Uncategorized

GOOD EVENING WELCOME EVERYONE TO THE DURHAM PLANNING COMMISSION WE’RE GLAD TO HAVE YOU HERE THIS EVENING THE MEMBERS OF THE DURHAM PLANNING COMMISSION HAVE BEEN APPOINTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL, BY THE COUNTY COMMISSION AS AN ADVISORY BOARD TO THE ELECTED OFFICIALS SO YOU SHOULD KNOW THAT THE ELECTED OFFICIALS ON EACH CASE HAVE THE FINAL SAY ON THE ISSUES IN FRONT OF US THIS EVENING IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK ON AN AGENDA ITEM TONIGHT WE ENCOURAGE YOU TO COME AND SIGN TUPE MY LEFT YOU’LL SEE THE TABLE WE HAVE A SHEET FOR EACH OF THE CASE IN FRONT OF US THIS EVENING YOU CAN SIGN UP TO SPEAK WHEN YOU ARE CALLED TO SPEAK WE ASK THAT YOU COME TO THE PODIUM ON MY RIGHT AND PLEASE SPEAK CLEARLY INTO THE MICROPHONE WE ASK THAT YOU START BY STATING YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS AND THEN YOU WILL HAVE TIME TO ADDRESS US WITH YOUR THOUGHTS AND CONCERNS EACH SIDE THOSE THAT SPEAK IN 5ER AND THOSE THAT SPEAK IN AGAINST AN ITEM WILL HAVE 10 MINUTES EACH WE CAN MAKE ADJUSTMENTS DEPENDING ON THE INTEREST ON THOSE ISSUES SO WE WILL DEBATE THAT AS WE GET INTO EACH AGENDA ITEM AND WE SEE HOW MANY FOLKS HAVE SIGNED TUPE SPEAK ON EACH ITEM FINALLY ALL MOTIONS ARE STATED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE SO IF A MOTION FAILS OR TIES THE RECOMMENDATION IS FOR DENIAL AND AGAIN WE ARE AN ADVISORY BOARD SO WE WILL BE DISCUSSING AND VOTING ON ISSUES TONIGHT BUT OR VOTE IS NOT BINDING IT WILL THEN GO TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DEENDING ON WHO HAS THE JURISDICTION >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH MAY I HAVE THE ROLL CALL PLEASE [ROLL CALL] COMMISSIONER JOHNSON HAS REQUEST FOR EXCUSED ABSENCE [ROLL CALL] COMMISSIONER KENCHEN HAS ALSO REQUESTED AN EXCUSED ABSENCE [ROLL CALL] AND COMMISSIONER VANN AS WELL HAS REQUEST AN EXCUSED ABSENCE [ROLL CALL] >> GREAT THANK YOU VERY MUCH WE WILL NOW MOVE TO REVIEWING AND APPROVING THE MINUTES AND CONSISTENCY STATES FROM OUR FEBRUARY 14th, 2018 MEETING >> MR. CHAIR, I MOVE THAT WE EXCUSE COMMISSIONER JOHNSON, COMMISSIONER VANN, AND COMMISSIONER KENCHEN FROM TONIGHT’S MEETING >> SECOND >> GREAT MOVED BY COMMISSIONER HARRIS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BRIAN ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND MOTION PASSES

GREAT THANK YOU WE’LL NOW MOVE TO APPROVING THE MINUTES AND THE CONSISTENCY STATEMENT COMMISSION RECALL BRINE >> ON THE FIRST PAGE, ITEM NUMBER FOUR ON THE MOTION I BELIEVE THAT THE COMMISSIONER HAS SECONDED THAT MOTION WITH COMMISSIONER HARRIS >> THANK YOU >> ANY OTHER AGISTMENTS OR CORRECTIONS TO THE MINUTES OR CONSISTENCY STATEMENTS? SEEING NONE I’LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR APPROVAL WITH THE ADJUSTMENT MADE BY COMMISSIONER BRINE MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AND CONSISTENCY STATEMENTS AS PRESENTED >> I’LL SECOND >> MOVED BY COMMISSIONER HYMAN, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HORNBUCKLE ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY WE’LL MOVE ON TO ADJUSTMENTS TO THE AGENDA MS. SMITH >> GOOD EVENING GRAY SMITH WITH THE CITY COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF WOULD REQUEST THAT THE AGENDA BE ADJUSTED SO THAT ITEM B UNDER PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR ZONING MAP CHANGES THAT’S 7B THE HEARINGS FOR THAT BE COMBINED WITH THE HEARING FOR ITEM 8A WHICH IS THE TEXT AMENDMENT FOR THE SAME AND WE WOULD RECOMMEND HEARINGS BE COMBINED WHEN YOU GET READY TO VOTE YOU NEED TO VOTE ON THE TEXT AMENDMENT FIRST AND STAFF WILL REMIND YOU IN CASE YOU HAVE AN ISSUE LATER ALSO, I WOULD LIKE TO STATE FOR THE RECORD THAT ALL ITEMS HAVE BEEN ADVERTISED THROUGH LEGAL & LOCAL ORDINANCES AND AFFIDAVITS FOR SUCH ARE ON FILE FOR THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT ONE HOUSE KEEPING ITEM, THE FIRE MARSHAL’S OFFICE REPRESENTATIVE IS HERE TONIGHT AND HE REQUIRES THAT WE HAVE NO MORE PEOPLE IN THE ROOM THAN WE HAVE ROOM FOR SEATS FOR SO THE ONES THAT ARE STANDING CAN STAND FOR NOW BUT IF WE GET AN INFLUX OF ATTENDANCE HE WOULD ASK EVERYONE TAKE A SEAT SO HE CAN KEEP TRACK OF THE ROOM CAPACITY, THAT’S FOR EVERYONE’S SAFETY SO PLEASE ADHERE TO THAT AND HEELLER BE MAKING HIS ROUND AND CHECK ON THE CAPACITY AS THE EVENING GOES ON AND THAT’S ALL I HAVE >> GREAT THANK YOU VERY MUCH AND THERE IS SEATING OVER HERE TO OUR LEFT AS WELL THAT’S AVAILABLE FOR THE PUBLIC COMMISSIONER MILLER >> MR. CHAIR, IF IT’S PROPERTY WHILE IT’S ON MY MIND I WANTED TO LET THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION KNOW THAT I LIVE WITHIN THE 600-FOOT NOTICE RADIUS FOR THE CASES THAT ARE DESCRIBED IN ITEM SEVEN ON OUR AGENDA AND WILL HAVE TO BE RECUSED FROM THAT UNDER THE RULES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION >> GREAT SO AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME WE’LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE YOUR RECUSE COMMISSIONER HARRIS >> I MOVE WE ADOPT AGENDA ADMODIFIED OR ADJUSTED BY SMITH AND MOVE FORWARD >> SECOND >> A PROPERLY MOVED AND SECONDED TO MAKE THE ADJUSTMENTS TO THE AGENDA THAT WERE PUT FORWARD BY MS. SMITH ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE SAY AYE >> AYE >> ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT WE WILL MOVE FORWARD WITH OUR FIRST HEARING >> MR. BUZBY >> YES, COMMISSIONER GHOSH >> BEFORE BEGINNING THIS ONE I WOULD ASK THAT I BE RECUSED, MY LAWFIRM REPRESENTS THE APPLICANT IN THIS CASE >> SO MOVED >> SECOND >> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING RECUSAL FOR THE FAVORABLE COMMISSIONAL HEARING PLEASE SAY AYE >> AYE >> THE MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY >> THANK YOU >> WE WILL MOVE TO OUR FIRST ISCA, THIS IS FAYETTEVILLE COMMERCIAL, CASE A1700016 AND Z1700041 AND WE WILL START WITH THE STAFF REPORT GOOD EVENING GAMEIES SONIAC WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRESENTING CASE NUMBER A1700016 AND Z1700041 THIS IS FAYETTVILLE COMMERCIAL THE APPLICANT IS PATRICK BIKER FROM MORNING STAR THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY’S JURISDICTION THE SITE IS 2.86-ACRES THE REQUEST IS A RE-ZONING REQUEST FROM RESIDENTIAL SUBURBAN 20 TO COMMERCIAL GENERAL WITH NO DEVELOPMENT PLAN THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING ALL USES WITHIN THE CG DISTRICT THE APPLICANT IS ALSO REQUESTING A FUTURE LAND USE

MAP AMENDMENT FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO COMMERCIAL THIS MAP SHOWS AN AERIAL OF THE PROPERTY # THE 2.86-ACRES THE SITE CONTAIN AS SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING, IT IS LOCKED WITHIN THE SUBURBAN TIER THERE ARE A VARIETY OF USES FOUND WITHIN PROXIMITY TO THE SITE THE RETAIL CENTER IS LCATED NORTH ACROSS MARTIN LUTHER KING PARKWAY THE OPPOSITE OF THE SITE OF FAYETTVILLE ROAD, AMERICAN TOBACCO TRAIL TO THE EAST OF THAT IS A SOUTH STORAGE FACILITY WITH ACCESS OFF OF MARTIN LUTHER KING PARKWAY TO THE SOUTH IS PROPERTY OWNED BY MORNING STAR IS A CHURCH AND TO THE WEST OF THAT IS A VACANT LOT THE PROPERTY IS DESIGNATED LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, SHOWN IN YELLOW ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP ON THE LEFT AND ON THE RIGHT THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING THE CHANGE DEZIGNATION TO COMMERCIAL, WHICH WOULD BE CONSISTENT TO THE RE-ZONING REQUEST AND THIS MAP SHOWS THE CONTEXT AREA THE APPLICANT HAS SUBMITTED AN APPLICATION TO CHANGE THE ZONING TO COMMERCIAL GENERAL, WHICH IS SHOWN ON THE RIGHT AND THE EXISTING ZONING WHICH IS RS20 ON THE LEFT THIS REQUEST HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY STAFF AND DETERMINED TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE THIS SUMMARIZES THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE CG DISTRICT A MINIMUM SITE AREA WOULD BE 20,000 SQUARE FEET THE MINIMUM LOT WIDTH IS 100 FEET, MINIMUM STREET YARD ARE BOTH 25 FEET MAXIMUM BUILDING COVERAGE IS 60% AND THE MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT IS 50 FEET THIS SLIDE SUMMARIZES THE POLICIES THE STAFF REVIEWS DETERMINING WHETHER OR NOT THE POLICY IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND FIRST ONE INDICATES THAT THE SLIDE, THAT THE PROPERTY IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE COMMERCIAL EXISTING FROM, THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING, I I’M SORRY THE EXISTING LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL THE APPLICANT IS SEEK AG CHANGE TO COMMERCIAL THEY ARE CONSISTENT WITH 212C BECAUSE THE COMMERCIAL DESIGNATION IS CONSISTENT WITH THE INTENT OF THE SUBURBAN TIER AND IT PROVIDES AN OPPORTUNITY FOR ADDITIONAL COMMERCIAL LAND AND EMPLOYMENT A PROPOSED PLAN AMENDMENT IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT IN THE AREA PARTICULARLY BECAUSE IT SERVES IN EXPANSION TO THE COMMERCIAL FLAM DESIGNATION LOCATED TO THE NORTH AND IT IS OVER 1 HALF MILE FROM THE NEAREST COMMERCIAL CORPS THERE ARE EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE, SUCH AS ROADS, WATER AND SEWER CAPACITY SUFFICIENT TO ACCOMMODATE THE SITE AND THE PROPOSED IMPACTS WHILE THERE IS NO DEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED AS PART OF THIS APPLICATION THE UDO DOES REQUIRE PROJECT FOUNDED BUFFERS BETWEEN COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL ZONING AND LAND USES TO ALLOW FOR APPROPRIATE TRANSITIONS AND ANY FUTURE DEVELOPMENT MUST ACCOUNT FOR THOSE REQUIREMENTS IN ADDITION UNDER THE UDO SECTIONS 7.3 THERE ARE DESIGN STANDARDS WHICH WOULD ENCOURAGE A VARIETY OF BUILDING MATERIALS AND TREATMENTS FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS STAFF DETERMINES THAT THIS REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND OTHER POLICIES AND ORDINANCES I’M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH AT THIS POINT WE’LL ACTUALLY MOVE TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND IF I COULD GET THE LIST OF THOSE WHO HAVE SIGNED TUPE SPEAK WE’LL START WITH THOSE WHO HAVE SIGNED TUPE SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THE PROPOSAL AND THEN WE’LL HAVE EQUAL TIME FOR THOSE WHO HAVE SIGNED TUPE SPEAK AGAINST THANK YOU WE’RE GOING TO DO OUR BEST HERE I’M NOT SURE IF EVERYONE HAS PUT DOWN IF THEY’RE FOR OR AGAINST BUT WE WILL START WITH MR. DAVID LISTER WHO SIGNED UP TO SPEAK FOR/WITH CONDITIONS ACTUALLY WE’LL START WITH

MR. BIKER, WHO IS THE APPLICANT IN THIS CASE >> MY NAME IS PATRICK BIKER I’D LIBELING TO HAVE THE LONG TIME PROPERTY OWNER I LANDA SPEAK FIRST FOLLOW BY MICHAEL PALMER REPRESENTING UDI AT INDUSTRIAL PARK OUR NEIGHBOR ACROSS THE STREET AND THEN MR. DON MOFFITT IS ALSO ASSISTING ON THIS AND THEN I’LL WRAP UP BRIEFLY I MAY HAVE TO DONATE A COUPLE OF MINUTES OF MY TIME TO MR. MOPT BUT I’LL ONLY SPEAK FOR A MINUTE, SIR >> IF I COULD I WOULD LIKE TO INTRODUCE >> FOR THE RECORD ALL 4 OF THOSE SPEAKERS HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK >> GOOD EVENING, CHAIR BUZBY, VICE CHAIR HYMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING MY FAMILY TO BE HERE MY NAME IS YO HAD LANDA HALL FROM DURHAM, NORTH CAROLINA AND I’M HERE WITH MY BROTHER, HIKAL HALL THE PARCEL WE’RE TALKING ABOUT THIS EVENING HAS BEEN IN OUR FAMILY NOW FOR FIVE GENERATIONS MY GRANDPARENTS THE LATE WILSON CALORIE EFFIGY PURCHASED ACREAGE TO INCLUDE THIS SITE TWO PARCELS NOW OWNED BY THE MORNING STAR BAPTIST WERE ONCE PART OF MY FAMILY’S LAND MY MOTHER PASSIONATELY FOLLOWED IN THE FOOTSTEPS OF OUR GRAND PARENT OUR FAMILY HAS ALWAYS BEEN INTERESTED IN COMMUNITY BUILDING AND THIS RE-ZONING IS NO DIFFERENT THERE ONCE WAS A TIME WHEN THIS LAND WAS HOME BUT THAT WAS BEFORE MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. PARKWAY WENT IN OUR BACKYARD EVER SINCE THE CITY CUT THAT ROAD IN OUR PROPERTY HAS BEEN SEPARATED SO TO SPEAK, NO LONGER ANINT GREATED PIECE WITHIN THE FABRIC OF THE COMMUNITY WE SPEAK TONIGHT REMEMBERING OUR PREDECESSORS, THEIR HARD W LOVE FOR FAMILY AND FOR THEIR HAND IN BUILDING OUR COMMUNITY >> IT HAS BEEN THE NEARLY 20 YEAR JOURNEY FOR MY FAMILY TO FIGURE OUT WHAT TO DO WITH THIS PROPERTY SINCE MARTIN LUTHER KING PARKWAY WAS BUILT MY MOTHER PLEADED WITH THE CITY TO GET ASSISTANCE INCLUDING THE CONDITION IN WHICH THE ROAD PROJECTS LEFT OUR PROPERTY SHE PASSED AWAIIN MARCH 2001 AND OUR BROTHERS AND I CONTINUED WHERE SHE BEGAN OUR VERY LONGARD YOUIS JOURNEY HAS BROUGHT THIS BEFORE YOU TONIGHT REQUESTING A FAVORABLE QUEMED RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL FOR THIS RE-ZONING THANK YOU VERY MUCH >> IC MOOAL PALMER I LIVE AT 2804 CAVSOCK DRIVE I’M GOING READ A LEFTER OF SUPPORT FROM THE BOARD OF UDI FOR WHICH I AM THE VICE CHAIR IT SAYS DEAR CHAIR BUZBY, VICE CHAIR HYMAN, MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION, FOR THE MISSION TO RAISE THE ECONOMIC WELFARE, EDUCATION AT THE SOCIAL LEVELS OF THE LOW INCOME AND UNDER PRIVILEGED RESIDENTS OF DURHAM OUR BOARD HAS RESOLVED TO LEND OUR ENDORSEMENT TO RE-ZONING CASE Z170041 FAYETTVILLE COMMERCIAL AFTER MEETING IN DECEMBER WITH OUR NEIGHBORS, MEMBERS OF HALL FAMILY OUR BOARD CAME TO RECOGNIZE THE IMPORTANCE OF THE APPROVAL OF THIS RE-ZONING FOR A LONG TIME DURHAM FAMILY THE HALLS HAVE OWNED THIS LAND SINCE THE 1940s AND HAVE SEEN IT SLOWLY DEPLETED FROM VARIOUS ROAD IMPROVEMENTS, PROJECTS OVER THE YEARS SITUATED AT THE CORNER OF MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR PARKWAY IN FAYETTEVILLE ROAD THE SITE IS WELL SUITED FOR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT WITHOUT THE RE-ZONING WE FEAR THAT THE HULK FAMILY LAND WILL CONTINUE TO DIMINISH IN VALUE AND THE HALLS WILL NOT BE ALLOWED TO REALIZE ANYTHING FROM THEIR FAMILY’S LONG-TERM AND OWNERSHIP ALL TOO OFTEN THE BARRIERS TO ENTRY AND THE RE-ZONING PROCESS ESPECIALLY THE APPLICATION AND CONSULTING FEES ACCESS AS AN IMPEDIMENT TO THE LANDOWNERS BEING AIBLE TO ACHIEVE MARKET VALUE FOR THEIR REAL ESTATE WE DO NOT WANT TO SEE THAT HAPPEN TO THE HALLS HIS FAMILY CONTRIBUTIONS WITHIN OUR COMMUNITY SERVED AS BUILDING BLOCKS FOR MANY MOREOVER AS THEIR NEIGHBOR WE GENUINELY ARE EXCITED ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF A NEW COMMERCIAL TENANT NEARBIMENT WE GLADLY WELCOME A NEW COMMERCIAL NEIGHBOR THAT WILL SERVE ONLY OUR NEED BUT THOSE OF THE GREATER COMMUNITY ALSO ALLOW THIS LONG-TERM DURHAM FAMILY TO SHARE IN THE

ECONOMIC PROSPERITY, WHICH HAS TOUCHED SO MANY IN DURHAM IT IS THE SINCERE HOPE OF UDI THAT THIS RE-ZONING WILL BE APPROVED PLEASE VOTE TO APPROVE THIS RE-ZONING SINCERELY RS STEWART PRESIDENT CEO OF UDI THANK YOU GOOD EVENING I’M DON MOFFITT, 2114 WILSON STREET HERE IN TUR FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO I DON’T KNOW I SERVE ON THE P FOR FOR SIX YEARS, I CHAIRED IT FOR THREE AND I SERVE ON THE CITY COUNCIL FOR FIVE YEARS I USUALLY ARGUE STRONGLY FOR DEVELOPMENT PLAN WAIT AT MNUTE THERE WE GO I USUALLY ARGUE STRONGLY FOR DEVELOPMENT PLAN BUT ON OCCASION I REQUIRE THAT THE PROPERTY OWNER GOING THROUGH THE SIGNIFICANT EXPENSE IN CREATING ONE I WANT TO SHARE IT WITH YOU WHY I SEE IT THAT WAY THIS SOME THE SITE IN 1993 BEFORE MARTIN LUTHER KING PARKWAY WAS CONSTRUCTED HERE IS THE SITE IN 2004 YOU CAN SEE THE PARKWAY IS NOW CONSTRUCTED IT LOWERED THE ROADWAY SUBSTANTIALLY LEAVING LEAVING TE ESSENTIALLY ON A HILL AT THIS POINT THE FAMILY STILL HAD THE ABILITY WHEN THEY DROVE OUT OF THEIR DRIVEWAY TO TURN LEFT OR RIGHT ON FAYETTVILLE PARKWAY IN THIS PHOTO FROM 2010 YOU CAN SEE THAT THE NEWLY BUILT LOWE’S AS PART OF THAT DEVELOPMENT THEY MADE SEVERAL IMPROVEMENT TO THE ROAD INCLUDE AG MEDIAN IN THE MIDDLE OF FAYETTVILLE SO THE FAMILY COULD NO LONGER TURN LEFT OUT OF THEIR PROPERTY IN THIS PHOTO IN 2017 YOU CAN SEE THE MEDIAN BOTH ALONG FAYETTVILLE AND ALONG THE PARKWAY SO THAT ALL ACCESS POINTS ARE ONLY RIGHT IN AND RIGHT OUT AND YOU CAN ONLY ACCESS THIS IF YOU’RE HEADED SOUTH ON FAYETTVILLE OR EAST ON MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR PARKWAY >> SO WHEN THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP YOU CAN SEE THAT THIS IS REALLY WELL SITUATED TO BE A COMMERCIAL NODE H IS WHAT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CALLS FOR YOU CAN SEE THAT THE LOWE’S AREA IS COMMERCIAL, THERE IS OUT PARCELS THERE, THERE IS TO THE CADDIE CORN TO THE NORTHEAST IS ANOTHER COMMERCIAL AREA IN THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND THEN A LARGE INDUSTRIAL AREA H IS MOSTLY UDI SO THE CURRENT CONDITIONS ARE HANDSOME ROAD ANDTUMERIC ROAD BOTH RIGHT NOW THIS IS THEY CAN TURN LEFT OR RIGHT COMING OUT OF FAYETTVILLE ROAD THE SITE THOUGH, AS I MENTIONED, IS THE RIGHT TURN IN AND RIGHT TURN OUT ONLY SO THERE IS WIDENING OF FAYETTVILLE ROAD, IMPROVEMENTS TO BE MADE TO MARTIN LUTHER KING AN ACCESS THAT BECOMES EVEN MORE DIFFICULT SO THE EXTENDED MEDIAN IS GOING TO FORCE BOTH HANSON ANDTUMERIC TO ONLY TURN RIGHT ON THE FAYETTVILLE ROAD THE POINT I WANT TO MAKE IS THAT THE USES OF THE SITE ARE ALREADY LOADED THAT’S ONE REASON WHY YOU MIGHT HAVE THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN REGARDLESS OF THE ZONING IT HAS POOR ACCESS THAT’S ONLY GOING TO GET WORSE A LOT OF DIFFERENT USES WOULD NOT SUCCUMB TO THIS AREA SIMPLY BECAUSE OF THE ACCESS ISSUES AND WHILE WE’RE ON THIS SLIDE I WANT TO CLEAR ATTENTION TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO THE WEST OKAY THERE IS NO MOUSE HERE, BUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO THE WEST ALONG HANSON YOD SHADY SIDE LANE, THAT’S THE ONLY AREA THAT MIGHT POSSIBLY SEE IMPACTS FROM ANY DEVELOPMENT ON THE SITE IN THIS CASE YOU CAN SEE THE ORIENTATION IS SLIGHTLY TURNEDO THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS BACK TO THE RIGHT AND YOU CAN SEE THAT FROM THE LOWE’S TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD IT IS 785 FEET TO THE SITE ITSELF IT IS AN ADDITIONAL 500 FEET FURTHER THAN THE ROW LOWE’S IN THIS ORIENTATION WE’VE SHIFTED SLIGHTLY AGAIN THIS IS THE SITE THERE IS A STREAM BETWEEN THE SITE AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT AND THE STREAM, THE TOPOGRAPHY, IT IS A 30-FOOT DROP FROM THE PROPERTY LINE DOWN TO THE STREAM SO THERE IS EFFECTIVELY A 300-FOOT, IT IS AN UNDESIGNATED BUT VERY REAL BUFFER THAT’S GOING TO EXIST AND THEN LET’S TAKE A LOOK AT THIS SITE, AS YOU KNOW FROM

THE PACKAGE, 2.856-ACRES, APART OF IT IS GOING TO GO INTO BUFFERS, SO THERE IS A 30-FOOT BUFFER IT IS ACTUALLY I THINK IT IS REQUIRING 30 FEET ALONG THE CREEK E ANOTHER 50 FEET REQUIRED BETWEEN THE PROPERTIER AND THE ADJACENT CHURCH SO BETWEEN THOSE TWO THREE QUARTERS OF AN ACRE WILL GO INTO THE BUFFERS AND THAT REDUCES IT TO JUST OVER 2-POINT-ACRES, OVER TWO ACRES, BUT THERE WAS ALSO ROAD WIDEBBING PROJECTS THAT’S GOING TO TAKE THIS MUCH LAND HERE THESE ARE ALREADY FUNDED AND SCHEDULED AND THIS IS GOING TO TAKE ANOTHER QUARTER ACRE OUT SO YOU CAN SEE THAT THEY ACTUALLY HAVE LESS THAN TWO ACRES THAT’S DEVELOPABLE SORRY PATRICK USES LIMITED BY THE SMALL SIZES OF THE SITE AS WELL AS ACCESS POINTS THANK YOU CHAIRMAN BUZBY, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION MORNING STAR LAW GROUPISM I’M HERE REPRESENTING MICHAEL HALL I JUST WANT TO WRAP UP BRIEFLY I DO VIEW THIS RE-ZONING AS A STRAIGHT FORWARD CASE OF RESTITUTION IT IS SIMPLY UNUSABLE FOR THOSE 2.8-ACRES TO HAVE RS-20 ZONING WHEN ONE IS AT THE INTERSECTION OF TWO MAJOR THOROUGHFARES AS DON NOTED THERE IS HOMES ALONG HANSAGE ROAD CLOSER TO THE HOME IMPROVEMENT THAN THE YOLANDA AND MICHAEL’S PROPERTY THAT YOU’RIC LOO AT THIS EVENING APPROXIMATELY $40,000 IT WOULD COST TO DO A DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND A TIA IS UNREASONABLE GIVEN THE ACCESS LIMITATIONS AND THE NATURAL ORDERING THAT ARE LOCKED IN THE DAY FOR THIS PROPERTY DURHAM CITY ORDINANCES INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE UDO PUT LIMITS ON NOISE, HEIGHT AND LIGHTNING AT THIS SITE THESE LIMITATIONS PROVIDE SUFFICIENT NEIGHBORHOOD PROTECTION GIVEN THE TREES, TOPOGRAPHY, BUFFERS AND ACCESS CONSTRAINTS THAT YOU JUST HEARD ABOUT AND FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS WE RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL AN WE’RE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THONG, SIR >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH WE HAVE FIVE ADDITIONAL SPEAKERS, THREE THAT SAID THEY SUPPORT WITH CONDITIONS AND TWO THAT ARE AGAINST WE ARE GOING TO HAVE THE FIVE OF YOU COME UP WHO ARE CONCERN WOULD DISTINGUISH YOU WILL HAVE AN EXTRA MINUTE OR TWO AS WE DIG FOR THE PROPONENTS OUR FIRST SPEAKER IS DAVID LISTER AND THE NEXT WILL BE JESSE BURRWELL AND THEN BARRY EVERATE WE’LL HAVE THE THREE OF YOU COME UP FIRST PLEASE >> GOOD EVENING COMMISSION, DAVID LISTER I LIVE AT 121 FALLENWOOD AVENUE I’M ALSO ON HOPE VALLEY FARMS NORTH, HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION SO I APPRECIATE WHAT YOU DO, HOW YOU SERVE AND I SERVE AND I KNOW SOMETIMES IT IS KIND OF TOUGH WE’RE LIKE THE XMAN WE SERVE PEOPLE THAT HATE AND FEAR US SO WITH THAT I WOULD LIKE THEM TO BE ABLE TO SELL THEIR PROPERTY I THINK THAT IT IS ONLY FAIR BUT I DO FEELTHRAL NEEDS TO BE SOME CONDITIONS I KNOW WHEN MY WIFE AND I WERE MOVING TO THE AREA LOOKING AROUND WE WOULD TURN DOWN HOMES THAT WOULD HAVE EITHER WENDY’S ON A CORNER OR WHAT NOT BECAUSE WE WANTED A FEELING OF COMMUNITY THE THINGS THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO SEEN THIS AREA MIGHT BE MEDICAL RETAIL, A MIXED USE BUILDING, FAMILY-STYLE RESTAURANT, GOURMET STYLE A BOOK STORE AND SOMETHING THAT’S PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY THE THINGS THE COMMUNITY IS KIND OF AGAINST IS A FAST-FOOD RESTAURANT A GAS STATION A MECHANIC AND A 24 HOUR ZONE AFTER TALKING TO AN OFFICER TODAY THAT GOES AROUND OUR COMMUNITY HE SAYS WITH THAT ROAD WITH MLK IT IS TOUGH BECAUSE IT DIVIDES DISTRICT 4 AND DISTRICT 3 AND IF WE HAVE SOMETHING THAT’S 24 HOURS AND WHAT NOT HE CALLS IT SORT OF LIKE A NO-MANS LAND SO ONE AREA CAN COME IN AND IT IS VERY DIFFICULT WE ALSO SAW IN THE COMMUNITY THAT IN THE PAST WE FOUGHT AT WAL-MART COMING IN AND THAT KIND OF DEVALUED OUR PROPERTY WE HAD SHOPLIFTING, WE HAD SPEEDING THROUGH OUR AREA AND WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE BUSINESSES ENHANCE THE COMMUNITY THAT PULL UP THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THAT MAKE IT SO WE ARE ONE AND WITH THIS TIME I WOULD LIKE TO SHARE TO YOU WHAT COMES FROM GILLOLGA BRONZE PROPHET AN AMAZING CAME FORWARD AND SAID SPEAK TO US HOUSES AND HE ANSWERED AND SAID BUILD OF YOUR IMAGININGS, BUILD A HOUSE WITHIN THE CITY WALLS, FOR EVEN AS YOU HAVE HOMECOMINGS IN YOUR TWILIGHT SO HAS THE WANDER IN YOU, THE EVER DISTANT AND ALONE YOUR HOUSE IS YOUR LARGER BODY, IT GROWS IN THE SUN AND SLIPS IN THE STILLNESS OF THE

NIGHT AND IT IS NOT DREAMLESS, IT IS NOT YOUR HOUSE DREAM AND DREAMING LEAD THE CITY FOR GROWTH AND HILLTOP WELL THEN I COULD GATHER YOUR HOUSES INTO MY HAND AND LIKE A SEWER SCATTER THEM IN FORCED MEADOW WHERE THE VALLEYS ARE YOUR STREETS AND THE GREEN PASTURE ALLEYS THAT YOU MIGHT SEEK ONE ANOTHER THROUGH VINEYARDS THAT THESE THINGS ARE NOT YET TO BE I WOULD LIKE TO SEE US REMAIN GREEN AND PROMOTE FRUIT AND TO NOT SANITIZE ALREADY ARCOMMUNITY WITH MORE CEMENT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE CHILDREN PLAYING, PLAYING CORNHOLE OR READING OR BEING WITH EACH OTHER PLAYING TOGETHER AND I DO THINK IT IS FAIR THAT THEY ARE ABLE TO SELL THEIR PROPERTY BUT I DO THINK THE OTHERS AROUND THE AREA SHOULD HAVE THEIR PROPERTY ENHANCED AS WELL SO I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH LADIES AND GENTLEMEN OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION GOOD EVENING MY NAME IS JESSE BURRWELL AND I RESIDE AT 718 HANSVILLE ROAD IN DURHAM AND I’M SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF THE OLD SECTION OF THE HANSON ROAD COMMUNITY I’LL TRY AND BE BRIEFISM THIS CASE IS A PROPOSE TOOL RE-ZONE PROPERTY AT THE CORNER OF MLK PARKWAY AND FAYETTVILLE ROAD FROM RESIDENTIAL TO COMMERCIAL MY NEIGHBORS AND I AGREE THE PROPERTY IN CESSION IS NOT SUITABLE FOR ANY TYPE OF RESIDENTIAL HOUSING SO WE KNOW THE REASON WHY THE PROPERTY OWNER MS. YOLANDA HALL AND HER LAWYER WANT TO REQUEST THIS RE-ZONING OF HER PROPERTY FROM RESIDENTIAL TO COMMERCIAL THE CONCERN OF MY NEIGHBORS AND MYSELF WITH THIS, A GENERAL COMMERCIAL ZONING IS INTENDED FOR GENERAL COMMERCIAL USES SO IF APPROVED THIS WAY THERE IS NO GUARANTEE WHAT WOULD END UP BEING THERE WITHOUT ANY ATTACHED CONDITIONS WHAT MAKES ME FEEL A LITTLE BETTER AND I WANTED TO MENTION IT PUBLICLY IS THAT MS. HALL LONG AND THE BIKER HAVE AGREED OR EXPRESSED THE WILLINGNESS TO BOTH RECEIVE AND PURSUE SUGGESTIONS FROM THE COMMUNITY OR WHAT TYPES OF COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENTS WOULD BE MOST PALATABLE TO THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES; HOWEVER, EVEN WITH THIS WE KNOW THERE IS NO GUARANTEE OF WHAT WOULD END UP BEING THERE WITH THE GENERAL COMMERCIAL ZONING FOR THE RECORD THE OLD HANSON ROAD COMMUNITY WOULD SUPPORT CERTAIN TYPES OF BUSINESSES AT THE PROPOSED SITE AND I PASSED THIS INFORMATION ON TO MR. BIKER THE OLD HANSON ROAD COMMUNITY WOULD SUPPORT COMMERCIALISM ON THE PROPOSED SITES SUCH AS A DAYCARE CENTER, A PROFESSIONAL OFFICE BUILDING LIKE A DENTIST OFFICE A DRY CLEANER’S DRUGSTORE AND GROCERY STORE AND SINCE I GAVE MR. BIKER OUR LIST I HAVE RECEIVED A LITTLE MORE INPUT AND IN REFERENCE TO A RESTAURANT MORE RESTAURANTS STRONGLY PREFER A SIT-DOWN RESTAURANT AND NOT A FAST FOOD RESTAURANT WITH THE DRIVE-THRU IT IS ALSO IMPORTANT TO KNOW THAT NO ONE I SPOKE WITH WANTED A SHEET OR SIMILAR BUSINESS THERE THAT WOULD MAINTAIN VERY LATE HOURS ON A 24-7 BASIS AND CREATE THROUGH TRAFFIC THROUGH OUR COMMUNITY AT ALL TIMES OF THE DAY OR NIGHT RESIDENTS OF THE OLD HANSON ROAD COMMUNITY ARE ASKING SIMPLY TO BE KEPT ABREAST OF WHAT’S GOING ON AND IF A GENERAL COMMERCIAL ZONING IS RECOMMENDED AND ULTIMATELY APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL WE ASK THAT A SIGNIFICANT EFFORT BE MADE TO GET COMMERCIALISM ON THAT SITE THAT IS PALATABLE TO A MAJORITY OF RESIDENTS IN THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION >> THANK YOU >> I’M A TERRIFIED PUBLIC SPEAKER SO FORGIVE ME HELLO COMMISSIONERS AND THANK YOU FOR THE TIME MY NAME IS BARRY EVERATE, 812TUMERIC LANE IN THE COMMUNITY OF GREEN GARDENS, THIS IS JUST 2 BLOCKS AWAY FROM THE PROPOSED RE-ZONING OF THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF MLK JUNIOR PARKWAY AND FAETTVILLE ROAD FROM RESIDENTIAL TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL I WOULD LIKE TO EXPRESS A FEW

