Hi everyone. This is Alice Gao. In a previous video, I introduced the homework dancing game and I discussed the intuition, which is that both players Alice and Bob seem to be happier if they choose to go dancing. In this video, I'm going to show you how to formalize this intuition using a solution concept called the dominant strategy equilibrium. To describe the concept dominant strategy equilibrium, let me introduce some notation first. First of all, some notations to denote strategies. We are going to use the index i to represent a player, so the strategy of player i would be denoted as sigma sub i. And then when we're talking about an equilibrium concept, it's often useful to represent the strategy of all the players except i. So we're going to use sigma sub minus i to represent the set of strategies of all the players except player i. Okay, then we need some terminologies for representing utilities. So when we're talking about utilities, all of the players' utilities are determined jointly by all of their strategies. So first of all, we need a set of strategies for all the players. This is called the strategy profile and we'll use sigma without any subscript to represent the strategy profile. So this is a set of strategies one for each player. Then we'll use big O sub i to denote the utility of agent i under the strategy profile. So for the strategy profile sigma, u sub i of sigma is the utility of agent i. If I break down sigma into more components, then you can write sigma as sigma i and sigma minus i. So the strategy of player i plus the strategy of all the other players. Now we're ready to talk about the solution concept. It's called dominant strategy equilibrium. First of all, we need to define what does it mean for one strategy to dominate another strategy for a player. So here let's consider a particular player, say player i, and let's compare two strategies sigma i and sigma i prime. So when can we say that sigma i dominates sigma i prime? We are going to compare the player's utility ui for the two strategies for sigma i and for sigma i prime with respect to some set of strategies for all the other players. So with respect to sigma minus i for the other players. Now I have two equations here. So the first equation says that for any set of strategies for the other players, the current player prefers sigma i to sigma i prime. So in other words, no matter what the other players do, I always prefer sigma i than sigma i prime. But notice here that the prefer here is a weak prefer. It's greater than or equal to that means in some situations, I might be the two might be the same to me. I might get the same utility for both of them. But in other situations, I might get a higher utility for playing sigma i than sigma i prime. So again, the first inequality says regardless of the other player's strategies, I weakly prefer sigma i to sigma i prime, i being the player i. Now the second inequality is very similar, except there are two differences. One is that this is a stricke inequality rather than a greater than or equal to. And the other difference is that the quantifier is not existential rather than universal. So the second equality can roughly be translated as this. There exists one set of strategies for the other players, such that I strictly prefer playing sigma i to playing sigma i prime. Now if I were to summarize both inequalities, that is for any set of strategies for the other players. So no matter what the other players do, I weakly prefer sigma i to sigma i prime. And for at least one situation, so for one set of strategies for the other players, I strictly prefer sigma i to sigma i prime. If both of these conditions are satisfied, then we say that for player i, strategy sigma i dominates strategy sigma i prime. So the first concept explains the relationship between two strategies for a player. So we can compare two strategies and figure out whether one dominates the other. Then next we will say that a strategy is a dominant strategy for a player if it dominates all other strategies. So essentially it is the best strategy for that player in some sense. It's possible that a player does not have a dominant strategy. Sometimes some strategies are not comparable using this concept, but in other cases a player does have a dominant strategy. So this strategy has to be better in the sense of the dominating relationship than any other strategy. Then finally, now we're ready to define a dominant strategy equilibrium. There exists a dominant strategy equilibrium if every player has a dominant strategy. So if every player has a dominant strategy, then we can take this set of dominant strategies for all the players, combine them together. That strategy profile is called a dominant strategy equilibrium. This is the concept of the dominant strategy equilibrium. Let's now apply the solution concept to the home or dancing game. Here's a question. Which of the following statements is correct about this game? Option A, home home is the only dominant strategy equilibrium. Option B, dancing dancing is the only dominant strategy equilibrium. Option C, one of the other two outcomes is the only dominant strategy equilibrium. Or maybe the game has more than one dominant strategy equilibrium. Maybe it has no dominant strategy equilibrium. Think about this yourself. Try to determine whether each player has a dominant strategy. And if each player has a dominant strategy, then you can put them together and that would be a dominant strategy equilibrium. Take a few minutes and then keep watching for the answer. The correct answer is B. The only dominant strategy equilibrium is dancing dancing. So if we are making a prediction based on the dominant strategy equilibrium concept, then we'll predict that both players will choose to go dancing. I've included the detailed explanation in a separate video. That's everything for this video. Thank you very much for watching. I will see you in the next video. Bye for now.


And I want to do ophthalmology since 1997, my first year of medical school. It seemed like a great job, nothing disgusting, pretty reasonable hours, very few emergencies, you get to sit down while you operate, and a comfortable lifestyle. But it was, of course, seemed impossible, not only because it was highly competitive, but because it's never been done by an Indigenous person before in Australia. Hi everybody, my name is Dr Chris Rovaker, and I'm an alumnus of the University of New Castle. I began my long association with the University back in 1997, when I moved from Brisbane as a school leaver down to New Castle to begin the Bachelor of Medicine degree. At the time I was one of very, very few Indigenous medical students in the country, and would soon be one of very few Indigenous doctors in the now quite early days when the universities and medical schools began graduating medical students of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander heritage from their courses. I eventually graduated in ophthalmology and I became the country's first Indigenous ophthalmologist, which in many respects was always seemed like the impossible dream. I always wanted to be an ophthalmologist, as I said, since first year of medicine, but it was such a competitive field in medicine, and I had no relatives and I didn't know anybody. And as an Indigenous doctor, we, for most of my medical life, you know, we were viewed either with suspicion or with the degree of disbelief that our Indigenous person couldn't possibly do medicine. I'm often asked about the state of Indigenous health in Australia, and the first part of my answer is that rather than go from a deficit base, I like to go from a straight space. And in telling my story, I like to tell a story of achievement and success. I think we're all aware of the health disparities between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australia. They are deniable in their long term, and they're tragic and not to be forgotten or over shadowed or discounted. But I think what's often overlooked are the good news stories, and how far we've come in such a short period of time, particularly since the 67 referendum, which was a critical moment in Australia's history. It's just over 50 years ago when Indigenous Australians achieved citizenship, and in many, many fields Aboriginal and Torres Islander peoples in the country have achieved very few other groups in such a short period of time. We now have Indigenous QCs, barristers. We have Indigenous leaders in business across almost all university degrees. We've had our first Indigenous Rhodes Scholar recently accepted into Oxford. We have Indigenous individuals playing at the highest levels in sports, and an increasing number of politicians. And of course, I've mentioned our success in medicine, and me being the first Indigenous ophthalmologist, but we've also recently graduated our first dermatologist. We now have a group of Indigenous surgeons, and almost all of the non-JP colleges, medical colleges in Australia, now either have their first fellow or have registrars within the system who will be fellows in the coming years. We have over four, I think it's around 150, 400 medical students coming through the system now as well. I mean, these are phenomenal numbers considering that it's just over 50 years ago that the referendum was passed to give us citizenship. And that's the strength base of the Indigenous story. In the context of Indigenous health in Australia, and specifically in the context of AIDA, and my role as president of AIDA, we have continued to work very, very hard both within and without the system to achieve improvements and change in systems. Our very recent and long-term project that is ongoing is the establishment of a set of parameters that not only define cultural safety, but guarantee cultural safety. That includes training in cultural safety with the Australian Indigenous Public Association and embedding it in the standards within ARPA that regulates the doctors of Australia and across the other professions within ARPA as well, but specifically in the context of AIDA within medicine. We have had a success during the COVID crisis of calling out instances of interpersonal, as well as institutionalised racism, and bringing that to the attention of ARPA, the medical colleges and relevant state jurisdictions. And appropriate responses have been made to that by those organisations and departments to ensure the safety of not only Indigenous doctors, but Indigenous patients as well. What we said for a very, very long time in Indigenous health is if you can do it right for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, then you in fact do it right for everybody. Because the principles involved in delivering quality and safe healthcare for Indigenous peoples are the same for all peoples, but because of the historical changes in many respects are more difficult to deliver for Indigenous peoples. In terms of COVID-19 response, that's something also that Aboriginal Australia can be very, very proud of. We've been ahead of the game for almost the whole crisis. Mainstream Australia has trailed Indigenous Australia's response. We had lockdowns before Mainstream Australia had lockdowns. We were talking about the risks to our people and ensuring that we had the resources to get through the crisis long before Mainstream Australia and the Australian government was doing that. And I suspect perhaps even before they were thinking about it as being a potential crisis. I wrote recently in a mainstream newspaper about Indigenous Australia's long history with pandemics, beginning with thepox virus soon after the arrival of the first fleet and the origins of where thepox virus came from have been debated for a long time and they're very serious, but there's no doubt that there was an epidemic there which didn't just occur in Sydney Basin. It spread across the entire continent from Indigenous nation to Indigenous nation along our highways and trade routes and impacted probably all Indigenous nations and severely and led to catastrophic social and economic collapse for those peoples. Later on, of course, we had the Spanish Flu and then more recently there was the Swine Flu that also went through Indigenous communities and affected in some areas up to 10% of those communities. So we have a long history of dealing with these pandemics and along memory of those pandemics as well as an awareness that because of our grade of burden of illness, including chronic diseases and issues of overcrowding and social disadvantage that we are a higher risk of poor outcomes, general outcomes, issues around morbidity, but also issues around mortality, so higher death rates and the COVID virus was treated very, very seriously when it was identified. So it's the social determinants of health that increase the risk of COVID-19 for Indigenous peoples, as well as the higher general burden of illness and particularly chronic diseases, low pressure, heart disease, diabetes being the big three. We've responded very well and are very, very proud of the response within Indigenous Australia. The Peak bodies have worked closely together and ADA has been a major part of the task force made up of Peak bodies in that response. We've been very successful in achieving no infections to date in rural or remote communities and it's around 56 at the last count Indigenous Australians having COVID-19. In terms of mitigating risk for COVID-19, as I've said, the Peak bodies have been working very closely together for a long time. We've built very strong connections and connections we can be very proud of with state and federal governments as well as our colleagues in the medical colleges, in the allied health space, in the nursing space and government task forces. We have very strong connections with the Australian Medical Association and their state affiliates. These strategies will not only ensure the improvement of the state of Indigenous health through internal advocacy, it will also ensure the continued growth of the numbers of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander doctors until we at least reach parity of 3,000 doctors in the country. That's a population parity of medical doctors. But also, our strategies will help us embed an understanding of why Indigenous health is important and embed a more culturally safe system for all Australians by ensuring it's culturally safe for Indigenous Australians. As I said earlier, if you do it right for Indigenous people in this country, you do it right for everybody because getting it right for Indigenous people is probably the hardest of major population groups in Australia. They're my thoughts and my musings around my own journey, not only through medicine, but my long association with the University of Newcastle. I was very proud to receive the Alumni Excellence Award last year. In fact, as I was at the award ceremony, it was a breakfast ceremony. I was looking through previous recipients and I noted that my cousin was a recipient a number of years before for the International Alumni Award. He's now the Chairman of Peabody Coal, Chairman and CEO of Peabody Coal. And so I saw that in there and then the next thing I knew, my name was announced as the winner. So I'm very, very proud of that. I'm very, very proud, as I said at my association with Newcastle and what Newcastle achieved. So thank you, Newcastle, again, for the opportunity to be involved in the life of the university and campus life. Thank you for the opportunity of being to be involved with the alumni. And although I live a long way away on the Sunshine Coast, my alma mater is never far from my thoughts. So I wish everybody well. Thank you again. Thank you for listening. I hope there's been something in what I've said that is of use and my kindest regards to all. Thank you very much.


