anything to the contrary is being put forward by somebody who is not a licensed traffic engineer by the state of North Carolina thank you yes commissioner copc thank you chair uh a couple questions for the staff uh I'm curious if there are other examples where the city's recently annexed land outside of the ugb since the adoption of the new 01:52:20 comprehensive plan we have not had an annexation outside the ugb since the adoption of the com okay thank you and I know that having you know these these new residents brought in you know paying taxes will bring Revenue uh you know into the city um do we have an idea of the cost to the city for the extension of services I know that's probably a question better asked in advance of the meeting but I'm curious if you can help us dimensionalize like what that commitment is for Durham to extend those 01:52:51 services excuse me yeah there I'm not sure the exact numbers but there is an operational impact analysis in your packet and a cost benefit analysis as well um I'm not sure the specifics thank you um all right and then for the applicant just getting back to what uh commiss commissioner chowski was referring to some of the request from the community um you know is the applicant willing to consider doing a tree survey on the Orange County side as a profer no sir uh is the applicant willing to undertake a wildlife impact 01:53:40 analysis I actually to my knowledge commissioner copac that's never been required of any project if you are aware of a project that's done one you know it's why I'm requesting ing it as a profer well I I understand I'm just saying examp of other devel of other developments that have been held to that standard to my knowledge the answer is no I I could be wrong doesn't never hurts to be a leader I just wanted to put this case the answer would be the answer would be no there was a request uh from a resident 01:54:10 uh for a privacy screen I don't know if that's something that uh it tends to be addressed if it's offense for M Roden we're we're happy to build that sure or and I think other residents had requested as well if it's Mrs rhen or Mrs McGregor if they want a fence no problem and do we know why there weren't all the seven streams shown uh is that just a level of granularity that doesn't take place yet or were they those left out somewhat for some reason in the analysis that was done I would I do not 01:54:39 accept that premise commissioner copc I'm not aware of any basis in the public record um for people to put that assertion forward and again that's something that is evaluated thoroughly at the site plan process and and whether it's 1 2 4 I don't know but I trust I trust BGE to figure that out and put the appropriate buffers on our site plan yes if I could just address something um to uh to your question about land disturbance tree survey um we do the Udo does require a land disturbance tree survey it's 833b in the 01:55:18 Udo uh it is required within of any area within 30 ft of preserved tree coverage flood plane steep slope reparan buffer landscape buffer um Wetland or Conservation Area so certain areas of the site but that happens at the site plan stage it is not required at the zoning stage and we are 100% in support of that what I do not think is reasonable is for the 125 acres in Orange County that we're talking about to be subject to a tree survey because that's a a massive amount of acreage to uh take on that that burden when we have 01:55:55 the Udo protections that Mr Kane just referenced um okay we're nearing 7:30 so yeah yeah I mean the last comment I would just make is I think this has come up repeatedly it's not just the case of this application but uh just about engagement uh and you know from an overall overarching standpoint in need to uh perhaps rethink the requirements for engagement I I think for a project the size I would think doing the bare minimum of Engagement isn't sufficient uh but but I know you did what was required but when it gets to when we're 01:56:31 talking about rural areas you know as the speaker said you could have a neighbor to the project that isn't included uh and so I think that's something worth mentioning and worth a rethink of what the requirements are for engagement for these sorts of projects thank you thank you any other questions wrap this up nearing go ahead just quick nothing no good sure awesome all right are we ready to move this forward chair as it relates to Case z2300 0051 and annexation bdg 2333 Mariah Ridge I make a motion that 01:57:11 we move this case forward to city council with a favorable recommendation second it's been moved by commissioner cutright and seconded by commissioner copac to move case z23 51- bdg 2333 Maria Ridge forward with a favorable recommendation may I have the roll call vote please chair Cameron [Music] no commissioner cutright yes commissioner chowski yes commissioner gregory no commissioner hen no commissioner copac no commissioner mver no commissioner woke no the motion fails 2 to six all right thank you all if you're 01:58:16 leaving please exit quietly um so we can continue on with the business um but however at the this time I'm calling for a break uh we will be back at in 5 minutes at 7:28 so let's just make it 7:35 we'll come back how do you attract a a say a high school basketball player to who who's interested I mean what what would you say to him about joining the fire department so U on the spot no High School guides uh High School people are in general they're easy to Target cuz they're young so uh for me it's always 01:59:12 