CONCERNS MY HUSBAND AND I SPENT OUR ENTIRE SAVINGS IN 2003 TO BUYER OUR HOME IN GREEN GARDENS BECAUSE IT WAS AWAY FROM THE CONCRETE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT WE HAD LIVED NEXT TO BEFORE NOW WE SEE THAT COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT CHASING US ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF MLK AND FAYETTVILLE WHERE THERE WAS ONCE NOTHING BUT A BEAUTIFUL TREE LINE IT WAS NOW LOWE’S HOME IMPROVEMENT AND AUTOZEN MANY OF MY NEIGHBORS SHARE MY CONCERNS REGARDING THE PROPERTY TWO LOTS AWAY FROM US AS BEING RE-ZONEDDISM WE WOULD NOT WANT TO SEE IT USED FOR A GAS STATION AS BEEN MENTIONED OR OTHER BUSINESSES, WHICH ARE OPEN LATE INTO THE NIGHT IT WOULD BRING NOISELUTION, WHICH WE ALREADY GET FROM LOWE’S SPEAKERS AND EVEN BRINGING TRAFFIC TO AN ALREADY OLD FAYETTVILLE ROAD EVEN AN INCREASE IN CRIME WITH THE INFLUX OF STRANGERS INTO OUR AREA LATE AT NIGHT WE REALIZE THIS LAWN HAS HAD DIFFICULTY SELFING HER PROPERTY AND IS BEST DEZIEROUS OF RE-ZONING WE WISH TO BE SUPPORTIVE IN A WAY IF WE WOULD CONSIDER SOME CONDITIONS AFTER DISCUSSION MY NEIGHBORS AND I AGREE THAT THERE ARE BUSINESSES WHICH WOULD BE MORE MANNENINGABLE TO US, HE WOULD INCLUDE A TRY CLEANERS, PROFESSIONAL OR MEDICAL OFFICE, BANK, DAYCARE CENTER, BOOK STORE, BAKERY, AND MANY OTHERS WHAT THEY HAVE IN COMSON THEY ARE NOT OPEN LATE INTO THE NIGHT AND WE HOPE IF THIS RE-ZONING IS APPROVED THAT MS. LONG WILL TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION OUR HOPES FOR CONDITIONS THAT WILL MAINTAIN THE QUALITY OF LIFE IN OUR COMMUNITIES THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME >> THANK YOU MS. EVERATE WE HAVE TWO MORE SPEAKERS TO SPEAK AGAINST MICHAEL SMALLWOOD AND DENISE HESTER IF YOU COULD BOTH COME UP, PLEASE GOOD EVENING MY NAME IS MICHAEL SMALLWOOD I LIVE AT 4611 LEMONGRASS LANE I’M AN ATTORNEY WHERE THE STATE WILDLIFE REL SOURCES COMMISSION I ALSO SERVE ON THE HOA FOR THE BAYPOINT OASIS ASSOCIATION, WHICH WE ENCOMPASS THE LOWERING OFTUME AIC, HELENGRASS LANE, SHADY SIDE A FEW OTHER ROADS ACTUALLY WE HAVE A FEW CONCERNS WITH THIS PROPOSAL WILL IT BE AN ADVERSE IMPACT ON OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, ON OUR RESIDENCES? INCREASED FOOT TRAFFIC, COMMERCIAL TRAFFIC, OTHER ISSUES, COMMERCIAL PARKING, COMMERCIALS TRAFFIC OVERALL THERE IS JUST SO MANY UNKNOWNS WE DON’T REALLY KNOW HOW TO FEEL ABOUT THIS WE AREN’T OPPOSED TO THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT OR ZONING OF THIS PARCEL ALTOGETHER BUT AS IT CURRENTLY STAND WE ARE OPPOSED WITHOUT ANY LIMITATIONS, WITHOUT FURTHER TEXT COMMITMENTS THROUGHOUT THE STAFF REPORT THERE ARE SEVERAL AREAS, NO LESS THAN FIVE WHERE IT STATE THAT WITHOUT A DEVELOPMENT PLAN THERE IS TOO MANY, THERE IS UNKNOWNS THAT MOVE FORWARD WE CAN’T FULLY ADDRESS THE ADVERSE IMPACTS, POTENTIAL ADVERSE IMPACTS, THERE IS NO TIA FURTHERMORE IF WE ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT UNDER THE COMMERCIAL GENERAL TAG THEN WE’RE UPDATED TUPE ALL SORT OF DEVELOPMENTS WHICH COULD INCLUDE A NIGHT CLUB, BAS, EVEN PAY-DAY LENDERS ADDITIONALLY WHILE APPEARS GOOD ON PAPER AND WHILE IT DOES LOOK LIKE A NATURAL OUTGROWTH OF THE NORTHERN COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT BUT NO DEVELOPMENT REALLY THESE SEPARATE AREAS BETWEEN RESIDENTIAL LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL ARE SEPARATED BY THE THOROUGHFARES OF MARTIN LUTHER KING AND FAYETTEVILLE WE DON’T NECESSARILY SEE ANY IMPACT IN THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AREA OR COMMERCIAL AREA THEY DON’T FEEL ANY IMPACT FROM US SO REALLY IT WOULD BE IF THIS IS APPROVED FOR COMMERCIAL GENERAL USE IT WOULD BE ENCOURAGING INTO THIS LONG HELD RESIDENTIAL AREA >> YOU MAY FINISH YOUR COMMENT >> OKAY, THANK YOU >> FURTHERMORE, THE QUESTION IS WHY NOW? THERE IS STILL COMMERCIAL LOT AVAILABLE, THE LOWE’S DEVELOPMENT FURTHERMORE TO THE EAST IS AN UNDEVELOPED TRACT OF LAND WITH JUST TREES IN WHICH THE GREENWAY PASSES THROUGH FURTHERMORE DOWN THE ROAD WE STILL HAVE THE UNDERUTILIZED OLD WALLMART BUILDING SO FOR ALL OF THESE GENERAL REASONS

AND THE REASONS TOO MANY UNKNOWNS TO JUDGE THE POTENTIAL PUBLIC’S IMPACT OR BENEFIT WE THINK WE ARE OPPOSED TO THE PROPOSAL AS IT STAND WITHOUT A DEVELOPMENT PLAN OR TEXT COMMITMENTS OR THOSE KIND OF LIMITATIONS >> THANK YOU >> AND THANK YOU MR. SMALLWOOD >> MS. HESTER >> GOOD EVENING >> I HAVE TWO QUESTIONS IF I COULD ASK PROCEDURAL QUESTIONS BEFORE I BEGIN >> YOU MAY >> FIRST OF ALL, ARE WE COMMENTING ON THE LAND AMENDMENT OR ON THE RE-ZONING, OR BOTH >> BOTH >> OKAY >> SECOND, WHO ACTUALLY IS THE APPLICANT IS IT THE HALL FAMILY OR IS IT A DEVELOPMENT COMPANY? >> WELL IF I UNDERSTAND IT CORRECTLY AND I SHOULD BE CORRECT UNDER I DON’T GET IT CORRECTLY I BELIEVE THE HALL FAMILY IS BEING REPRESENTED BY THE MORNING STAR LAW GROUPEN THIS PROCEEDING >> NO, NO, THERE IS ON THE SHEET AND WITH STAFF REPORT THERE IS A SHEET FOR THE DEVELOPER AND IT IS SOMEONE I CAN’T REMEMBER THE NAME FROM FUCRAY VERENA AND I KNOW THE PROPERTY OWNER HAS TO GIVE CONSENT FOR RE-ZONING TO MOVE FORWARD SO I JUST WANT TO KNOW WHO OFFICIALLY IS THAT APPLICANT >> WHY DON’T WE HAVE YOU SPEAK AND THAT IS A QUESTION I CAN GUARANTEE YOU ONE OF US WILL ASK MR. BIKE TO COME BACK UP DURING THE TIME OF COMMISSIONERS >> GOOD EVENING THANK YOU >> MY NAME IS DENISE HESTER, 3526 ABERCROMBIETRIVE IN DURHAM AND I LIVE LESS THAN HALF OF A MILE FROM THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND SEVERAL YEARS AGO THIS SAME PARCEL CAME BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE CITY COUNCIL FOR A RES ZONING AND IT WAS DENIED THIS TIME IT IS BACK AND WE ARE SENSITIVE TO PROPERTY OWNERS BEING AIBLE TO USE THEIR PROPERTY AS SEE FIT WE HAVE ALWS IN PLACE THAT GOVERN OR RESTRAIN SOME OF THE USES THE THING I WANT TO SAY I GUESS THE STRONGEST STATEMENT I CAN MAKE IS THAT THERE IS NO PNO DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND AS MANY ELUDED TO THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN HAS A LOT OF USES THAT ARE UNWANTED BUT WITHOUT A DEVELOPMENT PLAN THE RESIDENTS ARE DEI92ED THE ABILITY TO FORMERLY NEGOTIATE WITH THE DEVELOPER, WHOEVER THAT TURNS OUT TO BE AND I THINK THAT’S A SERIOUS OVERSIGHT BECAUSE PEOPLE SHOULD BE ABLE TO DO THAT AND ACTUALLY HAVE COMMITTED ELEMENTS ATZ PART OF THE ACTION AND THAT IS NOT POSSIBLE WITHOUT A DEVELOPMENT PLAN AS I UNDERSTAND IT THE OTHER ISSUE IS THAT THE CG, THE MOST EXTREME FORM OF RE-ZONING FOR COMMERCIAL ALLOWS PEOPLE HAVED ALL TYPES OF USES, WHICH WE WOULD NOT WANT SUCH AS SHEETS, GAS STATIONS, NIGHT CLUBS, FIRING RANGES, BARS, LOUNGES, FAST FOOD AND WITHOUT HAVING THE ABILITY TO PROSPER AND NEGOTIATE IT IS A WIDE OPEN FIELD, SHOULD THIS PROPERTY BE REZONED IT SAID A LEVEL OF UNCERTAINTY WHERE THAT WE KNOW THE DEVELOPMENT PRESSURE PLERLY THIS CAR AND THIS INTERSECTION IS HEATING UP QUITE RAPIDLY AND I THINK EVERYBODY WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOMETHING THAT IS AN ENHANCE FRONT THE AREA I’M NOT AGAINST THE RE-ZONING I OPPOSED IT GOING TO COMMERCIAL AT THAT TIME THAT WAS BEFORE THE LOWE’S WAS BUILT AND THE LOWE’S HAS A SUBURBAN CHARACTER AND A LESS INTENSE USE, WHICH I BELIEVE I HEAR PEOPLE SAYING THAT’S SOMETHING THAT WOULD LIKE TO SEE ON THIS PARCEL THE OTHER ISSUE IS TRANSPORTATION THE STAFF REPORT OR THE DEVELOPER’S STATEMENT SAYS THAT THE CITY IS PLANNING PLANNING — CAN I KEEP GOING? >> THAT’S JUST ONE OF LIFE’S LITTLE SURPRISE SAID, BUT YOU CAN CONTINUE >> THERE WAS TRAFFIC ENHANCEMENTS DUE FOR THE FALL OF 17 HOWEVER THAT’S NOT THE CASE THE CITY ON-SITE SAYS THERE HAVE BEEN NUMEROUS DELAYS DUE TO LAND ACQUISITION AND DUE POWER NEGOTIATIONS AND THAT JANUARY 2020 IS ACTUALLY THE NEW PROJECTED COMPLETION DATE FOR THE FAYETTVILLE STREET, OUR ROAD IMPROVEMENTS FROM BARBIE ROAD I THINK TO RIDDLE ROAD SO THAT SHOULD NOT BE IN THE REPORT IT IS MISLEADING THE PUBLIC TO SAY THAT THIS WHOLE TRANSPORTATION ISSUE WILL BE SOLVED BY THAT PARTICULAR ITEM ALSO THERE IS NO TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS AND THE TRAFFIC GENERALITY FROM 48 TO ALMOST 2500 TRIPS A DAY, CERTAINLY I WOULD THINK KICKS US OVER INTO THE AREA OF

NEEDING A TIA OR SOME TYPE OF DETAILED TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS, WHICH WAS NOT PRESENT WITH THE APPLICATION THE TRANSPORTATION, THAT’S A HORRIBLE INTERSECTION RIGHT NOW AND I DON’T THINK ANYBODY WOULD DENY THAT SO WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOMETHING THAT DOESN’T ADD MORE OF A BURDEN TO THE PEOPLE WHO ARE ALREADY IN THE AREA I THINK IT IS REASONABLE FOR RESIDENTS TO ASK FOR A DEVELOPMENT PLAN OUTLINING THE APPLICANTS VISION GIBTHEN ALREADY CONGESTED NATURE OF TRAFFIC IN THE AREA, THE GROWTH POTENTIALING AND THE ACCOMPANYING DEVELOPMENT PRESSURE THROUGHOUT THE CORRIDOR THANK YOU >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH AND JUST TO CLARIFY FOR THE RECORD THIS IS ONE OF THOSE SITUATIONS WHERE WE’RE HAVING A COMBINED PUBLIC HEARING AND THEN WE’LL HAVE TWO VOTES A VOTE ON THE FUTURE LAND USE AMENDMENT AND THEN A VOTE ON THE CONCURRENT ZONING, SO WE’LL HAVE TWO MOTIONS WHEN WE FINISH AT THIS POINT I’LL MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD AND THIS IS A TIME FOR THE COMMISSIONERS FOR QUESTIONS, COMMENTS? ANY COMMISSIONERS WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK? COMMISSIONER AL-TURK >> I HAVE TWO QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT MY FIRST ON BEHALF OF MS. LESTER IF YOU COULD CLARIFY THE QUESTION ABOUT THE OWNER APPLICANT AND THEN MY SECOND QUESTION WOULD BE WHETHER BECAUSE THERE IS NO DEVELOPMENT PLAN YOU CAN NOT PROPERLY AMENDMENT TEXT AMENDMENT WOULD YOU RECOMMEND A COMMERCIAL NEIGHBORHOOD THAT IS LESS INTENSIVE >> I LOOKED HARD AT THAT, COMMISSIONER, AND THE SITE IS JUST BECAUSE IT STILL HAS ALMOST TWO ACRES OF DEVELOPABLE LAND IF I WERE ONE ACRE I WOULD HAVE AGREED THAT THE COMMERCIAL NEIGHBORHOOD ZONING DESIGNATION WOULD BE APPROPRIATE BUT BECAUSE IT IS ALMOST TWO ACRES THAT 5,000 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING LIMIT IS CONSTRAINED FOR THE DEVELOPMENT ESPECIALLY FOR A COMMERCIAL RESTAURANT COULD HAVE A BIGGER FOOTPRINT THAN 5,000, THAT IS WHY WE DID NOT CHOOSE COMMERCIAL NEIGHBORHOOD IF IT WERE A SMALLER POINT WE WOULD HAVE 1.8 ACRES IS ALMOST 90,000 SQUARE FEET, LIMITING THAT WITHIN A 90,000 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING, DOESN’T MAKE A LOT OF SENSE THE ARENA IS SIMPLY A MAILING ADDRESS THAT MS. HALL HAS FOR CONVENIENCE SAKE AND JUST TO ADDRESS ONE OF THE COMMENTS THERE IS NO DEVELOPER IN THIS CASE THERE IS JUST A PROPERTY OWNER AND OUR TEAM THAT YOU’VE HEARD FROM WHO ARE WE HAVE NO DEVELOPER WE HAVE NO USER, IF WE DID WE PROBABLY WOULD HAVE A DEVELOPMENT PLAN WE WOULD BE ABLE TO TELL YOU WHAT IT SAID BUT THESE FOLKS HAVE OWNED THIS PROPERTY FOR 75 YEARS AND WHAT HAPPENS IS A NEW USER COMES IN AND BARGAINS THEM DOWN ON THE PRICE OVER AND OVER AND OVER SO AFTER 75 YEARS OF OWNERSHIP THEY DO NOT GET ANYTHING CLOSE TO FAIR MARKET VALUE FOR A PIECE OF PROPERTY WHERE THEY’VE HAD TO PUT UP WITH THE HARDSHIPS AS YOU SAW IN OUR POWER POINT THEY’RE WHY WE DON’T HAVE A DEVELOPMENT PLAN IN ADDITION TO THE $40,000 PRICETALG THAT I QUOTED FOR YOU POINT OF REFERENCE IS REFERRED TO THAT THIS, YO LANDA 10 OR SO YEARS AGO TRIED THAT WITH THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USH FORKED $30,000, THAT’S PRETTY HARSH AND TO ASK THERTO DO IT AGAINIAN IS A LITTLE EXTREME GIVEN THE LIMITATIONS WE’VE SEEN IN REGARD TO ACCESS, THE STREAM BUFFERS, THE PROJECT BOUNDARY BUFFERS AND THE OTHER LIMITATIONS ON THIS PROPERTY I HOPE THAT ANSWERED YOUR QUESTION >> THANK YOU >> ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER? >> THANK YOU >> COMMISSIONER BRINE >> THANK YOU COMMISSIONER AL-TURK I ASKED MY QUESTION SO I’LL MOVE ON TO OTHER THINGS FIRST OF ALL, IN THE STAFF REPORT ON PAGE THREE PARAGRAPH E I THINK THERE IS AN ERA ON THE SECOND LINE AND IT TALK SAID ABOUT IL AS IN ALLOWABLE USE CATEGORY AND I THINK YOU MEAN CG >> THAT’S CORRECT THANK YOU >> AND THE OTHER COMMENT IS I TRAVEL THROUGH THIS INTERSECTION QUITE A BIT AND LIMITED TO RIGHT IN AND RIGHT OUT I THINK THERE ARE BOYING TO BE TIMES OF DAY WHEN YOU MIGHT BE ABLE TO GET INTO THIS SITE VERY EASILY BUT YOU’RE GOING TO HAVE TROUBLE GETTING OUT AND I REALLY THINK THAT IS GOING TO LIMIT THE INTEREST IN THIS SITE I KNOW THAT STAFF USED A FAST FOOD RESTAURANT AS AN EXAMPLE BUT THOSE ARE USUALLY ACTIVE AROUND RUSH HOUR AND I CAN’T

REALLY SEE A FAST FOOD RESTAURANT WANTING TO COME HERE AND ONE OTHER COMMENT THAT WAS MADE ABOUT THE VACANT WAL-MART PROPERTY, LAST TIME I DROVE BY THAT WAL-MART BUILDING I THINK IT HAD A PLANET FITNESS SIGN ON IT, SO I THINK IT HAS CHANGED THANK YOU >> THANK YOU COMMISSIONER BRINE COMMISSIONER MILLER SO IS THERE A WAY TO SHOW THE OVERHEAD PHOTO OR AERIAL FO0 I WANT TO UNDERSTAND MORE ABOUT HOW THIS CREEK WORKS AND I KNOW MR. MOFFITT GOT A LITTLE RUSHED AT THE END OF HIS PRESENTATION PATERAGE, IS THE CREEK THAT RUNS BACK THERE IS THAT A JURISDICTIONAL STREAM AND DOES IT HAVE THE MANDATORY BOUNDARY BUFFNER >> YES, SIR ON BOTH SIDE AND THAT RUNS, CAN WE GT THE MAP UP TO SHOW WHERE IT RUNS TO IT IS RIGHT HERE MR. MILLER >> AND THAT’S NOT A PROPERTY THAT IS APLICANT CONTROLLED >> THAT IS CORRECT >> THAT BUFFER TAKES UP A LOT OF THAT NEIGHBORING PARCEL >> THAT IS CORRECT IN ADDITION TO THAT WE HAVE THE PROJECT BOUNDARY BUFFERS ON TOP OF THE 100-FOOT SO THERE IS ESSENTIALLY 300 FEET OF THE UNDISTURBED FORESTLAND BETWEEN THE PROPERTY ASK THE NEAR ESTRESIDENT AND IT WILL STAY PERMANENTLY FORESTED, 300 FEET >> IS THERE ANY REASON WHY THERE COULDN’T BE A CURB CUT FROM THIS PROPERTY ON TO MLK? >> I BELIEVE THERE COULD BE A CURB CUT BUT THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE REVIEWED AS PART OF THE SITE PLAN >> THAT’S JUST I DON’T KNOW THAT I ALWAYS KNOW THE RULES BECAUSE I BELIEVE MLK AT THAT POINT IS THAT A STATE ROAD OR A CITY STREET? >> I’M AFRAID I DON’T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT >> WE MAY LOOK TO MR. JOES TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION >> BILL JOES, TRANSPORTATION, THAT IS A CITY STREET >> SO THE CITY RULES WILL CONTROL WHETHER OR NOT THERE IS A CURB CUT AND ITS PROXIMITY TO THE INTERSECTION AND THOSE KIND OF THINGS BUT IT WILL STILL BE A RIGHT IN AND RIGHT OUT! IT HAS TO BE AND WE WOULD HAVE TO COORDINATE WITH THE CIP PROJECT FOR THE INTERSECTIONAL >> IS THERE, AND MY LAST QUESTION FOR YOU PATRICK IS I UNDERSTAND THE ARGUMENTS AS YOU HAVE IT WITH THE 90,000, ALMOST 90,000 SQUARE FOOT PARCEL YOU WOULDN’T WANT TO LIMIT THE BUILDING TO 5,000 SQUARE FEET IS THERE ANY REASON THIS PARCEL COULDN’T BE SUBDIVIDED SO YOU COULD HAVE TWO CM PARCELS HERE, EACH WITH ITS OWN 5,000 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING >> YOU COULD BUT THEN YOU KNOW WE ARE TRYING TO RECRUIT RESTAURANTS TO THIS LOCATION AND A LOT OF RESTAURANT ARE OVER 5,000 SQUARE FEET AND THEY ARE GOING TO HAVE A LARK SITDOWN AREA >> I UNDERSTAND THAT BUT I THINK THE COMMISSION HAS ALSO HEARD FROM THE OPPONENT ON THE CONCERN ABOUT A DEVELOPMENTAL PLAN AND THE EQUITIES ARE OBVIOUS AND WE HEARD THOSE TOO THIS SEEMS TO ME IF YOU WOULD SEE IN YOU WOULDN’T NEED A DEVELOPMENT PLAN BECAUSE THE LIMITATIONS ON SEAN WOULD MAKE THE BUSINESSES THAT WENT INTO THIS SITE THE MORE RESTRICTED RATHER THAN CG WHICH WOULD ALLOW A LOT OF THINGS THESE PEOPLE ARE CONCERNED AND I THINK THOSE ARE LEGITIMATE COMMISSIONERS >> I AGREE WITH YOU ON MOST OF THOSE POINT BUT AT THE OWNED OF THETY WE FELT FAIR MARKET VALUE WOULD BE BETTER REALIZED IF THE BUILDING, IT COULD BE OF PERFECT HARMONIOUS USE, BUT TO LIMIT THE BUILDING SIZE WOULD BE A SIGNIFICANT IMPEDIMENT FOR THE FREE MARKET TO LOOK AT THIS SITE GIVEN WHAT COMMISSIONER BRINE JUST REFERRED TO WE HAVE TO ATTRACT SOMETHING THAT’S COMFORTABLE FOR A RIGHT IN, RIGHT OUT ACCESS, I DON’T THINK IT COULD ATTRACT A HIGH USER LIKE A FAST-FOOD RESTAURANT AND ONCE YOU SAY THAT TYPE OF USE IS LESS LIKELY THE ONES THAT ARE MORE LIKELY TO COME HERE ARE GOING TO HAVE A LARGER FOOTPRINT >> AND SO IN MILE VERY LAST QUESTION IS SO WITH THIS RIGHT IN, RIGHT OUT LIMITATION ON BOTH SIDES IS THERE ANY POSSIBILITY THE PEOPLE WHO GET INTO THIS PARCEL AND THEN WANT TO GET OUT BUT HEAD WEST ON MARTIN LUTHER KING ARE THEY GOING TO TURN ON TOTUMERIC AND FOLLOW IT ALL OF THE WAY AROUND THROUGH NEIGHBORHOOD TO FIND THE LEFTHAND TURN OUT >> IT IS CERTAINLY POSSIBLE OR THEY COULD TURN DOWN TO, THEL WAY THE ROAD IS LAID OUT TODAY IT IS GOING TO BE MORE EFFICIENT TONIGHT TURN INTO UNITED INDUSTRY, THAT WOULD BE A LOT FAST TO GET INTO MARTIN LUTHER KING PARKWAY HEADING BACK TOWARD HOPE VALLEY BUT THAT’S COUNTERINTUITIVE >> EVEN IF IT MAKES SENSE FROM THE MAP

>> I HEAR YOU BUT IT IS FASTER >> IT WOULD BE FASTER BUT IT WOULD WORRY ME MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, I WOULD FEEL BENEFITFER THIS IS CN WITHOUT A DEVELOPMENT PLAN OR CG WITH A DEVELOPMENT PLAN I UNDERSTAND THE ARGUMENTS THAT WORK AGAINST IT I HAVE TO SAY I WAS NOT EXPECTING SOLE MUCH OPPOSITION TONIGHT AS THERE IS AND I WOULD SAY THAT I HAVE HEARD WHAT THE OPPONENTS SAY AND I SHARE SOME OF THEIR CONCERNS >> THONG COMMISSIONER MILLER COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS >> I HAVE CONCERNED AS WELL AS IT RELATES TO THE PROTECTION OF THOSE THAT LIVE ON HANSON AND THE IMPACTS OF A GENERAL COMMERCIAL DESIGNATION FOR RE-ZONING AS THE IMPACTS OF THIS WOULD BE ALMOST TRAGIC AND I SAY THAT BECAUSE WE HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT THE DIMINISHED CAPACITY OF THE ACTUAL SITE THAT GROSSLY OVER TWO ACRES WHERE JUST UP THE ROAD OFF OF FAYETTEVILLE THERE IS 1.86 ACRES CURRENTLY FOR SALE FOR $225,000, WHICH I DON’T KNOW WHAT THEY ARE GOING TO DEVELOP THERE EITHER AND IS GROWLY BECOMING A COMMERCIAL ZONING SITE, BUT I JUST I HAVE HUGE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE IMPACT BECAUSE A GENERAL ZONING IT MAY INCREASE THE ABILITY FOR A QUICK FILL TO A DEVELOPER BUT IT MAY NOT AND I CAN’T SAY THAT FAST FOOD WOULD NECESSARILY BENEFIT FROM THERE BECAUSE YOU HAVE A BOJANGLES THAT IS RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET A ZAXBIES DOWN THE STREET AND A WENDY’S AND PLUS ANOTHER STRIP MALL SO I THINK FINDING A WAY THAT BENEFITS BOTH THE SELLER AS WELL AS THE RESIDENTS WILL PROBABLY GET THIS MORE FAVORABLE AT LEAST FROM MY STANDPOINT BECAUSE FIRST AND FOREMOST I AM CONCERNED ABOUT THE RESIDENT GREW UP IN THAT AREA SO PEOPLE WILL CUT THROUGH A NEIGHBORHOOD TO AVOID TRAFFIC AND THAT’S WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN IF THIS IS COMMERCIAL GENERAL WHETHER IT DOESN’T MATTER WHAT’S PUT THERE SO HOW WE ADDRESS THAT IS MY CONCERN SO HOW DO WE GO ABOUT IT IF WE’RE NOT GOING TO PROVIDE A POSSIBLE TURN-IN OFF OF MLK WHERE YOU CAN TURN IN AND TURN BACK ON TO MLK SO AVOIDING TRAFFIC OF FAYETTVILLE REGUARDLESS OF THE TIME OF THE DAY AND WITH THE PROPOSED EXPANSION OF MLK AND THE TRAFFIC IMPACT THAT GROWING TO BE THERE THERE IS GOING TO BE A STRESSER WHETHER RESIDENTIAL OR COMMERCIAL SO >> WELL TO ADDRESS, TO PIGGYBACK A LITTLE ON COMMISSIONER MILLER’S COMMENT THERE WOULD BE SO EXTENSION ON CN WITH FAST FOOD ANDTRIVE THRUSERING MANY AROUND TOWN ARE ZONED CN SO THAT WOULDN’T HAVE AN IMPACT ON THAT PARTICULAR USE WHICH WOULD BE THE HIGHEST TRAFFIC GENERATOR WE CERTAINLY WILL PETITION FOR AN ACCESS POINT ON TO MLK PARKWAY TO ACCOMMODATE THAT I THINK ANY DEVELOPMENT AT THIS SITE WOULD HAVE TO REQUEST THAT AND I BELIEVE THAT WITH THE PROPER LAYOUT IT WOULD BE FEASIBLE IN ORDER TO DIFFERENTIATE THE TRAFFIC FROM PEOPLE WHO WANT TO USE MLK VERSE PEOPLE WHO WANT TO USE FAYETTEVILLE >> I THINK THAT THAT PARTICULAR ADDRESS OR THE ABILITY TO ADDRESS THAT INSTANCE WOULD HELP YOUR CALLING I UNDERSTAND HAVING GROWN UP OUT THERE FOR YEARS THAT WAS A STAPLE I RECOGNIZE THAT ONE SOLITARY HOUSE AMONGST EVERYTHING ELSE SO I’M SURPRISED IT HAS SURVIVED THIS LONG, BUT I THINK EVEN WITH THE RE-ZONING YOU’RE GOING TO FACE THE SAME HURDLE OF BEING ABLE TO ACTUALLY SELL THE PROPERTY UNLESS THERE IS SOMETHING UP FRONT UP FRONT THAT’S ALREADY BEEN MOTIONED OR OFFERED TO YOU, BUT THAT’S DEFINITELY ENCOURAGE YOU TO TRY TO GO FORWARD WITH A PLAN THAT IS RECEPTIVE ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENT OR QUESTIONS? WE HAVE COMMISSIONER HYMAN AND THEN COMMISSIONER GIBBS >> I WOULD JUST LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT I THINK WE ALL AGREE AND MR. BIKER YOU CAN CONTINUE IF THERE IS A QUESTION IN HERE, THE EXISTING, I THINK EVERYBODY AGREED THAT THE EXISTING ZONING IS INAPPROPRIATE IT IS RESIDENTIAL SUBURBAN, AND IT IS JUST NOT A GOOD FIT FOR THAT AREA AND SOMETHING NEED TO BE DONE WE ALSO AGREE THAT YOU KNOW IT IS NOT COST EFFECTIVE TO DO A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR ALL