you know what hold on i'm gonna read it watch he's gonna throw it i'm gonna counter it oh my god yes what are you meeting counter that fast how's it going everybody dato do it here back with some more dragon ball fighters right matches and in today's video i'm actually playing a recommended team from rhyme style over on twitter i asked for somebody to give me some team and character suggestions and he suggested i play a team of biris android 16 and jenemba now he recommended this team because he knew uh we were just playing before this that i absolutely suck with these kids yep oh no okay i if all of my characters died while i was going to explain why i sucked with these characters that would have been a shame oh no the loops i might okay didn't leave i might have actually been dead if he did see assist all right at least he had a block it i can't believe i dropped that we're gonna go through a tick throw nice i might spark oh i should have sparked is what i was that's what i was trying to do but i didn't want to spark and get hit with the instant transmission and then i failed to block it all right bad start 16 is coming to come out do we try to make a read you know what i don't regret going for the read because we almost got it all right one two one two oh miss that too oh that would have been so sick dang couldn't play the neutral with those faced unfortunate oh no oh he's the bar building assist too that's not good either now janim is probably my best character of the three whether or not that'll that'll look like the truth i don't know yet but hopefully we can get it done cross up all right block it didn't block that nice good enough i will take this please don't miss oh i thought what is what sense does that make dude why would it not bring you closer to them i guess does trunks assist not work like that because if that's just a standard for the whole um you know grapple level three's i get it i just thought all grapple level three's work like that where they brought you closer to the opponent dang i was i felt so smart i was like i'm gonna switch out get this blue life all right you know what brings on a suit back in here i'm trying to read oh how did that drop all right that's fine we'll get him with the one bar kill probably could have thrown the grab i probably could have done a few key blasts and got that meter list but see sis no the two h didn't get him in time that might be a kill it probably is one bar three yeah he's gonna fully kill oh wait no we can't oh kaioken with two bars probably will kill too yep that would get the job done dang dang you have no you have no idea how happy i was when i realized it was base goku and he couldn't level three of me only to be crushed don't don't to me like this oh that was sick only with that down heavy what i've been able to hit and where we're kind of doing all right here let me get closer to him in the corner we have a chance this is a very even game now the only problem is blue goku plays probably a little bit better of a neutral than jenemba but i mean that was just an air to air situation all right time to spark okay do it again okay okay i tried it down heavy that you gotta believe me going with the level one let's go oh jenemba brings it home big win for jenem i did not think you'd be able to kill right there i did not think you'd be able to kill right there i i'm impressed with jenemba's limit break damage now all right i'm gonna i'm gonna rog see assist see assist go out there oh no the css stopped don't grapple me don't don't come in grab i'm a back dash i'm so afraid all right that's fine we can still work with it i miss completely but now this might be my worst team but i still know i still know how to i don't never mind i was gonna say i still know a beer's combo or two i don't i do not know a beer's combo or two but i could i i i almost made it look like i did hey got another hit brilliant start though we have a character lead that is pretty good if we switch out we can recover all that blue health but uh you know probably not worth it at this stage of the game going in no connection made he's gaining so much bar back there oh don't drag and rush me i won't be able to tech it and you know it hey get off of me all right bring base goku in he has too much bar i'm not getting to a deed another css that got hit man those css have long cooldown stew so we are not going to be seeing jenemba are we dead okay he didn't spear bomb me probably because he wanted to save on meter i don't think he did me a favor i just think he didn't want to waste three bars yeah oh wait okay maybe spear bomb wouldn't kill maybe spear bomb just wouldn't have killed any i i just don't know my damage numbers that is not a normal heavy that didn't hit oh i gotta remember that's not a normal heavy this is why uh not my best team i wouldn't have killed in one bar whatever it's now's not the time to be too stingy with bar because i have an idea and will it work i i don't know but i have an idea with a specific characters level three and i may have no other option i may be trying to self-destruct the 16th i may be trying to build up three bars and self-destruct okay jenemba in the cool that suck that i dropped that that really suck that i dropped that not the worst though we're not in the worst position at all okay let me out of the corner that's fine too the only thing i don't want i i don't want to get hit with a command grab because that will start a series of things that i am not mentally strong enough to be able to don't do that don't build up don't build a spear bomb i have no other option don't do this to me can he kill wow damage that was a lot of damage i i never had a chance man we lost 16 like that in the blink of an eye don't sleep on limit break go to the only good news is he has no spear bomb charged up so we can play a little reckless mix him up mix him up mix him up oh we almost got that final command grab okay that's fine it's just going to be a lot closer now he'll probably go for kyle kin two bars that'll keep me in the corner do a ton of damage and give him sliding yep that's what he's going for this is gonna be this is going to be the most this is the decider what happens now changes everything we got him ladies and gentlemen we got him key blast through a portal janeva makes us go up to oh i didn't expect it i didn't expect it but here we go again here we go again back and can we get a clean sweep with this team that would be ah man i'm really not using that um that's the wrong hit i am really not using the c assist to its full advantage uh it keeps getting uh clipped out and uh yeah just leading to some unfortunate events that genius i up tagged he followed me with the drag rush he i've probably been up taking a bit too much if uh wow how did i get away with that one oh no combo all right does he want a super dash let's go i can i can deal with that too please hit please hit please hit please hit no blow it up why i do that i don't know i tried to i tried to defeat i tried to defeat through that that was uh not smart no my down heavy didn't connect and now goku blue is i might die if i die goku blue is healing up for sure come on bring and go okay goku blues back in at least at least we got that oh this might this is not going to kill is it a second chance at life i am all about it maybe a c assist would have been smarter save a little bar but i'm fine with i'm fine with what we got all right do we read him again i regret it i regret it you're not you're not a book i shouldn't have tried to read you bro okay uh i should stop trying to go for that block low block low block low okay we got an opening i wasn't smart by me but then again i just needed a little bit of a reset back down it appears you know what let's set up let's not set up all the orbs i was gonna say let's set up like six orbs another down heavy ah that wasn't close enough to the corner let's go i'm just going in it's not beer time it's not beer time i regret saying it was beer time i was clearly led astray don't kill me don't kill me i don't even know why i switched into 16 oh i do know why i switch to this i don't know why switch in the 16 stop oh he was very high okay we got to switch we we should switch beer sin right away here's my thought process it beers dies literally who cares i didn't expect he wouldn't die on impact okay we got it we got a little time off this part oh my goodness beer was actually going off that's fine what's he has he been building up spear bomb has he not thrown one nah dude nah i'm literally killing your sparking time until you come in i don't trust you hi i don't trust this guy i don't trust this guy for a second oh no please tell me he doesn't have a hand spear bomb okay i don't think he does i'm so afraid of a hand spear bomb it's a a spear bomb it equals a loss you know what hold on i'm gonna read it watch he's gonna throw it i'm gonna counter it oh my god what are you meeting counter that fast he doesn't have two bars but he's gonna build it up is that enough to kill let me break hold out jenema hold out hold out all i need you to do is survive and i'll i'll try to i'll try to get this w the first comment may i threw we didn't get the clean sweep we oh why did that counter not if that counter let me com would i would have been i would it probably is for the best it didn't counter my my brain would have felt so massive it would have exploded out of my skill would have exploded oh that was pretty smart oh that was a nice super dash as well oh no i feel like i'm too um i feel like i'm too frazzled after that loss oh plant them i remember it's it's medium light oh come on 16 you you're not gonna get that okay should i switch 16 out i feel like 16 is not my usually when we play point 16 something's gone horribly wrong or did something just go horribly right one two three four pose on them that's fine biris is the one who's here to finish the job and the job got done that's all that matters let's leave jenema to be the anchor jenema's gotta be the anchor for the team behind the back all we blocked it nice stuff biris is sick right now biris is so sick yo i'm feeling it right now dragon ball fighters i'm feeling that i i dashed i dashed him let's go i knew he was gonna tag i was waiting for all the reeds they're so good right now he's gonna he's gonna level three oh he didn't i really thought he was going to bad choice on my level one downside reflect dp ah we should have supered ah never mind save the bar good stuff though good stuff we did we did a play okay we played patient enough to get out of that situation jenema take it away oh not all not literally my whole team please thank you i saw all three members of my team recoil back and paid and i started panicking get this man oh i thought i would actually win that air air can 16 only attempt i have no other options i guess it doesn't matter he's dead but it's still oh he keeps missing that that did a lot of chip that did noticeable chip it didn't do a lot but i just i looked up in my health bar i was like oh wow yes okay that should be the game i think that should be the game yep that is three one we actually take it with this team that i came in here thinking we were gonna go over but a suggestion is a suggestion thank you to my opponents for the games and thank you guys so much for watching this video all the way to the end down below in the comments let me know what your worst team is or what your worst team would be in fighters and while you're down there leave a like and subscribe to the channel if you enjoy the stuff you see here other than that if you want to watch more videos right away there should be some up on your screen so give any of those a watch and once again thanks again for making it all the way to the end of this video i have been dr do it and i will see you in the next one