about the money hey when you're 18 you can make 45,000 straight out of high school I don't know many 18-year-olds that can make 45,000 on top of that look you're in a you're you're the team sport you want to be part of the team continue on that that team Essence the fire department is perfect for you you know we have that Bond we have that family that chemistry we we like to play pranks and jokes just like you do when you're on the team this will be the perfect job for you so you know I just feel like hey 01:59:38 you may not you may not be able to go to college and play D1 Ball but this is you can serve your community and still be part of a team and make your impact the department has a couple of new initiatives that you're using to try to recruit specific applicant types um so let's start with the 3030 initiative 30 by3 initiative what is the goal of that program and why is it needed so traditionally law enforcement has been a a male dominated field and we want to change that so we're looking to increase 02:00:13 those numbers uh we're pushing to get 30% more females into the department by the year 2030 M um by doing this kind of initiative we're trying to highlight law enforcement for women and try to make it an appealing career move for someone that may not have thought that law enforcement was for them I came to the city for the degree insurance and retirement benefits but I stay for the stability and vacation time the city of durm where careers meet Community to connect with a career that serves the Bull City visit durm nc.gov 02:00:53 [Music] careers I came to the city to develop leadership and supervisory skills I stayed because of the city's culture and dedication to serving residents the city of Durham where careers meet Community to connect with a career that serves the Bull City visit durhamnc.gov SLC careers [Music] owning a home provides a sense of financial stability family community and pride but housing prices are now higher than ever making it hard for many Durham residents to afford their first home that's why the city of Durham is 02:01:38 offering the down payment assistance program to support eligible individuals with up to $80,000 in 0% interest forgivable loans to purchase a house within the city limits visit this site or call to find out if you qualify for the program [Music] hey heyy [Music] everyone in Durham should be able to find a home they can afford that's why forever home Durham is creating affordable livable and inclusive communities for low to Middle inome residents from renting to owning find out how the city is helping more people 02:03:26 find homes right here in Durham learn more at foreverhome durham.com we don't always agree who to pull for on game day but we all can agree that litter is bad for North Carolina [Applause] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] there's no place like home home is where the heart is hey can I help you oh thank you thank you so much it is our place of safety and warm home is where love resides memories are created and laughter warms the heart that's why the Durham human relations division is committed to enforcing the 02:05:21 fair Housing Act which prohibits unlawful discrimination going to call the meeting back to order next case up we have case z23 trip 53 Hoover Road assemblage may we have the staff report please 0053 Hoover Road assemblage the request is for just over 23 acres of land currently zoned R5 r52 and CN to be zoned PDR 17.32 this would allow for up to 4002 residential units a minimum of 25 of which would be town houses the existing zoning as mentioned is residential Urban 5 residential Urban 5 2 and Commercial neighborhood the site 02:06:32 is surrounded by residential zoning to the west and south and industrial Light zoning to the to the east there is some commercial zoning to the north of the site the aerial map shows the general location of the project us70 is the highway to the east there are some light industrial uses to the East and residential neighborhoods to the west and south the site is currently designated established residential mixed residential neighborhood and Neighborhood Services area on the place type map staff recommends that should 02:07:10 the zoning request be approved the entirety of the site be redesignated on the place type map as mixed residential neighborhood the applicant has included graphic and text commitments as shown 5% of the rental units would be incom restricted to 60% Ami households for 20 years 5% of for sale units would be affordable for 80% Ami households for 30 years petition for closure of Hilltop Drive and Felix Street would take place improvements to Sader Street and crey Street would be constructed Northbound 02:07:47 left turn lane on South Miami Boulevard at Hoover Road and a 10ft shared use path along South Miami Boulevard the applicant has proposed a tree preservation area and riparium buffer bisecting the site Hilltop Street and Felix Street as mentioned are to be closed and seder and crey streets are to be brought to City standards neighborhood meetings were held on November 15th 2023 and December 3rd 2024 one comment has been received on the Durham resoning Explorer in relation to this case in support while we don't 02:08:24 have any comments as of today in opposition you may have received two emails earlier this afternoon expressing opposition to this case the proposal is consistent with the place type map designations of mixed residential neighborhood and established residential but is not consistent with the neighborhood services Place type staff