AND THAT IS BETTER SUITED FOR COMMERCIAL GRANTED IT IS ALWAYS DIFFICULT TO MAKE A DECISION WHEN YOU’RE NOT LOOKING AT THE SITE PLAN BUT IN SOME CASES I THINK THAT IT IS BEST TO MOVE FORWARD WITH WHAT SEEMS TO BE APPROPRIATE FOR THE AREA A LOT OF COMMERCIAL IN THE AREA >> THIS PARTICULAR PIECE OF PROPERTY CAN’T, YOU KNOW, I KNOW A LOT OF THINGS HAVE BEEN SUGGESTED AS FAR AS POCKET FOR THIS PHASE BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY WHEN YOU LOOK AT THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY NOT LOT OF THINGS ARE GOING TO FIT THERE, WHICH ELIMINATES A LOT OF THE ARGUMENTS SO I THINK THAT WE HAVE TO NOT LOSE SIGHT OF THE FACT THAT THE EXISTING ZONING IS RESIDENTIAL SUBURBAN AND IT NEED TO BE CHANGED THANK YOU >> THANK YOU COMMISSIONER GIBBS >> THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HYMAN THAT ANSWERS ONE OF MY QUESTIONS IS THERE A STRUCTURE ON THIS PROPERTY NOW, MY EYES WON’T MAGNIFY THIS, IT LOOKS LIKE EITHER A HOUSE OR >> A HOUSE IS IT OCCUPIED >> HOW DO THEY GET IN AND OUT AND IF YOU’RE SPEAKING IF YOU DON’T MIND COMING TO THE MICROPHONE PLEASE, THANK YOU >> YES, SIR BEEN CLOSED UP FOR MANY YEARS, I HAVE ABOLDER BROTHER WITH A DISABILITY AND [TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES] SOMETIMES IT IS EASIER FOR HIM TO CATCH THE BUS FROM THERE, AS OPPOSED TO ME IF I WAS NOT IN TOWN TO GET HIM TO WHERE HE NEEDED TO GO THE STRUCTURE IS THE HOUSE BUILT BY MY GRAND PARENT THAT SITS UP THERE, MOST PEOPLE DON’T REALIZE IT IS STILL SITTING UP THERE IT HAS BEEN UP THERE FOR A LOT OF YEAR SAID IT HAS PRETTY MUCH BEEN ALLOWED TO LANGUISH, SIMPLY LANGUISH AND THAT’S REALLY ALL I CAN SAY AT THIS POINT ON WHAT’S HAPPENED >> OKAY WELL THAT ANSWERS THAT QUESTION TOO AND I THINK WE HAVE A PRETTY DIFFICULT TIME IN GETTING A CURB CUT TO MAKE A LEFT TURN EITHER WAY ON EITHER STREET >> IT’S GOT TO BE RIGHT IN, RIGHT OUT COMMISSIONER GIBBS ON EITHER SIDE THERE IS NEVER GOING TO BE A LEFT TURN OUT OF THIS >> AND THAT’S, I THOUGHT THAT IS WHAT THE CURB CUT WAS THAT WAS MENTIONED EARLIER I WOULD BE INCLINED TO SAY GO AHEAD WITH TRYING TO FIND A BUYER UNDER THIS NEW ZONING I IMAGINE IT IS GOING TO HAVE TO COME BACK FOR THE COMMISSIONER FOR APPROVAL IS THAT NOT RIGHT? >> NO IT WOULD JUST BE A SITE PLAN APPROVAL APPROVED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND THE OTHER DEPARTMENTS THAT WOULD LOOK AT IT AND THAT WOULD PROBABLY WOULD REQUIRE A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS TO BE REVIEWED BY MR. JUDGE AND HIS TEAM >> I DON’T SEE ANY OTHER WAY TO DEVELOP THIS EXCEPT SELL IT TO SOMEBODY RIGHT IN, RIGHT OUT I’M GOING TO VOTE FOR THIS THING COMMISSIONER GIBBS ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? >> THANK YOU I KNOW COMMISSIONER MILLER HAD AN ADDITIONAL QUESTION >> I WANTED TO PUT A QUESTION TO MS. HESTER AND MR. BURRWALL AND MAYBE COME AROUND TO THE MIC SO THAT PEOPLE WHO WATCH THIS ON TV WILL KNOW WHAT YOU SAID AND THE QUESTION IS THE SAME FOR BOTH OF YOU, IF THIS PROPERTY WERE ZONED NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL WITHOUT A DEVELOPMENT PLAN WOULD YOU SUPPORT THIS RE-ZONING? >> WE WOULD THE HOLD HANSON ROAD COMMUNITY WOULD SUPPORT IT BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY WE WANT SOMETHING THERE THAT’S GOING TO BE PALATABLE TO A MAJORITY OF THE NEIGHBORS, I DON’T KNOW ANY SIMPLER WAY TO PUT IT THERE ARE SOME THINGS WE DO NOT WANT TO SEE THERE ANDTHER SOME THINGS WE COULD LIVE WITH AS I’VEED BEFORE THE LAND OWNER AND THE LAWYER MR. BIKER HAVE SAID THEY WILL WORK WITH US >> SO AND YOU UNDERSTAND THAT THE NEIGHBORING COMMERCIAL ZONE ONLY ALLOWS A SMALL COMMERCIAL BUILDING, ANY RESTRICTED LIST OF POTENTIAL USE SAID, AS IT COMPARED TO THE GENERAL COMMERCIAL H ALLOWS FOR A LOT MORE >> WELL SPEAKING FOR MYSELF WITHOUT TALKING TO MY NEIGHBORS I WOULD SUPPORT IT

>> AND MS. HESTER HOW WOULD YOU FEEL ABOUT IT IF THIS APPLICATION WERE FOR NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL INSTEAD OF GENERAL COMMERCIAL? I AM ALL FOR THE CITIZEN SAID BEING ABLE TO USE EVERY AVENUE OF IN50 PARTICIPATION FOR THESE TYPES OF PUBLIC OPINIONS, PUBLIC OPINION SESSIONS AND THEREAFTER, AND I’M ALSO ABOUT A 30 YEAR RESIDENT BACK IN DURHAM SINCE I GREW UP HERE AND I’VE SEEN MANY OF THINGS GO SOUTH, MANY OF THINGS THAT WAS PROMISED, BUT VERBAL MEANS NOTHING NOTHING WHAT SO WHENEVER IT COMES TO THESE TYPES OF PROCESS SAID >> BUT BACK TO MY QUESTION >> AND BACK TO YOUR QUESTION, I WOULD SUPPORT CN WITH A DEVELOPMENT PLAN, I WOULD NOT BE WILLING TO MOVE FORWARD WITHOUT A DEVELOPMENT PLAN, COMMITTED ELEMENT AND THESE COMMITTED ELEMENTS CAN REFLECT THE WISHES, HOWEVER PEOPLE NEGOTIATE FOR THE TYPES OF USES BECAUSE THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN CAN NARROW DOWN ON THE USES >> THAT’S RIGHT, >> EVEN MORE SO RESTRICTED MORE SO THAN THE ORNAMENTS, THAN UDO SO PUT ME IN THE SKEPTIC COLUMN AND I WOULD WANT A DEVELOPMENT PLAN WITH ANY TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT IN THIS CITY OR COUNTY THANK YOU >> THANK YOU MS. LESTER THANK YOU >> AND COMMISSIONER AL-TURK >> THANK YOU MR. CHAIR THIS IS A TOUGHER CASE, LIKE COMMISSIONER MILLERRED THAN I THOUGHT IT WAS GOING TO BE I ASKED THAT THE SYMPATHETIC TO THE NEIGHBORS THAT THERE ARE CONCERN SAID ABOUT TRAFFIC AND THE KIND OF USES THAT THIS WOULD ALLOW BUT I THINK COMMISSIONER HYMAN IS CORRECT TO SAY THAT THIS PROBABLY SHOULD NOT BE USED ZONED RESIDENTIAL AND THIS IS PART OF A COMMERCIAL NODE POSSIBLY AND IT JUST IT WOULD HAMPER THE APPLICANT QUITE A BIT AND MS. HALL QUITE A BIT I THINK IF WE PUSH FOR A DEVELOPMENT PLAN SO I’MNER CLINED AT THIS POINT TO SUPPORT IT WITH SOME HESITATION THANK YOU >> SEEING NO ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS WE HAVE PROVEN THAT WE ARE A DELIBERATIVE BODY AND WE WILL SHOW THAT AGAIN ON BOTH OF THE REMAINING CASES I PREDICT BUT AT THIS POINT I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR THE FIRST CASE >> MR. CHAIRMAN IF I MAY, I MOVE WE SEND CASE A1700016 THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHANGE FORWARD TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION >> SECOND >> PROPERLY MOVED BY COMMISSIONER MILLER AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BRINE WE WILL HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE PLEASE [ROLL CALL] I’M GOING TO VOTE NO ON THIS ONE >> I’M SORRY COMMISSION RECALL HORN MOLES PASSES 9-1 >> AND THEN MR. CHAIRMAN IF APPROPRIATE I’LL MOVE CASE Z 1700041 ZONING MAP CHANGE IN THE SAME CASE FORWARD TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATIONS >> SECOND >> PROPERLY MOVED BY COMMISSIONER MILLER AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HORNBUCKLE ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND THOSE OPPOSED >> MOTION CARRIES 9-1 >> GREAT THANK YOU VERY MUCH THANK YOU WE WILL MOVE ON TO OUR NEXT CASE AND AS FOLKS LEAVE THERE ARE SEATS OPENING UP SO WE ENCOURAGEIA TO GRAB A SEAT AND FOR THOSE OF YOU IN THE LOBBY YOU MAY COME IN, THERE ARE NOW SEATS AVAILABLE WE WILL MOVE TO A ZONING MAP CHANGE HEARING FOR ROLLINGDALE AND WE WILL START WITH THE STAFF REPORT >> THERE ARE A LOT OF SEATS OPEN IN THE FRONT JUST IN CASE

ANYONE IS LOOKING FOR A SEAT >> LET’S SEE IF WE CAN REINFORCE THAT BECAUSE I DON’T WANT PEOPLE MOVING IN THE MIDDLE OF A CASE WE ENCOURAGE EVERYONE TO GRAB A SEAT AND THEN WE’LL START WITH THE STAFF REPORT FOR THE ROLLINGDALE CASE >> THE FLOOR IS YOURS >> GOOD EVENING JAMIE SONIAC WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRESENTING CASE NUMBER Z1700040 THIS IS THE ROLLINGDALE ZONING MAP CHANGE REQUEST THE APPLICANT IS LANDON LOVELESS FROM UNDERFOOT PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY’S JURISDICTION, THE SITE IS 6.65-ACRES THE REQUEST IS A CHANGE FROM RESIDENTIAL SUBURBAN 20 TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT RESIDENTIAL 3.940 A PROPOSED USE IS A TOWNHOUSE DEVELOPMENT WITH TUPE 25 UNITS THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN THE SUBURBAN TIER AND ALSO LOCATED WITHIN THE CAPE FEAR RIVEN BASIN THIS MAP SHOWS AN AERIAL OF THE PROPERTY IN THE SURROUNDING AREAS, THE SUBJECT SITE IS TWO PROPERTIES HIGHLIGHTED IN RED IT IS 602 AND 606NC HIGHWAY 54 THE PROPERTY’S FRONT ON THE EASTSIDE OF THE HIGHWAY JUST NORTH OF THE INTERSECTION SAID TUFTER PLACE AND ACROSS FROM SQUALL HOLLOW LANE THE SITE IS HEAVILIED WOODISM THIS IS THE EXISTING CONDITIONS MAP AND YOU CAN SO THAT THERE IS MIGHT NOT BE ABLE TO SEE IT BUT THERE IS AN ISOLATED WETLAND TO THE REAR, WHICH ABUTS A BUFFERAGE STREAM THAT RUNS ALONG THE REAR PROPERTY BOUNDARY, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL IS PRIMARILY THE USE WITHIN THE AREA THE WOOD CROSS SAID THE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IS LOCATED DIRECTLY TO THE EAST GLENNDALE HILL SAID RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IS TO THE WEST WHITNEY PARK SPRING HILL AUTOBOND LAKE AND DARBY GLENN RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS ARE TO HAD THE SOUTHEAST >> THIS IS THE FUTURE LANDUSE MAP THE PROPERTY IS DESIGNATED LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, WHICH IS FOUR DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE OR LESS AND THIS DESIGNATION IS CONSISTENT WITH THE RE-ZONING REQUEST THE CONTEXT MAP, WHICH IS THE CURRENT SLIDE SHOW SAID THE EXISTING ZONING ON THE LEFT, WHICH IS HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW TO BE RS20 WITH THE PROPOSED 20 ON THE RIGHT SHOWN IN BLUE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT RESIDENTIAL 3.940 THIS REQUEST HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY STAFF AND DETERMINED TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE THE SIDE HIGHLIGHTS THE REQUESTED DISTRICT, SOME OF THE STANDARD THE DENSITY AGAIN IS 3.940 UNITS PER ACRE THERE WOULD BE A MINIMUM STREET YARD OF EIGHT FEET, A COMMITMENT OF TREE COVERAGE OF 20% ARE REQUIRED OPEN SPACE PERCENTAGE OF 16 MAXIMUM IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE SHOWN ON THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN IS 34 AND THERE WOULD BE A MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT OF 35 FEET THIS IS THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT SHOWS THE PROPOSED CONDITIONS IN ADDITION TO SOME OF THEIFTIMES THT I MENTIONED ON THE PREVIOUS SLIDE THE ACCESS POINTS ARE SHOWN WITH OUR POINTS, THE LIPARIAN BUFFSER SHOWN IN A HATCHED BRINE AS WELL AS A ONE FOOT NO BUILD ADJACENT TO THAT IN TERMS OF SUMMARY OF TEXT COMMITMENTS I JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT A FEW A DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE A MAXIMUM OF 25 TOWNHOUSE UNITS, THERE WILL BE A BICYCLE LANE PROVIDED ALONG THE EAST SIDE OF NC54, INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS AND TURN LANEPS AT SQUALL HOLLOW LANE AND THE ENTRANCE BUS SHELTER AND PAD ON THENERINGSIDE OF NC54A PAYMENT OF $500 PER STUDENT TO THE DURHAM PUBLIC SCHOOLS, AND ASSOCIATED DESIGN AND GRAPHIC COMMITMENTS STAFF HAS DETERMINED THOOTHE PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IN TERMS OF BEING CONSISTENT WITH THE LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL FLAM AND IS CONSISTENT WITH POLICIES 2.3, 232A, 812H, 814B AND 11.1C STAFF HAS DETERMINED THAT THIS REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND OTHER

POLICIES AD ORDINANCES I’LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE THANK YOU >> THANK YOU WE WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND WE HAVE TWO INDIVIDUALS SIGNED UP TO SPAK IN SUPPORT THE APPLICANTS, AND FOUR SIGNED UP AGAINST SO WE WILL START WITH THE APPLICANT LANDON LOVELACE AND JOSH WENDELL COME TO THE MICROPHONE PLEASE AND WE’LL HAVE TEN MINUTES FOR EACH SIDE >> THANK YOU JAMIE GOOD EVENING LADIES AND GENTLEMEN OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MY NAME IS LANDON LOVELACE WITH UNDERFOOT ENGINEERING I REPRESENT JOSH WENDELL WITH ROLLING DALE INVESTMENT LLC THE PROPERTY OWNERS I WANTED TO RUN THROUGH A LITTLE BIT ON THE SITE K. WE GET THEARIAL BACK UP ON THE SCREEN AS JAMIE MENTIONED IT IS ACTUALLY TWO PARCELS TOTALING 6.65-ACRES ABOUT A MILE AND A HALF, MILE AND THREE QUARTERS NORTHWEST OF SOUTHPOINT THERE IS A JURISDICTIONAL STREAM THAT RUNS ALONG THE EASTERN PROPERTY LINE PORTIONS OF IT ARE PAIR INIAL, WHICH WOULD HAVE 100-FOOT ON EITHER SIDE AND A PORTION OF IT IS INTERMITTENT WHICH WOULD HAVE A 50-FOOT BUFFER ON EITHER SIDE WE’VE ALSO OFFERED A 30-FOOT WIDE CORRIDOR ALONG THE SOUTHERN PROPERTY LINE THAT WOULD BE IN TREE SAVE AREA THOUGH NO NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING WAS REQUIRED WE DID HOLD THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING IN OCTOBER AND HAD A PRETTY GOOD TURNOUT I THINK THERE WAS PROBABLY 30 OR 40 FOLK SAID THERE WE’VE HAD ADDITIONAL COORDINATION WITH STAKEHOLDERS AND DURHAM STAFF SINCE THEN AND MANY OF THE TEXT AND DESIGN COMMITMENT CAME OUT OF THOSE MEETINGS AND THOSE CONVERSATIONS WE’VE ALSO HAD ADDITIONAL RECENT TEXT AND DESIGN COMMITMENTS THAT WE’RE WILLING TO OFFER TONIGHT THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO PUT IN PLACE WITH SUBSEQUENT APPROVAL PRIOR TO COUNCIL ACTIONS I DON’T KNOW IF IT IS PROPERTY TO LIST WHAT THOSE ARE RIGHT NOW >> WHY DON’T WE WAIT ONE MOMENT IF YOU DON’T MIND AND THEN WE CAN CHECK WITH THE STAFF TO MAKE SURE THAT HAS THE STAFF BEEN NOTIFIED OF THESE POTENTIAL CHANGES? >> THEY HAVE NOT, IT WAS YESTERDAY AND TODAY DISCUSSION >> YOU SHOULD BE AWARE THAT IF YOU PROFFER NEW CONDITIONS TONIGHT AND IF THE STAFF IS NOT ABLE TO YOU KNOW ACCEPT THEM AS STATED THEN IT WILL AUTOMOBILELY RESULT IN A 50 DAY CONTINUANCE SO JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE YOU’RE AWARE OF THAT >> 50 DAY CONTINUANCE >> AND WHY DON’T WE ACTUALLY HAVE THE STAFF OFFER THEIR CLARIFICATION ON THE RULES BECAUSE MY UNDER IS THAT THAT IS NOT NECESSARILY AUTOMATIC BUT IS WORTH NOTING >> STAFF IF YOU CAN CLARIFY OUR POLICY TYPICALLY WE DO NOT ACCEPT PROFFERS THE NIGHT OF THE MEETING WE ACCEPT THOSE AHEAD OF TIME HOWEVER THERE ARE A FEW WE WILL ACCEPT IF THEY ARE FAIRLY SIMPLE, STRAIGHT FORWARD I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOU’RE THINKING OF BUT ONCE WE GET THERE YOU CAN CERTAINLY SHARE THOSE WITH US AND WE CAN LET YOU KNOW IF THOSE AR SIMPLE ENOUGH TO BE HANDLED TONIGHT OR NOT WE TYPICALLY GO AHEAD AND ASK FOR A 60 DAY DEPHARRELL FOR CONTINUANCE WHEN YOU PROFFER FROM THE FLOOR >> THANK YOU I WAS PREPARED TO SHARE THE PROFFERS >> COMMISSIONERS THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY I’M GROWING TO SHARE THE PROFFERS THAT MR. LOVELESS SPOKE TO LIKE YOU SAID WE HAD A MEETING ON OCTOBER 19 WITH SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS, GOTTEN SOME GOOD INPUT FROM THAT AND ALSO FROM DURHAM AND THE CONTINUED DISCUSSIONS THAT MYSELF, MY PARTNERS AS THE DEVELOPERS AND BUILDERS AT THE SITE OF THIS PROJECT WE FELT THAT THESE WERE RELATIVELY SIMPLE AND WOULD HELP QUAIL SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT HAVE BEEN BROUGHT UP

ONE OF THE CONCERNS WAS THE STORMWATER DAM SLOPE CONCERN OVER EROSION AND ALSO AESTHETICS OF RAW DIRT SO WE HAVE NO PROBLEMS PROFFERING TO SIDE THAT SLOPE ANY SLOPE OF THE DAM ANOTHER CONCERN WAS WE SEE IN TOWN AND COMMUNITIES A LOT OF MUNOTNY AND DESIGNS, ESPECIALLY GARAGE DOORS SO WE’RE GOING TO PROFFER TO STAGGER FACADE AND BARE BURY GARAGE STYLE AND COLOR CONSIDERING ARCHITECTURAL THEME AND AVAILABILITY OF DOORS ANOTHER COMMENT, NO BUILDINGS SHALL BE PLACED CLOSER THAN 60 FEET TO TH SOUTHERN PROPERTY ALIGNED TO THE EASTERN SIDE OF THE PROPERTY ADJACENT SPACE TRACT FOR WOODCROFT NO TOWNHOME BUILDINGS CLOSER THAN 30 FEET FROM ANOTHER TOWNHOME BUILDING WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT TO KEEP SPATIAL CONSISTENCY WITH THE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES CONTIGUOUS TO THE PROPERTIES THE TWIN BUILDINGS THERE ANY ON-SITE RETAINING WALL SHALL BE OF A TAN AND BROWN EARTH TONE COLOR AND THEN ANY FOUNDATION WALLS BASE ON UNITS EXCEEDING 48 INCHES SHALL BE STONE OR BRICK VENEERED >> THANK YOU ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS WHAT WE WILL DO WE ARE IN THE MIDDLE OF A PUBLIC HEARING WHAT I WOULD ASK IS IF YOU HAVE THAT IN WRITING SHARE THAT WITH THE STAFF WHILE WE INVITE UP THE FOLK SAID WHO WISH TO TESTIFY AGAINST THE PROJECT AND THEN WHEN WE COME BACK WE’LL ASK FOR THE STAFF IN QUOTE IN TERMS OF THEIR RECOMMENDATION ON HOW TO PROCEED IN TERMS OF THE LEVEL OF PROFFERS THANK YOU >> THANK YOU >> JUST ONE MOMENT PLEASE >> SO IF YOU MAY WE WILL ASK THE FOLLOWING FOUR INDIVIDUALS TO COME UP AND BE PREPARED TO SPEAK WE MAY ASK FOR THE STAFF’S INPUT BEFORE THEN WE HAVE AND I APOLOGIZE IN ADVANCE I CAN’T READ EVERYONE’S HAND WRITING, ERICA LEGM, MARIGA JER ANDO, VONY LION AND KEITH BUDRO ANDT YOU WILL HAVE 10 MINUTES COMBINED SHE WILL NEED FEED HER TIME TO YOU OFFICIALLY IF YOUR THROAT HURT YOU MAY GIVE A THUMBS UP GREAT YES, YOU MAY >> GREAT YOU MAY PLEASE PROCEED THANK YOU >> HELLO MY NAME IS ERICA LEGM, A RESIDENT OF 19 ST. JAMES COURT AND I AM DIRECTLY IMPACTED BY THIS RE-ZONING MY FAMILY AND I MOVED HERE FROM SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA A LITTLE OVER A YEAR AGO AND OVER THE 25 YEARS THAT WE LIVE IN CALIFORNIA WE WATCHED OUR BEAUTIFUL, LIVABLE CITY BECOME SO CONGESTED AND EXPENSIVE THAT DAILY LIFE BECAME VERY DIFICULT AND UNPLEASANT WE SPENT A YEAR INVESTIGATING ALL OF THE CITY’S IN THE NATIONS TO FIGURE OUT WHERE TO RELOCATE AND WE CHOSE DURHAM WE CHOSE IT BECAUSE OF ITS DIVERSITY, PROGRESSIVE SPIRIT AND NATURAL BEAUTY AND WE’RE NOT THE ONLY ONES WHO FEEL LIKE THIS I’VE MET SO MANY TRANSPLANTS FROM ALL OVER TE COUNTRY THAT WANT TO MOVE TO DURHAM WE WANTED TO LIVE IN SOUTH DURHAM BECAUSE OF ITS PROXIMITY TO RTP FOR WORK BUT WE STRUGGLED TO FIND A NEIGHBORHOOD IN THE-AIR THAT WASN’T DEVOID OF TREES AND SURROUNDED BY CONCRETE WHEN WE FOUND WOODCRAFT IT WAS QUITE LITERALLY A BREATH OF FRESH AIR WOOD CRAF’S MISSION STATEMENT IS THAT IT IS A DEVELOPMENT THAT CO-EXISTS IN HARMONY WITH NATURE RESIDENT LOVE WOODCROFT AND PROPERTY VALUES STAY UPP, HOUSES SELL QUICKLY PEOPLE WANT TO MOVE HERE BECAUSE IT IS UNIQUE WE’RE NOT OPPOSED TO GROWTH THE PLACE WHERE WE LIVE IS SPECIAL AND WE WANT TO MAKE IT ACCESSIBLE TO ALL PEOPLE BUT WE DON’T BREVE WE HAVE TO SACRIFICE OUR COMMUNITY VALUE FOOZ DO THAT >> EVERYONE HERE AND THE MANY PEOPLE THAT SIGNED OU PETITION CARE ABOUT THE FUTURE OF OUR CITY WE WANT IT TO GROW AND WELCOME NEW RESIDENTS WHO LOVE IT AS MUCH APS WE DO AND TO BECOME INVESTED IN MAKING IT EVEN BETTER PEOPLE BECOME INVESTED IN THEIR COMMUNITY WHEN IT HAS A DISTINCTIVE IDENTITY THT INSTILLS A SESE OF PRIDE THAT IS WHAT WE NEED MORE OF THOUGHTFUL BUILDING THAT IS SENSITIVE TO THE AREA, NOT EXPENSIVE COOKIE CUTTER DEVELOPMENTS THAT DOESN’T CULTIVATE WHAT IS ALREADY GREAT ABOUT THE SPACE WE INVESTED IN WOODCROFT BECAUSE IT WAS CAREFULLY DESIGNED TO CAPITALIZE ON IT WONDERFUL NATURAL SETTING THIS RE-ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL IS NOT IN KEEPING WITH THE CHARACTER OF OUR COMMUNITY THE AREA ZONED FOR SINGLE FAMILY HOME DEVELOPERS STATE THIS RE-ZONE WILLTHET TONE FOR FURTHER EXPANSION OF THE AREA WHILE THE INFRASTRUCTURE IS NOT IN PLACE FOR THAT TYPE OF EXPANSION AT THIS TIME WE DEAL

WITH SERIOUS TRAFFIC ON THE 54 ALREADY AND THE WOODCREST PARKWAY EXPANSION IS NOT SLATED FOR COMPLETION UNTIL 2025 THEY WANT TO BUILD ON THE THIRD FLOOR CREEK, WHICH IS ALREADY ONE OF THE SIT PEACE DIRTIEST WATERWAYS THIS WILL FURTHER IMPAIRTHAL WADDERSHED AND BE A SIGNIFICANTED 92ING RISK FOR OUR PROPERTY THEY PROPOSE TO KEEP THON ABSOLUTE MINIMUM OF TREES INSTEAD OF WORKING TO INCORPORATE OUR COMMUNITIES UNIQUE AT TRIBUTES GROWTH ISN’T SLOWING DOWN IN DURHAM IT IS INCREASING AND WE NEED MAKE SURE WE ARE PLANNING AND BUILDING FOR GROWTH WHERE WE WANT IT AND WHERE IT MAKES THE MOST SENSE ENVIRONMENTALLY PLANNING COMMISSION WE SUPPORT YOUR COMMITMENT TO OUR CITY, WE APPRECIATE THE WORK YOU DO IN GUIDING THE GROWTH OF DURHAM IN ENHANCING OUR QUALITY OF LIFE ALL THE TIME WORK TOGETHER TO GROW TO MAKE OUR CITY AN EXAMPLE FOR THE REST OF THE NA >> THANK YOU >> GOOD EVENING MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MY STATEMENTS ARE A BIT MISJOINTED BECAUSE I INCLUDED PARAGRAPHS FROM MY NEIGHBORS MY NAME IS NADIA YO LANDO FOR THE PAST SIXTEEN YEARS I HAVE LIVED AT 14 STREET JAMES COURT THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO VOICE MY CONCERNS AND TO THAT OF MY NEIGHBORS I ADMIRED DURHAM’S STRATEGIES FOR GROWTH IN THE DURHAM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BUT I FEEL THAT MORE INVESTIGATION NESARY FOR ACCEPT AG REZONING CHANGE HOME VALUESEN OUR AREA HAVE GONE UP 5.8% IN THE PAST YEAR INDIVIDUALS IN HOMES INTERVIEWING THE PROPERTIES ON BOTH SIDE WILL SUFFER ECONOMIC DAMAGES BECAUSE THEIR HOMES WILL DEPRECIATE IN THE PRESENT WINDERMERE STYLES BACKYARD VIEWS OF WILDLIFE WILL BE REPLACE WOULD THE BACK OF BUILDINGS, BRIGHT FLUORESCENT LIGHTS AND CEMENT PARKING LOTS THE DEVELOPER PLANS TO RAISE THE TREES IN THE LOTS, AT AS AESTHETIC VALUE IN TERM OF THE SALE VALUES ADDED TO THE HOME THE EPIDER NOTED FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS CONTINUE ALONG HIGHWAY 54 THIS DEVELOPMENT WILL ASUST UNSETTING THE TONE FOR FEW PROJECTISM THIS DEVELOPMENT IS NOT THE MODEL RENDITION ENDURANCE PLAN WINDERMERE IS DOWN A HILL FROM THE STEEP SLOPE THAT IS PLANNED SITE, WHICH HAS US VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE STONE WATER AND THE POTENTIAL FOR DAMAGE POLLUTION THE DURHAM BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN ADVISORY COMMISSION RECOMMEND FIVE FOOT BICYCLE LANE A LESSON OF THE FOUR FOOT LANE IS PLANNED INSTEAD PROBABLY DUE TO RE-ZONING SOUTH DURHAM RIDERS DESERVE THE SAFETY TO PROVIDE THE FIVE FOOT LANE FROM THE DURHAM’S PLAN WE KNOW THAT MANY OF DURHAM’S TREES ARE SOON REACHING THE END OF THE NATURAL LIFE AND DURHAM SHOULD ADDRESS ITS POTENTIAL TO APPROPRIATE DEVELOPMENT REGULATION AND STREET SCAPE STANCE THE DEVELOPER’S REQUEST TO RAISE 80% OF THE CANOPIES NOT IN TONE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD’S PRESENT RE-ZONING THE PRPOSED RE-ZONING WLL GENERATE AN ESTIMATE 193 VEHICLES PER DAY, THIS PART OF HIGHWAY 54 HAS VERY POOR SIGHT STANCE AND IS KNOWN FOR SPEEDING, SOMETHING THAT HAS NOT ESCALATED INTO A PROBLEM EVEN THE PRESENT ZONING MAY SOON APPROVING THE RE-ZONING MAY INCREASE TRAFFIC SUBSTANTIALLY AND THIS MAY HAVE REPERCUSSIONS LASTLY, A DURHAM RESIDENT IN THE SIMILAR POSITION STATED TO YOU, WE PURCHASED HOME IN GOOD FAITH IN THIS AREA AND NOW WE’RE IN THE POSITION WHERE WE HAVE WHERE WE ARE FORCED TO DEFEND THEM UNLIKE THE DEVELOPMENT TEAM THIS IS PERSONAL FOR US BECAUSE THIS IS ALL WE HAVE PLEASE CONSIDER VOTING N FOR THIS RE-ZONING REQUEST THANK YOU >> THANK YOU MR. BUDRO >> THANK YOU # I’M KEITH BUD ROW I LIVE AT 19 SAINT JAMES COURT AND MY HOME IS DIRECTLY AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED RE-ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT I’M NOT AGAINST GROWTH THE GREATER DURHAM AREA HAS SEEN SOME OF THE SHARPEST GROWTH IN THE STATE DURHAM WILL CONTINUE TO GROW AND CHANGE IS INSEV EVTABLE WE FEEL FORTUNATE TO LIVE HERE AND WE WANT TO SEE DURHAM GROW INTO THE MOST SUCCESSFUL CITY IT CAN BE SUCCESSFUL CITIES PUT WHERE THEY NUT DEVELOPMENT, HOW IT IS ARRANGED AND WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE, THAT’S WHY WE ALL LVE OUR NEIGHBORHOODISM WOODCROFT IS A UNIQUE DEVELOPMENT, IT CULTIVATES SMALL TOWN VALUES WHILE CULTIVATING ON ITS ASSETS, SCENIC BEAUTY, ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER AND A SENSE OF COMMUNITY THAT’S WHY EVEN THOUGH IT IS AN OLDER COMMUNITY OUR PROPERTY VALUES STAY UP ALL DEVELOPMENT IS NOT CREATED EQUAL, SOME DEVELOPMENT PROJECT MAKE A COMMUNITY A BETTER PLACE TO LIVE, WORK AND VISIT, OTHERS WIL NOT THE MORETHER COMMUNITY DOES TO PROTECT AND ENHANCE UNIQUENESS WHETHER NATURAL OR ARCHITECTURAL THE MORE PEOPLE WILL WANT TO SEEK IT OUT THIS PROJECT IS AT ODDS WITH OUR COMMUNITY’S WELL THOUGHT OUT VISION OF THE FUTURE THE INTENT OF THIS RE-ZONING IS TO ALLOW THE BUILDING OF

