Good afternoon. Welcome to the Durham Planning Commission. The members of the Durham Planning Commission have been appointed by the City Council and the County Board of Commissioners as an advisory board to the elected officials. You should know that the elected officials will have the final vote on any of the issues that are before us this evening. Tonight's meeting is being held virtually using the Zoom meeting platform. So in this virtual meeting platform, the public participants do not have the ability to talk or be seen on video by default, and to maintain meeting decorum and a discernible record of the meeting, the chat function has been disabled. Speakers will be given the ability to speak. We'll have one item with public hearing this evening. Individuals that signed up in advance will call your name when it's time to speak. If you would like to speak and haven't signed up in advance, we will give you the opportunity to digitally raise your hand and we'll call on you. You can press star nine to digitally raise your hand. If you would like to call into tonight's meeting, please dial 1-301-715-8592. When it's time to speak during the public hearing, we will call your name, we'll ask that you give us your name and your address, and then you'll have the opportunity to make your remarks. Finally, all motions are stated in the affirmative. So if a motion fails or ties, the recommendation is not favorable. Thanks again for joining us. May we have the roll call please? Yes, Chair Busby. Sorry, I was having some issues starting my video. I believe we have one absence for tonight. Mr. Morgan is the only commissioner I'm aware of that will not be able to join us this evening. Is there anyone else that may have emailed you, Chair Busby? No, that's all. Okay. Amandolia? Here. Baker? Here. Busby? Here. Cameron? Here. Durkin? Here. Keynesian? Here. Lowe? Sorry, you said cut right here. Commissioner Lowe? See Commissioner Lowe on the call. I'll get back and make sure I don't have an email from him. Cut right, I'm sorry, I'm circling back, cut right? Here. Sorry about that. McIver? Here. Miller? Here. Cease? Here. And Williams? Here. Okay, thank you. Thank you. Let's hold off on, we're gonna need a motion to at least excuse Commissioner Morgan, but why don't we wait and see if Commissioner Lowe is able to join us or not? Yeah, I'm thinking he may have sent me an email a while back about this when we first set this meeting up. So let me double check and I'll circle back to everyone, how about that? Great, thank you. Thank you. Just a reminder, I think, for commissioners, but also for anyone that's joining us or listening, tonight's a special meeting that will specifically focus on the goals and objectives on the comprehensive plan. Before we get to that item, we do have the approval of the minutes and the consistency statements from our March 25th, 2021 meeting. And so I'm happy to accept a motion, but if there's any changes, any adjustments to that, please let us know. Again, I read them. I didn't see anything that stood out as needing to be adjusted. So if no one else did either, I'll take a motion to accept the minutes and the consistency statement. So Chair, I move that we approve the minutes and the consistency statement. Second. Thank you. Moved by Commissioner Miller, seconded by Commissioner Amandolia, and we'll have the roll call, though. Amandolia. Yes. Baker. Yes. Busby. Yes. Cameron. Yes. Cutwright. Yes. Durkin. Yes. Keenshin. Yes. Lowe. MacGyver. Yes. Miller. Commissioner Miller. Yes. Cease. Yes. And Williams. Yes, I think I clicked the mic before I said it. Okay, thank you. You're welcome. Ms. Smith, any adjustments to the agenda? No, Chair Busby, staff does not recommend any adjustments to the agenda since we have the one public hearing tonight. I'm not aware of anything we need to change. I would like to state for the record that the hearing was advertised in accordance with state and local law, and the affidavits for the advertisements are on file in the planning department. In addition, we advertised the hearing on our engaged Durham page. Thank you. We will then move to our new business. And so this is our main item this evening. It's the hearing on the goals and objectives for the comprehensive plan. And I assume we will start with a staff report and look forward to hearing the latest of what is in front of us. Again, I do want to say in advance too, I really appreciate the work the staff's put into this. This has been very significant, lots of materials and look forward to hearing the latest. So I'll hand it off for the staff report. So wonderful. Good evening, everyone. I'm Brooke Ganser, a member of the Durham City County Planning Department team working on the comprehensive plan. Carl will be running our slides tonight and I'll hand it over to Lisa Miller about halfway through the presentation. But I'd just like to say on behalf of our team that we are very excited to be bringing the revised community goals and objectives for the comprehensive plan to you for our public hearing and recommendation tonight. These goals and objectives are the culmination of a lot of input and work. So before we start, we want to again acknowledge the tremendous contributions from so many members of the Durham community to make these goals and objectives what they are. And thank all of the engagement ambassadors, members of the outreach team, members of multitude of boards, commissions, and committees, including the Planning Commission, staff from a variety of city and county departments, and many others for their contributions and collaboration. Next slide, please. Thank you. Here's a brief overview of what we're planning to cover this evening. Our presentation to you all on March 9th went into detail on the background of this project. This evening, we will focus on sharing the full process to date to get to these community goals and objectives, but we'll not be going into as great of detail on any single portion of that process. However, we'll be glad to answer any questions about any and all of this work. So as our work on a new comprehensive plan began, the city's equitable community engagement blueprint was being developed. Through early conversations with our colleagues in