recommends designating the entire site mixed residential neighborhood if the zoning map Chang change is approved staff and the applicant are available to answer any questions thank you at this time the 02:09:02 chair is opening the public hearing and the applicant is already at the podium okay can y'all see the PowerPoint Madam chair it's not very nice is that it right uh good evening again chairwoman members of the commission I'm Patrick biker I live at 2614 Stewart Drive I'm attorney with Morning Star Law Group I'm here tonight representing uh the local ownership group uh for this assemblage along Hoover Road uh I'm joined tonight by Dan juel who's the regional director for Thomson Hutton uh Thomason Hutton 02:09:38 created the development plan that's before you this evening this is a rather unique uh situation since Dan and I are representing a group of local owners who have assembled one of the strongest infield developments that I can recall this local ownership group also includes Durham Habitat for Humanity the team has put together 23 Acres but it is important to note only slightly more than 12 acres are developable the construction of seder and Creasy streets with sidewalks on both sides will create a grid Network in 02:10:09 this uh corner of Durham and when you add in the required stream buffers along with the storm water control measures all those factors put together reduce the acreage that can be developed to just over 12 acres in total I have to say I've worked in durm for about 30 years and I did not realize that this infill opportunity existed until we started working on this resoning unfortunately unfortunately this acreage was used as an illegal Dumping Ground for many years the local owners have had to spend over 02:10:40 $60,000 of their own money to clean up this uh illegal dumping activity that you can see on these slides uh we're showing tonight since the Hoover Road assemblage owners are the applicant here and not a developer it precluded some of the options related to our comprehensive plan however the owners have made a strong commitment to affordability along with the new streets and sidewalks that affordability commitment drives this infield development in order to locate new housing approximately 2 miles east 02:11:10 of downtown as shown on our development plan there is a commitment to apartments and town houses within this assemblage in order to diversify the housing stock in this corner of Durham since it was the desire of this ownership group to diversify the housing types in this area we knew we had to be a good neighbor and focus on community engagement accordingly in addition to our two virtual neighborhood meetings that Mr Cain referred to um I want to highlight that um approximately 600 uh residents were notified of each of those 02:11:41 virtual neighborhood meetings um in addition to the virtual neighborhood meetings we also had two lengthy meetings with Partners against Crime district one uh the first meeting was on Saturday July 20 of this year and then and then again we met with them on Saturday November 16 2024 as a result of those meetings the leadership of Partners against Crime district one provided us with this letter of support we hope you can take this opportunity to review this letter I will provide a copy of the letter um 02:12:11 from the pack one leadership to the planning department to be included in the record of this meeting and so um based on uh these reasons we respectfully asked for your recommendation of approval uh our team will be happy to answer any questions you may have and we thank you for your time tonight thank you we have Jeff noris part of the applicant team the previous one oh he signed up for the wrong one um John nope Rob Lewis nope that's it that's all was on there let me see who's on the zoom is there anyone on the zoom wishing 02:13:08 to speak is there anyone on the zoom wishing to speak one last question anyone on the zoom wishing to speak all right I am going to the chair is going to close the public hearing now and we are now open for commissioner discussion and questions commissioner W uh just had some clarifying questions about the affordable housing component um I'm just could you walk me through that I'm just wildly confused oh yeah it's 5% uh there'll be a mix of tow houses and apartments on the site um 5% of the apartments that are for rent uh 02:14:10 will be uh income restricted to 60% of area immediate income for a period of 20 years and then uh on the townhouse for sale tow houses uh 5% of the town houses will be um for sale at 80% of the area median income and those will be deed restricted for 30 years 30 and then I'm assuming habitat is doing the town home no actually my my understanding u based on our meetings with them is they're simply going to sell their acreage they are cash strapped at this time is my understanding uh take the money from the 02:14:46 sale of the property and redirect it to uh existing projects they have ongoing right at at this time where they need um financial help gotcha and could you walk me through the rationale I think I see here that policy 40 is not fully met um because it requires a affordability period of 30 years and you're offering 20 you we got yeah it's it's because of the difficulty in the we're just seeing very difficult financing conditions for multif family projects at this time it's much different than it was uh just a few 02:15:19 years ago and so since this is an ownership group and not a developer um their feeling was it would be easier to attract a developer with