THE CLUSTERED STRUCTURES AND WORD OF THE DEVELOPER THIS DEVELOPMENT WILL ASSIST IN SETTING THE TONE FOR FUTURE PROJECT ALONG 54 >> AND AS YOU CAN SEE AS YOU SAW FROM THE STAFF’S MAP I WISH I WOULD HAVE KNOWN I COULD HAVE PUT DIGITAL FILES TOGETHER BUT IT IS COMPLETELY SURROUNDED BY RESIDENTIAL SUBURBAN SO THIS COMPACT NEIGHBORHOOD OVERLAY IN THE CENTER IS NOT SENSITIVE TO THE UNDERLINING LAND USE OF THIS AREA AND THE RESIDENTS WHO NOW LIVE THERE >> THE KEY ISSUES I SEE ARE INSUFFICIENT PLANNING AND EFFECT OF LEVELING AND BUILDING ON A SLOPE THAT DRAINS INTO THIRD FLOOR CREEK WATER SHED, STORMWATER RUNOFF IS NOT SUFFICIENT ADDRESSED AND W ASKED THE DEVELOPERS FOR MORE DETAILS AND THEY HAD NOT TO WORRY THE ENGINEERS WOULDFUL IT OUT THIRD COURT CREEK IS MUCH POLLUTED AND IS ON THE STATE’S OH, THANK YOU, ON THE STATE’S LIST OF IMPAIRED WATERWAYS RUNOFFS FROM THE REPLACEMENT OF THE WOODLAND WITH IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COULD HARM THIS ALREADY AT RISK WATERSHED THE 54 AND I HAVE ANOTHER THESE TWO PICTURES HERE ARE PICTURES I RECENTLY TOOK OF A VERY CONGESTED 54, I DON’T KNOW IF IT’S NECESSARY TO PUT ON SCREEN BUT THIS IS RUSH HOUR ON 54 EVERY DAY IT IS TERRIBLY CONGESTED IN THE MORNINGS AND THE EVENINGS AND THE WOODCROFT EXPANSION ISN’T SCHEDULED FORCOMPLETION UNTIL 2025 DEVELOPERS WOULD LIKE TO REROAN AND RE-ZONE THE PAVING THE WAY FOR FURTHER EXPANSION BUT WE CAN BARELY MANAGE THE TRAFFIC AT PRESENT THE IS SERVED BY THE FIVE AND THE FOURTEEN BUT HOW WILL PEOPLE MOVE TO THIS DEVELOPMENT AND HAVE SAFE ACCESS THEY HAVE TO CROSS THE STREET WITHOUT A LIGHT TO ACCESS THAT THE BUS STOP THAT THEY ARE GOING TO PROVIDE WOODCROFT’S MISSION STATEMENT IS THAT IT IS A DEVELOPMENT DESIGNED TO COEXIST HARMONIOUSLY WITH NATURE THIS IS A LARGE PART OF WHAT MAKES IT UNIQUE IS IT NECESSARY OR ANY BEST INTEREST TO REMOVE 80% AND LEAVE THE MANDATORY MINIMUM OF TREES PLANNERS WERE NOT YOUR ADVERSAILLESIES, WE ARE YOUR ALLIES, WE ARE HERE BECAUSE WE CARE ALL THE TIME WORK TOGETHER FOR THE MUTUAL BENEFIT OF OUR CITY PROBLEMS LIKE AIR POLLUTION, WATER POLLUTION, TRAFFIC CONGESTION AND LOSS OF SPACE WILL EFFECT IN THE IMMEDIATE AND DOWN THE ROAD THANK YOU >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH >> IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON THIS CASE? >> SEEING NONE WE WILL MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD AND WE WILL GO BACK TO STAFF FOR GUIDANCE ON THE PROFFERS >> STAFF JAMIE SINIAC WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF OVERALL DOES NOT VIEW THE PROFFERS IN ANY NEGATIVE WAY WE WOULD JUST LIKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE ADDITIONAL TIME TO REVIEW THEM REGARDING STORMWATER THAT OTHER GROUPS MAY HAVE TO CHIME IN ON SO WE ARE ASKING FOR A 30 DAY REFERRAL AS OPPOSED TO THE 60 DAY CONTINUANCE RATHER >> GREAT, THANK YOU VERY MUH >> SO I WILL OPEN IT FOR DISCUSSION WITH THE COMMISSIONERS AND I WILL NOTE THAT IT IS PROPERTY TO LOOK FORWARD FOR A MOTION FOR A 30 DAY CONTINUANCE IF THAT IS APPROPRIATE IT IS ALSO FINE FOR US TO HAVE QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION AT THIS POINT AS WELL COMMISSIONER GHOSH? COMMISSIONER BRINE, COMMISSIONER AL-TURK >> YES THANKS I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF I UNDERSTAND YOU WANT A 30 DAY CONTINUANCE FOR THESE SPECIFIC PROFFERS ARE WE CONSIDERING THESE PROFFERS AS BEING GIVEN AT THIS TIME OR WOULD IT BE PROPERTY TO AS THE APPLICANT # IF THEY INDEED INTEND TO PROFFER THESE TONIGHT? AND I WILL SAY I BELIEVE WE’LL THREAT STAFF CLARIFY I BELIEVE THAT THE APPLICANT HAVE PROFFERED THESE OFFERS AS THEY UNDERSTOOD THE SITUATION AND THEY CHOSE TO PROFFER HIM, DID I UNDER THAT CORRECTLY >> AGAIN JAMIE SONIAC THAT IS MY UNDERRING, TESE ARE THE PROFFERS THAT ARE ON THE TABLE THAT HAVE BEEN SUGGESTED BY THE APPLICANT I SEE THEM KNODING THEIR HEAD >> OKAY GOOD QUESTION I THINK EVERYONE KNOWS WHAT WE’VE DONE I MAY HAVE MORE COMMENTS IF YOU WOULD GO TO OTHER COMMISSIONERS >> COMMISSIONER BRINE >> I’M GOING TO PASS WITH THE MOVEMENT >> COMMISSIONER AL-TURK >> OKAY THANK YOU CHAIR I HAVE TWO QUESTIONS FOR STAFF FOR JAMIE, THE SECTION ONE OF THE STAFF REPORT, WOOD, CROFT, WHAT IS THAT ZONING DESIGNATION THE HEIGHT YELLOW? >> YES, MY APOLOGIES >> THE MAP SHOULD HAVE A LEGEND STATING THAT WOODCROFT,

TO THE EAST SHOULD BE RS10 >> OKAY >> THAT’S THE BEIGE CULLER >> RIGHT >> OKAY THANK YOU AND SO THE RS10, IF I REEMBER CORRECTLY THE MAXIMUM UNIT OR ACREAGE OR UNITS PER ACRE IS 4? >> CORRECT >> ALL RIGHT AND THEN A QUESTION FOR ABOUT TRAFFIC MAYBE FOR BILL JUDGE THAT’S ANOTHER CONCERNTALITY HAS BEEN BROUGHT UP SO IF THIS IS APPROVED AND IT GOES FROM RESIDENTIAL 20 TO PDR3.94 YOU ARE NOW ESHOING THAT THE IMPACT WOULD BE 55 VEHICLES PER DAY EXTRA RIGHT I GUESS MY QUESTION IS RUSH HOUR IS A PROBLEM ON THIS ROAD SO I’M CURIOUS JUST CAN YOU ESTIMATE BASED ON YOUR VEHICLE TRAFFIC PER DAY HOW MUCH, HOW MANY VEHICLES WILL BE TRAVELLING DURING RUSHHOUR BILL JUDGE, TRANSPORTATION THE NET INCREASE OF 55 WOULD BE IN COMPARISON TO THE EXISTING ZONING NOT NECESSARILY WHAT THE SITE IS CURRENTLY GENERATING SINCE IT IS MOSTLY VACANT BUT TYPICALLY FOR A SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE OR EVE AN TOWNHOME WE CAN ASSUME ABOUT ONE TRIP IN THE PEAK HOUR FOR EACH UNIT, GENERALLY A RULE OF THUMB >> OKAY SO WE ARE TALKING ABOUT POTENTIALLY 25 EXTRA TRIPS PER DAY, 25 IN THE AMP, 25 IN THE PMP! OKAY THANK YOU >> YOU KNOW I’M, SO BACK TO MY FIRST QUESTION ABOUT DENSITY IT DOES SEEM TO ME AND I UNDERSTAND THAT TOWNHOMES ARE A LITTLE DIFFERENT THAN SINGLE FAMILY HOMES IN TERMS OF CHARACTER BUT IN TERMS OF DENSITY AND IN TERMS OF HOW IT KIND OF FITS WITHIN THE REST OF THE AREA IT SEEMS TO ME LIKE THIS DENSITY IS RELATIVELY APPROPRIATE, IT IS 3.94, THERE IS AN APARTMENT COMPLEX A FEW PARCELS NORTH OF THIS AND THAT PDR IS 3.65 SO IT SEEMS TO ME AGAIN IN TERM OF DENSITY SOMETHING THAT’S NOT COMPLETELY COMPATIBLE WITH THE NEARBY PARCELS AND IN TERMS OF TRAFFIC I DO UNDERSTAND THAT IT WOULD GENERATE EXTRA TRAFFIC BUT AT LEAST THE NUMBERS THAT WE’VE GOTTEN IT IT WOULD STILL BE UNDER THE MAXIMUM CAPACITY OF A NORTH CAROLINA 54 SO THAT’S ALL MY COMMENTS THANK YOU >> THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HYMAN >> YES MY QUESTION IS FOR THE APPLICANT IF YOU COULD STEP FORWARD WHEN YOU WERE OFFERING THE PROFFERS YOU WERE RESPONDING TO COMMENTS THAT HAD BEEN MADE AT THE COMMUNITY MEETING SO YOUR PROFFERS WERE IN RESPONSE TO YOU KNOW SOME QUESTIONS THAT HAD COME UP DURING THOSE COMMUNITY MEETINGS SO WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW AND ANY OF THE APPLICANTS WHO ARE OBJECTING TO YOU KNOW TO THE PROJECT DID ANY OF THOSE OFFERS RESPOND TO SOME OF THE CONCERN THAT YOU HAD AND IF SO COULD YOU SPEAK TO THAT? FIRST THOSE WERE IN RESPONSE TO THE MEETINGS AND SOME OF THE OBJECTIONS, THAT IS CORRECT? >> THAT IS CORRECT, MA’AM AND THOSE SPECIFIC PROFFERS WERE DUE TO VERY RECENT CONVERSATIONS THAN THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING >> SO I WOULD STILL LIKE TO KNOW FROM THOSE INDIVIDUALS WHO WERE BASICALLY AND YES THE LADY WHO RAISED, YOU CAN COME FORWARD TO THE MIC >> AND THIS QUESTION IS SPECIFICALLY TO ANY OF THE INDIVIDUALS WHO SPOKE AGAINST THIS PROPOSAL >> RIGHT >> TO MY KNOWLEDGE NO ONE HAS HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH YOU RECENTLY SO I’M NOT SURE WHAT THOSE REFER TO >> THANK YOU >> COMMISSIONER SATTERFIELD >> YES, MR. CHAIR WE HAVE MULTIPLE PROFFER THAT ARE BEFORE US, THEY ARE NOT IN WRITING STAFF IS MAKING A RECOMMENDATION THAT THIS BE CONTINUED FOR 30 DAYS, I’M NOT COMFORTABLE MAKING A DETERMINATION WITHOUT ALL OF THE INFORMATION BEFORE ME SO I’D HIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE CONTINUE THIS FOR 30 DAYS >> SECOND >> GREAT PROPERLY MOTIONED AND SECONDED WE CAN NOW CONTINUE DEBATE ON THE MOTION THAT’S ON THE FLOOR BEFORE US SO FOLKS THAT WERE ABOUT TO MAKE COMMENTS IF YOU HAVE COMMENTS ON THE MOTION, COMMISSION RECALL BRINE >> I HAVE NO COMMENTS ON THE MOTION I DID HAVE A QUESTION FOR OPPONENTS

IF I MAY ASK IT BEFORE WE VOTE I DID WANT TO JUST CLARIFY WITH STAFF ON THE MOTION THAT HAS BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED SO WE BELIEVE THAT WE CAN BE BACK, THIS WOULD BE A CONTINUANCE FOR 30 DAYS AND WE BELIEVE IN 30 DAYS WE WOULD HAVE THESE PROFFERS THAT WOULD BE IN WRITING AND IN AN UPDATED PACKET IN FRONT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THAT WAY THAT IF THE IN NAS THAT HAVE CONCERNS WOULD BE ABLE TO REVIEW THE PROFFERS IN ADVANCE AND BE ABLE TO UNDERSTAND THOSE AND COME SPEAK AGAIN IF APPROPRIATE THAT’S CORRECT >> GREAT >> GREAT, THANK YOU >> WE COMMISSIONER GHOSH ON THE MOTION >> BEFORE WE VOTE ON THE MOTION I WOULD, I THINK IT IS APPROPRIATE FOR US Y MEAN COMMISSIONER BRINE SAID HE HAD QUESTIONS FOR THE OPPONENT AND THEY ARE NOT THE APPLICANT AND I HATE TO ASK THEM TO COME BACK IN 30TYS TO TALK TO US WHEN THEY’VE TAKEN THEIR TIME TO SHOW UP TODAY I DO THINK IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO ALLOW COMMISSIONER BRINE AND ANYONE ELSE THAT HAS QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS THAT ARE DIRECTED TOWARDS THE OPPONENTS OF THIS TO HAVE SOME TIME TO DO THAT IN CASE THEY ARE NOT ABLE TO COME BACK IN 30 DAYS I EXPECT THAT THE APPLICANT WILL BE BACK IN 30 DAYS >> THAT IS FAIR THAT IS A PROPER SITE RAILROAD WINGMAN MOTION [LAUGHS] THAT’S NOT PROCEDURAL RIGHT NOW THE MOTION IS ON THE FLOOR AND THAT’S THE MATTER BEFORE US >> THAT IS TRUE NOW IF WE ARE GOING TO GO THIS ROUTE WE CAN WITHDRAWAL THE MOTION AND ALLOW FURTHER DISCUSSION AND PLACE THE MOTION BACK ON THE FLOOR F SOMEONE WHO HAS OFFERED THE MOTION WITHDRAWALS AND IN THAT CASE WITH I WILL WITHDRAWAL THE MOTION WITH THE IDEA I WILL REINTRODUCE IT AFTER THESE CONCERNS ARE ADDRESSED >> GREAT PROPERLY MOVED AND WITH DRAWN COMMISSIONER BRINE THE FLOR IS YOURS >> THANK YOU >> I HAD SEVERAL COMMENTS BUT I ONLY BASKETBALL WANT TO ASK ONE QUESTION, IALLER SAVE THE COMMENTS FOR ANOTHER TIME IN THE PRESENTATIONS BY THE I HEARD SOMEBODY MENTION PETITION AND I’D LIKE TO KNOW A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THE PETITION HOW MANY PEOPLE MAY HAVE SIGNED IT, SO FORTH PLEASE COME TO THE MIC YOU’RE WELCOME IF IT IS A COPY YOU CAN LEAVE YOU CAN CERTAINLY LAVE THAT FOR THE RECORD >> I WILL IT WAS AN ON-LINE PETITION STARTED THREE OR FOUR WEEKS AGO, GOT ALMOST 200 SIGNATURES AND THAT JUST I THINK IT IS A BRIEF, THAT THE FRONT PAGE OF THE PETITION, WHICH YOU CAN REVIEW JUST BRIEFLY GOES OVER OUR CONCERNS THERE IS ALSO I THINK I’M GOING TO BRING THIS UP BECAUSE IT IS KIND OF IN CONNECTION WITH THE PETITIONISM THERE IS AN E-MAIL GROUP OF ABOUT 50 OF US THAT I WOULD NOT, IF WE DON’T HAVE THE 30 DAYS I WOULD NOT FEEL SUPER COMFORTABLE SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF A LOT OF THESE PEOPLE M OF THEM DIRECTLY AFFECTED LIKE I AM I’D WANT TO TAKE IT BACK THESE PROFFERS, TALK ABOUT THESE PROFFERS SO I WOULD BE UNCOMFORTABLE MAKING A DECISION BASED ON NEW INFORMATION RIGHT NOW FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE >> I TAKE IT THAT THIS PETITION BASICALLY IS AGAINST THE RE-ZONING >> OH, YES >> THAT’S ALL I WANTED TO KNOW >> WHERE SHOULD I LEAVE IT MR. BUZBY >> YOU MAY ACTUALLY GIVE IT TO COMMISSIONER AL-TURK AND WE’LL ALL TAKE A LOOK AS WE CONTINUE TO DELIBERATE THANK YOU >> COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS >> I BELIEVE HE WAS BEFORE ME JOUST DIDN’T SEE HIM GO AHEAD >> COMMISSIONER GIBBS >> I HAVE A QUESTION FOR AND I DON’T KNOW WHO THIS SHOULD GO TO, I GUESS THE PROFFERS, THE APPLICANT, IT HAS TO DO WITH THE RUNOFF, THE STORMWATER RUNOFF INTO THE CREEK DID YOU PROFFER A SOLUTION THAT JUST COMPLETELY WENT OVER MY HEAD I DIDN’T EVEN HEAR IT BUT I THINK IT IS SOMETHING THAT SHOULD, I THINK IT IS A MAJOR PART OF THIS SITE AND GIVES SOME GUIDANCE AS TO WHERE THIS MAJOR PROBLEM IS GOING TO BE ADDRESSED SO THAT WE WON’T HAVE TO GO IT IS SOMETHING THAT YOU AND THAT’S SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT BEFORE NEXT TIME I THINK YOU HAVE A QUESTION THAT PROBABLY REQUIRES A LITTLE BIT OF EXPLANATION BEFORE HAND YOU’RE ASKING ABOUT STORMWATER AND WHETHER OR NOT IT IS A PROBLEM AND I THINK THAT’S ANY

TIME WE WOULD GO THROUGH A PRELIMINARY BLAT CONSTRUCTION PRANS FOR THE SITE WE WOULD BE REQUIRED TO MEET ALL CITY OF DURHAM AND STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA AND FEDERAL STORMWATER REQUIREMENTS THAT HAVE TO DO WITH WATER QUALITY, WATER QUANTITY, WHAT WE CAN FOR LEASE OFF SITE AND WHAT NOT THE PROFFER WE MADE DOESN’T NECESSARILY THAT’S A GIVEN, THAT IS SOMETHING THAT HAS TO BE DONE REGARDLESS, THE PROFFER THAT WE WERE OFFERING IS THAT BASED ON THE SITE TOPOGRAPHY WE KNOW WHERE STORMWATER WANTS TO BE DOWN AT THE BOUGHTP OF THE SITE WATER RUNS THOUSAND HILL, WE ALSO UNDERSTAND ST. JAMES SPORT WOULD BACK UP TO THAT EVEN THOUGH THERE IS 150 OR 160 FEET OF UNDISTURBED BUFFER BETWEEN ANY OF THOSE BACKYARDS AND WHERE THE TOTAL FLOW OF ANY POSSIBLE DAM WOULD BE FOR A POND I THINK A LOT OF TIES FOLKS HAVE LOOKING AT THE BACK OF A DAM BECAUSE IF IT’S NOT STABILIZED PROPERLY IT CAN LOOK NOT GOOD, IF IT’S JUST SEEDED AND THE GRASS DOESN’T GROW PROPERLY THEN YOU’RE LOOKING AT THE BACK OF A DAM THAT REALLY DOESN’T LOOK WELL SO BY OFFERING TO SOD IT THAT GIVES YOU IMMEDIATE STABILIZATION, WHICH NOT ONLY LOOKS BETTER BUT ALSO HELPS WITH ANY POTENTIAL [INAUDIBLE] AND I WASN’T TRYING TO PUT WORD IN YOUR MOUTH BUT A SITE LIKE THIS CAN BE DESIGNED AND SORT OF MITIGATE RUNOFF SLOW IT DOWN ANYWAY BUT I DIDN’T KNOW IF I MISSED SOMETHING AND THAT’S ALL MY QUESTION WAS ABOUT WHICH I THINK IS THE MAJOR IMPACT OF THIS SITE ANYWAY THANK YOU >> THANK YOU COMMISSIONER GIBBS WE ACTUALLY HAVE STAFF DID WANT TO MAKE A POINT BEFORE COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS >> GRAY SMITH WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT THE PETITION YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU IS A PRIVATE OPINION POLE TYPE PETITION IT IS NOT A PROTEST PETITION PER LAW I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE TO CLARIFY THAT TO EVERYONE >> GREAT THANK YOU >> COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS >> YES, AS FAR AS THE SITE IS CONCERNED I DID HAVE I HAD A CONCERN, AS FAR AS YOU’RE GOING IN AND DEVELOPING AND THE RETENTION WALLS ARE PERTINENT AND THEY ARE INDEED HELPFUL IN PUTTING SOD DOWN AND ALSO ENCOURAGING, BUT YOU ARE DEVELOPING IN A PARTICULAR WATERSHED TYPE AREA, THE RUNOFF ON HIGHWAY 54 IS FAST AND THE PROTECTION FOR THE NEIGHBORS AS YOU INCREASE THE WATER RUNOFF WAS IMPERVIOUS SURFACES, I WAS WONDERING WHILE THERE WAS NO MENTION ON NO CONSIDERATION FOR A RUNOFF POND ON-SITE TO DRAIN TOWARD THAT TO HELP WITH WHAT YOUR PETITION IS FOR DEVELOPMENT >> AND THAT’S A VERY GOOD QUESTION AND I THINK AND PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I’M WRONG I THINK THE ANSWER IS THAT IS NOT PROPERTY DESIGN COMMITMENT AT THE TIME OF RE-ZONING BECAUSE THAT’S SOMETHING REQUIRED PER YEAR YOUR STRANDER SANDARDS, THAT GOES WITHOUT SAYING, IT GOES BACK TO WHEN WE DEVELOP IT THIS HAPPENS TO BE A TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENT THAT IS VERY LOW DENSITY A TYPICAL TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENT IS USUALLY 8-12 UNITS PER ACRE WE’RE LOOK ATHFOUR AND WE’RE ONLY AT 34% IMPERVIOUS WHERE A TYPICAL FOR TOWNHOME IS MORE IN THE 60-70% IMPERVIOUS SO WE DON’T PROFFER A STORMWATER POND BECAUSE THAT GOES WITHOUT SAYING, AS PART OF THE REQUIREMENTS THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO DEVELOP IN THE CITY OF DURHAM THAT WE MEET ANY OF THE POST-DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF HAS TO BE DETAINED AND TREATED BACK TO PRE-DEVELOPMENT STANDARD SO THAT GOES, I THINK IT IS NOT INCLUDED BECAUSE THAT’S THE TRAINSIC IN YOUR ORDINANCE REQUIRED TELESITE PLAN I THINK THE REASON IT WASN’T SAID AT THE MEETING YOU’RE MEETING SO MUCH OPPOSITION >> AND WE TRIED TO EXPLAIN THAT AT THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING AS BEST WE COULD AND UNFORTUNATELY I THINK WHAT WAS HEARD WAS WE’LL GIVE IT OO THE ENGINEER AND THEY’LL FIGURE IT OUT AND THE ANSWER IS AT A RE-ZONING IT IS NOT APPROPRIATE PROFFER BECAUSE IT IS A REQUIREMENT AT TIME OF THE SITE PLANNER CONSTRUCTION PLAN AND I JUST WANTED TO REITERATE WHAT THE APPLICANT JUST STATED THE LEVEL OF DETAIL REGARDING TOPOGRAPHY FOR THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN IS NOT A REQUIREMENT AND FOR STORMWATER AS WELL THOSE ARISHUES THAT COME UP DURING THE SITE PLAN SO WHILE WE WILL DEFINITELY TAKE IN AND REVIEW AND PROVIDE FEEDBACK REGARDING THE PROFFER IT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WE TYPICALLY LOOK AT AND REQUIRE UNDER THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT CLEAR IN THE EVENT IT WASN’T >> THAT’S GREAT THANK YOU VERY MUCH ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS BY THE COMMISSIONERS

BEFORE I ENTERTAIN A MOTION FROM COMMISSIONER SATTERFIELD? COMMISSIONER SATTERFIELD >> YES THANK YOU I WANT TO MAKE A MOTION TO EXTEND FOR OUR CONTINUANCE OF 30 DAYS AS I MENTIONED BEFORE AND THAT WIFFLE ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO PUT TH MULTIPLE PROFFERS IN WRITING AND MAKE IT PART OF THE FORMAL APKANSASICATION AND AN OPPORTUNITY FOR STAFF TO HAVE INPUT AND THEN WE HAVE DETAILS THAT WE CAN RESPOND TO ASKING QUESTIONS ABOUT AND THE COMMUNITY CAN ALSO HAVE THEM PUT ON >> I WOULD SECOND WITH THE UNDERRING THAT 30 DAYS MEANS OUR NEXT REGULAR MEETING WHETHER THAT’S 30 DAYS FROM NOW THAT IS CORRECT SO PROPERLY MOVED AND SECONDED FOR A 30 DAY CONTINUANCE ON THIS CASE ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE SAY AYE >> AYE >> ANY OPPOSED? THAT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY SO AGAIN JUST SO WE’RE CLEAR WE WILL BE BACK AT OUR NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING WITH THIS CASE AND WHAT WILL BE POSTED ON-LINE AND WE’LL BE AVAILABLE WE’LL INCLUDE THE PROFFERS AND SO WE CERTAINLY HOPE IF YOU’RE AVAILABLE TO JOIN US AGAIN WE WOULD LOVE TO HAVE YOU JOIN US WE WILL MAKE SURE WE HAVE AN ADDITIONAL PUBLIC HEARING FOR THOSE OF YOU THAT CANNOT JOIN US AGAIN WE’LL CERTAINLY KEEP YOUR COMMENTS IN MIND AND ENCOURAGE YOU TO BE IN TOUCH IF YOU’RE NOT ABLE TO JOIN US AGAIN WE WOULD LOVE TO HEAR YOUR FEEDBACK ON THE PROFFERS AND ANY ADDITIONAL CONCERNS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE SO THANK YOU WE’LL MOVE TO OUR FINAL ITEM OF THE EVEN AND JUST TO EFFALL MIND FOLK AT THE VERY BEGINNING OF THE MEETING WEAL MADE AN U JUSTMENT TO THE AGENDA SO WE HAVE TWO HEARINGS UNFRONT OF US FOR THE OLD WEST DURHAM NPO AND WE HAVE DONE TWO THINGS WE ARE COMBINE THOSE INTO ONE PUBLIC HEARING AND THAT WILL STILL ALLOW EVERYONE TO SPEAK BU WE’LL SAVE TIME AND REDUNDANCY AND THEN, THANK YOU, AND THEN IN ADDITION WE SWITCHED THE ORDER OF THE VOTES WE WILL START WITH THE TEXT AMENDMENT AND THAT’S TC1 AND THEN WE WILL HAVE THE ZONING MAP CHANGE VOTE SECOND AND THAT’S TO CONFORM WITH EXIST ING WALL I KNOW COMMISSIONER MILLER WANTED TO SPEAK & WE’LL SEE IF OTHERS WILL SPEAK AS WELL >> THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN I RESPECTFULLY REQUEST TO BE DISQUALIFIED FROM THE HEARING IN THIS CASE UNDER OUR RULES AS IT IS MY UNDERRING THAT I SHOULD BE DISQUALIFIED MY HOME ON VIRGINIA AVENUE IS ABOUT 500 FEET AWAY FROM THE BOUNDARIES OF THE PROPOSED NPO AND SO UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES I ASK TO BE DISQUALIFIED >> MR. CHAIR I MOVE THAT COMMISSIONER MILLER BE RECUSED FROM THIS CASE >> I SECOND THE MOTION FOR THE OBSERVATION THAT I DON’T THINK HE IS DISQUALIFIED >> PROPRIETARYLY MOVED AND SECOND ISED ALL THOSE IN FAVOR AYE >> AYE >> ANY OPPOSED? GREAT AND COMMISSIONER GHOSH >> YES THANK YOU FOR THE TIME CHAIR BUZBY THOSE OF YOU WHO HAVE BEEN ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR ME ARE A WHILE OR EVEN PAYING ATTENTION EARLIER TODAY I OFTEN RECUSE MYSELF FROM CASES BECAUSE OF A CONFLICT OF INTEREST DUE TO THE TYPE OF WORK I DO THIS CASE IS NOT AS SIMPLE AS ORGANIZATIONS AND I HAVE EVALUATED WHETHER A CONFLICT EXISTS MY FIRM REPRESENTED A PROPERTY OWNER IN THIS NPO RELATED TO MATTERS ABOUT THIS NPO, BUT OUR ENGAGEMENT BY THAT PROPERTY OWNER WAS RELATED TO WHETHER THERE WAS ENOUGH INITIAL BUY-IN TO MOVE FORWARD IN THE NPO WE HAVE NEVER EXTENDED A PUBLIC MEETING OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT ON BEHALF OF THE PROPERTY OWNER WE NEVER HAVE TRIED TO INFLUENCE ANY OF THE PROVISIONS WITHIN THE NPO FOR THAT PROPERTY OWNER WE ALSO NO LONGER REPRESENT THAT PROPERTY OWNER AND HAVE NOT DONE ANY WORK ON THE NPO SINCE SOMETIME LAST YAR AND FINALLY THAT PROPERTY OWNER IS NOT THE APPLICANT ON THIS CASE ULTIMATELY I HAVE WITH COUNCIL FROM OTHERS DETERMINED THAT THERE IS NO REAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST PUT ANOTHER WAY MORNING STAR HAS NOTHING TO GAIN OR LOSE DEPENDING ON THE OUTCOME OF THIS CASE WHETHER FINANCIAL OR OTHERWISE NEXT, I ASK THAT I BE REFUSED FROM THIS MATTER SIMPLY BECAUSE OF THE APPEARANCE OF A CONFLICT OF INTEREST THE INTEGRITY OF THIS PROCESS OUT WEIGHS MY COMMITMENT TO VALENTINE APPLICATIONS THAT COME BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION BUT BEFORE A VOTE I WANT TO SAY I’M APPALLED IN WITH THE MANNER IN WHICH MY CHARACTER HAS BEEN CALLED INTO QUESTION BY CERTAIN MEMBERS WITHIN THIS NPO COMMUNITY I HAVE NEVER GIVEN ANYONE IN THE SIT A OF DURHAM OR THE COUNTY ANY REASON TO QUESTION MY ETHICAL VALUES I TAKE THE WORK THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION DOES VERY SERIOUSLY AND HAVE NEVER DONE ANYTHING TO JEOPARDIZE THAT MY LAWFIRM HAS REPRESENTED APPLICANT ON SEVERAL CONTINGEGENT CASES BUT I HAVE NEVER BEEN SUBJECTED TO WHAT I

HAVE BEEN WITH THIS DACE AND I THINK YOU ALL HAVE SEEN SOME OF THAT NASTINESS THAT THIS CASE HAS DRUMMED UP IN THE E-MAILS WE HAVE BEEN RECEIVING IT IS THE SAME HOW THIS CASE HAS BEEN SO POLARIZING I WANT TO REMIND EVERYONE IN THE AUDIENCE NO MATTER THE OUTCOME OF THIS CASE YOU ALL ARE NEIGHBORS I ENCOURAGE YOU TO CONDUCT YOURSELVES AS SUCH THANK YOU FOR THE TIME, CHAIR BUZBY AND I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE A MOTION ON THAT RECUSAL >> COMMISSIONER GHOSH COMMISSIONER HYMAN >> MOTION TO RELCUSE COMMISSIONER GHOSH >> SECOND >> PROPERLY MOVED AND SECONDED ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE >> AYE >> ANY OPPOSED? ONE OPPOSITION >> I OPPOSE >> AT THIS POINT WE WILL START WITH THE STAFF REPORT >> THANK YOU CHAIR BUBY MATT FILTER, SENIOR PLANNER, CITY COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT PROJECT MANERN FOR THIS CASE TC180001 AND TC800002 I’M GOING TO TALK FOR THE NEXT 15 MINUTE I’M GOING TO TALK ABOUT WHAT AN NPO IS, GIVE YOU A BACKGROUND ON OLE’ WEST DURHAM, THEGIA GEOGRAPHY HIGH LEVEL OVERVIEW OF THE NPO CONTENT PROVIDE A VERY BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE STAFF DETERMINATION I’M SURE YOU SAW IN YOUR PACKETS THE VERY EXTENSIVE HELVE OF DETAIL IN THERE I CAN’T HIT ONLY ALL OF THAT BUT I THINK IT WILL SUPPLEMENT WHAT I’M SHARING WITH YOU TONIGHT SO FROM A HIGH LEVEL WHAT IS AN NPO THIS IS A SPECIAL ZONE OVERLAY CREATED IN 2006 ALLOWS NEIGHBORHOOD TO ESSENTIALLY CREATE CUSTOM ZONINGS FOR THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD TO PROTECT INCOMPATIBLE DEVELOPMENT I THINK THIS IS IMPORTANT TO KNOW THIS IS RESIDENT INITIATED PROCESS, PLANNING DEPARTMENT DOES NOT INITIATE THIS PROCESS OR DIRECTED TO DO SO STAFF PROVIDE TECHNICAL SUPPORT THE OVERLAY MODIFIES ASPECT OF BASE ZONING BUT IT DOES NOT REPLACE IT AN MPO IS A MAP AND A TEXT AMENDMENT IT IS IMPORTANT TO ALSO KNOW THAT AN MPO AS IT RELATES TO RESIDENTIAL USES CAN NOT REGULATE ARCHITECTURAL OR BUILDING MATERIALS OF SINGLE FAMILY OR DUPLEX HOMES AND LASTLY IT IS JUST DIFFERENT FROM A HISTORIC DISTRICT, THEY ARE BOTH ZONING OVERLAYS, THEY HAVE DIFFERENT PROCESSIES, DIFFERENT PERMITTING APPLICATIONS, THERE IS NO, FOR EXAMPLE, COA PROCESS WITH AN NPO DURHAM ONLY HAS ONE NPO, TUSCALOOSA LAKEWOOD, APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL IN 2008, SOTE ABOUT 10 YEARS THERE IS AN NPO PROCESS WE’VE OUTLINED AND FOLLOWED, BASICALLY BREAKS DOWN INTO FIVE STEPS THE NEIGHBORHOOD SUBMITS AN APPLICATION IN THAT APPLICATION THEY NEED TO HIGHLIGHT CERTAIN CHARACTER ELEMENTS, POSSIBLE REGULATORY ITEMS, SUPPORTING INFORMATION, INCLUDING SIGNATURE OF PROPERTY OWNERS AND SUPPORT OF DEVELOPING AN NER ARE WE RECOMMEND 51% BUT IT IS NOT REQUIRED SECOND STEP IS STAFF REF VIEWED THAT’S OR THAT APPLICATION TO MOCK SURE THE APPROVED CRITERIA IS MET THE VARIETY OF CRITERIA DETAILED IN YOUR STAFF REPORTS BUT FOR HERE CONSISTING CHARACTER HAS TO HAVE AN AVERAGE AGE OF 25 YEARS, OF A STRUCTURE LARGER THAN 15-ACRES, ET CETERA >> THIRD STEP IS THAT THE JCPC THE JOINT CITY COUNTY PLANNING COMMITTEE IS MADE UP OF THREE MEMBERS OF TH CIY COUNCIL, THREE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY CHIGGERS AND TYPICALLY THE CHAIR OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION THEY REVIEW THESE APPLICATIONS WHEN WE DO GET THEM WE DO NOT GET MANY AND THEY PRIORITIZE THEM THEY TAKE A LOOK AND DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT TO TREMENDOUS PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO BEGIN WORK ON THEM WE ADD THEM TO OUR WORK PROGRAM REVIEWED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FOURTH STEP IS THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD DEELOS THE DRAFT OVERLAY THEMSELVES WITH SUPPORT FROM THE STAFF THIS INCLUDE OUTREACH DATA COLLECTION, EDUCATION, NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS THE NEIGHBORHOOD JACKSONVILLE REFINING THE ORDINANCE BASED UPON FEEDBACK AND THEN THE LAST STEP OBVIOUSLY IS APPROVAL AND DENIAL BY THE GOVERNING BODY IN THIS CASE CITY COUNCIL BUT FIRST A REF VIEW BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION WHICH IS WHAT WE’RE HERE TONIGHT FOR WHEN WE TAK ABOUT THE OLD WEST DURHAM NPO AREA I JUST WANTED TO PROVIDE A COUPLE MAPS FOR CONTEXT THIS IS ESSENTIALLY THIS DOESN’T QUITE GO TUPE THE STREET BUT IT ISWOOD IN THE NORTH, DOESN’T QUITE GO TO BROAD IN THE EAST AND IT IS ESSENTIALLYHILLS THAT IS ALONG THE SOUTH AND UP ALONG THE WEST IT IS 428 PARCELS THIS PROPOSED DOMINICK AREA >> THERE ARE 295 UNIQUE PROPERTY OWNERS THE NPO PROPOSAL IS FOCUSED ON THE RESIDENTIAL BLOCKS, NOT COMMERCIAL AREAS SO YOU’LL SEE LITTLE DOUGHNUT CUTOUT THERE THAT IS ACTUALLY KIND OF PROPERTY

>> THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS PRIMARILY MODEST SINGLE FAMILY AND DUPLEX HOMES ON URBAN LOTS I THINK THE AVERAGE LOT SIZE IS 7500 SQUARE FEET AND THE BOUNDARY LOOKS A LITTLE BIT GERRYMANDERED BUT ACTUALLY ALIGNED PRETTY WELL TO ZONING IN THE FUTURE LAND USE MAPS, WHICH YOU’LL SEE HERE IN A MOMENT SO THIS IS THE ZONING MAP, AS YOU CAN SEE 99% OF THE PROJECT AREA IS SPLIT BETWEEN RU-5 AND RU-52 THE ONLY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THOSE BEING RU52 ALLOWS THE DUPLEX BY RIGHT, RU52 IN THIS CASE IS THE DARKER BEIGE I GUESS IS WHAT YOU COULD CALL IT THERE ARE A FEW COMMERCIAL PARCELS THAT ARE KIND OF LEFT OVERS FROM WHEN THERE WAS A RE-ZONING FOR THE COMPACT DESIGN DISTRICT TO THE SOUTH BUT THEY WERECLUDED IN THIS AREA THIS IS THE FUTURE LANDUSE MAP AS YOU CAN SEE IT IS ALMOST ENTIRELY MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, AGAIN THERE ARE A FEW HOLDOVER SAID FOR WHEN THE CITY AND YOU ALL SEVERAL YEARS ERGO ADJUSTED THE FTURE LAND USE MAP AND COMPACT NEIGHBORHOOD TIERS >> SO GETTING SPECIFICALLY TO THIS CASE THE OLD WEST DURHAM NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION SUBMITTED THE PETITION IN 2014 ON THAT PETITION WERE 86 UNIQUE PROPERTY OWNER REPRESENTING 86 PARCELS AT THAT TIME IT WAS 29% OF THE PROJECT AREA AND 21% OF THE PARCELS WHILE WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THESE TYPES OF NUMBERS I DID WANT TO CORRECT AN ITEM IN THE MEMORANDUM ON PAGE 8 AS A REFERENCE TO INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE EXPRESSED OPPOSITION OR EXCLUSION IN WRITING WRITING TOE PLANNING DEPARTMENT BY JANUARY 12018 THE NUMBER SAID ARE CORRECT THE PASSENGERS ARE NOT SO I’M JUST UPDATING THEM NOW FOR YOUR INFORMATION, 27 UNIQUE PROPERTY OWNERS REPRESENTING 106 PARCELS 9% OF THE PROJECT AREA, 25% OF THE PARCELS IT IS ALSO IMPORTANT TO REALIZE YOU’LL PROBABLY HEAR DIFFERENT NUMBERS BEING CITED FOR DIFFERENT MEETINGS AND DIFFERENT PETITIONS THESE ARE SNAPSHOTS IN TIME NOT NECESSARILY WHIP COUNT THERE IS NOT AT PROCOLUMN WITH THE CITY MAINTAINING AND A ANTI COLUMN THAT UPDATES EVERY WEEK WE HAVE VARIOUS SNAPSHOTS EVERY TIME AND THIS IS ONE OF THEM PART OF THE REASON FOR THERE THE APPLICATION IS CONCERNED FOR DEMOLITION, LARGER INFILL HOMES, CHANGING THE FABRIC OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, REDUCTION IN TREE CANOPY, OVER PAVING OF THE DRIVEWAYS AND THERE HAS BEEN ROUGHLY I BELIEVE IT IS LIKE 20 DEMOLITIONS IN THE PAST DECADE SO HOW IS THE MPO DEVELOPED? IT IS IMPORTANT AGAIN TO REITERATE THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND NEIGHBORHOOD VOLUNTEERS WITH THE AUTHOR STAFF PROVIDE TECHNICAL SUPPORT, HELP SAID THEM UNDERSTAND WHAT IS ENFORCEABLE, WHAT’S LEGAL, WHAT’S NOT HOW DO YOU TABLING THIS IDEA AND TRANSLATE IT TO THE ACTUAL TEXT COMPLIANT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLANS AND WHERE NECESSARY IT HAS BEEN A VERY ACTIVE ONE YEAR PUBLIC PLANNING PROCESS, WHICH I’LL SURE YOU’RE AWARE AT THIS POINT THERE WERE BASED ON ESTIMATES FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION 205 UNIQUE PARTICIPANT BETWEEN JANUARY 1 OF 2017 AND JANUARY 1 OF 2018 SO THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF VOICES IN THIS PROCESS THERE WERE THREE PUBLICLY NOTICED WORKSHOPS AT EK POWELL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL THERE WERE 12 ADDITIONAL EVENTS HOSTED BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION NOT KIND OF THE TYPICAL PUBLIC MEETINGESS YOU SEND NOTICE LETTERS OUT BUT THEY PUT FLY FLYERS UP AND POSTED OF THAT NATURE AND ON-LINE, WE KIND OF DID THE BEST WE COULD TO TAKE THREE MONTH OF ACTIVITY AND PUT AN END TO THE PACKET FOR YOU IF YOU’RE CURIOUS TO SEE THE BACK AND FORG ON-LINE BECAUSE THAT IS AN IMPORTANT MECHANISM FOR SOME IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD WHO ARE NOT ABLE TO ATTEND PARTICULAR MEETINGS >> GOOD SUPPORT AMONG THOSE WHO HAVE PARTICIPATED IN THE PLANNING PROCESS BUT NO CLEAR DEMONSTRATIONOMP 51% OF UNIQUE PROPERTY OWNERS, THAT’S NOT REQUIRED IN THIS PROCESS BUT THAT’S SOMETHING THAT THE OPPONENTS FEEL IS VERY IMPORTANT TO NOTE THESE ARE JUST SOME VARIOUS PHOTOS FROM SOME OF THE WORKSHOPS HELD OVER THE PAST YEAR THE MOST ACTIVE ONE WAS IN NOVEMBER WE HAD A LITTLE NORTH OF 100 PEOPLE IN ATTENDANCE AT THAT 1 I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE ACTUAL SUBSTANCE OF THE NPO LET MEET JUST GET ADORING OF WATER REAL QUICK >> A DRINK OF WATER >> IT APPLIES TO ONLY SINGLE FAMILYQUAL DUPLEX DEVELOPMENT IT FOCUSES ON A FIVE TOPICS; FLOOR AREA RATIO TO LIMIT BULK, HEIGHT LOWERING THE STRUCTURE HEIGHT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, LOTS: ENERGIZING LOT DEMENTIONED SAID, TREES, BACKYARD TREES, PARKING RETUSING PARKING REQUIREMENTS AND PRERENTING WHAT YOU COULD CALL OVERPAVING THE FAR, FLOOR AREA RATIO PROVISION ADDRESSING BULK IS BY FAR THE MOST DISCUSSED AND DEBATED, PROBABLY WHEN YOU WILL RECEIVE E-MAILS OR

COMMENTS MANY OF THEM DO CENTER AROUND THIS ONE IN PARTICULAR ALTHOUGH THERE ARE A VARIETY OF OTHER CONCERNS ACROSS THE WORK THE PROPOSALS CAPS STRUCTURAL SQUARE FOOTAGE RELATIVE TO LOT SIZE SO A FLOOR AREA RATIO 32.5% FOR EXAMPLE ON A 7500 SQUARE FOOT LOT WHICH IS THE AVERAGE LOT IN OLD WEST DURHAM MEANS YOU WOULD BE ALLOWED UNDER THIS PROPOSAL MAXIMUM OF 2438 SQUARE FEET NOW WHAT IS INCLUDED IN THAT IS THE FOLLOWING IT IS THE HEATED SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE ADDED TO THE TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE OF AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE REQUIRING A PERMIT, TAKE THAT TOGETHER YOU DIVIDE IT BY THE LOT SIZE AND YOU GET A NUMBER EITHER YOU’RE BELOW THAT NUMBER OR AT THAT NUMBER YOU’RE ABOVE THAT NUMBER, AND IT ALLOWS YOU, TELLS YOU WHETHER OR NOT HOW MUCH ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT YOU COULD VIEW ON YOUR RESIDENTIAL PARCEL SO ENTHUSIASM — SO AN EXAMPLE, A 7500 SQUARE FOOT LOT CONTAINS A SIGLE FAMILY HOME WITH 1400 SQUARE FEET, 1400 SQUARE FOOT UNHEAT GARAGE THE RESIDENTIAL LOT IS 1450 FOR THE HOUSE, 40 FOR THE GARAGE, DIVIDED BY THE LOT SIZE GIVES YOU 24.7%, SO IN THIS SCENARIO BECAUSE 32.5% IS THE CAP THERE IS ABOUT 8% LEFT UNDER THAT CAP OR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT ON THAT PROPERTY THIS IS JUST GIVING YOU A SENSE OF WHAT THE FAR’S IN OLD WEST DURHAM CURRENTLY ARE THIS IS BROKEN DOWN FROM SMALLEST TO LARGEST BY CORTILE THE RED DOT ACROSS THE WAY IS 32.5% SO YOU COULD THINK OF THE SPACE AS THE ADDITIONAL QUALIFYING DEVELOPMENT THAT COULD OCCUR ON EACH OF THESE PARCELS SO IN SUMMARY, TOPIC ONE, CURRENT RESHULATIONS, THERE IS NO LIMIT ON FLOOR AREA PRESENTLY IF YOU’RE UNDER THE HEIGHT CAP PRESENTLY ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS ARE CAPPED AT 30% OF HEAT. SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE STRUCTURE, CURRENT REGULATIONS PROPOSED REGULATIONS LIMING FLOOR AREA TO 32.5% OF LOT SIZE WITH SOME OF THE CAVEATS THAT YOU’LL SEE SUCH AS EXEMPTING BASEMENTS BUT IT ALSO INCREASES THE 80U CAP TO 50% OF HEATED SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE BUT IT IS LIMITING THAT TO A 700 SQUARE FOOT TOTAL AND THIS NOW COUNTS TOWARD THE FAR SECOND COMPONENT HEIGHT CURRENT REGULATIONS SAY THAT HEIGHT IS MEASURED BY ESSENTIALLY TAKING THE AVERAGE OF A PITCH LIKE THIS, SICE YOU’RE TAKING THE AVERAGE THOUGH IT IS THE MIDPOINT THERE IS NO APEX HEIGHT, FOR THE PRIMARY — >> YOU MAY CONTINUE YOUR COMMENT >> THANK YOU, CHAIR, I APPRECIATE THAT THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT ALLOWED PRESENTLY IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD IS 35 FEET BUT YOU COULD BOW TUPE 45 FEET IF YOU DO A ONE TO ONE SETBACK THERE IS INFILL STANDARD THAT LIMIT YOU TO NOT BEING MORE THAN 14 FEET TALLER THAN THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES ACCESSORY STRUCTURES THAT STILL REMAINS BUT YOU CAN NOT EXCEED 25 FEET WHEN WITHIN FIVE FEET OF THE PROPERTY LINE SO THAT’S CURRENT IN COMPARING TO THE PROS AND THE NPO THE NPO PROPOSES A NEW HEIGHT MEASUREMENT APEX HEIGHT ESSENTIALLY TAKING A LOOK AT THE TALLEST POINT IN ADDITION TO THAT MIDT POINT, EXEMPTING CHIMNEYS AND ANTENNAS IT SET A NEW PRIMARY STRUCTURE HEIGHT CAP OF 31 FEET THAT APEX HEIGHT AND REDUCING THE MIDPOINT HEIGHT DUNE 26 SO IT WAS 35 AND NOW IT IS GOING TO DOWN TO 26 ADDING THE 31% APEX HEIGHT THEY ARE ALSO PROPOSING TO SET A NEW ACCESSORY STRUCTURE HEIGHT CAP OF 20 FEET MIDPOINT AND INTRODUCING A SETBACK REQUIREMENT OF 10 FEET IF HEIGHT OF THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE EXCEED 16 FEET AND I’M SURE YOU HAVE QUESTIONS AS TO HOW THESE NUMBERS WERE REACHED I THINK THE OPPONENTS WOULD BE THE PERFECT PEOPLE TO ANSWER– WELL OPPONENTS MIGHT AS WELL [LAUGHS] WELL PROPONENTS WOULD BE THE BEST TO ANSWER THAT ALTHOUGH STAFF WOULD BE CERTAINLY WELCOME TO COOMB IN LATER FYI 80% OF THE HOMESSEN WEST DURHAM ARE SINGLE STORY SO IN GENERAL THIS ACCOMMODATES A TWO-STORY HOME AND ONE AND A HALF STORY ACCESSORY STRUCTURE THIS IS THE IMAGE ALREADY INCLUDED IN THE DRAFT ORDINANCE FOR YOUR REVIEW THIRD COMPONENT STANDARDIZING LOT SIZE SIZES CURRENT REGULATIONS THERE IS NO MAXIMUM LOT AREA CURRENTLY MINIMUM LOT WIDTH VARIES SOMEWHAT BASED ON THE TYPE OF PROJECT, TYPE OF USE, WHETHER A LARGE PROJECT OR A SMALL PROJECT AS WELL AS THE LOT WIDTH OF THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES FLAG LOTS ARE ALLOWED PROPOSED REGULATION SAID TRY TO STREAMLINE TIS A LITTLE BIT MAXIMUM LOT AREA OF 12,000 SQUARE FEET MINIMUM LOT WIDTH OF 50 FEET

AND PROHIBITING FLAG LOTS FOURTH COMPONENT REQUIRING A BACK YARD TREE THE CURRENT REGULATION IS THERE A STREET TREE REQUIRED FOR 40 FEET OF EVERY STREET FRONTAGE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD NO REGULATION ON TREES IN THE BACKYARD YOU CAN HAVE A BUTCHER NONE, NO REGULATION THE PROPOSAL THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION HAS PUT TOGETHER SAYS THEY WOULD LIKE TO REQUIRE A BACKYARD CANOPY TREE OF TWO INCHES OR GREATER IN CALIPER TO REL EXIST THE TREE CANOPY ALREADY THERE SOME OF THE NEW DEVELOPMENT IS SCRAPING THE ENTIRE LOT AND REMOVING THE BACKYARD TREES TO ACCOMMODATE LARGER ACCESSORY STRUCTURES, LARGER HOMES, A LARGE PARKING PADS,THENINGS OF THAT NAPER >> THE LAST COMPONENT IS REDOUSING PAINING AND OFFSTREET PARKING NUMBERS CURRENT REGULATION SAYS THAT THE DRIVEWAY, THE PAVING CAN EXCEED 25 FEET IN WIDTH UNLESS SHOWN AT A PLOT PLAN SHOWN ON A PLOT PLAN YOU CAN GO WIDER AS IT RELATE TO CURRENT OFF STREET REQUIREMENT, TWO PER TWELLING UNIT NOW ZERO THAT’S A CHANGE ACTUALLY THAT WAS DRIVEN, THAT CAME FROM OLD WEST DURHAM THAT WE’VE APPLIED CITY WIDE, THAT’S AN EXAMPLE OF LEADERSHIP LOCALLY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE WE THOUGHT IT WAS A GOOD IDEA WE APPLIED IT CITY WIDE BUT THAT’S STILL IN THE ORDIANCE PROPOSED REGULATION ESTABLISHES THE MAXIMUM WIDTH OF 12 FEET THAT ALLOWS EXPANSION OF 400 SQUARE FEET OUT TO 24 FEED IN IDWITHTH BEHIND THE FRONT BUILDING LINE AND REDUCES THE OFFSTREET PARKING SPACES TO ONE PER DWELLING UNIT IT IS JUST IMPORTANT TO NOTE GARAGES AND WIDE DRIVEWAYS ARE NOT COMMON FEATURES SO REDUCTION ON THESE REQUIREMENTS ARE LESS PAVING AND THIS IDEA THERE MIGHT BE MORE GREENSPACE, ASSIST WITH STORMWATER THINGS OF THAT NATURE AND BECAUSE YOU’RE REQUIRING LESS PARKING YOU CAN KIND OF TIGHTEN UP SOME OF THOSE PAVING STANDARDS SO THIS IS JUST A SUMMARY OF CONTENT REFFLECT NPO REFLECT YEARS OF GRASSROOTS PUBLIC OUTREACH AND CONSENSUS BUILDING FOR A VARIETY OF POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES WHICH EXIST, WHICH ARE DETAILED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND I’M CERTAIN THAT OPPONENT AND PROPONENTS WILL SHARE WITH YOU SHORTLY THE PROPOSAL ATTEMPT TO BALANCE NEW INVESTMENT WITH SOME MAINTENANCE AND PRESERVATION OF WHAT MAKES OLD WEST DURHAM OLD WEST DURHAM AND RELATING TO HEIGHT AND BULK THE PROPOSED CAPS DO EXCEED THE ESTABLISHED BUILT ENVIRONMENT, THE TYPICAL PROPERTY HOWEVERTHER PROBABLY MANY CASES WHERE ADDITIONS AND NEW HOMES WOULD BE AFFECTED AND LIMITED UNDER THIS PROPOSED ORDINANCE AND THAT’S ONE OF TH TRADE OFFS THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS MADE HERE STAFF DETERMINATION, JUST FOR CLARITY IN EVERYBODY IN THE ROOM STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OR IT NILE OF N NPO IT IS CONSISTENT NEIGHBORHOOD PROTECTION OVERLAYS AS WELL AS ENSURE THAT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IS CONTEXTIAL IN FILL CAPACITY WE RECOMMEND TO YOU TONIGHT TO RECEIVE THE PORT REPORT, HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING AND PROVIDE A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL I WOULD BE HAPPY TO TAKE ANY QUESTION SAID IF THEY ARE VERY TECHNICAL IN NATURE, I ANTICIPATE YOU PROBABLY HAVE A LOT OF QUESTIONS, MANY MAY BE ANSWERED BY THE PROPONENTS AND OPPONENTS SO OF COURSE DEFER TO YOU ON HOW YOU WOULD LIKE TO PROCEED BUT I’M HAPPY T ANSWER QUESTIONS IF YOU FEEL APPROPRIATE >> GREAT THANK YOU MR. FILTER I THINK WHAT WOULD MAKE THE MOST SENSE WOULD BE FOR US TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND THEN WE’LL HAVE YOU AVAILABLE TO PROVIDE ANY CLARIFICATION IF WE HAVE ANY AND ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS WE MIGHT HAVE AGAIN, JUST TO REMIND EVERYBODY IF YOU WEREN’T HERE EARLIER THE PROCESS FROM HERE FORWARD IS WE WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING WE HAVE A HAVE A UTLOT OF FOLKS WHO HAVE SIGNED UP FOR AND AGAINST SO WE’RE GOING TO HAVE TO EXTEND THE AMOUNT OF TIME TRADITIONALLY WE OFFER 10 MINUTES FROPONENTS AND 10 MINUTES FOR OPPONENTS WE HAVE 14 PEOPLE SIGN UPPED IN 5ER AND 25 AGAINST AND SO WE OFFER EQUAL TIME SO YOU MAY HAVE TO BARE WITH US FOR A MOMENT AND WE WILL THOUGH WORK TO EXTEND THE TIME AVAILABLE FOR EVERYONE TO BE ABLE TO SPEAK IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK YOU ARE ALSO AVAILABLE TO DECIDE TO NOT SPEAK WHEN YOUR NAME IS CALLED, YOU CAN DECLINE TO SPEAK OR OFFER YOUR TIME TO SOMEONE ELSE WE WILL HAVE THAT PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD NOW U WHEN YOU TO SPEAK WE ASK YOU COME TO THE MICROPHONE, STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR MAILING ADDRESS AND YOU SPEAK TO US AS THE COMMISSIONERS AND SO WE ASK THAT YOU DIRECT YOUR COMMENTS TO US, WE ASK THAT THEY ARE RESPECTFUL COMMENTS, THAT IT GIVES YOU THE OPPORTUNITY TO TALK ABOUT WHAT YOU LIKE OR WHAT YOU DON’T LIKE ABOUT THIS SPECIFIC PROPOSAL AT THE END WE’LL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD, THE PUBLIC HEARING AND AS YOU’VE SEEN BEFORE WE’LL OPEN IT UP FOR COMMISSIONERS TO BE ABLE TO ASK QUESTIONS THEY MAY CALL ONE OF YOU SPECIFICALLY BACK UP TO THE MICROPHONE TO HELP PROVIDE SOME CLARIFICATION OR MAY BE A QUESTION FOR STAFF OR JUST TALKING AMONGST OURSELVES ABOUT WHAT WE’RE THINKING OR QUESTIONS THAT WE HAVE AND THEN AS I HAD AT THE END WE WILL HAVE TWO MOTIONS ON THE TWO DIFFERENT ISSUES AND THEN

JUST A REMINDER WE ARE ADVISORY BODY ONLY, WHETHER IT IS A FAVORABLE OR UNFAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION THIS WILL MOVE FORWARD TO THE GOVERNING BODY, THE CITY COUNCIL AND I BELIEVE CORRECT ME IF I’M WRONG STAFF, USUALLY IT IS A TWO-CYCLE OR A 60 DAY TIME FRAME FROM MOVING TO US TO THE CITY COUNCIL >> BEFORE WE OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO DETERMINE THE APPROPRIATE AMOUNT OOF TIME >> IF I’M IN ORDER I WOULD ALLOW EACH SIDE 30 MINUTES AND THAT WE HAVE TO ADJUST THAT WE CAN BUT I MOVE THAT WE EXTEND THE PERIOD FOR EACH SIDE 30 MINUTES TO GIVE US AN ADDITIONAL HOUR >> PROPERLY MOVED AND SECONDED ANY COMMENTS BEFORE WE VOTE DISCUSSION ON THE ITEM? ANY OPPOSED? >> OKAY STAFF? >> STAFF HAS ONE CLARIFICATION HOW DO YOU PROPOSE TO DIVVY THE 30 MINUTE UP? >> VERY CAREFULLY >> [AUDIENCE LAUGHS] IN RUNNING THIS CLOCK, IT HAS A MIND OF ITS ON, IT GOES OFF AND WE HAVEN’T SET IT WE WOULD LIKE TO TRY TO ATTEMPT TO GET IT CORRECT SO IF YOU COULD LET US KNOW HOW MANY DECIDE TO DO THAT >> WE HAVE 14 SIGNED UP TO SPEAK IN FAVOR AND WE HAVE 25 WHO HAVE SIGNED TUPE SPEAK AGAINST AND IT IS WORTH NOTING WE DID SAY WE WOULD GIVE ADDITIONAL TIME IF THAT IS REQUIRED BUT WE DO ENCOURAGE YOU IF YOUR COMMENTS ARE REDUNDANT WITH WHAT YOU’VE HEARD BEFORE IF YOU WISH TO GIVE YOUR TIME TO THE GROUP AS A WHOLE YOU MAY DO THAT WHAT I WILL DO IS I WILL CALL EVERY PERSON WHO WAS SIGNED UP AND I WILL GIVE YOU THE OPPORTUNITY TO COME AND SPEAK IF IT TURNS OUT WE NEED ADDITIONAL TIME WE’LL LOOK TO GIVE THAT TIME >> COMMISSIONER HAIR >> IT LOOKS LIKE THE PROPONENTS HAVE 10 MINUTES EACH AND THE OPPONENT HAVE ONE MINUTE EACH TO BE WITHIN YOUR TIMEFRAME >> ONE OTHER POINT OF CLARIFICATION OUR CLOCK DOES EVEN MINUTES SO IF YOU COULD GIVE US EVEN MINUTES WE DON’T DO 2.25, IF THAT’S WHAT YOU WANT THAT’S WHAT WE’RE GOING TO DO AND IF SOMEONE WANTS TO DEFER TIME TO SOMEONE ELSE WE’LL PAY ATTENTION BUT IF WE MISS THAT WILL YOU LET US KNOW PLEASE >> ABSOLUTELY >> THANK YOU ALL FOR WORKING WITH US >> AGAIN WE WILL START WITH THE PROPONENTS BARB WELLWITS AND THEN WE HAVE DAN WELLISH AFTER THAT AND SO TO HELP SPEED US UP I’M GOING READ A COUPLE NAMES AT A TIME AND IF YOU COULD LINE UP WE WOULD APPRECIATE IT NOW SAW EARLIER WHERE THE BUZZER WENT OFF AND WE GAVE FOLKS A LITTLE EXTRA TIME THAT’S WHERE WE HAD FOUR OR FIVE SPEAKERS WE HAD 39 SPEAKERS SO WE DO ASK THAT YOU WORK TO KEEP YOUR COMMENTS WITHIN THE TIME LIMIT AVAILABLE THEN WE HAVE SEMI FURMAN, CATHY SAILOR BOB WELLEN, JOB SHELLP AND BOB ASHLEY SO WE CAN GATE GROUP LINED UP IN ADVANCE >> WE’VE GOT SOME TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE TO GET STARTED WITH THE PRESENTATION >> WE NEED TECHNICAL STAFF TO HELP LOAD A PRESENTATION PLEASE >> WHILE REARER GETTING THIS LOADED, DOES ANYONE HAVE A PRESENTATION YOU’RE PLANNING THAT YOU NEED TO GET LOADED IT WOULD BE GOOD TO IDENTIFY THAT NOW IN THE INTEREST OF TIME WHAT IS YOUR NAME, SIR WHY DON’T WE START WITH YOU AND WE CAN HAVE YOU THEN LET US KNOW WHO ELSE IS PREPARED TO SPEAK WITH YOUR GROUP >> IF YOU CAN ACTUALLY WHILE WE LOAD THAT UP YOU CAN WRITE THEM DOWN AND I CAN CALL THEM IN THE ORDER YOU WOULD PREFER >> I HAVE IT WRITTEN DOWN >> THAT WOULD BE GREAT AGAIN, EVERYONE SIGNED UP WILL BE CALLED AND GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK BUT WE WILL HAVE THE TIME LIMITS CONSTRAINT THANK YOU, SIR >> MR. CHAIRMAN I’LL MAKE ONE MORE REQUEST WE HAVE SIX SPEAKERS LINED UP TO SPEAK, SOME OF THEM ARE

LIKE THREE MINUTES, SOME OF THEM ARE A MINUTE OR LESS BUT BETWEEN THE SIX IF WE COULD HAVE 12 MINUTE IS THAT AN APPROPRIATE REQUEST >> I THINK THAT’S TWO MINUTES EACH THAT IS FINE >> THANK YOU >> OKAY BUT PAY ATTENTION IF ONE OF YOU IS RUNNING OVER SOMEONE ELSE WILL HAVE TO SPEED IT UP THANK YOU >> THANK YOU AND GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS I AM BARBARA WELLNITS AND I LIVE AT 2612 WEST KNOX STREET I AM A MEMBER OF THE NPO WORKING GROUP AND THE FIRST OF SIX SPEAKERS WHO ARE JOINTLY URGING YOU TO SUPPORT PASSAGE OF THE NPO TONIGHT FIRST LET ME ASK OUR NEIGHBORS WHO HAVE COME TONIGHT TO SUPPORT THE NPO TO STAND UP WELL NOTED THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR COMING OUT TONIGHT SO IN THE INTEREST OF TIME I WILL NOT READ THE DRIVING ISSUES BUT THESE ARE THE NINGS THAT MOST CONCERNED NEIGHBORS WHICH WE SPENT A LOT OF TIME SO THEY ARE ALL THERE AND THEY ARE VERY MUCH IN YOUR PACKET SO WE’LL GO ON FROM THERE I WANT TO TALK TODAY ABOUT HOW THE NPO PROPOSALS WERE DEVELOPED LAST SPRING A GROUP OF 10-12 FOLKS SELF-IDENTIFIED AS A GROUP FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD BOARD ASSOCIATION INCLUDED MY HUSBAND AND I WHO BOUGHT OUR DREAM HOUSE HERE EIGHT YEARS AGO THE GROUP FIRST SPENT HUNDREDS OF HOURS READING UP ON NATIONAL TREND, STUDYING COUNTY PROPERTY STATISTICS, GATHERING NEW DATA ON THE HEIGHT OF OLD WEST HOMES, TAKING PREFERENCE PHOTOS WE SOUGHT NEIGHBOR INPUT AND TECHNICAL ADVICE FROM CITY STAFF AND EXPERTS IT WAS IMMEDIATELY OBVIOUS TO US FROM DATA JUST HOW IT FELT SOME OF THE NEW HOMES ARE MORE THAN 12 IS THE CURRENT MEETING HOME THIS CHART OF AVERAGE HOME SHOES BUILT PER DECADE IS ONE EXAMPLE AND YOU CAN SEE HOW THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF STRUCTURES HAS NEARLY TOWELED SINCE THE NINTH STREET WITH THE RED BAR SPIKES DEVELOPMENT IN THE RECALLY 2000s WE THEN DISTILLED THE CHARACTERISTICS OF PROPERTIES, WHICH HAVE CAUSED THE GREATEST CONCERN AND WE CAME TO UNDERSTAND THAT EFFECT OF VERY LARGE STRUCTURES ON OUR TYPICALLY FARROWED DEEP LOTS YOU CAN SEE IN THESE SLIDES THAT THE BUILT STRUCTURES STARTING WITH 33FR AND ABOVE TENDS TO OVERWHELM THE NEIGHBORING HOMES THEY DEGRADE PRIVACY AND SUNLIGHT AS THEY FORM LONG TWO STORY WALLS ALONG PROPERTY LINES WITH NO LANDSCAPE BUFFER S AND ACCESSORY STRUCTURES BUILT RECENTLY ARE WAY OUTSIDE THE NEIGHBORHOOD AVERAGES ABOUT 400 SQUARE FOOT LONG OVERSIZED STRUCTURES MOST IMPORTANTLY FOR MANY PEOPLE LEAD TO MORE OFFSTREET PARKING PAVEMENT, REDUCED GREENSPACE AND LOT OF TREE CANOPY AIR AND WALK FILTRATION AND THE AERIAL VIEW I WILL SAY SAYS IT ALL NOTE THE TOTALLY PAVED BACKYARD ON THE RIGHT VERSUS THE LAWNPS ON THE LEFT IN THAT AREAIAL IN SUMMARY FOR ME, THE NPO PROPOSALS WE DRAFTED IN THE FALL WORK AS INTEGRATED TOOLS TO DISCOURAGE THESE TRAITS, THAT ARE NOT AN EMOTIONAL ATTEMPT TO FREEZE THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN TIME, THE CURRENT REVISED DRAFT PRESENT OUR BEST EFFORT AT DEFINING THE SWEET SPOT BETWEEN MAINTAINING OLD WEST CHARACTER AND SCALINGIS AAND RESPECTING PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS THANK YOU GOOD EVENING MY NAME IS SIMIAN FURMAN, 2709 WEST KNOX STREET I’M ON THE BOARD [TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES] OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND I’M A CONVERT TO THIS PROTECTIVE OVERLAY WHEN CAME TO MY DOOR 2014 SEEKING IS INITIAL SUPPORT FOR THIS NPO THAT PETITION MENTIONED EARLIER I REFUSED TO SIGN IT MY NEW REACTION WAS THAT ANY NEW ZONING WAS OVERREACH BUT OVER TIME I GOT INVOLVED IN THE COMMUNITY AND FOUND MORE WAYS TO GIVE BACK I LEARNED PEOPLE’S STORIES AND REALIZED I BELONGED TO A DIVERSE NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT SHARED INTERESTS ALL WHILE WINNING THIS OVER ZEALOUS DEVELOPED