The IGP, Uzman Baba, has ordered the posting of new commissioners of police in Imo, Katuna, Edo and Adamoa in a bid to tackle the security challenges in those states, while Imo has been faced with attacks by gunmen suspected to be members of Ipro, the Houston security network here saying, bandit have yet to stop their activities in Katuna state. At least two police stations have been attacked in Imo since the beginning of April.


Greenhouse gases aren't the only thing that we humans are pouring into the atmosphere. We're also pouring particulate matter or we often call them aerosols into the atmosphere. Now these aren't gases. These are small particles and they stay up anywhere from a couple of days to a few months depending on how big and how heavy the particles are. A good example is smoke. Smoke from a smokestack from burning coal for example or smoke from a bush fire which is a natural aerosol which goes into the atmosphere. Aerosols mainly work to cool the atmosphere so they act in opposition to greenhouse gases and they do that because they scatter incoming sunlight. So some of that sunlight doesn't make it to the earth's surface. So that has the effect of actually cooling the earth's surface. So in fact ironically even though it's not good for us because it's local air pollution and it affects human health negatively directly it does provide us a benefit by slowing the cooling a bit. So right now the earth is at about 1.1 degree Celsius above pre-industrial but if we stripped out the aerosols that would go to 1.4 or 1.5 degrees even as we speak today. So they are cooling by 2 or 3 or 4 tenths of a degree. Now there is one exception to that and there are some carbon particles put out as soot. They actually absorb sunlight and they actually add to the heating. So we have to look at this balance between the aerosols that scatter and cool the aerosols that absorb and heat. On balance it's a net cooling effect so we understand that pretty well. But ironically as we clean up air pollution and there's a good reason for doing that for health reasons we're actually going to add to the warming of the atmosphere.


in the event that the applicant tries to make this next cycle turn around, but they can't, what happens if they can't meet the next? The commission hypothetically would continue this 30 days. If you vote to do that and it passes to continue for 30 days, that's a date specific. We have to come back because that's a date specific hearing. We have to open the hearing back up. And then at that point, the applicant would have to explain what they did accomplish or did not accomplish at that time. And it could be continued again because we'd still be within the 90 days. Exactly. But we would have to open it up regardless of what they've accomplished. Thank you. Okay. And if I could ask a question. Yes. Sorry. Is it continuing for 30 days or is it continuing just to the next date? To the next regular meeting. We have to do a date specific. Second Tuesday of December. Second Tuesday of December. This is the 10th, December 10th. So, Madam Chair, shall I make the motion? We're waiting for our applicant to let us know that you're done. Thank you. Thank you. Then I will entertain a motion. Madam Chair, I move that we continue this case until the commission's regularly scheduled meeting in December, which I believe will be the second Tuesday of December. Grace, can you tell me what the actual date is? The 10th. The 10th day of December. And having made that motion and before anybody seconds it, I will say that I want to give these applicants every opportunity to convince the commission members that the project is something we should vote for. However, I have to agree with Mr. Busby. There are some things, especially about unit makes that I would like to see and might be disappointed if it's not included in the package. Okay, motion by Commissioner Miller. Do I have a second? Second. Second by Commissioner Brine that we have a one cycle continuance until the next meeting scheduled for December 10 on the Glen Road Townhouse, Townholmes Project, all in favor of this motion. Let's have a roll call, please. Commissioner Williams. No. Commissioner Morgan, excuse me, is it absent, Commissioner Johnson? Yes. Commissioner Brine. No. Commissioner Darkin. I have to admit, I need clarity on, am I voting for the continuance? Yes, I'm voting yes for the continuance. Thank you. Commissioner Altark. Yes. Commissioner, Vice Chair Busby. Yes. Chair Hyman. Yes. Commissioner Miller. Yes. Commissioner Cajun. Yes. Commissioner Santiago. Yes. Commissioner Baker. Yes. Commissioner Lowe. Yes. Commissioner McIver. Yes. Eight passes 11 to two. Thank you. Thank you. The next item we have, public hearing, text amendments, outdoor lighting. Staff report, please. Thank you. Hello, my name is Carl Colosna. This is my first time here with the planning department. Please be nice or? We promise to be nice. Great, JCCPC did the same thing for me. Thank you. So this is a text amendment, text amendment TC190002. This is a privately initiated text amendment to amend unified development ordinance. So article 7.4.2p.2 of the unified development ordinance controls the applicability of the outdoor lighting section. And article 7.4 in general is what regulates outdoor lighting. So it does so by setting standards for height that lights can be and also foot candle limitations at certain parts of the site. So what currently with the ordinance, article 7.4.2p.2, outdoor lighting that is used exclusively for recreational activities is at least 100 feet from residential uses and is not illuminated during late hours. And late hours are defined as 1 a.m. to 8 a.m. on Friday and Saturday and midnight to 8 a.m. on all other days. If it meets those criteria, it is exempt from the lighting standards that place in the rest of 7.4. So what this amendment would do where it passed would allow lighting that operates during those late hours that I mentioned to maintain exemption. It would also have to keep the 100 foot separation and the exclusively recreational use. But it would be allowed to be exempted from those hours of operation provided that a minor special use permit was issued. And the per the text of the language that's been provided to us by the applicant, the review criteria related to that minor special use permit includes the review criteria for looking at lighting. So that's basically the amendment. I think in a short nutshell, this went to JCCPC on October 2nd. There were no major comments for it then and staff recommends approval of this text amendment. And I'm here for questions and I believe the applicant is here as well and we'll have comments. Thank you. Since this is a public hearing, has anyone signed up to speak? You should be too. Apparently there is. Thank you. Sorry, that's the part where I don't know what's going on. Yeah. Thank you. I do have three people who have signed up to speak. Todd Waldo, Eric Jackson and Keith Burns can come in fact. Please state your name and your address. Certainly. Madam Chair, I'm Keith Burns. I'm a longtime Durham resident and a member of the Durham bar, but unfortunately office in Raleigh with the next and Pruitt law firm. Thank you all for having us tonight. Thanks Carl and welcome to your first meeting. We've worked hard with staff to get to something that we all could live with. This started out as a text amendment that requested a blanket exemption to allow for late hour lighting in industrial zones. Staff concluded that that was too broad and came back to us for the request that we modify that. So we submitted a modification that really seeks just the opportunity to apply through a special use permit process for late hour lighting. So long as it relates to sporting and other outdoor activities. So I really am here as the attorney to answer questions about the text of this. I know that you're all wondering why we would be asking for this. And I know that that's probably not something we want to get too far into because this really is about the ability to come back and ask for permission later through that special use permit. But we are going to answer the question why at the risk of going down a rabbit hole. So Eric will come up. Eric is the developer for a site that is at the intersection of Page Road and I-40. So out more in the park area and certainly has the buffers in place not much residential anywhere around it. And he'll speak very briefly to that and then Todd will come up. Todd is the major user who has the need for outdoor lighting and he'll speak to the reason that we need late hour outdoor lighting. And so with that, Eric. My name is Eric Jackson. I'm with RealtyLink. I represent the developer for the property. Really here more for moral support. We have one of our tenants, Todd who will speak here in a little bit. But as Keith alluded to, the property is located at I-40 in Page Road bounded by the Neusch River and the interstate. So not a lot of residential around. Yeah, I mean, that's pretty much where we stand on. Let Todd come up and speak more to the specifics of what we're asking for. Good evening, Madam Chair, members of the commission. Todd Waldo with Topgolf, 8750 North Central Expressway, Dallas, Texas. We're very excited about the opportunity to bring the first Topgolf to the research triangle and more importantly to the city of Durham. I don't know if everyone's familiar with Topgolf, but it's a premier golf entertainment venue with a best in class operation. We are proposing to bring a new concept to Durham, more of a family friendly concept complete with a full service restaurant and bar, a golf driving range, miniature golf and other outdoor gaming activities. This text amendment is critical to us based on the late hours of the operation so they would more coincide with the gaming options available at the venue and also the maintenance operations that would occur after hours at the venue as well. This is about a 64 acre mixed use development. We've been looking in Durham for quite some time and feel this is the best fit for us. The site has a lot of challenges, a lot of constraints. It's very much an engineering exercise that we're going through right now with trying to design the site to effectively accommodate not only the Topgolf venue, but the other tenants and users that will be part of this, so very critical to the success of the project and hoping that for your favorable support tonight and open any questions you may have. Thank you. We still have one other, so that's all three. You got all three. Okay, all right, thank you. Madam Chair, if I could just one or two things in conclusion on that. Topgolf operates into the evening like so many entertainment venues and after those regular evening hours are concluded at midnight 2 a.m., they then have to send their maintenance facilities out into the field to perform maintenance operations so they're ready to operate the next day. And it's that maintenance operation that really dictates that there'd be an ability to keep lighting on there to clean up and to prepare after the end of it. So it's critically important to Topgolf's golf operations that they have these additional hours. And the other thing that I just would stress again is that we're not asking for approval for any particular use or any particular site tonight. We're merely asking for a text amendment that would allow us to come back and prove in connection with a special use permit that this really is a good idea for these hours at this site. So again, it's just tonight's about the ability to come back in and make a formal request later. Okay, thank you. Are the other individuals who would like to speak to this issue during the public hearing? If not, I'm going to close the public hearing and give our commissioners an opportunity to ask questions. I'll start to my left this time. Are there any commissioners who would like to ask questions? Then the chair recognizes Tom Miller. So if I can ask Mr. Walder to come back up. When we talk about extra hours, how many extra hours? Yes, so the typical hours of operation for the Topgolf venue is Sunday through Thursday, 8 a.m. to midnight. We have extended hours on the weekend, Friday and Saturdays extends to 2 a.m.  