a 20-year restriction as opposed to a 30-year restriction God given the difficulties in in the financial markets at this time for multif family projects and then one other question I had was policy well actually two um policy 49 not being met were there options considered to help lower the utility cost for future residents again because we're not the developer we're just an 02:15:55 ownership group it's very difficult for us to speculate as to what would be uh appropriate um measures to to take with that because you know the the ownership group that owns this property and has assembled it over a number of years um simply doesn't have the expertise to make that determination and just while I'm clear on process as an ownership group if this Zone zing and with said conditions were approved that would be transferable by sale to said developer correct yes yes and no it's not that it's 02:16:32 sailable by it's not it's transferable it's that the zoning runs with the land regardless of who the ownership is so if if the resoning is approved and this property owner sells to another entity that entity is still Bound by these zoning rules until they come before you all and the city council to ask for those zoning rules to be changed gotcha but they would only come before the city if there was any changes that the new owner would need that's correct okay yep and then um all right that was last last question 02:17:10 thank you right um so a couple questions for the applicant so first of all maybe I misread it but I was trying to understand the traffic numbers and I thought what I was seeing was that there would be a decrease in expected traffic I didn't pick that up in the site uh staff report but we did have a a TIA that was that was um scoped with M Thomas was done by VHB by Mr Andy top who's an excellent traffic engineer uh our understanding was that the existing Network can handle the traffic from this uh development without any 02:18:00 um looks like staff has confused by staff report um while they're they're checking that um from uh from bpac there had been a request for curb radius of 10 ft and uh raised sidewalks raised crosswalks across car access points is that something that the ownership group uh has considered we considered it but Dan that didn't seem like it was again that was something that we weren't we just were not comfortable with given the um that we don't have a specific layout in terms of where the town houses would go 02:18:36 where the apartments would go we we really don't have the wherewithal to evaluate that and and commissioner copac Dan Jewel Thomas and one of the other reasons we couldn't commit to that is it could require uh right of way that we don't know whether that RightWay exists right now or we would have to acquire additional RightWay so we can't commit to something when we don't know that we have the property needed uh to do those improvements if that makes sense Point yeah yeah it makes sense thank you for 02:19:05 clarifying that um do you want to go and then I'll ask my last question okay thank you earing Thomas Transportation so there the zoning report does show that there' be a decrease in traffic based on the highest and best use under the current zoning versus what was proposed with this zoning so that's why it shows a decrease thank you I appreciate that um and then I had a question about the tree coverage uh I know that you come before us uh Mr juel previously and there had been a an application that 02:19:38 sort of committed to the minimum by default uh I'm curious in this case if if you see opportunity to go uh beyond the the minimum requirements for for True coverage for the site so as as you you called us out uh we do generally commit to the minimum requirement um but as Mr biker pointed out in his presentation and I think in the staff report as well um because of the Fairly large amount of stream buffer and buffers that were were're putting in place and that sort of thing um there will be more tree coverage I mean it's 02:20:18 just when we get to site plan you'll see that uh we just typically do not uh commit to more when we know we're going to have more if that makes sense it's there there's so many other environmental constraints we're consider we're committing to landscape buffers and that sort of thing so we'll have we'll have well above the tree coverage requirement for sure we don't know exactly what that number will be but it'll be at least 7% okay yeah and I do want to highlight commissioner copc the uh tree coverage area behind Capri 02:20:46 Terrace I recall a resident of Capri Terrace attending one of our virtual neighborhood meetings and that was was done specifically uh to to address her concerns uh to demonstrate the community engagement that uh that we undertook as a as a team for this project to um put this development plan forward so there while it may not address the percentage I do want to stress the location is based on our community engagement okay yeah and and just so I don't only uh gripe about Community engagement uh I 02:21:15 did appreciate the engagement that was done here uh the pack attendance you know useful to see the letter with some Community leaders considered this um you know this is an area that has um a high displacement risk um uh cost burden renters um much higher percentage people of color than the county uh and so I think the engagement is even more important here um and uh you know I'm I'm hopeful that with an info project like this with the availability of of of more units and density here that the result uh could