WE KNOW DURHAM IS RISING AND BECOMING MORE EXPENSIVE I BOUGHT THIS CHARMING LITTLE 900 SQUARE FOOT SHALL AYOU SEE UP ON THE SCREEN IN 2004 FOR $91,000 THE TAXED ASSESSED VALUE IS NOW $259,000 I WISH MY SALARY HAD ALMOST TRIPLED IN THE LAST 14 YEARS, I PROBABLY COULDN’T PURCHASE MY HOME TODAY AT MARKET VALUE SO CLEARLY DIMINISHING NONE OF THE OPPONENTS I HAVE SPOKEN WITH PERSONALLY HAVE DESCRIBED TO ME THE BENEFITS OF OVER SIZED HOMES AND [AUDIO BLACKOUTS I THINK WE CAN DO THIS NPO IS NOT PRFECT, IT ATTEMPT TO GUIDE SMART, PURPOSEFUL CHANGE TO SERVE OUR ENTIRE COMMUNITY, HOMEOWNERS, MY NEIGHBORS WHO RENT AND THOSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO JOIN US IT DESERVES OUR SUPPORT I THANK YOU AND I YIELD THE REMAINDER OF MY TIME >> THANK YOU >> GOOD EVENING MY NAME IS CATHY SAILOR I WAS THE NPO TO DRAFT THE NPO I LIVE AT 1,009 HAROLD STREET MY LITTLE BACKGROUND MY PARENT WERE BOTH BORN AND I WAS WORN IN THE HOSPITAL, I’VE SEEN A LOT OF CHANGES DURHAM OVER THE YEARS, I LIVE IN OLD WEST DURHAM IN A 100-YEAR-OLD HOUSE THAT I’VE OWNED FOR 25 YEARS WITH THE SAME AMOUNT OF TIME OLD WEST DURHAM INCLUDING CURRENTLY FIVE RENTAL HOUSES AND TWO DUPLEXES BOUNDARY AREA I AM RETIRED FROM ABOUT 20 YEARS OF PROFESSIONALLY DOING CUSTOM RENOVATIONS OF OLD HOUSES I LOVE WEST DURHAM THE SHADE TREE CANOPY IS WONDERFUL AND THE BIRD THERE ARE LOUD ENOUGH TO WAKE YOU UP IN THE MORNING THE LOT ARE GENERALLY PRETTY SMALL SO WE ARE ALL CLOSE TO OUR NEIGHBORS THAT WE HAVE TO INTERACT WITH IT IS A LEGAL COMMUNITY I LOOK AT THIS ZONING OVERLAY FROM TWO PER SPECKBS AS A RESIDENT OF OLD WEST DURHAM WHO WANTS TO RESERVE OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND WHO WANTS TO HAVE RENTAL INCOME FROM IT AND I THINK THE NPO STRIKES A VERY GOOD BALANCE, IT GETS DEVELOPERSES FROM OVER BUILDINGS AND PROFITING ON THE FEDERAL EXPENSE OF THE NEIGHBORS AND STILL PERMITS OWNERS A GENEROUS ALLOW TOON IMPROVE AND ENLARGE THEIR HOMES OR REBUILD A LARGER HOUSE NPO FINELY, [TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES] [INAUDIBLE] ADDITION OF A ONE OR TWO BEDROOM APARTMENT I DON’T THINK THE NPO WILL ENCOURAGE THE ORDERLY SPECIFICATION OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD WITHOUT DESTROYING IT I YIELD THE BALANCE OF MY TIME THANK YOU >> DO YOU MIND AGAIN YOUR NAME >> —- SAILOR >> THANK YOU >> HI, MY NAME IS BLUEWELL LUCKIS I HAVE BEEN REPRESENTING MY HOME IN WEST DURHAM FOR ABOUT THROW YEARS I LOVE THE CHARM MANY HOPE TO BUY A HOUSE THERE SOME DAY IF WE CAN STILL FIND ONE THAT’S AVAILABLE AND AFFORDABLE TO BUY BUT FOR RIGHT NOW WHAT’S IMPORTANT TO KNOW ABOUT MANY OF US IS WE LIVE IN MORE THAN HALF OF THE PROPERTIES IN OLD WEST DURHAM WE AREICT AIVE PARTICIPANTS IN OLD WEST DURHAM AND PART OF AN ENGAGED CITIZENRY THAT KEEPS THE NEIGHBORHOOD FRIENDLY AND SAFE WE PAY PROPERTY TAXES INDIRECTLY THROUGH OUR RENT, WE ARE VOTING RESIDENTS OF DURHAM AND MANY OF US SUPPORT THE NPO DESPITE LANDLORD FINES ON OUR LAWNS DECLARING OPPOSITION WE ARE COUNTING NPOs TOHELP KEEP THE SMALLER OLDER HOUSING UNITS IN OPIZATION AS LONG AS POSSIBLE IT IS THE SMALL HOUSES, DUPLEXES AND THE EDUs THAT WILL REL MAIN RELATIVELY AFFORDABLE THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO INCLUDE OUR VOICESSEN THIS HEARING THE YIELD THE REST OF MY TIME

>> THANK YOU >> GOOD EVENING DAN WELCH AND MY WIFE AND I HAVE OWNED OUR HOUSE SINCE 1990 I’M HERE TO TALK ABOUT THE ENGAGEMENT CONSENSUS EFFORT SO WE ARE RUNNING SHORT SINCE MATT FILTER TOUCHED ON THE EXTENSIVE INBEIGEMENT AND THE MANY MEETINGS AND SO FORTH I’LL SKIP OVER THAT BUT EACH TIME A POLLING WAS TAKEN THERE WAS A STRONG MAJORITY THAT SUPPORTED THE NPO THAT’S OCCURRED EVERY SINGLE TIME WE’VE TAKEN A POLL WHEN THE NPO WAS LAST DRAFTED THE MAJORITY GREW, A 3-1 OR 4-1 FOR EACH OF THE DOMINICK– NPO A LINE BY LINE REVIEW, THAT WAS WHAT HE WAS TALKING ABOUT WITH OVER 100 PEEP AND REVIEWING THE LIST AND I KNOW THERE IS A LOT OF THAT PACKETS THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT OPPOSITION BY SHEER VOLUME OF WORD THAT’S TRUE BUT IT HAS COME REPORTEDLY FROM A VERY SMALL GROUP OF PEOPLE WHEN WE SAW THE HISTHIGHEST ON THIS TOPIC IT SHOWED SUPPORTERS OUTLINED 4-1, WHICH WAS CONSISTENT WITH WHAT WE HAD SEEN IN THE PUBLIC MEETINGS SINCE OUR FIRST DRAFT IN NOVEMBER WE MADE MORE THAN A DOZEN ADJUSTMENTS TO THE NPO IN RESPONSE TO THE NEIGHBOR NOW THE OPPONENTS OF NPO TRIED TO MAKE A DEBATE ABOUT THE NUMBER OF PROPERTIES OPPOSED BUT IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT’S 57% PROPERTIES IS THAT REALLY REASONABLE? PROPERSITION YOU HAVE IN YOUR PACKET REPRESENTS MANY PROPERTIES BUT AS THE STAFF REPORT INDICATED THERE ARE ONLY 21 BASIC SIGNATURES AND ONLY 4 OF PHOSE ACTUALLY LIVE IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD ONE MORE THING TO KNOW ON THIS PETITION IT WAS COMPLETED IN AUGUST AND SEPTEMBER BEFORE THE FIRST DRAFT OF THE NPO EVEN EXISTED AND SO IT IS CLEAR THAT THEY WERE AGAINST ANY NEIGHBORHOOD PRODUCTION NO MATTER HOW MODEST SO WE ASK YOU IS THIS PROPERTY? DO OUR RESIDENTS THOSE OF US WHO LIVE IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD NO LONGER HAVE ANY SAY IN OUR FUTURE HAVE DEVELOPERS REUSED THAT MUCH CONTROL OVER OUR COMMUNITY AND I HAVE SOME COMMENT ON AFFORDABILITY BUT I’LL SAVE THAT POSSIBLY FOR Q AND A BECAUSE I’M SURE IT WILL COME UP AND IALLER PASS THIS ON >> WE ACTUALLY HAD TWO SIGN UPS FOR THE HEARINGS SO I WOULD CONSIDER ELIMINATING THOSE OF YOU WHO SIGNED UP TWICE, WHICH YOU WERE SUPPOSED TO TO, BECAUSE THERE WERE TWO HEARINGS WHEN YOU WALKED IN THE DOOR SINCE WE COMBINED THE HEARINGS WE HAVE 12 AND 4 AND 16 SPEAKING AGAINST AND SO WHAT I THINK MAKES THE MOST SENSE FROM HERE FORWARD IS WE HAVE HAD FOUR SPEAKERS THAT HAVE SPOKEN FOR 12 MINUTES IF I HAVE THAT CORRECT, IF WE CAN I WOULD JUST WE WOULD GIVE 30 MINUTES PER EACH SIDE IF WE COULD PUT THE REMAINING 18 MINUTES UP AND WE HAVE EIGHT ADDITIONAL SPEAKERS AND IF YOU FINISH EARLY THEN THAT’S TIME THAT YOU CAN FEED TO COME BACK IF YOU WOULD LIKE A LITTLE OVER 2 MINUTES EACH AND SPEAKING AGAIN 30 MINUTES TOTE PLEASE GO AHEAD >> GOOD EVENING GOOD PEOPLE JOHN SHELLP 1022 ROSE HILL TO CLOSE OUT OUR INITIAL PRESENTATION BY POINTING OUT GOLDWEST HAS A HISTORY OF WORKING CREATIVELY AND CONSTRUCTIVELY TO ARRIVE AT SOLUTIONS THAT WORK FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND FOR THE CITY AT LARGE WITNESS OUR STRONG SUPPORT FOR THE NINTH STREET DISTRICT THE HIGHER DENSITY DEVELOPMENTS AND AN IMPACT NEIGHBORHOOD FOR THE NEW DEVELOPMENTS THAT STATION 9 APARTMENTS AND ELSEWHERE AND ALL ALONG THE WAY EVENTUALLY WE WERE GOING TO WORK WITH THE DOMINICK IT IS CAREFULLY BALANCED THE COMPETING INTEREST OF INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY OWNERS, THE NEED FOR THE CITY AT LARGE AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER OF OLD WEST DURHAM IT AHOWS FOR REASONABLE EXPANSION FOR PROPERTY OWNERS, IT ALOWS FOR THE ADDITION OF MORE HOUSING UNITS BY ENCOURAGING ACCOMMODATING DUPLEXES, BUT AT THE SAME TIME IT ENSURES THAT NEW DEVELOPMENT WILL BE IN SCALE AND IN CONTEXT, AND AS A RESULT THIS DEVELOPMENT WILL BE AFFORDABLE IT IS PAINFUL TOOL WATCH IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AS FAMILIES ARE KICKED OUT OF THEIR HOMES, FORCED AS THEIR HOUSE IS DEMOLISHED AND REPLAS WOULD A MEGOLE HOUSE THREE TIMES THE RENT THE NEIGHBORHOOD ENGAGEMENT IS THOROUGHLY AND WELL DOCUMENTED AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE STAFF REPORT IN MILE 14 YEARS AS

NEIGHBORHOOD PRESIDENT I’VE NEVER SEEN THIS MANY AND THIS LEVEL OF ENGAGEMENT ON ANYTHING IN OLD WESTORALLY I TIME AND AGAIN NEIGHBORS HAVE ATTENDED OUR MEETINGS AFTER MEETING IN TOWARD STRONG SUPPORT OF THIS OVERLAY, IT HAS THE ANONYMOUS BACKING OF THE BOARD WE URGE YOU TO FORWARD THIS TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR FULL APPROVAL AND THONG FOR ALL YOU DO >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH BOB ASHLEY 3714 DEVIN ROAD IN DURHAM I’M HERE AS MY CAPACITY [TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES] [AUDIO BLACKOUTSBLACK THE PROPOSAL UNITS WOULD NOTE THAT THE OVERLAY ESTABLISHES

THE STAFF OF FOR ALL THAT THE NPO CAN DO TO UPHOLD THE HISTORIC IDENTITY AND CORE VALUES OF OLD WEST DURHAM DIVERSITY IS NOT JUST A WORD WE SAY IT IS A COMMITMENT WE MAKE AND WE SACRIFICE TO THAT COMMITMENT WE LOSE IT AND WE MAY AS WELL NOT SPEAK THE WORD THANK YOU >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH >> MY NAME IS SUSAN SULE, I LIVE AT 2904 LEGION AVENUE, I AM YOUR FIRST REPRESENTATIVE IN TUSCALOOSA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION BOARD BEING THE FIRST NEIGHBORHOOD WHO WENT THROUGH ALL OF THE YEARS OF WORK TALK TO DEVELOP NEIGHBORHOOD SECTION OVERLAY AS OUR ONLY NEIGHBORHOOD SO FAR THAT HAVE COMPLETED THIS OVERLAY WE APPRECIATE THE USE

OF WORK REQUIRED BY THIS ORDINANCE WE APPLAUD DURHAM FOR DOING THE WORK TO REACH AN UNDERSTANDING OF THE SPECIAL ELEMENTS OF THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD, DESERVE PROTECTION AND WE APPRECIATE THE EFFORTS THEY HAVE TAKEN TO FIND A DIVERSED GROUP OF ZONING TOOLS THEY HOPE WILL PROTECT THEIR SPECIAL ELEMENTS WE URGE YOU TO SUPPORT THIS I ALSO AS A MEMBER OF THE INNER-NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL WANT TO REMIND YOU THAT THE INNER-NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL TOOK A VOTE IN SUPPORT OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD PROTECTION OVERLAY AND OF THE WORK THAT OLD WEST DURHAM HAS DONE AND ON A PERSONAL NOTE I WISH WE HAD THOUGHT OF THAT BACKYARD TREE [AUDIENCE LAUGHS] >> THANK YOU >> HI MY NAME IS CRIST TEEN CUPDO AND I LIVE AT 246 ENGLEWOOD AVENUE IN WEST HILLENDALE AND I’M WITHIN 600 FEET OF OLD WEST DURHAM AND THE HOUSE ON LAWNDALE TAT YOU SAW PICTURES OF, THE GIANT McMANSION IS BEHIND MY STREET THAT’S ON MY BLOCK AND I SAW A PERFECTLY FINE BLUE SINGLE FAMILY HOME BULLDOZED DOWN AND REPLACED WITH THIS GIANT MONSTROSITY AND IT HAS TWO FRONT DOORS, A FRONT DOOR AT THE BACK, FRONT DOOR AT THE BACK, TWO MAILBOXES AND IT THEN THE GIANT GARAGE WITH THE MOTHER-IN-LAW SUITE ABOVE IT AND IT JUST TOTALLY WARPED EVERYTHING AND MAKE SAID ME SO SAD I’M IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT SO WE HAVE MORE PROTECTIONS THEN OLD WEST DURHAM DOES AND THIS NPO WASN’T AS STRONG AS THE HISTORIC DISTRICT IT IS THE NEXT BEST STEP AND I SO WISH THAT ALL OF WEST DURHAM COULD HAVE BEEN IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT WHEN WEST HALLANDALE DID IT BECAUSE PART OF THE CHARM OF DURHAM IS THESE OLD MILL HOUSES AND UNIQUE ARCHITECTURE OF EACH 1 IT IS NOT A COOKIE CUTTER LIKE CARIE, IF YOU WANT THAT MOVE TO CARIE DURHAM IS UNIQUE WITH THE BEAUTIFUL ARCHITECTURE, EACH ONE UNIQUE AND SPECIAL AND WE NEED TO PRESERVE THAT IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF CONTENTION ABOUT THIS A NEIGHBOR IN OLD WEST DURHAM POINTED OUT THE NPO PROCESS BEBAN IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE UDI WAS ADOPTED DURING THE PUBLIC HEARINGS MANY OF THE PEOPLE OF SOUTHWEST DURHAM WANTED A MORE PROTECTED CATEGORY THE CITY PLANNING DEPARTMENT TOLD US THE NPO WAS THE BEST WAY TO PROCEED THE CONSERVATION BEGAN AND AS THE FIRST PARTICIPANTS IN THAT PROCESS THEY WERE ASSURED THAT SOME OF THE DEVELOPERS IN THE PROPERTY WERE NOT MENTIONED AND IT WAS NOT TO PROTECT THE CHARACTER, AFFORDABLE, AND DIVERSITY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD INCLUDING THE MODERN HOMES AND PRESERVE THAT CHARACTER THE CITY TOOK A VERY LONG TIME TO ALLOCATE THE RESOURCES NECESSARY TO WORK WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION ON THE NPO AND WHILE THE CITY FORD TO REBUILD WITH THE RENTAL RATES YOU UNFORTUNATELY SERVE AS MODELS JUST EXACTLY WHAT THE NPO IS TRYING T PREVENT SO I JUST SHARE THAT WITH YOU AND URGE YOU TO VOTE FOR THIS NO, I AM NOT A RES DEPENDENT OF WEST DURHAM I LIVE WITHIN 600 FEET AND A LOT OF MY NEIGHBORS IN WEST HILLENDALE WE TALK ABOUT WEST DURHAM AND THEIR EFFORT TO THIS MLER I ENCOURAGE YOU ALL VOTE YES >> THANK YOU VERY HUTCH SO THERE ARE TWO MINUTES AND 40 SECOND REMAINING FOR THE PROPONENTS AND I MAY HAVE MISSED THIS, SEMIE INFURMAN TO SPEAK TWO MINUTE AND 40 SECOND TWO AND A HALF MINUTE WE WILL HOLD THAT TIME AND WE WILL MOVE TO 30 MINUTES FOR THE FOLKS AGAINST THE ARE POSAL THERE IS A SET OF FOLKS WHO ARE GOING TO BRING UP AN ORDER WHO HAVE SIGNED UP, AGAIN A TOTAL OF 30 MINUTES THERE ARE 16 INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE SIGNED UP AGAINST, SO IDEALLY A LITTLE UNDER TWO MINUTES EACH IF YOU CAN OR CONCEDE YOUR TIME TO OTHER SPEAKERS AND WORKING AT THIS RATE WE HAVE MS. MART TOON SPEAK FIRST AND THEN MR McFARLING AND IF YOU KNOW YOUR ORDER COME UP AND LINE UP PLEASE COME AND SPEAK AGAIN YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS INTO THE MICROPHONE

GREAT, YOU MAY THE AND SPEAK PLEASE IF YOU’RE FIRST PLEASE COME >> MY NAME IS LeANN JACKSON, 2404 INDIAN TRAIL I AM A NON-RESIDENT HOMEOWNER OF WEST DURHAM PERHAPS THE PROPERTY IN OLD WEST DURHAM IS NON-OWNER OCCUPIED MY SMALL LOTS ARE DISPROPORTIONATELY AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED NPs I AM AGAINST THE DOMINICK IN 2014 THE PETITION TO EXPLORE AN NPO WAS CIRCULARRED IN OLD WEST DURHAM THIS PETITION WAS BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION OR THE ATTENTION OF OTHER NON-RESIDENT OWNERS YEARS LATER I LEARNED THAT THE NPO WHEN I RECEIVE AFFIDAVIT MAILING FROM THE CITY MOST OF THE INFORMATION ABOUT THE DOMINICK WAS DISSEMINATEED ON THE OLD WESTERN I NOTICED THAT THE ORIGINAL PETITION WAS CIRCULARRED WITH ACCOMPANYING INFORMATION CLEARLY STATING BLM UNTRUE FOR THE DOMINICK AS PROPOSED TODAY THE NLER PETITION GAINED THE SIGTURES OF31% OF UNIQUE HOMEOWNERS IN FAVOR OF EXPLORING THE POSSIBILITY OF THE MLER REMEMBER SIGNATURE WERE GIVEN BASE ON MISINFORMATION WITH SIGNATURES OF ONLY 31% THE JURY CITY COUNTY PLANNING COMMITTEE ALLOWED THE PROCESS TO GO FORWARD IN SPITE OF THE RECOMMENDATION THAT NO NPO BE PURSUED WITHOUT 51% SUPPORT THE SIGNATURES ON THE ORIGINAL PETITION REPRESENT A SMALL FRACTION OF THE TOTAL PARCELS SINCE THE ORIGINAL PETITION THE OWNERS OF 117 PARCELS HAVE ASKED TO OPT-OUT THE DOMINICK THE DESIRES ARE NOT KNOWN IT IS CLEAR ADEQUATE SUPPORT FOR INNPO HAS BEEN LACKING FROM THE VERY BEGINNING PLEASE VOTE AGAINST THE PROPOSED OLD WEST DURHAM NPO YOU GET YOUR FOLK IN ORDER AND I’LL MAKE SURE ANYONE WHO IS REMAINING GET UP TO SPEAK >> MY NAME IS GLENN MARTIN AND I OWN THREE RENTAL PROPERTY IN OLD WEST DURHAM I AM THERE TALK ABOUT THE SURVEY RESULTS FROM THIRD AND LAST NPO SILTY PLANNING MEDIAN NOVEMBER 17th THIS MEETING HAD THE LARGEST TURNOUT OF THE 2017 MEETINGS CITY PLANNING SHOWS 70% SUPPORT FOR THE NPO AMONG THE PARTICIPANT FILLING OUT THE 86 SURVEYS THE OLD WEST DURHAM BOARD USED THESE NUMBERS TO SAVE 70% OF THE 293 UNIQUE HOMEOWNERS TO SUPPORT THE NPO OKAY SO LET ME STEP THROUGH THE FORMS BECAUSE ONLY 86 OF THE SURVEYS WERE VALID FROM 86 SUBSTRACT 9 BECAUSE OF DUB LUICATE ADDRESSES, PROBABLY HUSBAND AND WIFE UNIQUE HOMEOWNERS SUBSTRACT FIVE BECAUSE OF 9 OWNERS, SUBSTRACT 7 BECAUSE ADDRESS IS NOT EVE IN OLD WEST DURHAM SUBSTRACT NINE BECAUSE NO ADDRESS WAS ON THE SURVEY AT ALL THIS LEAVES 56 VALID SURVEYS 40 FOR THE NPO AND 16 AGAIN SO 40 OUT OF 293 MEANS 14% OF THE UNIQUE HOMEOWNERS HAVE DEMISTRAIGHTED SUPPORT FOR THE NPO NOT ADEQUATE TO FORM CONCLUSION FOR THE OVERALL SUPPORT WAS NOT RANDOM OR A REPRESENTATIVE MEETING WAS STACK WOULD NLER SUPPORTERS OKAY NO WAN HAS DEMONSTRATED REAL NUMBERS THERE IS NO VOTE AND THAT’S A FLAW IN THIS WHOLE SYSTEM WE’VE GOT THE MINORITY THINKING IT THROUGH, YOU’RE HEARING YOUR VOICES YOU’RE NOT HEARING THE MAJORITY VOICES PLEASE VOTE AGAINST THE NPO THANK YOU VERY MUCH >> THANK YOU >> MARTY McFARLAND 1020 HELM STREET I ALSO OWN 1022 CAROLINA AVENUE I’VE BANE PROPERTY OWNER IN OLD WEST DURHAM FOR 30 YEARS NOW I HAD THE OPPORTUNITY OR I HAD THE OPPORTUNITY, I’M ONE OF THE LUCKY INDIVIDUALS I HAVE AN EMPTY LOT IN OLD WEST DURHAM AND IN TALKING WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND TRYING TO DO SOME BUILDING ON THAT LOT I FOUND OUT A LOT OF

INTERESTING FACTS AND I THANK MATTHEW THE LOT THAT I HAVE IS 49.75 FEET WIDE AT THE FRONT, WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? WELL RIGHT NOW THE CURRENT REGULATIONS, THE MINIMUM WIDTH OF THE LOT SHALL BE THE SMALLER OF THE AVERAGE WIDTH OF THE ADJACENT LOT OR THE MEDIAN FRONTING ON THE SAME LOT SO ACCORDING TO MATT’S CALCULATIONS THE AVERAGE LOT IS 52.5 SO REALLY NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE EXISTING REGULATIONS AND PROPOSED NPO REGULATION, CURRENT ZONING WORKS FINE REQUIRE AS 54-FOOT WIDE LOT FOR ME TO DO SOMETHING WITH AND THAT SAID, WE HAD A CAVEAT IN THERE NOW MAY WANT TO DOUBLE CHECK YOUR DEED AND/OR REQUIRE WITH THE DURHAM COUNTY TAX ASSESSMENTS MY TWO LOTS ARE OWNED TOGETHER ON ONE TAX BILL SO IT LOOKS LIKE ONE LOT BUT IT IS ACTUALLY 2 SEPARATE LOTS I SPENT $750 AND $400 ON A TITLE SEARCH SO I CAN STAND HERE AND PROVE TO EVERYONE THAT I ACTUALLY HAVE 2 LOTS THEY HAVE BEEN DESIGNATED THAT WAY SINCE THE SURVEYS WERE DONE ORIGINALLY BACK AROUND 1908, 1911 I THINK THEY WERE THE LAWYERED, SO THANK YOU JESUS NO MATTER WHAT HAPPENS WITH THE NPO I’VE GOT A BUILDABLE LOT OKAY SO THAT’S SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT CURRENT REGULATIONS ARE REALLY JUST FINE ALSO THERE IS ANOTHER CONSEQUENCE TO THIXMY NEIGHBORS ACROSS THE STREET HAVE ABEMPTY 50-FOOT LOT BESIDE THEIR HOUSE GOING THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION THEY ARE COMPINING THE 2 LOTS SO THEY’LL HAVE ENOUGH ROOM TO ADD ON TO THEIR HOUSE TO STILL BE UNDER THE CAR THAT’S TAKING A BUILDING LOT OUT OF THAT NEIGHBORHOOD RIGHT THERE ONCE IT’S COMBINED IT WILL NEVER BE SEPARATED AGAIN ALSO REDUCING THE INFILL POSSIBILITIES UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE WHICH WAS SO PASSIONATELY POINTED OUT RENT ARE GOING TO GO UP, I WAS TOLD BY PAT YOUNG HEEL WAS VERY NICE AND ANSWERED AN E-MAIL BACK I WAS THING THE MPO WOULD HELP REDUCE PROPERTY VALUES, KEEP PROPERTY VALUES LOW, PATRICK SAID NO, NO OBSERVATIONS, USUALLY PROPERTY VALUES, VALUES START GOING UP WELL INCREASED IN PROPERTY VALUES, INCREASE EQUALS IN INCREASE IN TACKS, WHICH OF COURSE EQUALS IN AN INACROSS IN RENTALS AND THAT’S WHY THE INCREASE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THONG FOR YOUR TIME I AM OPPOSED TO THE NPO >> THANK YOU >> GOOD EVENING MY NAME IS HOWELL HIKES I’VE BEEN A DURHAM RESIDENT SINCE 1994 AND I RESIDE AFT 15 TWIN LAKE PLACE I HAVE A BACKGROUND IN COMPUTER SCIENCE, ENGINEERING AND A MASTERS IN PROJECT MANAGEMENT I’VE SPENT DECADES ANALYZING DATA SO I CAME INTO LOOK AT SOME OF THE DATA THAT ARE IN ALL OF THESE REGULATIONS AND PROPOSED NPO TO TRY TO DETERMINE HOW THAT WOULD EFFECT SPECIFICALLY ON WHETHER YOU COULD BUILD THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT EXISTS IN OLD WEST DURHAM IF THE NPO HAD BEEN IN EXISTENCE FROM DAY ONE I ALSO SPOKE WITH MATT FILTER, WHO WAS VERY HELPFUL PART OF WHAT MATT TOLD ME IS HE FELT THAT 94% OF THE PROPERTIES THERE WAS SOME GIVE OR TAKE IN THAT BECAUSE SOME OF THE OLDER PROPERTIES THEY DIDN’T REALLY HAVE THAT MEASUREMENTS FOR BUT HE WAS STARTING WITH THE ASSUMPTION OF 94% WOULD BE OKAY BUT WHEN I LOOKED AT THE SERVER AND THE INFORMATION THAT THAT WAS BASED ON AND FOUND THE RESIDENTS HAD ONLY LOOKED AT HEATED SQUARE NEAT BUT YET THE REGULATIONS REFERRED TO IN THE CALICATIONS OF THE PAWNER PAWN AND THAT SEEMED MOST CONTENTIOUS SO I LOOKED AT IT IT SAYS WELL WE’RE GOING TO COUNT YOUR GARAGE SPACE WE’RE GOING COUNT ANY STRUCTURE THAT NEED TO BE MET WE’RE GOING TO COUNT ADUs THAT GOT TO THAT KIND OF 90% SO WE ALSO LOOKED AT PROPERTY WRECKAGE AND AT LEAST WHAT’S ON THE WEB INCLUDING HEATED SQUARE FEET, WHICH DOES NOT INCLUDE A LOT OR OTHER SQUARE FEET TO THE TAX DEPARTMENT THEY WERE ABLE TO GET ME THE COMPLETE PROPERTY RECORD I WOULD HAVE LOVED TO HAVE DONE IT FOR THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY BUT THEY WERE LIMITING HOW MUCH THEY WERE WILLING TO GIVE OUT WHAT WE DID IS WE TRIED TO PICK A REPRESENTATIVE STREET AND THE STREET THAT WE’VE GOT THAT WE ENDED UP WE PICKED UP

ALABAMA, WE GOT THE WRECKAGE FOR EVERY PARCEL ON ALABAMA TO DO THE CALCULATION INCLUDING THE UNHEATED SQUARE FOOTAGE AND WE FOUND 5 PARCELS EXCEEDED THE FARL CURRENT REGULATION LAW OF COMMENT WELL WE’VE GOT THESE NEW HOUSES AND WE’RE TEEING TO PREVENT NEW SO I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THESE FIVE HOUSESSIC ONE WAS BUILT IN 1911, ONE IN 1919, ONE IN 1922 GOOD TWO OF THEM IN 1930 SO I’LL NOT SAYING WE’RE TALKING ABOUT THE NEW HOUSES EXCEEDING THE FAR AS IT EXISTS IN THE PROPOSAL I DID END UP PUTTING SOME OF THE DATA OUT EARLY ON SOME SERVERS, IT WAS A DRAFT, IT IS STILL NOT ACCURATE I FOUND I GOT A LOT OF ADDITIONAL PEOPLE THAT TOLD ME THEY WERE AGAINST THIS REGULATION AND THERE IS CERTAINLY A LOT OF PEOPLE AND A LOT OF DIFFERENT FEELINGS DEPENDING WHO WE WANT TO TALK TO BUT WE FOUND OUR NUMBER WAS GROWING SO BEYOND THE FINE THE NEXT THING WE WANTED TO DO IS WE TOOK A LOOK HOW MANY PARCELS HERE WOULD BE ABLE TO ADD LESS THAN 50 SQUARE FEET BECAUSE YOU ARE CERTAINLY NOT GOING TO DO AN ADDITION THAT SMALL AND THEN EVEN IF WE DROP THAT UP TO 275 SQUARE FEET SO THAT’S BARELY MORE THAN A SINGLE CAR GARAGE I THINK IT WAS NOTED EARLIER THAT THE BULK OF THE HOME SAID IN THIS YEAH AERODON’T HAVE A GARAGE SO SINGLE CAR GARAGE SEEMED GREAT THE FOURTH OF THE HOMES CAN’T DO THAT AND AGAIN WE ARE TALKING OLDER HOMES SO WE CERTAINLY OR I AM CERTAINLY THE FEELING THAT THIS IS NOT DESIRABLE ADDITION >> THANK YOU WE’LL DEFER TO THE NEXT PERSON >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH >> AND THEN THE FINAL 25% OF THE PARCELS ON ALABAMA HELL OWEN PRAING COMMISSION, PLANNING COMMISSION MY WIFE AND I BOUGHT OUR HOME ON 1010 EASTON STREET IN 1962 WE RAISED GREAT BRAND CHILDREN AND MOST OF THEM ARE EDUCATED ON TO COLLEGE WE TALK ABOUT THIS NPO RULES AND REGULATIONS AND WE WONDER IF WE COULD GET ENOUGH MONEY FOR OUR HOUSE WHO WOULD WANT TO BUY IT WITH THE STIPULATIONS THAT THE NPO HAS THAT PEOPLE WOULD BUY A PROPERTY TO HAVE TO DEAL WITH AND GOOD JUST WANT YOU TO CONSIDER THAT AS WE HAVE TALK ABOUT IT OURSELVES THANK YOU SO MUCH >> THANK YOU, SIR >> HI MY NAME IS PERRY ETREAT AND I’M A PROPERTY OWN IN OLD WEST GEORGIA I LOVE DURHAM AND FRANKLY I LOVE OLD WEST DURHAM NEIGHBORHOOD AND I UNDERSTAND HOW WE ALL NEED TO WORK TOGETHER AS THIS BEAUTIFUL CITY GROWS AND THERE ARE CHALLENGES THAT ARE INHERENT IN THAT HOUR I THINK AS YOU WILL HEAR FROM THE SPEAKERS THAT COME UP THERE ARE VARSQUAD REASONABLE OBJECTIONS TO THE NPO IF IT WAS RECALLALLY ON THE DEVIATION FROM STATE’S OBJECTIVES AND THERE HAS BEEN KIND OF A FLAWED PROCESS AT LEAST IN MY ESTIMATION WHERE A LOT OF IT HERE THERE ARE A [LOW AUDIO] THE SERVICE IS LOST DOGS AND ANYMORE NEIGHBORHOOD FOCUS RATHER THAN SOMETHING OF THIS CRITICAL NATURE THE RESULT IS A CURRENT PROPOSED REGULATORY OVERLAY # THAT MANY OF US JUST DON’T FEEL WE CAN SUIS– SUPPORT SHOULD IT BE THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO MOVE FORWARD? WE’VE CREATE ADREPRESENTATIVE MAP WHERE THE OWNERS OF THE PARCEL OF THIS MOCK UP OF THE SLIDE THAT YOU SEE WISH TO BE EXCLUDED FROM THE OVERLAY AND I THINK WHAT YOU CAN SEE FROM THAT IS THERE IS SOME DISH AGREEMENT ABOUT THE PROPOSAL AS IT CURRENTLY STANDS AS THERE IS A LOT OF CONCERN ON THE OPPOSITION SIDE JUST AS THERE ARE A NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO ARE HERE WHO ARE FOR IT A NUMBER OF FOLKS HAVE TAKEN TIME TO COME AND BE APART OF THIS AND TURN AROUND I WOULD LIKE THOSE WHO ARE IN