How much time? Two to three hours or so. So if you closed it too, you'd want to be open until four? Close that too, we want the lights to stay on an extra two to three hours after close. Until the sun comes up the next day. Unlike this time of year, obviously it gets dark earlier and the hour is a little bit different than the daylight savings time in, so yes. The lights, our orientation of this building would face away from any residential or pretty isolated in this area with a lot of vegetation that would remain around the perimeter. So we feel there is little to no impact to any offsite users or roadways or things of that sort. Thank you. So I have a couple of problems. First with the way this is drafted. One, I noticed that, and this is a problem that exists today with the existing thing. So I'm looking at the draft here. It's, we have substantive rules in a section that's identified as applicability. Normally when it's just a matter of code writing when you identify a section as applicability, you can find what's in it to the scope of applicability and don't put the substantive rules in there. We already have substantive rules in there because we limit the hours of operation. What I don't understand is, so we have, here's the rule and here are the exceptions. And the exceptions are in the UC2 or downtown tier. And then with the additional language and as authorized by a minor special use permit. And then we talk about what the standards would be for the minor special use permit. I wish there was a way to recodify the whole section, one that cured the applicability issue and also structured the thing more clearly as to the base rule, the exceptions, and then the use permit rather than to run it all together in a particularly long sentence. So that would be one thing, but my other problem with it is, is a use permit has to have some sort of outward ceiling in it. A use permit that is wide open, in other words, unlimited hours. That's not a use permit. That's not what the statute has in mind for use permits. In other words, the way a use permit works is, here's the base zoning in this zone, you can do A, B, C, and D. And with a use permit, if you can satisfy these standards, you can have E too. The problem here is, is that E is open-ended. And so it's not an E, it's more like a variance. And that's a different process with different standards. And I think that we're mixing the variance approach with the use permit needs to have a cap on it. A couple of extra hours or three extra hours or something like that. Then it's got to have a hard ceiling on it. If it doesn't have a hard ceiling, then in my opinion, it's not competent under North Carolina statutes. So those are my technical objections to the thing, but I will say that I have a policy objection and that's changing the whole UDO for everybody for one particular use on one particular piece of property. And that's what we're being asked to do. Now, the applicant's legal counsel said, yes, we're asking to change it generally. And that's true, but the applicant sees it as this one piece of property. And I don't like changing the zoning for everybody in order to accommodate a particular use. And I don't have anything against Topgolf or any of those other, or any of the things that it does. But I do not like to change the rules from Rougemont all the way down to Chatham County so that the 164 acre parcel can be used by one tenant of one landlord in a particular way. I just, if we are going to make, if we're going to rend the zoning ordinance to let somebody through, then I want it to be the smallest possible tear. So I'm gonna vote no against this on the broad policy issue, even if we were to fix what I think considered to be technical problems. Thank you, Commissioner Miller. Are the other commissioners who would like to speak? Commissioner Bryan and then Commissioner Al Turk. Well, Commissioner Miller has already touched on my concern and he expressed it far better than I probably could, but it seems to me that what we're trying to do here is specifically for one piece of property, but by making this change, we affect or make it possible to affect multiple locations elsewhere. And I agree with Commissioner Miller, I don't particularly like doing that. Commissioner Al Turk. Thank you, Chair. This is a question to Commissioner Miller, if you will. So you say on a, from a policy perspective, you don't like this. So what is a different approach, I guess, if you could? I'm not sure there is a different approach and this particular application that I would approve of. We're going through a process now that has not been notified, but we're creating an exception for all kinds of recreational uses that could be applied everywhere in the county. There are people out there who want to sleep at night in their homes, who don't know that we're talking about this because they didn't get a notice, but their neighbors who might want to set up light poles and stay up, run lights late at night for recreational purpose will have a process available to them that as a result of this, in other words, the process that we're creating isn't going to just help top golf. It's going to be everybody else. And I know that we've got things built in the code, but they're not particularly, in my opinion, if you had a house next door to a recreational facility that had a light pole 100 feet away, I would want the damn lights to be off at least between 12 and eight, 100 feet. My lot is 110 feet wide. It's no distance at all. And I think even if we were going to consider this, I would like to have a more robust process. It went to JCCPC. I'm sure all the proper notices were published in the paper and now it's to the Planning Commission and then it's going to go off to the city council and board of county commissioners. And the people who are going to be most impacted by this have no idea that this is even being talked about. I just don't think this is the right way of doing it. If you could come to us and demonstrate that our current standards for lighting, for recreational purposes, we're creating problems all over the place for high school and middle school football games and those kinds of things, then we need to look at the rules. But that's not what's happening here. The rules have been in place for a long time. Now we have one user who is a tenant of an owner on one 64 acre piece of property, which as they pointed out, that one may be a long way away from any residential, from what I would think would be the ostensible other side of this question. But that's not what we're being asked to do. We're not looking at one parcel, we're looking at the whole county. So I just don't think this is the way to go. I mean, there might be another way to go, but I can't craft it sitting here. There might be a way to fix this so that these folks, if you, I think you could solve the technical problem by saying that you could add two extra hours to the limited hours here, but it may not satisfy top golf because they may need three out. First of all, they need an extra hour to be open on Saturday night, which is beyond the, because they wanna go to two when we stop at one, and then they want two to three hours after that. I mean, is there a way to fix this that I might vote for it? Yeah, a clever person can probably do that. I'm not that person tonight. Thank you, that's helpful. Commissioner Johnson. Thank you. So of course I was hoping that this conversation played out because I was trying to get clarity on what should I really be focusing on. So I think the one thing that came to mind as I've commissioned is Miller's comments is that what's being, what would be allowed with this, what's being asked is that someone could come near or in your community with something that has not been there before and that someone who wants to go to sleep at midnight with no lights coming on, all of a sudden they have any enterprise or individual, you say it's recreational activities and say something's owned as recreational. And so this comes to their community neighborhood or whatnot and they're like, oh, how did this happen? And we've already said that this is now the new standard and they had no input into recognizing what the implications is. So I agree with Commissioner Miller's logic and thinking like, well, this has broader ramifications. I was curious when I was rereading this, it was like, did you consider the applicant taking the approach of just trying to get the existing language just to add another, a couple, add hours, extend the hours within how it's situated now versus this more what is essentially a broader application of the change. Thank you. And is that even allowed? Just to be clear, this standard would allow them to seek a special use permit that would increase those hours which would require a public hearing for each case. So if this were approved, they could request that out of public hearing. It would not allow everyone in the county to increase the time their lighting is on by right. Thank you. All right, well, Commissioner Santiago had his hand up for you first. Yeah, I just thank you, Madam Chair. I just wanted to clarify this text amendment. Is this the absolute only way for this applicant to achieve what they wanna do long-term or is there any other process? There's probably lots of different ways that it could happen. But I will agree with Commissioner Miller that don't know what that is at this particular, off the top of my head. Thank you. Commissioner Durkin. So for clarification, if this was enacted and they sought a minor special use permit, then their neighbors would be noticed and have the opportunity to come out and speak against it or what can you elaborate on the process because I'm probably not the only one that doesn't know that process. So a minor special use permit is a quasi-dutritional hearing where evidence is required to be submitted by the applicant and any opponents. It would be a minor special use permit heard by the Board of Adjustment, which is a citizen body, much like the one they use it on. And there are, they do, all their hearings are public hearings and there's notice provided and it's typically 300 feet, I think. And so for each case where the lighting, the applicant was requesting this extended lighting time, there would be a public hearing held. We actually have a member of our commission who should know this process very well. I don't know if commissioner Lowe, because you were on the Board of Adjustments, right? If you, do you have anything to add that we shall know, sorry to put you on the spot, but I know that you were on that board before. No, that's quite all right. But no, I do not have anything to add because what he said a minute ago is accurate. We have that quasi-judicial Board of Adjustments committee that must go there and be voted upon. And do you find that the public comes to those meetings in the same rate that they come to ours? Absolutely, after the public shows up at those meetings. That's helpful. Yeah, absolutely. Thank you, Commissioner Miller. But I do want to point out, it's different. This is a legislative, you can come and give your opinion because we're talking about changing the law, everything that we do here, the Board of Adjustments is such as a judicial body. First of all, not anybody can come speak. You have to have standing. Standing rules in North Carolina are constantly shifting as court decisions come down and it can be difficult.  