be to perhaps reduce 02:21:50 some of the pressure uh on existing folks who who do want to stay I know those Dynamics can be hard to tease out um but I just want to highlight that this is an area where we want to be especially uh intentional in the Outreach that we do and I hope that will continue on through uh to the site planning stage so yeah they certainly ask questions the folks at pack one certainly ask questions along those lines I would say both meetings uh the one in July and the one in November we were there for at least an hour at least an hour te 02:22:21 teasing out some of those issues hey so I had I'm sorry I had a um a question so because it's only you're only developing 12 of 23 Acres I I'm wondering why you wouldn't increase the tree coverage right it just seems like it' be a stronger application if you did that if you know you know you know you're GNA be preserving trees in addition in excess of the Udo right it's hard to it's hard to guesstimate what that percentage would be and the other thing I want to emphasize is that um we also don't even know what what height 02:23:06 the buildings will be since we're just the ownership group so if they're three-story apartment buildings you know three-story walk-ups that's that's going to definitely consume more of the property than four stories with an elevator but we don't know what type of apartment developers is going to be attracted to to build at this location and that um and there again if if if we were representing one of our typical you know 95% of the time that Mr jul and I are here we have a specific developer who 02:23:38 who can yeah I I only build four-story apartment buildings I only build fivestory apartment buildings we have no idea what the interest is in this location so because we could have you know three story town homes and three story apartment buildings that would be that would that would probably use up most of the 12.3 Acres that we actually have to use there there is uh Patrick excuse me there is one other mitigating C circumstance if you look at the uh the survey and the development plan your package or the existing additions you'll 02:24:06 notice there's a very big Power Line easement run that runs through the middle of the site and we can't plant trees in there so that's one of the reasons it's it's diminished uh but we'll we'll work that out as site plan okay sorry I just have a couple more one is um policy 101 is talking about Native plantings it seems like that's an easy one to to to do um and um I guess this is AI this area is a priority for green infrastructure in that policy is not met as well nor is there a school profer and I'm done 02:24:52 pardon me SC I'm scrolling through the staff report so I can get to the uh the same thing um policy 101 encourage new development that incorporates St of plants wildlife habitats natural landscaping and that discourages invasive exotic species uh again since they're not going to be building this or developing develop it um they can't commit to that right now and don't necessarily want to commit to that for another developer uh but that's that's one that we're able to meet sometimes on some projects that we brought before you 02:25:29 but not all again this is a a little bit little bit different U circumstance uh I suspect there's uh invasive species out there right now that we're probably going to be getting rid of just because of what's growing at and what was the other policy you mentioned um this area is priority for green infrastructure that's policy 108 uh native trees vegetation protect protected green spaces green roofs walls and bios squals again it's not that that the developer will not do that it's just we can't commit to that right now but I 02:26:03 think we do a pretty good job of touching a lot of the other uh policies we I think we're getting a a pretty fair score based on some other projects we've seen and done but I appreciate those questions those are all good I just want to highlight there was an outstanding question about the school mitigation you had as wellu yeah this point we'll we'll evaluate that going forward to city council commissioner copc but uh this has been a tough site for our our team to maintain I that's why I didn't show 02:26:40 you nearly all the trash pictures we had um and so they've actually lost many tens of thousands of dollars it may six figures now maybe I mean yeah it's probably over six figures that's been spent on taking care of illegal dumping here so uh unfortunately we're not at a position to commit to it but we'll look at it before we go to city council it's a tough s thank you anyone else questions questions questions more questions nope are we ready to move this case forward all right may I have a motion 02:27:25 chair as it relates to case z2300 053 Hoover Road assemblage I make a motion that we move this case forward with a favorable recommendation to city council second everybody wants to get out of here okay it's been moved by commissioner cut right and seconded by commissioner copac to move case z230 53 Road assemblage forward with a favorable recommendation may I have the roll call vote please jar Cameron yes commissioner cutright yes commissioner chowski yes commissioner Gregory yes commissioner hen 02:28:10 yes commissioner copac yes commissioner mver yep and commissioner woke yes the motion passes 8 to0 thank you do we have any committee updates none do we have any new business none do we have any staff announcements no no staff out none meeting meeting adour happy holidays everybody see you next year