OPPOSITION TO PLEASE STAND THANK YOU >> THANK YOU >> GOOD EVENING MY NAME IS ADAM HALL AND I LIVE AT 2719 CREST STREET TONIGHT I’M HERE ON BEHALF OF THE LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE FOR THE DURHAM REGIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS I CURRENTLY SERVE AS THE CHAIR THANK YOU FOR EVERYONE BEING HERE TONIGHT AND THANK YOU FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR ALLOWING PUBLIC INPUT I WOULD LIKE TO START BY RECOGNIZING WHY WE ARE DISCUSSING THIS NPO OLD WEST DURHAM NEIGHBORHOOD FELT THREATENED BY THIS NEW DEVELOPMENT THAT IS HAPPENING ALL ORB DURHAM THE ROUTE CAUSE OF NPOS ARE INCREASED HOUSING DEMAND AS A RESULT OF AN INCREASING POPULATION NORTH CAROLINA IS ONE OF THE FASTESTIOING STATE IN THE U.S AND DURHAM ALONG WITH THE REST OF THE TRIANGLE IS ONE OF THE FASTEST GROWING-AIR OZIN NORTH CAROLINA AS A RESULT THIS GROWTH AND INCREASED DEMANDFUL MORE HOUSING NEIGHBORHOODS ARE CHANGING McMANSIONS, AS THEY HAVE BEEN TERMED, ARE POPPING UP LEFT AND RIGHT AND LOT ARE BEING RE-PURPOSED TO SULPORT HIGHER DENSITY I WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT WE KNOW THIS IS TROUBLING TO THE RESIDENT OF OLD WEST DURHAM WHEN THE CURRENT RESIDENTS FIRST INVESTED IN THIS COMMUNITY AND BOUGHT THEIR HOMES WERE CHOSE TO LIVE HERE THIS WAS NOT THE TYPE OF NEIGHBORHOOD THEY SAW WE SEE YOU AND WE UNDERSTAND THAT YOU ARE CONCERNED; HOWEVER THE LONG-TERM EFFECTS OF THESE PROTECTION OVERLAY DISTRICTS CANNOT BE IGNORED PEOPLE WANT TO LIVE IIN NEIGHBORHOODS CREASE AMENITIES, PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AND JOB OPPORTUNITIES BY SHUTTING DOWN THE MARKET’S ABILITY TO MEET THE DEMAND FOR HOUSING THE AFFORDABILITY OF THESE NEIGHBORHOOD WILL PLUMMET AS A RESULT WOULD-BE RESIDENTS ARE PUSH FURTHER AND FUTHER OUT NPOs SERVE AS AN ARTIFICIAL RESTRICTION ON SUPPLY WHILE COMPLETELY IGNORING THE DEMAND FOR MORE HOUSING IN THESE HIGHLY DESIRABLE URBAN CENTERS IF WE’RE GOING EXPAND HOUSING OPTIONS IN DURHAM WE MUST PROMOTE POLICIES TO CREATE OPPORTUNITIES FOR DEVELOPMENT AND CREATE MISSING MUNICIPAL HUGS WITH THIS HIGH LEVEL OF GROWTH DURHAM IS EXPERIENCING THESE OLD NEIGHBORS WILL HAVE TO CHANGE IN ORDER TO KEEP UP WITH THE DEMAND TO RUN THE RISK OF SHUTTING OUT EVERYONE WHO CAN NOT AFFORD AN EXPENSIVE OLD HOUSE AGAIN I WOULD LIKE TO STATE THAT WE UNDERSTAND WHY RESIDENTS FEEL THREATENED HOWEVER WE CAN FIND BETTER SOLUTIONS THAT DO NOT EXACERBATE THE HOUSING PROBLEM WE URGE THE PLANNING COMMISSIONING TO REJECT THIS PROPOSED NPO AND INSTEAD FOCUS ON HOW WE CAN BROADEN HOUSING OPTIONS AND PRICES THROUGHOUT DURHAM THANK YOU >> THANK YOU >> MY NAME IS JOHN TEMPLE I LIVE AT 10:15 EL STREET AND I HAVE FOR 54 YEARS IN JUNE SO THIS ARGUMENT THAT IT IS DEVELOPERS AGAINST THE NEIGHBORHOOD DOES NOT HOLD A QUART TO ME BECAUSE I HAVE BEEN HERE ALL THIS TIME, I WAS BORN IN DURHAM IN WATCH HOSPITAL ABOUT THREE BLOCKS AWAY, I LOVE DURHAM SO MUCH THAT I COMMUTED TO PURR TO TEACH SCHOOLS FOR 31 YEARS, 68 MILES A DAY I LOVE MY NEIGHBORS I JUST DISAGREE WITH SOME OF THEM RIGHT NOW BECAUSE I THINK THE NPO IS COMPLETELY UNNECESSARY AND IN FACT I THINK IT IS MISNAMED IT SHOULD BE NRO, NEIGHBORHOOD RESTRICTIVE ORDINANCE BECAUSE IT TAKES AWAY PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHT I DON’T WANT TO HAVE 67.5% OF MY LAND THAT I CAN NOT EVER BUILD ANYTHING ON WHILE AT THE SAME TIME I GET THE PLEASURE OF PAYING PROPERTY TAXES EVERY YEAR ON THE PROPERTY AND BOUGHT THIS HOUSE IN THE 1960 WHEN I WENT THERE I RENTED THE FOR TWO YEARS FOR $50 A MONTH SPEAKING OF AFFORDABLE PRICES AND HOUSES WHEN I BOUGHT THIS HOUSE FOR 10-$15,000 IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT I WAS A SCHOOL TEACHER MAKING $5,000 A YEAR THEN, SO THE CITY THINKS MY HOUSE HAS INCREASED IN VALUE 28 TIMES SO I DON’T THINK THE INCREASE IN RENTAL RATES HAS AS MUCH TO DO WITH PEOPLE TRYING TO GOUGE THE RENT AS IT DOES WITH THE FACT THAT WHEN PROPERTY TAXES INCREASE IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN THEIR PROPERTY LANDLORD HAVE TO INCREASE THEIR RENT IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO KEEP THE PROPERTY NOW I WROTE YOU ALL A LETTER, IT ALSO WENT TO THE CITY

COUNCIL AND IT WENT TO THE PLANNING BORSO I SAID A LOT OF IN THAT NOW GOT A LETTER FROM ME TO OPT-OUT BECAUSE I WROTE A LETTER TO DO THAT TO MR. FILTER AND I WAS TOLD THAT IT WAS TOO LATE BECAUSE THERE WAS A DEADLINE ON JANUARY 31st, WELL SELDOM ON THE LIST URB ISED OF THERE WAS NO MAILING ANNOUNCING IF YOU WANTED TO MAKE A COMMENT ABOUT THE NPO THAT WE SHOULD SUBMIT BY JANUARY 31st SO THAT’S WHY I SENT YOU THE OPT-OUT LETTER BY E-MAIL SO YOU COULD SEE IT A LAW OF FOLK SAID THE CITY COUNCIL, MAYOR TALKING ABOUT DENSITY AND POPULATION I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH THEM THAT THE NPO WILL NOT EFFECT DENSITY BUT I THINK IT WILL EFFECT IT FAVORABLY, I THINK IT WILL EFFECT IT NEGATIVELY THAT IT WILL LESSEN I THINK SOMEONE ELUDED TO THE FACT THAT IT IS A VERY POPULAR SCHOOL RIGHT NOW AND THERE IS LOT OF YOUNG FAMILIES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD SOME OF THOSE FAMILIES ARE GROWING AND SOME OF THEIR HOUSES ON THEIR LOTS ALREADY ARE ATORALLY EXCEED THE 32.5% SO I THINK WHEN THEIR KIDS NEED MORE BEDROOMS SOME OF THEM WILL CHOOSE TO UNFORTUNATELY 37 NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE THAT WILL BE THE ONLY WAY THEY CAN HAVE MORE SPACE BECAUSE THEY WON’T UNDER THE NPO NOT BE ABLE TO EXPAND THEIR HOUSE NOWIUM GOING TO SAY ONE MORE THING I ASKED SOMEONE TODAY AT ONE MEETIETH WENT TO THERE WAS ALMENTION THAT WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO ADDITION IN OURADIC THAT WILL NOT COUNT WITHIN THE FAR, I THINK IT IS A VERY REASONABLE THING TO ADD THAT BECAUSE IT FUZZ NOT ADTO THE FOOTPRINT OF THE HOUSE IN THE EXISTING HOUSES TO BUILD INTO YOUR ATTIC I WAS TOLD MY SOMEONE THAT WAS IN THE ORDINANCE BUT I DIDN’T HEAR MR. FILTER MENTION THAT AND SO HE MIGHT BE ABLE TO ANSWER IF YOU CAN NOW BUILD INTO ATTICS AND HAVE IT COUNT AGAINST THANK YOU SIR AND I THINK THAT RAR QUESTION WE’LL BE SURE TO ASK >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH SO JUST TO NOTE I STILL HAVE EIGHT SPEAKERS SIGNED UP WHO WISH TO SPEAK AGAINST NOT ALL OF THEM MAY BE HERE AT THIS POINT BUT JUST WANTED TO POINT THAT OUT WITH 10 AND A HALF MINUTES LEFT >> JAMES WILLCONS MY MAMA IS IN THE BACK, MOM OFF STAND UP 81 YEARS OLD THIS IS THE FIRST MEETING WHERE WE ARE ACTUALLY SAYING INTERESTINGLY, WHICH IS COMPELLING BECAUSE WE’VE TALK ABOUT BEING INCLUSIVE AND INVOLVEMENT AND FEEDBACK BUT WHAT YOU’VE HAD IS A GROUP OF PEOPLE THAT WERE ON A MISSION TO GET SOMETHING ACCOMPLISHED AND THEY SHUTDOWN ANY OPPOSITION AGAINST IT MY OWN MOM STOOD UP IN THE LAST MEETING ON HER BIRTHDAY IN NOVEMBER AND SHE ACTUALLY HAD PEOPLE YELLING AT HER FROM CORNERS OF THE ROOM TO SIT DOWN AND SHUT UP SO THAT’S THE KIND OF TREATMENT THAT THE OPPOSITION HAS RECEIVED MR. GHOSH ADDRESSED THE AND WHEN I WENT OUTSIDE AT WAKE I SAID IF YOU THINK YOU’VE BEEN ON THE FIRING LINE SITTING IN THAT SEAT YOU OUGHT TO COME OVER AND LIVE AT 929 ALABAMA ON THE CORNER BECAUSE I WAS THE FIRST GUILE OUT FRONT PUT HIS NECK OUT AND SAID SOMETHING IS WRONG WITH THIS PROCESS THERE IS A LOT OF THINGS THAT CAN BE SAID HERE TODAY I COULD CHURN A LOT OF BUTTER FOR YOU MR. FILTER STATED THAT THEY RECOMMEND SOME REASON PEOPLE RECOMMEND 51% SIGNATURES, NOT REQUIRED, BUT RECOMMENDED, THEY TIS AUTHORITY NUMBERS AND THEY’VE NEVER BEEN PASSED 29% JUST NOT EVEN CLOSE TO THAT NUMBER BUT IT WILL MAKE YOU BELIEVE WITH THEIR GREEN SHIRT AND THEIR UNITIES THAT THIS IS A IF THING IT IS NOT A GOOD THING AND THEN THE OTHER THING IS ONE LADY STOOD UP AND TALKED ABOUT DIVERSITY WELL I CAN TALK ABOUT DIVERSITY BECAUSE AFTER BEING BORN IN A MILLHOUSE ONEDETH STREET WHICH WOULD TODAY BE IN THE PARKING LOT OF THE CEDAR GROWTH WITH 81 PLUS YEARS AGO SHE UNDERSTANDS OLD WEST DURHAM NOBODY WANTED TO HEAR HER FEEDBACK AS TO HOW TO MOVE FORWARD OR A LOT OF OTHER PEOPLE IN HER AGE RANGE, WHICH HAVE A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF WISDOM ALL OF THESE PEOPLE THAT ARE PUSHING THIS ARE FIVE, SIX, SEVEN, EIGHT YEAR OLDS AND THEY ARE TOGETHER ON IT

BUT THERE IS A LADY THAT STOOD UP HERE GOOD TALKED ABOUT DIVERSITY ABOUT 40 OR 50YEARS AGO IN 1949 I STARTED EK PUB I UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT NEIGHBORHOOD LOOKED LIKE THERE WERE MORE BLACK PEOPLE LIBBING IN OLD WEST DURHAM THEN THERE ARE NOW BECAUSE THESE PROGRAMS HAVE PUSHED THEM OUT THE PEOPLE HAVE COME IN DRIVEN PRICES UP AND THEY ARE GONE YOU’VE HAD SINCE THAT TIME HICKSTOWN, WHICH WAS A WELL ESTABLISHED ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WAS PREDOMINANTLY BLACK IS TORN TO THE GROUND THERE IS NOT A HOUSE LEFT ASK YOU IN MY LETTER TODAY PLEASE LET THE CITY KEEP THEIR HANDS OFF OF THIS THE FOLKS IN OLD WEST DURHAM KNOW THERE IS A SAYING PROTECT OUR HOOD, WE WERE THAT HOOD, MY FAMILY, 70 YEARS AGO PROTECTING IT AND I THINK WE’VE DONE A PRETTY GOOD JOB AND WE’LL KEEP DOING THAT JOB THANK YOU IF I ASK THAT YOU VOTE NOTE AND IF YOU CHOOSE TO VOTE YES THEMMER THEN I ASK YOU TO SHELVE IT TODAY, GO HOME AND READ THE PAPERWORK AND MAKE THE SAME RULES WORKEN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD SO I DON’T MIND LIVING UNDER YOUR DURHAM CITY RULES, CHANGE YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND LIVE INKED THE SAME RULES AND THEN I’LL COME DOWN HERE AND APPLAUD YOU FOR IT THANK YOU >> GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS CIFEROUS COSTAR, I LIVE AT 1002 OAKLAND AVENUE THE ONLY PROPERTY I OWN AND I’VE LIVED THERE THE PAST 16ERS YOO MY WIFE AND I INITIALLY SUPPORTED THE INITIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE NPO WHEN CITY STAFF HANDED OUT MEETING ANNOUNCEMENTS, BUT WE NOW BOTH OPPOSE IT SETTING ASIDE ARGUMENT ABOUT THE ELEMENTS OF THE NPO, WHICH I BELIEVE ARE RESTRICTIVE MY BIGGEST CONCERN IS THE PROCESS THROUGH WHICH IT’S BEEN BROUGHT TO YOU YOU’VE ALREADY HEARD THE PROPOSAL GOES BEYOND ITS EARLY AND INITIAL FRAMING, PROHIBITING INNOVATION BY CURRENT OWNERS AND I SHARE THE OWNERS EXPRESSED THAT COUNTER PRODUCT AND ACCELERATE TEAR DOWNS AND DECREASE AFFORDABILITY BY LIMITING THE RESOURCE OF SQUARE FOOTAGE SURPRISINGLY, I SHOULD SAY STARTING AT THE PUBLIC METH IN NOVEMBER # THE GENTLEMANNAL BEFORE ME SPOKE ABOUT I WAS APPALLED WHEN I SAW DECENT PEOPLE WITH LEGITIMATE CONCERNS GET SHOUTED DOWN BY MEMBERS OF THE NPO WORKING WITH GROUP I FOUND OUT AFTER THAT POINT THEY ARE SECRETATIVE ABOUT DECISION MAKING AND I HAD INFORMATION RIS REPRESENTED TO ME WE’VE SEEMED TO COME TO A POINT WHERE TRANSPARENCY SOME SHOWN BY THE LATEST CHANGES MADE AFTER UNANNOUNCED MEETINGS WITH CITY LEADERSHIP I AND OTHERS ARE REFERRED TO AS TREESNISTS SIMPLY ASKING FOR A LEGITIMATE SURVEY TO CONFIRM THE LEGIT SUPPORT THEY CLAIM TO HAVE YOU KNOW YOU ARE GOING TO GET BROWBEATED IS NOT A LEGITIMATE WAY OO GAUGE SUPPORT THE BOARD HAS REJECTED THAT REQUEST FOR MULTIPLE AMENITIES THAT WHEN THE SAME MEETING WITH THEY APPROVED THE NPO THEY WERE MORE HAPPY TO HAVE A NEIGHBORHOOD VOTE ON THE T-SHIRT DESIGN THE SAME BOARD IS NOW CONSIDERING DELAYING THAT PROCESS WHICH WOULD PREVENT MEMBERS JOINING THE BOARD WHOER TO NOT SHARE THEIR NPO AFTER ALL OF THIS I BELIEVE THE NEIGHBORS THAT CREATED THE NPO HAVE DONE IT WITH GOOD INTENTIONS BUT THIS PROCESS AND THEIR BEHAVIOR IS NOT RIGHT AND SHOULD NOT BE ENDORSED BY YOUR SUPPORT OF THIS PRODUCT REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THE NPO IS ENDED UP BEING ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL I ASK YOU TO PLEASE, PLEASE WORK WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO SCRAP OR OVERALL THE CURRENT GUIDELINES SO NO OTHER NEIGHBORHOOD IN OUR GREAT CITY HAS TO GO THROUGH AS MUCH CONFLICT AND ILL WILL AS MINE AS THE PLACES IN THE COMMISSION GHOSH HAS EXPERIENCED PRIOR TO HIM ANNOUNCING THAT BUT FRANKLY I’M SURPRISED GIBBON THE NEGATIVITY THAT HAS THE OUT IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD FOR THIS THANK YOU FOR THE TIME >> THANK YOU >> GOOD EVENING I’VE BEEN LIVING HERE ALMOST 20 YEARS AT 2019 CAROLINA I’VE SENT SEVERAL E-MAILS THAT BARE MY NAME, SOMETIMES IN THE SIGNATURE THIS IS BECAUSE THE DEBATE HAS BEEN QUITE ANIMATED GIVEN THE PRECIOUS NATURE OF CERTAIN SUDDEN THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN GOING ON HERE FOR SO,IUM GROWING TO ADDRESS TWO MAJOR POINTS WE ARE HERE TONIGHT AS SEVERAL YEARS AGO SEVERAL PEOPLE WERE GOING KNOCKING ON DOORS ASKING PEOPLE TO SIGN UP FOR PETITIONS FOR THIS NPO ON THE GROUND THAT THERE — I HAVE SIGNED UP FO IT AND NOW

REGRET IT I FEEL BETRAYED THE LITERATURE GO ON THEN ABOUT THE PROPODESSAL OF THE NPO MENTIONED THAT IT WAS ONLY FOR THE EXISTING ZONING I’M SORRY I DON’T THINK ANYBODY CAN CLAIM THE RESULTS IT HAS BEEN SIX MAJOR ADJUSTMENTS, MAJOR PROPERTY RIGHTS AS THIS MEASURE WAS DEDUCTED AND I SUGGEST THAT I’M NOT EXPERT BUT SEEMS TO ME IF YOU HAVE TO QUALIFY WITH CERTAIN AMOUNT OF SIGNATURES AND EVERYTHING FOR AN NPO PROCESS TO GO AT LEAST THAT PROCESS CAN RESPECT IT INTENT AND THE INTENT HAS NOT BEEN RESPECTED IT IS JUST ON THAT I BELIEVE THAT THIS NPO SHOULD BE NULLIFIED AND GO BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD BUT THE OTHER POINT THAT I WISH TO ADDRESS IS THAT, BY FAR, IF I MUT SAY, THE MOST CONTENTIOUS ISSUE THERE IS A SEALING TO THAT TO THE FAR NPO MAINLY 2400 SQUARE FEET, TO BUILD UP TO 2400 SQUARE FEET, WHICH RESULT FOR 4,000 SQUARE FOOT 5%, 4,000 SQUARE FOOT NOT EVEN THE SMALL ALERT IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND IT CONVERSELY RESULTS IN 30% FOR THE LOT AND NOT EVEN THE LARGEST I BELIEVE ACTUALLY 16,000 SQUARE FEET LOT FOR WHICH IT RESULT FOR 22.5% SO THE NPO TREAT EVERYBODY EQUALLY NO LOSERS AND WINNERS AND I THINK THIS IS NOT WISE AND THE PUBLIC CANNOT EVEN STAND UP TO A CHALLENGE W THAT I’M DONE THANK YOU VERY MUCH >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH >> BEFORE YOU BEGIN I KNOW I HAVE SPEAKERS STILL SIGNED UP, I DON’T KNOW IF ANYONE BEYOND THE TWO OF YOU ARE PLANNING TO SPEAK, ARE THERE ADDITIONAL FOLKS THAT HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK AGAINST THIS WHO STILL WISH TO SPEAK? IF YOU CAN COME AND STAND IN LINE AS WELL IT IS JUST HELPFUL FOR US TO GET A SENSE OF HOW MANY SPEAKERS ARE REMAINING WE HAVE ONE MINUTE LEFT IN THE 30 MINUTES ASSIGNED AND SO I WOULD LIKE TO EXTEND THAT BUT I NEED COME BACK TO THE COMMISSION TO TALK ABOUT WHAT IS THE APPROPRIATE WAY WE ALWAYS MAKE SURE THAT THERE IS EVEN TIME PER SPEAKER SO I OPEN IT UP TO MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS IS THERE ANYONE ELSE SPEAKING OR JUST THE THREE OF YOU? I’M INCLINED TO GIVE AN ADDITIONAL SIX MINUTE PER EACH SIDE, TWO MINUTE FOR EACH SPEAKER AND THAT WOULD GIVE THE SUPPORTER SAID EIGHT AND A HALF MINUTES IF THEY WISH TO USE THAT TIME COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS >> WELL WE HAD A CARRY-OVER OF TWO MINUTE AND 40 SECOND FROM THE OTHER, ROUNDER THAT UP TO THREE MINUTES THAT GIVES YOU APPROXIMATELY ONE MINUTE EACH >> WELL AND WHAT I WAS SAYING WE’LL ADD SIX MINUTES, IF WE GIVE THEM EACH TWO MINUTES WE’LL GIVE SIX MINUTES IN ADDITION TO THE TWO AND A HALF MINUTES THAT WERE REMAINING FOR THE SUPPORTERS SO THAT WOULD GIVE THEM EIGHT AND A HALF MINUTES IF THEY SO LIKE! >> OURS IS JUST NOT WANTING TO GO TOO FAR INTO REBUTTAL, CERTAIN STATEMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE BOTH DIRECTLY AND INDIRECTLY ON BOTH SIDE SO JUST TRYING TO GET THIS MORE TO THE MOTION OF THE COMMISSION TO CARRY FORWARD FOR COMMENTS >> I’M OPEN TO ANY MOTIONS, COMMISSIONER BRINE >> I MOVE THAT WE GIVE EACH SIDE AN ADDITIONAL SIX MINUTES >> MOVED AND SECONDED ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE >> AYE >> ANY OPPOSED? >> ONE OPPOSE GREAT WE WILL GIVE YOU SEVEN MINUTES IF WE CAN GET THE CLOCK UP TO SEVEN MINUTE I GUESS WE HAD ONE MINUTE LEFT THANK YOU >> YOU MAY BEGIN SIR >> I FEEL LIKE I’M AT THE ACADEMY AWARD GOOD EVENING I’M THE CHAIR OF THE TRIENINGAL WE ARE A GROUP OF OVER 15,000 PROFESSIONAL SAID ADVOCATING FOR PRO ECONOMIC GROWTH POLICY THROUGHOUT THE TRIANGLE WE PROVIDE GUIDANCE TO THE TRIANGLE’S LEADERS ADVOCATING FOR VISIONARY PUBLIC POLICY INVOLVES ITSELF IN POLICY DECISIONS THAT THE CITY AND COUNTY LEVELS AND FOR BOTH OF THESE NEIGHBORHOOD PROTECTION OVERLAYS ARE PUBLIC POLICIES FOR SEVERAL REASONS

BY THEIR NATURE NPO RESTRICT SUPIE BY RESTRICTING DEVELOPMENT OTHERWISE INVESTED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD GO ELSEWHERE ROBBING DURHAM OF POTENTIAL INCREMENTAL GAINS IN TAX REVENUES AFFORDABILITY DURHAM ADDS 20 NEW RESIDENTS DAILY AND THE CURRENT PRODUCTION OF HOUSING UNITS IS NOT KEEPING UP WITH THIS GROWTH AS DEMAND OUTSTRIPS SUPPLY PRICES INCREASE THE HOUSING AFORDABLE ISSUE CASCADES ACROSS ALL PRICES OF HOUSING AND IS NOT JUST LIMITED TO THE MOST NEEDY THERE IS A GROWING MISSING MIDDLE IN OUR HOUSE NOTHING VENATORY, WHICH WILL CONTINUE TOGROW POLICIES SUCH AS NPOs FORTUNATELY DURHAM, UNLIKE RALEIGH RECOGNIZED THE IMPORTANT YOUTH, ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS; HOWEVER THIS NPO WILL SEVERELY LIMIT THE ABOUT TO ADD ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS TO OLD WEST DURHAM PROPERTIES, THIS IS ANTISETICAL TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME THANK YOU >> MY MAIM NAME IS RICK EMRIC, I I’M ALSO A MEMBER I WILL CONTINUE THE DISCUSSION ON WHY NPOS ARE BAD PUBLIC POLICY THIS NPO WILL PREVENT MORE DENSE DEVELOPMENT FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD FOREVER LIMITING THE AMOUNT OF STRUCTURES DURHAM’S MAYOR STAND DENSITY TO IMPORTANCE STATING ONE OF THE THINGS IN DURHAM THAT WE’RE GOING TO HAVE TO GET USED TO IS WE NED MORE DENSITY EITHER WEAL BUILD MORE HOUSES OR THE PRICE OF HOUSING IS GOING TO GO THROUGH THE ROOF AND WE NEED MORE DENSITY, END QUOTE OLD WEST DURHAM IS VERY CLOSE TO THE NINTH STREET DISTRICT, WHICH WILL HAVE LIGHT RAIL STOP IT IS ESSENTIAL THAT WE HAVE HIGH DENSITY SURROUNDING TRANSIT STOPS IN THE CITY PROPERTY VALUES OWNING A HOME IS OFTEN THE GREATEST INVESTMENT IN HOW WE PAY FOR OUR REIRM TO THIS ORDINANCE WILL RESTRICT THE AMOUNT OF IMPROVEMENTS TO BE MADE IN THE OLD WEST DURHAM HOMES T UNFAIR TO THOSE WHO HAVE FAITHFULLY INVESTED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND PRESIDENT MICRO VIEWPOINT IF ALLOWED THE USE OF MLERs WILL SPREAD AS OTHER GROUPS ATTEMPT TO PREVENT CHANGE TO THEIR AREAS THIS HAS HAPPENED IN RALEIGH WHERE THERE ARE NOW 19 WHAT ARE EQUIVALENT TO NPOS IN DURHAM, FOREVER FROZEN FROM PARTICIPATING IN THE CITY’S GROWTH AND RESULT IN DEVELOPMENT OCCURRING FURTHER FROM THE CITY’S CORE, FURTHER FROM TRANSIT SERVICES AND ADDING TRAFFIC CONGESTION AND POLLUTION THE NEIGHBORHOOD OVERLAY IS JUST ANOTHER WAY TO SAY NO STRONGLY URGES NPOs AND STRONGLY OPPOSE SAID NPOs IN GENERAL AND THIS ORDINANCE SPECIFICALLY WE EARN YOU TO DENY THE REQUEST THANK YOU HELL HOE WALDO FINERB 1119 PLANNER STREET I OPPOSE THE NPO I HEARD A YOUNG LADY SPEAK EARLIER ABOUT BEING HOMELESS YELL ENCOURAGE ALL OF YOU SHOULD HAVE BEEN AT THE TAX OFFICE OR THE COUNTY COMMISSIONER’S OFFICE WHEN THEY WAS RAISING THE PROPERTY TAX THAT IS ONE OF THE REASONS WHY YOU HAVE THE HIGH PRICE OF HOMES COMING UP IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOODS NOW I’VE BEEN IN MY HOME SINCE 1994, WALLTOWN HAS GROWN TREMENDOUSLY I I OPPOSE ANYTHING THAT INFRINGE ON MY CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO HAVE HOMEOWNERSHIP TO DO WHAT I SEE FIT TO DO WITH MY PROPERTY, THAT IS WHY WE PURCHASE OUR HOMES TO DO WITH WHAT WE SEE FIT TO A CERTAIN DEGREE TO LIMIT ME, THE ABILITY TO DO WHAT I WANT TO DO WITH MY HOME IS INFRINGING ON MY RIGHTS I SAY THAT # # BECAUSE THE 14th AMENDMENT GUARANTEES US THAT NO LOCAL GOVERNMENT OR STATE GOVERNMENT OR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SHALL ENTER ANY KIND OF ORDINANCE OR LAWS THAT INFRINGE ON THOSE RIGHTS, THIS DOES AGAIN, I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THEIR SUPPORT WHEN IT CAME DOWN TO TEACHERS GETTING A RAISE, YOUR CHILDREN BEING DISCOUNTED, NOT HAVING SUPPLIES, DON’T HAVE THE THINGS THEY NEED TO PERFORM IN SCHOOLS AS WE SIT HERE AND DEBATE ON WHETHER OR NO HOW TO INFRINGE ON A HOMEOWNERS RIGHT TO HAVE AND DO WHAT THEY