Then you have to present evidence. You can't give an opinion. You have to give evidence relating to the standards. This is sometimes harder for people to do than just coming to the mic and saying, I live next door and I don't want these lights to be on. I'm not saying it was the best alternative. So I'm just asking questions. No, but it is the way that this would be done. And there are plenty of times when I think a special use permit is a great way to manage special situations and still have meaningful public involvement and so I'm not criticizing the special use approach. I do think that the way the language is written needs to be different even to accomplish it. But I still don't like it here because it's kind of a big change for one person. Commissioner Ailterk. I just wanted to clarify the process again. So if someone asks for a minor special use permit, everyone within 300 feet of this property would get a notice that there's going to be a Board of Adjustments meeting, right? And they could come, but as Commissioner Miller is pointing out, they don't all have the opportunity to speak, is that correct? I think they all have the opportunity to speak. Whether or not you have standing if we're challenging court is a more complicated issue where, for example, at the Planning Commission, anyone who signs up to speak has standing to give you their opinion. And we have a major special use permit process? We do have a major special use permit process. It's the same process with the same findings. It just goes to the governing body instead of the Board of Adjustments. City Council sitting is the Board of Adjustments. And is there a reason that in this particular case you went with the minor rather than the major? Just, yeah. Just give it to me. We reserve only the, for the lack of a better term, the juiciest. Very big stuff. Very big stuff for major special use permits. Okay. Thank you. Is that a legal term, Commissioner Miller? Yes, it is. Commissioner Bride. I have a question for the applicant. Does the development that you're talking about still have to go through a rezoning? Oh my God. Commissioner Bride, there is no rezoning required there, but there will be a special use permit application process and so there's a substantial amount of entitlement work to be done on the development as a whole. Okay. Well, you've answered my question. Don't need any rezoning, that's all. Certainly. And just to one of the points that Mr. Miller raised, we're happy to accept a three hour cap on the extension that might be granted through a quasi-judicial process as an amendment to the text that we've proposed. And the other point that I would make while I've got the mic for a second is that at the quasi-judicial hearing, the burden is on the applicant to prove that in fact this is an appropriate use of the property and that the extended hours would be appropriate on that site. Thank you. If I may just add that. Of the chair recognizes commissioner Lowe. Thank you, I'm stuck. On the Board of Adjustments, the question came up, would they wouldn't be allowed to speak on the Board of Adjustments? They are. I just want to make that clear, just kind of make that clear there. It was signed up just like we do here and their name is on the roster and the chair would allow them to speak, everyone that signs to speak. Thank you. Any other commissioners who would like to speak? Commissioner Busby. I would just like to say, I appreciate the proffer for the three hours. I don't even know if that's a proffer necessarily, but the comfort with the three hours, I'm planning to vote for it regardless. I understand the arguments and I understand the discomfort, but also no one has given a better alternative. So I do plan to vote for it as is. I do hope that as it moves forward, the three hour language could be worked in. I think that makes it better and it does give some clarity, certainty, guardrails as we move forward. But I'm not thinking we need to make a motion tonight to include that because I think the staff needs a little time to work with the applicant as it moves forward. That's my thinking. Okay. Commissioner Brot. A question for staff. Would it be feasible for the applicant to seek a variance that would be specific to his site? They certainly could seek a variance. The standards for the variance for variances are typically harder to meet than a special use permit. And in particular, they'd have to show there was some sort of hardship based on the land. And I have a hard time imagining how you'd prove that not having your lights on until 5 a.m. is a hardship. Thank you. Are there any other questions? Yes, commissioner Santiago. Thank you, Madam Chair. I just wanted to ask real quick, in terms of the process and writing a text amendment, is there any way to maybe draw up some design standards in terms of something like this? I've been to multiple top call locations, those lights are very tall. So I wonder if there's any way to design the site itself in a way to limit the distance that the light affects to surrounding properties, even if the 100 foot buffer is there. If I could respond to that, the process on this was we started with an initial conversation with staff about the issue that we faced and the problem we're trying to solve. We discussed the variance option and concluded that was not a good option. We proffered texts that would allow for after hours lighting in every industrial zone. And staff said, gee, I really think that's too broad. And we said, okay, well, let's talk about what another alternative might be. And we and staff, after looking at this for some amount of time, settled on the special use permit as the best alternative to achieve what the applicants trying to achieve at this site while protecting the city and the county interest in not creating something that applied indiscriminately across the entire county. And to your question about standards, those standards are a part of the special use process. So the special use process requires us to appear and prove that it's not gonna have an adverse impact on surrounding properties. And there are a whole list of things there. They are the things that I think that you would expect to be there and would want to be there. And the comfort that I would hope that you would draw from the way we're trying to approach this is to understand that when this comes back to the Board of Adjustments, they will be looking for us to prove that we've met those standards and that the people in the area are protected. Thank you. Commissioner Miller. How is the property that your client has now currently zoned? Industrial or? Industrial or industrial light? Industrial light, I think. IP zoning district, planned industrial zoning district. Oh, it's planned industry. So an extra layer of limitation that could be put here. So their approach was let's approach it by zone and change the standards. The staff's response to too broad, I agree. Let's do it by use permit. We could combine both approaches and say in certain zones with a use permit with specialized standards like this one does, like this one has, and that cap, you could get a lot closer to something I might vote for. But I would still want to study the map a little bit to see what we were getting people in for. Are there additional questions? No, I was gonna move. Okay. Oh, great, okay. Well then, Commissioner Al-Turk. I move that we send case TC-19002 to the city council and the county commissioners with a favorable recommendation. Second. It has moved by Commissioner Al-Turk and second by Commissioner Busby that we send item number TC-19000002 outdoor lighting forward to the city council with a favorable recommendation. All in favor of this motion, let us have a roll call, please. Commissioner Williams. No. Mr. Johnson. No. Mr. Brine. No. Commissioner Durkin. Yes. Commissioner Al-Turk. Yes. Vice Chair Busby. Yes. Chair Hyman. Yes. Commissioner Miller. No. Commissioner Ketchin. Yes. Commissioner Santiago. Yes. Commissioner Lowe. Yes. Commissioner Baker. Yes. And Commissioner MacGyver. Yes. Motion passes. Thank you. Nine to four. Thank you. We're ready for the next item, text amendment affordable housing dwelling unit definition. Thank you. Michael Stock with the planning department. Text amendment TC-1905 would amend the current definition of affordable housing dwelling unit found in section 17.3 of the unified development ordinance. The purpose of the amendment is to reflect differences between rental and for sale units, allow flexibility for residents to remain in units as their income increases to a certain extent and to also be consistent with new policies and procedures being established by the community development department as they develop those procedures for tracking affordable housing units built, pursuant to any of the incentives allowed through the UDO, the affordable housing density bonus, any parking allowances and such. This was developed in conjunction with the community development department and through the city attorney's office. I also reviewed this. It was also sent out to a number of non-profits and also market rate providers to get input and feedback on. And it was also sent to the Coalition for affordable housing and transit to get their feedback on. The amendment would remain consistent with the charter provisions of the city that allows for the affordable housing density bonus and that it remains a low income incentive definition as established by HUD. So the definition that is provided will meet that requirement as does the current definition. And I'll be happy to answer any questions. We do have Karen Lotto with the community development department that has a lot more knowledge and background about affordable housing than I do and is here to answer any questions as long as. So as do I. Thank you very much. Thank you. I do have two individuals who have signed up to speak. They did not indicate for or against. So I'm going to start with these four. Okay, this may be against. Okay, we'll start with Dick Hales. Good evening members of the commission. Thank you for your service. I am an active member of the Coalition on affordable housing and transit and back when we were we try and advocate for three main things, reserving publicly owned land for affordable housing, putting more money into affordable housing, which certainly has had a big boost lately and also trying to figure out ways of encouraging more added housing staff such as through the expanded housing choices initiative. While that was going on and we along with you all were active in trying to sift our way through that. It was brought to our attention that several of the major nonprofit affordable housing providers in town said, by the way, we also need to amend this definition of low moderate income affordable housing to be more workable. And the concern was particularly on the side of affordable housing for sale. At that time, it was during the closing stages of the EHC and there was not an actual draft that Habitat and the Land Trust and others had put together and reviewed. And so we endorsed at that time trying to make this a priority to come back because they felt like it was a specific problem they'd have in trying to make full use of the hopefully approval of the bond funds and other things to produce more affordable housing in town. So we're, so I'm speaking in advocacy for the nonprofits that requested this change. And we think it's one small thing that can be beneficial in helping to produce more affordable housing in town. Thanks. Thank you. The next individual I have is listed as Julius Bartel. I'm not forward or against, I just, all right, my definition of affordable housing is somebody that's looking $600 a month on social security has a place to rent. The housings around here now are not period, but they can be more travel trailers. I'll live five years in a travel trailer to get on my feet when my wife and I first got married. From that on property in South Carolina, on property here in North Carolina is Wendell. But that trailer gave me a chance to get on my feet as a man, I was a 20 years old, my wife was 20 years old. If you had a mobile home park, which trailers run anywhere from eight to $23,000 to put people in it, homeless people, you can charge them $100 a month rent. They'll help pay for the trailers and after you get done with the trailers, you can sell the trailers back to people that won't travel trailers, go on trips with this, that and the other, or they might even want to buy them. But I suggest travel trailers to help with the homeless problem we have as well as affordable housing because you can buy a trailer with $20,000, or you can build, and these come complete, we have furniture with couches, beds, refrigerators, stoves, heaters, sinks, commodes, you build a house to $70,000, you still gotta put another $20,000 into it. And then after that, you know, but it's be hard to get, travel trailers is about thinking with help without the situation and immediate firm, you can take nine months to build a house, or you can take 30 days to put in water and sewer and a lot and pull the trailers in there and park them and put people in them that need to be put in. Thank you. Thank you. I do not have any other individuals who have signed up to speak. So I'm going to close the public hearing and give commissioners an opportunity to ask questions. Commissioner Durkin. I have a question for staff and it might be better suited for Karen. No offense, Michael. Even Karen, a lot of community development. I had a question about how this, the rents for these units and the income levels tied together because my concern is that the definition doesn't include a rental requirement. So typically an affordable unit would be 30% of the applicable AMI. And so you could put anybody who's at 60% in a unit but the rent, it doesn't mean that the rent is affordable. So it doesn't make it an affordable unit. So that's a very good question. And going along with this UDO definition, there is actually a set of program regulations that the community development department and planning have been working together for right now the only, because right now this definition applies to the density bonus. That is the one kind of UDO affordable housing program. We are going to be bringing forward a set of regulations for the density bonus to city council, to this body. Wait, what's the process? I don't generally go to planning commission so I'm not totally sure what the process is. Are we going straight to council? Or are we? For the regulations? For your regulations? Yes. Straight to council. So my apologies, you don't get to see them but we are actually going to have a whole detailed set of regulations that will lay out all of this. How is income calculated? How is rent calculated? What is maximum rent? Similarly on the fore sale side, how is the fore sale price? What is the maximum fore sale price? That will all be laid out in the regulations that we will ask council to approve. So how, but how do we make it clear that those regulations, I mean it says we'll follow the policies and procedures of. The department, that's the reference right there. So that this will be the policies and procedures of the department of community development. I guess my concern really is just that they're not tied in the definition and so it does not make having a 60% AMI tenant in a unit where they're paying 70% of their income towards the rent is in zero way of an affordable unit. But there are a whole lot of other things that you can only put so much into the definition. Right. And so that's why there has to be a much more, we have 15, 20 pages of regulations that go with how this actually rolls out. And that will all be laid out in the regulations, how all this is calculated. But without having those regulations, this definition doesn't mean anything to me and I can't vote for it as it's written without having the bigger context. And you could have a definition that ties the rent to it and it'd be concise and make sense. And the regulatory agreements are full of what it means to have an affordable rent and just adding the fact that it... I mean, I hear what you're saying but without having the larger context, the definition doesn't really do a lot. Well, this is the definition that's in the UDO. I mean, this is a refinement of the definition that's in the UDO now. Right, I don't think that definition works. But I think the important thing to define here is this is not the definition for affordable housing for the city of Durham as a whole. This is the definition of affordable housing for programs using affordable provisions within the UDO. And those programs have policies and procedures associated with them. So it's not, you could not go and use the density bonus and just say, well, I'm going to provide units that 60% of AMI but people have to spend 70% of their income for housing because that's not how the program is set up.  You have to put, and that contract will specify the affordability levels of your units, how they are distributed, what the rents can be, how you'll calculate income, what documents you're expected to have in the tenant file, how the city, how community development department will monitor those units, what reporting will be required, you know, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. So there isn't an option right now where you can go and just do what you want and say that it meets the density bonus because in order to do that, you have to be in compliance with our regulations. So there are regulations in place for the density bonus? That's what we're taking through council. That's what we're going to be taking through council in the coming weeks. Okay, I guess it just seems like a backward way to do it then if they're... Well, we can't actually take regulations for that say that 80% AMI is the fore sale rule if it's not in the definition of the UDO right now. So as Karen was alluding to, we wanted to run these concurrently. So council is gonna see those regulations and procedures that Karen's department is developing at the same time they're gonna see the text amendment. So it's going to run together. So we're just blind to the larger context, unfortunately. Yeah, we needed to explain that a little bit better for you. Okay, I don't like that at all. Thank you. Commissioner Miller. So I have a problem but mine is a legal drafting problem. You are incorporating by reference standards to be made or policies to be adopted. I mean, the word is policies by a city agency that can be changed by the city agency, which will in effect change the applicability of the ordinance because you'll be changing the rules. You can't do that. The city may incorporate by reference an existing standard from an outside agency by identifying it. But you cannot incorporate by reference standards that might be made or changed in the future by an agency of city government. That is a delegation of the legislative function to a city department or official. You can't do that. The general assembly has delegated the legislative function to the city and it has to follow the rules and the city council has to adopt ordinances. The city council cannot in turn say this is the big rule but all the details will be handled by our staff and changeable by them in the form of policies. You just can't do it that way. Not lawful. And so because I also don't understand what these are, but also because I don't believe it's a competent way of adopting law, I have to vote against this too and I really don't want to because when we were talking about the age C and Dick and folks came to us and said we have a definition of affordable housing that doesn't work for Durham. I was all about that, but we need to have and I agree with Karen, you don't necessarily want to put the whole damn thing in the ordinance. You can incorporate by reference and we do. We incorporate things by reference in other places and we can do that here, but it's got to be already existing. It's got to have a date. And when we need to change that, then we have to come back and change the ordinance by the date. That's the way it's done at the municipal level. The only exceptions that are allowed in places, there are places where federal law specifically say you can like future changes to the IRS code and those have been held competent at the state level, but not when you're essentially delegating to a city agency the ability to make the details of the rules. You can't do it. I mean, you can do it, but you can't do it this way. You can't say you can't incorporate future changes. And so I would like to see that change. Do we know, I mean, we're creating these regulations and when we have them done, we'll adopt them somehow. And then in my opinion, so you create the regulations first and then you change this by a specific reference to the regulations adopted by the community development department and dated blah, blah, blah or adopted by council and then it's competent, then you can do it. And I would support that. But I would also, like Ms. Durkin, like to see it first and I would like to hear her explain why it's good or not good because this is her area, not mine. It is my area. And I would like to have that all coming together and have the incorporation by reference to be an appropriate and correct one. And then I have another question, just to make sure I understand, we have a charter provision that expressly contemplates incentives for affordable housing. And I believe, because we've seen other communities try to kind of mess around with their codes and their processes to twist developers' arms and to promises to build affordable housing. And now we're seeing North Carolina courts letting developers out of those promises. Durham has something that the other communities don't have. We have a charter provision that expressly says in Durham, the city can with an affordable housing density bonus or other incentives. We could even have other incentives. Take a developer's promise. And in my opinion, because we have that in the charter, we have something, if somebody takes us to court, we've got law at the state level because a charter is a state law that the others don't have and we'll win. But I wanna make sure that if we change the definition away from 60% AMI that, and we get a developer who promises affordable housing units at 80% AMI, purchase units at 80% AMI, that that will still be the kind of affordability that is contemplated as a minimum in the charter. Does the charter tie us to a 60% 15-year standard or can we make the standard tougher in places, like going to 30 years and relax it in places like going to 80% AMI for purchase units? I just wanna be confident about that. What does the charter say? So in the, my talk with my department, the charter provision discusses low and moderate income, meaning regulations established by HUD. And if they haven't established it, then the city can go ahead and establish what it wants. Right. The 80% is considered low income AMI through HUD. 60% and Karen can get into a little bit more detail is a specialized program, the home program within HUD. So the current definition meets it, the proposed definition also meets it. Because it's contemplated by HUD, we're golden under the charter. Thank you. And then one, if I may, one last thing. So in the text, we talk about a dwelling unit committed for a 30-year term as affordable through covenants or restrictions.  