WANT TO WITH THAT PROPERTY >> SO I ENCOUNTER COURAGE YOU TO TURN THIS DOWN BECAUSE IT DOES JUST THAT, INFRINGE ON OUR RIGHTS AS HOMEOWNERS >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH ANYONE ELSE WHO HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO SPEAK THIS EVENING AGAINST THERE IS ONE MINUTE AND 17 SECOND REMAINING AND IF NOT WE WILL ALLOW THE SUPPORTERS TO HAVE AN ADDITIONAL, IT WS ABOUT NINE MINUTES IF YOU ROUND UP AND I’M ASSUMING YOU WILL NOT NEED THE FULL NINE MINUTES BUT WE WILL OFFER YOU EQUAL TIME IF SUPPORTERS WOULD LIKE TO MAKE ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS AND THEN WE’RE GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING GOOD DO WHAT WE DO BEST WHICH IS DELIBERATE >> MY NAME IS DAN WELSH, 923 ALABAMA AVENUE AND I JUST WANTED TO ADDRESS A FEW THINS I HEARD AND JUST ADD CLARITY TO IT HOPEFULLY FIRST OF ALL, I HEARD ABOUT THE INITIAL PETITION IT WAS CONCERNS WITH THAT I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT AT THE TOP OF THE INITIAL PETITION THIS IS FOR THE APPLICATION TO INITIATE THE NPO IT CLEARLY STATED THAT AT THE TOP THAT THERE WAS NO TEXT DRAFTED AT THIS POINT AND THE PURPOSE WAS TO INITIATE AN NPO AND FIND OUT WHAT NEIGHBORS WANTED TO ADD OR WHAT KIND OF PRECS THEY WANTED TO ADD TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD SO WE FEEL LIE THAT WAS CLEAR TO THSE WHO ARE SIGNING THE INITIAL APPLICATION SO IS GENTLEMAN WHO TRIED TO MINIMIZE SUPPORT IN THE MEETING SAYING THE ROOM WAS PACKED WITH NPO SUPPORTARDS, JUST LIKE TONIGHT WE PUT OUT NOTICES AND PEOPLE SHOW UP, WE HAD A GOOD SHOWING TONIGHT BUT I WANT TO THANK THE PEOPLE THAT DID SHOW UP PUT OUR SUPPORTERS DON’T WRITE AS MUCH BUT THEY SHOW UP AND THEY REGISTER THEY SUPPORT THEY BELIEVE THAT’S ENOUGH AND SO WE FEEL LIKE IT SHOULD BE WE DON’T FEEL LIKE IT SHOULD HAVE THREE SHOULD HAVE TO BE PAGES AND PAGES OF E-MAILS WRITTEN AND SO FORTH BUT IN ANY CASE THE PEOPLE AS YOU CAN SEE SHOWED UP TONIGHT JUST LIKE THEY HAVE IN THE PAST THE FAR STUDY THAT CHOSE ALABAMA AVENUE I HAPPENED TO LIB ON ALABAMA AVENUE IN THE BLOCK HE WAS TALKING AND IF YOU’LL INTUS IT IS AT AN ANGUAL THE RST OF OLD WEST DURHAM I DON’T HAVE A MAP RIGHT HERE IN FRONT OF ME BUT IT IS AT AN ANKLE AND MOST OF THE LOTS ON ONE SIDE OF THE STREET ARE PIE SHAPED AND VERY SMALL THAT BLOCK ACTUALLY HAS TH SMALLEST HOT IN OLD WEST, 1836 SQUARE FEET IS WHERE THE NEIGHBORHOOD GROCERY IS, IT HAS A 68% BAR OR SOMETHING CRASSY BUT BECAUSE THESE ARE REALLY TINY LOTS, VERY UNUSUAL, THAT WAS NOT A RANDOM CHOICE TOS PICK ALABAMA AVENUE AND DO A SRVEY AND SHOW THAT THE FAR WAS TRYING TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THE FAR WAS OUT OF LINE THAT WAS CERTAINLY NOT RANDOM AND I WANT TO BE CLEAR MOSTLY ABOUT THIS IDEA THAT WE’RE ANTIDENSITY, ANTIAFFORDABLE HOUSING YOU BE THIS WAS NEVER ABOUT TRYING TO PREVENT DENSITY AND IN FACT THS IS AN OVERLAY IT IS NOT A COMPLETE RE-ZONING TAKING US OUT OF THE RU25, AND AREA WE DIDN’T ATTEMPT TO GET MULTI-FAMILY UNITS IN, WE NEVER THOUGHT THAT WAS IN THE REALM OF THE WHAT THE REALM WAS AVAILABLE TO DO ANYWAY BUT TO DO THINGS THAT COULD ENCOURAGE ADDITIONAL UNITS AND WE TOOK ADVANTAGE OF THAT BY ADDRESSING THE ADU SITUATION I THINK FAIRLY AGGRESSIVELY SO WE DID SOME STUDIES ON HOW MANY ADDITIONAL ADUs COULD BE ADDED BASED ON THE NPO IT IS TRUE THAT WITH THE LOTS WITH THE HIGHEST FAR SOME OF THOSE COULD NOTTANCE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO ADD AN ADU, WE LOOKED FOR FOR EXAMPLE AT 500 SQUARE FOOT ADU, THERE IS ABOUT 16% OF THE LOTS THAT WILL NOT BE ABLE TO ADD AN ADU BECAUSE OF THE 32.5% CAP WE ACKNOWLEDGE THAT ON THE FLIP SIDE BY REDUCING THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OR EXCUSE ME THE PERCENTAGE OF HEATED SQUARE FEET YOU NEED TO BUILD AN ADU WE FOUND 63% OF THE LOTS WILL BE NEWLY ABLE TO ADD A 500 SQUARE FOOT ADU, SO WE LOSE 16% OF TH PROPERTIES, CANNOT BUILD A 500 SQUARE FOOT ADU, 63% OF THE PROPERTY ARE NEWLY ABLE TO ADD A 500 SQUARE FOOT ADU, NETTED OUT THAT’S 47% OF THE PROPERTIES THAT ARE NOW WILL BEABLY TO ADD AT A 500 SQUARE FOOT AD, THAT WAS ONE OF THE WAYS WE FELT WE COULD EFFECT THE DENSITY SITUATION IN TERMS OF DENSITY OF HOUSING UNITS WE ALSO HAVE A LOT OF DUPLEXES STILL IN OLD WEST THAT HAVE NOT BEEN BUILT ON I THINK THE COUNT IS AROUND 120 OR 125 AND WE’RE FULLY ACCEPTING OF THOSE BEING BUILT OUT INTO DUPLEXES AND INCREASING THE DENSITY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD ALL WE’RE ASKING IS THAT WHEN

THAT HAPPENS IT IS DONE IN SCALE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD THE DUPLEXES BEFORE 200 THE AVERAGE DUPLEX SQUARE FOOT SUBJECT AROUND 750 SQUARE FEET DON’T HAVE THE EXACT NUMBER BUT WE’RE LOOKING AT THAT A UP CANAL DAYS AGO AND THE AVERAGE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF DUE PLECS HAVE BEEN ADDED IN THE LAST 10 YEARS, THAT’S 750 SQUARE FOOT ASIDE THE AVERAGE DUPLEX SIZE HAS BEEN ADDED IN THE LAST 15 YEARS 1500 SQUARE FEET A LITTLE MORE THAN THAT ACTUALLY AND SOLE YOU KNOW THIS IS NOT AFFORDABLE HOUSING WHEN WE’RE ATING THESE HUGE DUPLEXES THIS IS 1500 SQUARE FEET PER SIDE GOING FOR WAY, WAY MORE RENT THAN THE EXISTING DUPLEXES THAT ARE IN PLACE AND SO WE FEEL THAT THERE IS A LOT OF ROOM TO ADD DUPLEXES AND A LOT OF POTENTIAL LOTS THAT CAN ADD DUPLEXES WE JUST WANT THEM TO BE IN SCALE SOLE THEY’LL BE MORE AFFORDABLE AND PULFIT IN WITH THE CHARACTER OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD >> GREAT THANK YOU VERY MUCHISM >> SO WITH THAT SAID WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD, THE PUBLIC HEARING I APPRECIATE EVERYONE HAVING COME TONIGHT AND TO SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS WE WILL NOW DELIBERATE AS COMMISSIONERS AND AS I SAID EARLIER WE MAY, WE WILL LIKELY DIRECT QUESTIONS TO STAFF AND WE MAY DIRECT QUESTIONS TO SOME OF YOU AND ASK YOU TO COME UP AND HELP US MAKE SURE WE FULLY UNDERSTAND THE SITUATION AND THE VOTES IN FRONT OF US I’LL OPEN IT UP FOR COMMISSIONERS WE’LL START WITH COMMISSIONER AL-TURK AND COMMISSIONER BRINE AND SATTERFIELD, HORNBUCKLE >> THONG, CHAIR I’M TALKING A LOT TODAY FIRST I WANT TO THANK EVERYONE FOR COMING, FOR E-MAILING, FOR SENDING LETTERS, CALLING, YOU KNOW I KNOW THAT THIS HAS BEEN A VERY CONTENTIOUS CASE AND THAT IT HAS CAUSED A LOT OF TENSION IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD BUT I WILL SAY IT AT LEAST IN THE CORRESPONDENCE I HAD MOST OF THE EFFMAILS ARE VERY THOUGHTFUL SO I APPRECIATE THE FEEDBACK AND IT HAS HELPED M THINK ABOUT THE ISSUES THAT ARE REALLY IMPORTANT I DO WANT TO ALSO THANK THE STAFF FOR THIS GREAT REPORT THIS IS THE REPORT THEY GAVE US IS EXCELLENT SO I WILL KIND OF DRAW ON THAT AND A COUPLE OF CASES BUT LET ME YOU KNOW, I HAVE, FOR ME Y THERE ARE THREE PROBABLY MORE THAN JUST THREE QUESTIONS BUT THREE BROAD QUESTIONS THAT I’M GOING TO KIND OF DISCUSS IN MY COMMENT AND ONE IS WHAT WOULD THIS NPO HAVE, WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF THIS NPO ON NEW CONSTRUCTION? AND RELATED TO THAT SECOND POINT IS HOW WOULD THIS EFFECT AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND DENSITY, WHICH HAS BEEN BROUGHT UP AND THIRD, WHAT ARE ITS EFFECTS ON NOT JUST NEW CONSTRUCTION BUT THE ABILITY OF HOMEOWNERS TO MAKE RENOVATIONS AND ADD TO THEIR HOMES SO A COUPLE OF THE THINGS THAT I GUESS THE BIG PICTURE THOUGHTS IS THAT OLD WEST IS RELATIVELY DENSE ALREADY, 6 TO 8 UNIT PER ACRE WHICH IS MORE DENSE THAN A LOT OF THE OBVIOUSLY SUBURBAN NEIGHBORHOOD THAT ARE LESS THAN FOUR AND IN SOME CASES LESS THAN TWO UNITS PER ACRE SO IT IS A RELATIVELY DENSE NEIGHBORHOOD AND IT SEEMS LIKE FROM THE NEIGHBORHOODS, YOU KNOW, AND I’M GLAD THAT HOWARD POINTED OUT THAT THE NUMBERS IN SOME CASES AR NO COMPLETELY ACCURATE FROM THE TAX ASSESSORS OFFICE BECAUSE THEY DON’T INCLUDE GARAGES AND WHAT NOT # BUT RIGHT IF YOU JUST INCLUDE HEATED SQUARE FOOTAGE, 6% IT SEEMS LIKE OF ALL HOMES ARE ABOVE THAT 32.5 SO THAT’S A COUPLE OF DOZEN HOMES THAT ARE ABOVE THE PROPOSED FAR, THE ALL OF THESE ACRONYMS, FAR AND ADU, SO THE PROPOSED MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA RATIO OF 32.5 SO THIS IS TO ME A PRETTY LOW NUMBER BUT HAVINGED THAT RIGHT I STILL WANTED TO SEE-LETTERS SAY THIS NPO WAS ADOPTED IN LET’S SAY 2009 AND WHAT KIND OF EFFECT WOULD IT HAVE ON NEW CONSTRUCTION AND I LOOKED AGAIN AT THE TAX RECORDS FROM THE COUNTS AND IT LOOKS LIKE NOT INCLUDING 2017 BUT THERE ARE 13 HOUSES BUILT IN OLD WEST DURHAM AND STAFF HAS IF ANYTHING I SAY SEEMS COMPLETELY OFF LET ME KNOW, SEEMS LIKE 13 HOURS BUILT IN OLD WEST DURHAM IN 2010 BASED ON COUNTY RECORD 13 SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, THE DUPLEXES, JUST TO PUT THAT IN CONTEXT I LOOK AT DURHAM COUNTY AND THERE WERE 5,000 SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND

DUPLEXES BUILT IN THAT SAME TIME SO I GUESS WHAT I’M SAYING IS THAT THIS IS A VERY SMALL NUMBER OF HOMES THAT ARE BUILT IN ALL OF DURHAM COUNTY 13 HOUSES, COMPARED TO 5,000 OVER THE LAST 7-8 YEARS IN ALL OF DURHAM COUNTY OF THE 13 HOW MANY OF THEM AFFECTED BY THIS NPO AND IT SEEMS LIKE BY MY CALCULATIONS 7 OF THEM WOULD NOT HAVE TO BE ABLE TO BE BUILT NOW THAT IS SEVEN HOUSES IN THE LAST 8 TO 9 YEARS THAT WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO BE BUILT UNDER THIS NPO NOW I GUESS YOU COULD CUT THE NUMBERS AND SAY THAT’S 50% OF NEW CONSTRUCTION OR YOU COULD SAY THAT’S ONE HOME A YEAR AFFECTED BY THIS NPO AND I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW I DO WANT TO ADDRESS THIS DENSITY QUESTION THAT LET ME SEE TOM AND ADAM AND OTHERS FROM THE TCC MENTIONED THAT IS AN NPO A GOOD POLICY MEASURE OR IS IT BAD FOR TENSITY AND AT LEAST IF WE’RE INTERESTED IN AFFORDABLE HOUSING WE DO HAVE TO CONSIDER THE QUESTION IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THIS I A MINIMAL EFFECT ON SUPPLY,RECTOMY POTENTIALLY RIGHT AGAIN THIS NPO WOULD HAVE, FROM WHAT I’VEEEN, AN EFFECT ON ONE HOUSE A ERYOO, AND MY ASSUMPTION IS ONE HOUSE WOULD PROBABLY BE A LITTLE BIT SOMEONE WOULD BUILD IT UNDER THE 32.5 SO THAT, YOU KNOW, MY KIND OF BIG POINT THIS IS IT SEEM LIKE SUPPLY WILL BE AFFECTED VERY MINIMALLY THE SECOND QUESTION I MENTIONED WAS IS IT GOING TO HAVE AN EFFECT ON RENOVATIONS RIGHT CAN YOU ADD ON TO YOUR HOME? AND AGAIN FROM STAFF REPORT IT LOOKS LIKE THE MEDIAN FAR RIGHT NOW, THE FLORIDA AREA RATIO, IS AROUND 18% TO 19% OF THE LOT SIZE THAT SUGGESTS TO ME THAT 50% OF HOUSES WOULD BE ABLE TOOL ADD AN ADDITIONAL 14% OF THEIR LOT SIZE RIGHT ON TO THEIR HOME OR AS AN ACCESSORY UNIT IF YOU THINK ABOUT THAT THAT’S 14% OF THIS # INITIAL 18%, THAT IS YOU KNOW ALMOST AN ADDITION OF THREE QUARTERS OF YOUR HOUSE, RIGHT AND SO YOU KNOW I WAS INK THING ABOUT THIS WELL YOU KNOW PEOPLE WHEN THEY DO RENOVATIONS HOW MUCH DO THEY ADD? IS IT REASONABLE TO ADD 75% EXTRA? THAT SEEMS PRETTY HIGH TO ME RIGHT SO I LOOKED IN THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF HOMEOWNERS SUGGESTS A PEDROOM IS ABOUT 12% OF YOUR HOME A MASTER BEDROOM A FAMILY ROOM IS ABOUT 12, SAY A KITCHEN ANOTHER 10%, IF YOU ALT ALL OF THESE THINGS IT SEEMS TO ME LIKE UNDER THE CURRENT OR THE PROPOSED NPO 50% OF HOMES WOULD BE ABLE TO ADD A CONSIDERABLY AMOUNT ON TO THEIR HOMES AND 75% WHO AR 22.5 FAR OR BELOW WULD BE ABLE TO ADD ON TO A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT TO THEIR HOUSE, EITHER ON THEIR PRIMARY STRUCTURE OR THE ADU, BUT THIS ING ARES ME TO WHAT I THINK IS FOR ME A CONCERN AND THIS HAS COME UP THE ADU, THE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT SO I’M GOING TO ASK STAFF A QUESTION BEFORE I MAKE THIS COMMENT SO ADUs ONE OF THE THINGS I’VE NOTICED IN THE STAFF REPORT IS WE DON’T HAVE AND THIS IS MABE HARDER TO FIND BUT DO YOU HAVE A SENSE OF HOW MANY LOTS IN OLD WEST DURHAM OR EVEN IN DURHAM, ALL OF DURHAM COUNTY HAVE ADUs AND IF SO WHAT IS THE MEDIAN OR AVERAGE SIZE OF THOSE AD Us SO IN OLD WEST DURHAM AND ACTUALLY FOLKS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD BABARA WELL ON THAT STORY BARBARA WHO HAS BEEN DOING A LOT OF DATA ANALYSIS MIGHT HAVE IT MORE AT THE TIP OF THEIR FINGER TIS AND I WOULD VENCH TO GUESS THERE IS MAYBE A DOZEN AT MOST ADUs IN OLD WEST DURHAM, MOST OF THEM ARE NEW CONSTRUCTION THERE IS ONE DEVELOPER IN PARTICULAR WHO HAS AN 80 MODEL AND SEEM TO BE A SIMILAR SIZE MY UNDERSTANDING IS 733 SQUARE FEET UNHEATED GROUND FLOOR GARAGE AND THERE IS USUALLY ROUGHLY A 733 SQUARE FOOT ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT ABOVE THAT AND THAT’S BEEN REPLICATED SEVERAL TIMES I DON’T KNOW OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD HOW MANY THOUGH GOOD SO THAT WOULD BE 1700 SQUARE FEET ADDED RIGHT AND SO AND THEN THAT IS BASED ON, OR THE MAX AT LEAST RIGHT NOW UNDER THE UDO IS 30% OF THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE IS THAT RIGHT? >> SO THE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT IN THAT EXAMPLE WOULD BE CAP AT 30% UNDER THE CURRENT REGULATION NOT AT A GARAGE THE DIFFERENCE IS UNDER THE PROPOSED NPO THERE WERE TRADE OFFS, THEY ARE BUMPING UP THE HEATED SQUARE FOOTAGE UP TO 50% VERSUS 30% WERE IT IS NOW BUT THEY ARE ALSO NOW COUNTING

THAT IN THE FAR AND CAMPING IN AT 700 THERE IS A LITTLE BIT OF A TRADE OFF THERE I THINK MR. WELCHES POINT EARLIER SEEMS ACCURATE I DON’T HAVE THE DATA IN FRONT OF ME THAT YOU ARE ESSENTIALLY TAKING FOLKS THAT ARE NEAR OR AT OR ABOVE THE 32.5 THAT ARE ELIGIBLE TO ADD AN ADU THEY WILL NO LONGER BE ABLE TO DO SO BUT THAT IS A RELATIVELY SMALLER POPULATION THAN THE FOLKS AT THE OTHER END OF THE DISTRIBUTION WHO MAYBE HAVE AN 1100 SQUARE FOOT HOUSE, 30% OF THAT IS A LITTLE MORE THAN 300 SQUARE FEET, UPPING THAT UP TO 50%, THEN ALLOWS THEM TO GO A LITTLE BIT HIGHER AND MAYBE HAVE THE MORE MARKET VIABLE UNIT I DON’T HAVE THE DATA IN FRONT OF ME THAT’S JUST THE FIRST FLUSH ON WHAT I’VE HEARD TONIGHT AND THE DATA I’VEEEN >> THANK YOU AND THAT LAST POINT IS WHAT I WAS GETTING TO RIGHT THERE ARE A CONSIDERABLE NUMBER OF HOMES THAT ARE RELATIVELY SMALLTALITY YOU KNOW ARE AT 18% FAR RIGHT NOW MAYBE 20%, WHICH MEANS THEY CAN ADD ANOTHER 12.5% OF THE LOT SIZE AS AN ADU AND SO MY, YOU KNOW MY SUGGESTION OR MY CONCERN IS IF THERE IS ROOM TO BUILD AN ADU AND IT FALLS WITHIN THE FAR WHY RESTRICT IT TO ONLY 700 SQUARE FEET, I MEAN THAT YOU KNOW TO ME RIGHT IF YOU HAVE A 2,000 SQUARE FOOT HOME AND RATHER THAN ADD ON TO THE PRESUMEARY STRUCTURE SAY MAYBE I’LL BUILD A 1,000 SQUARE FOOTER 900 SQUARE FOOT ADU THAT RATHER THAN BEING AN EFFICIENCY CAN BE A 2 BEDROOM OR SOMETHING TO ME THIS POTENTIAL RESTRICTION OF 700 SQUARE FEET I THINK MAY HAVE A MORE NEGATIVE EFFECT ON AFFORDABLE HOUSING THAN THE FAR BECAUSE AS I’VE SHOWN I THINK THE FAR JUST BASEDONT NUMBERS DOES NOT SEEM TO EFFECT THE SUPPLY THAT MUCH SO I GUESS I DON’T KNOW IF PROPONENTS WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS, YOU KNOW KIND OF ANSWER THIS QUESTION OF YOU KNOW WHY DOES THE ADUs CAP AT A 700 SQUARE GET TO COULD THERE BE CHANGE AND TO ANY PROPONENTS WHO ARE CONCERN ABOUT ADUs IS THERE SOMETHING ABOUT ADU PROVISION AS IT IS WRITTEN RIGHT NOW THAT YOU KNOW IF IT WAS CHANGED YOU COULD SUPPORT IT >> THANK YOU >> ALL THE TIME JUST START WITH BRINGING UP OPPONENTS A COMMISSIONER HAS ASKED YOU TO COME UP AS PART OF THEIR TIMEQUAL IF YOU CAN DIRECTLY ADDRESS THAT QUESTION PLEASE >> THANK YOU >> DAN WELCH, 923, ALABAMA AVENUE AND AS I RECALL OUR DISCUSSIONS AROUND THE ADU THE 700 SQUARE FEET WE CONVERGED ON THAT FOR A NUMBER OF DIRECTIONS FIRST OF ALL, THERE WAS A MAJOR CONCERN AS WE SHOWED SPIN OF THE SLIDE EARLIER ABOUT OVERSIZED ACCESSORY STRUCTURES THAT OVERWHELM THEY CAN BE ALLOWED TO SET INTO THE FAR BACK WAY UP AGAINST INTO THE SETBACKS AND THEY TEND TO LUME OVER BACKYARD, TWO-STORA AFFAIRS WITH A LOT OF SQUARE FOOTAGE AND SO THERE WAS A LOT OF I THINK THERE WAS GENERAL CONSENSUS WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT MINIMIZING THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES AND SO WE LOOKED AT WHAT WOULD BE PROPRIETOR TO DO AND WE ACTUALLY HONED IN ON THE 700 SQUARE FEET I BELIEVE GOING BACK AND THINKING ABOUT THAT, PARTLY BECAUSE THERE IS A VIABLE BUSINESS MODEL COMING IN SEVERAL ADUs BULT AND IN FACT MAYBE THE ONLY MATT SAID 12 UNITS OR SO PROBABLY HALF OF THOSE HAVE BEEN BUILT IN THE LAST FEW YEARS AS THESE CARRIAGE HOUSES WHERE THE ADU IS 700 SQUARE FEET SO 700 SQUARE FEET WAS KIND OF A GOOD NUMBER BECAUSE THAT’S WHAT THE MARKET WAS DEMANDING THAT’S WHAT THEY ARE ABLE TO SELL AND THAT WOULD HELP MEET OUR OBJECTIVE OF NOT HAVING THESE STRUCTURES ON THE BACK LOT LINES LOOKING OVER PEOPLE’S BACKYARD AND SO FORTH SO THAT’S I THINK LARGELY WHERE IT CAME FROM >> GREAT AND COMMISSIONER AL-TURK IF YOU WANT TO BRING UP ONE PROPONENT OR APONE TONIGHT ANSWER YOUR SECOND QUESTION ANDTHEN WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO MOVE TO THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS >> AND ONE MINUTE AS WELL, PLEASE >> WE THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS UP BECAUSE I DO THINK THE RESTRICTIONS OF THE UDOs IS ONE OF THE WEAKEST POINT OF THE NPO AS A MATTER OF FACT, IF THE OBJECT WAS TO PREVENT EXCESS DEVELOPMENT THIS COULD HAVE BEEN ACHIEVED BY JUST INCREASING SETBACKS AND PREVENTING THE BACK LOT, INSTEAD OF THAT BECAUSE OF THE PROPONENTS WANTED TO RESTRICT THE MOVEMENTS OVERALL THEY PUT ALL KIND OF MEASURES, DIFFERENT CREATABILITY AND LET PEOPLE DECIDE FOR THEMSELVES WHAT THEY WANT TO DO A PERFECT ILLUSTRATION OF IT, THEY WANT TO DECIDE FOR HOMEOWNERS WHETHER THEY WANT TO HAVE A HUGE DWELLING OR USE THEIR LOT FOR AND BALANCE IT BETWEEN A MAIN STRUCTURE AND I THINK THAT’S ONE OF THE

WEAKEST POINT OF THE CURRENT PROPOSE THANK YOU VERY MUCH >> THANK YOU >> ANY CLOSING COMMENTS >> SURE I WILL SAY ONE MORE THINGISM THING THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF, I’VE TRIED TO ADDRESS TWO QUESTIONS THAT HAVE COME UP A LOT, ANOTHER ONE WHICH HAS BEEN BROUGHT UP ABOUT THE PRCESS AGAIN, IT SEEMS LIKE IT HAS BEEN A CONTENTIOUS ONE AND I HAVE HEARD BOTH GOOD AND BAD ABOUT THE PROCESS AND SO AT LEAST FOR ME I CAN NOT MAKE MY DECISION BASED ON THAT BECAUSE IT IS HARD FOR ME TO ASSESS WAS IT A PERFECT PROCESS, I DOUBT IT WAS IT A TERRIBLE PROCESS I ALSO DOWNTOWN DOUBT THAT SO I’M DUGHING TO BASE IT ON THE MERITS OF THE NPO AND I DO APPRECIATE ALL OF THE COMMENT BUT I CAN NOT MAKE THE DECISION BASED ON THE PROCESS ITSELF THANK YOU >> THANKS COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER BRINE >> THANK YOU >> I ALSO WANT TO ECHO COMMISSIONER AL-TURK THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENDANCE TONIGHT AND THONG FOR ALL OF YOUR INPUT, E-MAIL AND SO FORTH I DO REGRET THAT THE PROSSEEMS TO HAVE BCOME CONTENTIOUS, ANOTHER THING THAT COME OUT TO ME TONIGHT DURING THE COMMENTS WAS TH PROCESS OF COMMUNICATION WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD MAY HAVE BEEN A LITTLE TOO MUCH ON THE LIST SERVED AND THE PEOPLE WHO DON’T GO ON-LINE AND DON’T USE LIST SERVES AND STUFF AND I HAPPEN TO BE ONE OF THEM ARE LEFT OUT MAYBE MY WIFE WOULD HAVE FIGURED OUT WHAT WAS GOING ON BUT I’M NOT ANYHOW, I HAVE SEVERAL COMMENTS AND A FEW QUESTIONS I’LL DO THE COMMENTS FIRST I WANT TO ACTUALLY START WITH THE NINTH STREET PLAN, THE WAS ADOPTED NOVEMBER, 2008 AND IN THE NINTH STREET PLAN, WHICH CREATED THE NINTH STREET COMPACT NEIGHBORHOOD PART OF WHICH IS IMMEDIATELY SOUTH OF OLD WEST DURHAM IT IS ACKNOWLEDGED THAT THE RESIDENTIAL MILL VILLAGE, WHICH IS WHAT IT WAS CALLED IN THE DEVELOPMENTAL PLAN, COULD REALLY EXPERIENCE PRESSURE FROM BEING ADJACENT TO THE COMPACT NEIGHBORHOOD AND IT ALSO NOTED THAT ONE WAY THE NEIGHBORHOOD COULD PROTECT ITSELF IS THIS WAS A NEIGHBORHOOD PROTECTION OVERLAY, WHICH WAS A NEW TOOL IN THE BOX AT THIS TIME IT JUST TOOK A LONG TIME IT APPEARS TO ACTUALLY GET AROUND TO TRY TO DO ONE AND DURING THAT PERIOD OF TME, WHICH IS NOT QUITE 10 YEARS IT SEMS LIKE LOT HAS HAPPENED SO PERHAPS SOME FOR THE GOOD AND SOME NOT SO GOOD FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD SOME COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT IT GOES I HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT SOME OF IT I CAN UNDERSTAND THE USE OF THE FAR TO REGULATE BULK I THINK CHAPEL HILL DOES IT AND I THINK THEY USE EVEN A LOWER NUMBER I DO SYMPATHIZE WITH ONE GENTLEMAN WHO POINTED OUT THAT IT DOESN’T QUITE TREAT EVERYBODY EQUALLY IF I OWNED A 12,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT I SHOULD BE ABLE, IF YOU FOLLOWED THE FARES THAT HAVE SOMETHING LIKE 3850 SQUARE FEET BUILDING, BUT THEY CAP IT AT 36 SO THAT’S ONE THING THAT BOTHERS ME A LITTLE BIT I UNDERSTAND THEY ARE REGULATING, TRYING TO REGULATE THE HEIGHT BUT WHAT BOTHER ME HERE IS THAT WE SEEM TO HAVE ADOPTED A POSITION THAT ONE HEIGHT FITS ALL AND I DON’T AGREE WITH THAT THEY THINK IF YOU OWN A LARGER LOT YOU CAN AFFORD TO GIVE MORE SETBACK THEN YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO BUILD HIGHER IF YOU GAVE SOME SETBACK, ONE THING I SUGGESTED TO SOME OF THE PROPONENTS WAS MAYBE ONE FOOT OF ADDITIONAL HEIGHTS OR TWO ADDITIONAL FEET OF SETBACK AND I ALSO THINK THAT THE SETBROOK PSED FOR THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE RATHER THAN JUST JUMPING UP 10 FEET, WHEN YOU GET OVER 16 FEET I SUGGESTED THAT THAT BE A GRADEIATED THING AND ON THE SUBJECT OF TREES THE REQUIREMENT OF A BACKYARD TREE I THINK THE CONCERN THERE IS TREE REPLACEMENT WHERE PEOPLE HAVE COME IN AND CUT DOWN TREES TO BUILD A LARGER STRUCTURE BUT IT DOESN’T REALLY SAY THAT AND WHEN YOU

STATE THAT YOU KNOW THIS SEEMS LIKE IT WOULD IT APPLY TO ANY LOT IN OLD WEST DURHAM THAT’S A CONCERN TO ME BECAUSE YOU MIGHT HAVE SOME ELDERLY PEOPLE LIVING IN OLD WEST DURHAM ON FIXED INCOMES WHO JUST SO HAPPENS DON’T HAVE A CANOPY TREE BACK THERE AND TO BE TOLD THEY NEED TO PUT ONE IN IS AN EXPENSE I DON’T THINK THEY WOULD WANT TO LOOK AT AND THE OTHER CONSIDERATION THAT COMES IN IF YOU LOOK AT SECTION 8.3 OF THE UDO ON TREES WHAT YOU SEE IS THAT DEVELOPERS ARE GIVEN A CERTAIN IN TERMS OF SQUARE FOOTAGE AS TREES THEY PLANT FOR A 2-INCH CALIBER, CANOPY TREE, THAT CREDIT IS 175 SQUARE FEET AND IF YOU’RE HOPING THAT THAT 2-INCH TREES THAT YOU PLANT MIGHT GROW INTO A 4-INCH TREE YOU REALLY NEED TO ALLOW THAT 275 SQUARE FEET AND I BRING THAT UP BECAUSE SOMEBODY WHO MAYBE HAS BUILT A McMANSION A YOU WANT TO SEE A TREE BACK IN THE BACKYARD COULD MAYBE HIRE AN ARBRIST TOS COME IN, LOOK AT THE PROPERTY AND COME BACK AND TELL YOU THAT THERE IS NOT ENOUGH ROOM FOR A TREE THEN WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO AND I DON’T HAVE A GOOD ANSWER TO THAT THE OTHER THING THAT STRUCK ME ABOUT THE TREE IS THAT YOU ARE OBVIOUSLY CONCERNED ABOUT YOUR TREE CANOPY BUT THERE IS NOTHING IN HERE ABOUT TREE PRESERVATION I THINK IF YOU’RE GOING TO TRY TO MANAGE YOUR TREE’S CANOPY YOU NEED TO ENCOURAGE TREE PRESERVATION AS WELL AS TREE REPLACEMENT NOW SEEM TO ONLY BE FOCUSED ON REPLACEMENT, TO ME THAT’S A FLAW AND NOW I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ONE THING AS I SEE AS THIS PLOT DIMENSIONS, MAXIMUM LOT AREAS AND SO FORTH WHEN EXACTLY WOULD THAT APPLY? >> JUST PULLING UP A COPY OF THE NPO SO JUST BARE WITH ME FOR ONE MOMENT SO THAT WOULD APPLY WIH AN ATTEMPT TO SUBDIVISION OR LOT CONSOLIDATION >> SOLE IT IS ONLY IF SOMEBODY COMES IN AND BUYS UP PROPERTIES AND WANTS TO RESUBDIVIDE? >> EXACTLY I THINK THERE IS PRE-LIMITED CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE SOMETHING LIKE THIS MIGHT OCCUR BUT, AND I DON’T WANT TO SPEAK FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION PERHAPS SOMEONE CAN VOLUNTEER TO FOLLOW UP ON THIS BUT KIND OF PREVENTING AGAINST LARGE SCALE REDEVELOPMENTS WHERE SOMEONE BUY AS FEW BLOCKS AND WANTS TO RECONSOLIDATE AND TINKER WITH THE LOT SEATS UNDER EXISTING ZONING >> OKAY WOULD THE MAXIMUM LOT AREA REQUIREMENT PREVENT SOMEBODY WHO IS PRESENTLY A PROPERTY OWN WHO OWNS TWO ADJACENT LOTS FROM COMBINING THEM IF THEY WOULD GET A LOT THAT WAS OVER 12,000 SQUARE FEET? >> YES >> THAT TO ME AGAIN IS A PROVISION THAT I’M UNCOMFORTABLE WITH BECAUSE IF I WERE A PROPERTY OWNER LIVING IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND YOU TOLD ME I COULDN’T COMBINE TWO OF MY LOTS I DON’T KNOW WHETHER I WOULD WIN OR NOT BUT MY RESPONSE WOULD BE I’LL SEE YOU IN COURT >> I WOULD SAY AND I DON’T HAVE ALL OF THE DATA HANDY WITH 428 PARCELS BUT I DO THINK THERE IS A VERY, VERY LIMITED SET OF CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE THERE ARE TWO PEOPLE THAT HAVE PROPERTIES CONTIGUOUS WITH ONE ANOTHER WHOM MIGHT BE INTERESTED IN DOING THAT, PERHAPS THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION HAS MORE COMMENT ON THAT BUT YOUR POINT IS TAKEN >> OKAY WELL IF I MAY MR. CHAIR I WOULD LIKE TO GET THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION TO COMMENT ON THIS MAXIMUM LOT AREA AND HAVE ANY LOTS, ANY POSSIBILITIES THERE MIGHT BE FOR COMBINATION BY CURRENT OWNERS >> COMMISSIONER BRINE YOU MAY DO SO BUT WE’LL LIMIT TIME SO IF YOU COULD ADDRESS THE QUESTION WE’LL BRING UP ONE INDIVIDUAL FOR ONE MINUTE >> HOW MANY PROPERTIES ARE THERE IN OLD WEST DRHAM WHERE TWO LOTS SIDE-BY-SIDE OWNED BY THE SAME OWNER IF COMBINED WOULD YIELD SOMETHING THAT’S 12,000 SQUARE FEET

DOES ANYBODY KNOW? IF SOMEONE DOES

You Want To Have Your Favorite Car?

We have a big list of modern & classic cars in both used and new categories.