I'm worried that we really want to be bigger than that. Is it possible that we could have a development agreement with the developer that includes affordable housing units with an incentive that is negotiated through a city department that isn't run through as a development plan commitment or something like that? I would rather see restrictions taken out and the word agreements put in because I see the city making agreements with people that don't, for affordable housing, that don't necessarily have to be the result of a rezoning. In other words, if I already have the zoning I need for my land, but I want to put affordable housing on there, the city wants it to be affordable, well, there's not gonna necessarily be a commitment or anything like that coming through. I would like to see the word restriction does not convey meaning to me. The word agreements as an alternative to covenants or commitments does. Speaking with Karen, she said that normally look at restrictive covenants or deed restrictions, we have no problem adding the term agreements to that as an additional avenue. All right, I'm cool. So if we could, I would back to what Mr. Erkin was saying, I agree, I would like to see that fixed before I vote yes on this because I really want to vote yes on this. Okay, Commissioner Busby. Great, thank you, Madam Chair. And I hear my fellow commissioners' concerns. I want to move this forward. I think we've put good work into it. There is a trust fall here, but this is, and we just voted on it last week, affordable housing is a core value of this community, 74% of our community, if I think I got the number right, voted for the affordable housing bond. I trust that the staff who is very credible on this issue will get the policy right. And I trust that the city council will look at both of these together. Normally I would understand the concerns that my fellow commissioners are raising, but this is our community's number one priority. I do not want us to hold it up. I would encourage the staff to consider some of Commissioner Durkin and Miller's concerns, just to, if there are things we can do to make this the best possible policy that can strengthen it, that can address some of those issues. I encourage you to do that as it moves forward, but I'm ready to vote for this this evening. Thank you. The other Commissioner Altor. Thank you, Chair. I have a question about the last sentence in the paragraph on rental units. This is probably to Karen. So it says if tenant income after initial occupancy rises above 80%, then the unit will no longer qualify. So can you explain that a little bit more so the unit then just, or what happens to the tenant at that point? And that speaks to the larger regulations of how the larger regulations are going as well. So typically the way we handle this in an affordable housing project is you must initially be eligible at whatever the income level is, 60% of area median income in this particular threshold. Your income can rise up until 80% at which you're no longer considered eligible for an affordable unit. At that point, you have the option, you can negotiate with the landlord with the owner of the property directly to stay in the property as a market rate tenant. But that unit no longer counts as an affordable unit. And the developer has to bring in the owner. So the owner of the property at that point is required to lease, if this is now not in the definition, but in the rules, the owner of that property is now required to lease the next available comparable unit to an income eligible tenant. So because the way the regulations require, you're required to maintain 15% of the units affordable. And the idea behind this is, we didn't want people to, their income is all of a sudden 61% of AMI, you have to leave, you no longer qualify for the unit. We wanted to allow people's income to rise to a place where they were more competitive in the market. So the stock stays the same, and the tenant basically negotiates with the landlord, but we still maintain our 15%. Thank you for that explanation. Thank you. That was great. Mission arrived. I guess this is somewhat of a follow up question, but when we talk about the home ownership, you have to meet a certain level at the time of closing, but then there are no limits on increases in income after closing as long as the unit remains the household's principal residence. So if I went into a house at, say a little below 80% and got a better job or won the lottery or something and suddenly had a whole lot more income, is the unit I am still considered affordable? So it is affordable. You have purchased the unit at that point.  It is only at the point that you go to sell the home if it's within the 30 year period that the issue is you have to sell to an income eligible household. And it will further indicate in the policy procedures you have to sell at a price at or below the maximum price that the city establishes in that year for a for sale product. And that maximum price will be calculated every year based on mortgage rates and other factors in the market. But no, you're as a homeowner at that point, the only thing we would be monitoring as community development is do you still live in the home? Okay, thank you. I will echo commissioners, my fellow commissioners in that it would be helpful. I think at least for me to see the rules that we're talking about. Yeah. I feel like I'm sort of thinking in a void. Okay. All the other questions. Other commissioners have commissioner Durkin. Just as a, I can't not vote for this. It just is, I feel like I'm in a really conflicting place here being the one who always asks about affordable housing. But I do think in my comments, I agree with commissioner Busby that it is a kind of a trust fall and in my comments that I'll be expanding on what my concerns are, but I will be voting for it, but with a lot of reservations in my comments. Thank you. Any other unreadiness? If not, I am ready for emotional. Madam chair, I move TC-1900005 affordable housing dwelling unit definition forward to the city council with a favorable recommendation. Second. Motion by commissioner Miller, second by commissioner Al Turk that we move item number TC-19005 affordable housing, dwelling unit definition forward to the city council with a favorable recommendation. Would it also go to the, goes to the board of commissioners too, right? It will, yes. To both, both elected bodies. Okay, to both elected bodies amending our motion to ensure that it's both. All in favor of this motion, a roll call please. Commissioner Williams. Yes. Mr. Johnson. Yes. Commissioner Bryan. Yes. Commissioner Durkin. Yes. Commissioner Al Turk. Yes. Vice chair Busby. Yes. Chair Hyman. Yes. Commissioner Miller. No. Commissioner Ketchum. Yes. Commissioner Santiago. Yes. Commissioner Baker. Yes. Commissioner Lowe. Yes. And commissioner MacGyver. Yes. Motion passes 12 to 1. Thank you. We have one. Thank you. We have one other item under new business. It's your presentation, your quarry eno intake presentation. Oh, please chill it. Hello again. Tonight, we're going to present to you about something that's very important, but it doesn't get seen, because mostly it's underground. I would like to introduce my colleague, Sid Miller, from, who's the Senior Water Resources Manager, something like that, at the Water Management Department. We at the City of Durham are posing a new intake along the Eno River, which has implications for the delivery of clean water to the people who live in Durham. And we'll also have some implications to the Watership Protection Overlay District that exists along the Eno River. So Sid will give a presentation first about the intake itself, and then I'll talk about the Eno Watership Protection Overlay. Thank you. Good evening, commissioners. I'm not used to, I'm not usually in this room. I'm usually in the committee room. So this is all a little different for me. I should also warn you that I get up at five o'clock in the morning, and we're already approaching my bedtime. I already said well. But you don't need a special use permit to stay up. I can't say. So I'm gonna talk about sort of the first three items here about our water supply in general for the city to provide a little context. I'm gonna talk about Tier Quarry itself, and then what we're seeking, which is a new intake along the Eno River, and I'll explain why. And then Scott will talk about everything else. So we have Lake Mickey, which is one of our primary, whoop, we have Lake Mickey, which is one of our main reservoirs for the city, which was built quite some time ago. And then we also have Little River Reservoir.  We've recently increased our allocation out of Jordan Lake. At this point, we don't have an intake ourselves on Jordan Lake. I'll explain more about that. So these are our water supplies that we have, sort of a brief description of them. For Jordan Lake, you see I've crossed that off, and that's basically because we do not have an intake in Jordan Lake at this time. One of our water treatment plants. When you say an intake, you mean like a straw into the water. Exactly. There is an intake in Jordan Lake. It's owned by the Cary and Apex jointly. This is one of our water treatment plants, which I know some of you are quite familiar with. Right. 1917. This is the other, the Wade G. Brown Water Treatment Plant, currently undergoing an expansion. This is just a brief about the two. And then this is where our water supply system interfaces with your work. This is our distribution system. This is where the land use choices you all make have an impact on the water that we deliver and are limited by our abilities to deliver that water to any specific location within the city. So the Western Intake Partnership is something that we actually just recently formed. Includes the City of Durham, the Orange Water and Sewer Authority, the town of Pittsburgh and Chatham County. The purpose of the Western Intake Partnership is to develop a new facility on the western side of Jordan Lake, which will include an intake, a large treatment facility and then regional pump station to send treated water to each of the partners. This is our current projection of water supply needs. The dotted green line is the average day demand, which is sort of how we plan for the quantity of water that we have in supply. And then that dashed red line is maximum day demand, which is how we plan the water treatment facilities that we need. So I've shown where our current level of water supply is with that solid green line. That is what we currently have. And as you can see, we're already late in getting Jordan Lake online. Now, we have interconnections with the town of Kerry, which is how we're able to transfer treated water as we need. And that's how we currently access our Jordan Lake water supply storage allocation. But we're limited in how much water we can transfer from the town of Kerry. So this is where Tier Quarry comes in. That's actually a nice picture of Tier Quarry. That's where it's located, which, incidentally, is on Denfield Road. Denfield. So Tier Quarry is essential. We need to bring it online as a raw water storage facility. The thing about Tier Quarry is that it's essentially only filled by rainwater. So it was last used in 2007 during a severe drought. We installed a temporary intake and temporary pumps and pumped water from Tier Quarry into a raw water line that's adjacent to the quarry and sent it down to the Williams Water Treatment Plant. So we need to be able to fill Tier Quarry from either the Eno River or from Lake Mickey. And when I say either, we need to be able to fill it from both. We need to be able to choose what we fill it from when we need to fill it. So going back to here, you can see our existing Eno River intake. We have one which is downstream of the quarry. And I don't really have a way of pointing. So it's the one to the east. The westernmost pin on the map? The easternmost pin. The easternmost pin on the map? That's our existing intake. Okay. So we have one, but it's not near the quarry. No, it's not. One that we would like is the westernmore pin which is closest to the quarry. That's advantageous because, well, for two reasons. One, it's much closer to the quarry. And two, it's at a higher elevation. So if we have an intake there, we can bore a tunnel from the river to the quarry which will allow us to fill a quarry about 60, well, more like 55% full just by gravity. The rest of the storage of the quarry will have to be pumped but for the most part we'll be able to fill it by gravity. The way we're gonna operate the quarry, the intakes is that we will only withdraw water from the Eno River when it is flooding. So there are approximately 12 days during an average year when we would skim water from the Eno River, we would take between 10 and 20% of the flow and pump it or send it by gravity into the quarry. We would also pump water from Lake Mickey. Again, when Lake Mickey is full, we would pump water from Lake Mickey to the quarry. There's a raw water line that's just to the east of the quarry. So in order to build a new intake on the Eno River, that section of the Eno River needs to be classified as a water supply by the state. Once it's classified as a water supply, then there are land use implications. And that's where you come in. So if something is classified as water supply by the state, there are local governments are required to enact watershed protection overlay zoning districts in order to protect the quality of that water. We currently, Durham currently has water supply, watershed overlays for Falls Lake and Jordan Lake, for Lake Mickey, for Little River, and for the Eno. Not for this. There is one for the Eno. Yeah, but not for the quarry. Not for the quarry. There is one for the, at a good point. There's one for the existing emergency intake, the one that's further to the east. There are, I don't know a lot of the details, but there are the state has classifications, WS1 through 4, based on the existing development patterns, how developed it is, which have different requirements for pervious surface limits, water treatment, those sorts of things. The Eno is a WS4, which is the most developed type, which has the least amount of restrictions on new development. There's a, before any of this happens, there's not only the land use implications, I'm gonna talk about, but there's also a lot of other approvals that need to happen through the state. This will also affect a river-based water supply, has a protected area of 10 miles from wherever the intake is. So this, the current Eno overlay affects the city Durham, county of Durham, in Orange County. Extending it would also affect a small bit of the town of Hillsborough. So, Sid has his work cut out for him to work with the state and some of our neighbors to the west. So this kind of visualizes what I just talked about. This over here on the east is the part of Durham where the intake is, it goes all the way down the Eno over here to the town of Hillsborough. And this shows the areas in Orange County and Hillsborough that would be affected. Just more in Orange County than there is in Durham. It's true. So this is the, so one step back. So as part of the watershed overlay, there is a, it's demanded a critical area where the strictest restrictions apply. And then there's the protected area which have less strict restrictions. The minimum the state requires is a half mile critical area. There is an option to, for local governments to select a one mile critical area. For all of Durham's watersheds, we have selected a one mile critical area. So this is the existing critical area. The old emergency intake is over here at the eastern end. The darker areas in the city, the lighter areas are in the county. So if the intake removed, the critical area would need to move as well. The small half circle here with the hatching indicates what a half mile critical area would look like. The larger blue semi-circle is what a mile would look like. So the restrictions in the UDO for the E, the EA is the abbreviation for the critical area. EB is the abbreviation for the protected area. So in the EA, industrial uses and fuel sales are prohibited. There's a 24% impervious surface limit with no exceptions. There's a stream buffers of 150 feet perennial and 50 feet for intermittent. And there's a minimum 20,000 square foot lot size. In the EB, there's no use restrictions. There's a 24% low density option, 70% high density option where additional water quality controls allow you to put more impervious surface. There's a slightly smaller buffer for perennial streams and there's no additional standards for a lot size or things like that. We discussed this at the Joint City County Planning Committee at their June meeting. Some of the things we discussed is that because of the nature of this area, adding the more restrictive one-mile critical area does not give us that much for benefit of water quality because it's primarily developed. So it also would affect a lot more properties if we used a one-mile critical area. It takes in a lot of the property along Roxborough Road and would effectively prohibit a lot of redevelopment along that area. It would cause some existing fuel sales would no longer be admitted. So a kind of compromise solution we talked about with the Joint City Planning Committee was that we would keep the existing one-mile critical area for the existing emergency intake and then establish a half-mile critical area for the new intake. The protected area would still be 10 miles downstream. And there's no option in the middle we couldn't draw. It's half or one? Yeah, it's a, well, yeah. Two choices. So the process going forward, SID and water management have the work they need to do to get this permitted and get agreements from our other localities. Once we know that it's getting close to a go, we plan on bringing a UDO text amendment and a zoning map change for this. We've talked it over with our attorney and they're comfortable with us having it go forward before the state actually approves it and having the effective date of the ordinance. At the time the state approves it, that way councils and commissioners' hands are tied to having to approve a zoning change based on an action of the state. So that, we'd be happy to answer any questions. By all means, Commissioner Miller, Commissioner Elter, I thought we would done it. Commissioner Baker, yeah, okay. So you answered my questions about development impact. If we draw water from the Eno River, will we have treatment impacts? In other words, right now we have treatment facilities that are set up to treat what we expect to get out of the water sources that they draw from. If we add the Eno River, which was Durham's original water source many years ago, and not a very good one, because there's a lot of discharge upstream, it's a dirtier source than the others. Will we have to change our treatment at Williams? I guess that's where this water would go. So the short answer is I'm not certain, but more complete answer is that, so you're right that the water within the Eno River is likely different from the water that's in Lake Mickey or Little River Reservoir. What's actually more different is the water that's already now in the quarry. But before we do any of this work, we'll be doing water quality studies and treatability studies. So if there are any required changes in treatment or if there is pre-treatment that's required, all of that will be figured out before anything is pumped. And so will there be based upon the regulatory changes and also the business of constructing these facilities and operating them changes in how impacts on the recreation quality of our Eno River based parks and is there a wildlife impact, which you don't normally hear me ask about, but I'm more worried about it this time. No. So the operating roles that we've come up with, we worked on that in collaboration with the Division of Water Resources, the Wildlife Resources Commission and US Fish and Wildlife Service. Everybody is good with what we've proposed and how we've proposed it. Well, the Eno River Association? I've attended the Eno River Users Group two months ago. The Eno River, there were a number of organizations there and we talked about what we have proposed doing and everyone was okay with it. All right, that's good. That's what I had. Thank you. Commissioner, yeah, it's Al Turk. Thank you. I'm not sure if this is related to what Commissioner Miller just asked, but on that last slide, it sounds like you're gonna propose a half mile right from the critical area from the proposed intake. Is that correct? Yes, that's correct. Yeah, so has that been discussed with some of the groups that typically, like the Eno River Association and others, another environmental group? It's not been discussed with them yet. This is still pretty early. It's infancy, but yeah, before we move. Okay, so you plan on doing that before you start writing the text movement or kind of between that and the time that we see it? Because I think it'd be nice to have them kind of early or provide some feedback early on. Yeah, certainly, that's a good idea. Yeah, thank you. Commissioner Baker? Yeah, I was just gonna ask if a green roof counts as impervious surface area. So technically that's a stormwater question, which is a whole other department and division. My understanding is green roofs, I don't know how exactly they're treated in terms of credit that's allowed. And typically this has to do with nutrients. As far as impervious surface area, I'm gonna guess that for the purposes of this, it's impervious. Okay. Is it possible to transfer impervious surface area credits from one parcel to another parcel? It is, it has to be within the same watershed classification, so it would have to be within the EA to the EA or the EB to the EB. Okay, and do you think that there could be some sort of similar, something similar with the square foot minimum lot size? If you did something like that, you think that it would be possible? Yeah, and I will say there are a few things that are not state mandated that are in this and that minimum lot size is one of them, the fuel sale prohibition is another. So there are probably options. Don't know what they are standing here at this very moment, but this is certainly reflecting of a older time. Sure, sure. Yeah, I was just, I'm curious because it'd be interesting to explore some standards that... We'll say it inside, the Eno is a, even when this was established 25 years ago, it was already pretty well developed. We're in our other watersheds, which are much bigger and have, are on the fringe where there's a lot less development. We actually get more impervious surface transfers in those areas. There's just fewer opportunities in this one. Any additional questions? Thank you both for an excellent and very informative presentation. Something new and different. Something new and different. And that's our last item, motion to adjourn. Happy thanks.