the Neighborhood Improvement Services Department, we identified specific aspects of engagement we would work to incorporate into our engagement for this plan based on the blueprint. These have included working to provide information and engagement opportunities in accessible language and in both English and Spanish, asking demographic questions as we engage to understand who we are hearing from through different engagement methods, letting that data guide where we invest resources in reaching folks to move towards more equitable engagement, compensating residents for engagement and for engaging folks within their communities, particularly through the creation of our engagement ambassadors program. And then lastly, improving coordination across multiple projects and engagement efforts. So we have learned a lot about engagement and working towards equitable engagement in the last year and a half of work on this project, but we also know we still have a lot to learn and much more work to improve how we work with residents and build trust and relationships within our community. This work so far has allowed us to hear from many residents who have been excluded from our work in the past and their voices have significantly shaped the work we're bringing to you today. We are excited to share these goals and objectives that we believe accurately and equitably reflect the needs and priorities of the Durham community. So we began work on the new comprehensive plan in the summer of 2019, beginning with the recruitment for our resident outreach team and raising awareness of upcoming work to create a new comprehensive plan for Durham. Engagement on this plan began in November 2019 with the listening and learning phase of engagement. We began this project by asking big picture, open-ended questions that were intended to both find out what residents care about most and what they wanted to see in our community in the future. Through the listening and learning engagement efforts, over 1,000 residents shared their needs and priorities for life in Durham. Now and into the future. So approximately 400 residents came to one of the five community workshops. More than 600 residents participated in a mini listening session hosted by one of 40 engagement ambassadors and 169 residents shared their perspectives through the online survey. The summary of this engagement is provided in attachment four of this agenda item beginning on page 10. So with all that input from residents, our work started by organizing it all. Our first step was to assign topics to each comment in order to get a big picture understanding of the topics that came up the most. This was an imperfect system, but a good way to get a general sense before diving into more detailed data analysis. So these are the top 10 topics that were in the top 20 across all three engagement methods. All of these topics are reflected through specific topical objectives or incorporated into multiple objectives. We will share more on this later in the presentation. Because we began with big open-ended questions, we heard input both on things directly impacted by land use planning and decisions and other input not as closely tied to land use planning. So the vast amount of input we received shows the ways in which planning and decision-making are completely intertwined with virtually all aspects of community life in Durham. This directly informed our approach to drafting goals and objectives for this plan. So in August through December of 2020, we drafted 33 different objectives, reflecting the needs and priorities we heard from residents through engagement. We want to take a few minutes to share our process for drafting those objectives. Erin Parrish from the Office of Performance and Innovation shepherded us through this work by sharing her expertise and grounding us in an approach and perspective centered on residents. In addition, Nikki McDonald, our first engaged Durham program assistant was invaluable in this work, bringing her lived and community organizing experience, helping us stay true to residents' perspectives, experiences and voices. The graphic created by staff to share this process with the community is part of attachment for beginning on page 46. So to begin, we began with large, rich listening and learning data set that allowed us to elevate the lived experience of residents listening to, respecting and honoring the voice of residents who have been disinvested in and actively harmed by planning in the past. We did this by filtering according to the kind of engagement that occurred and the demographics of the people who participated in that kind of engagement. And then we started by sorting every quote that every resident had said into coded topics. There were about 70 different topics in total. So we created umbrella topics like housing, transit, the environment, and we looked at what codes might fit under that specific umbrella. So using housing as an example, there were about 15 or 20 different topics and codes that would fit under housing, like belonging, gentrification and displacement, growth and development, homelessness and McDougal terrace, just as some examples. We took all the quotes and observations coded under a larger universe of housing related topics to find patterns and stories emerging from these voices, beginning with what we heard through the engagement ambassador sessions. And next, we worked towards clarity and iterations by moving back and forth between the quotes and what was drafted to understand what people were saying. So we answered a series of structured questions, which included what are these residents saying? Why is it important? We then took an equity lens and asked who benefits and who's being burdened by what we're seeing here. And finally, we asked, how does this fit in a comp plan? And can we make policies about this? And so once we answered all of those questions, we were pretty close to maintaining the source material and resident quotes in a draft objective. So then we wrote draft objectives. We wrote all of these draft objectives in the voices of residents who we heard from through our engagement efforts. So every objective, as you can see, starts with we need. And then lastly, we revised the drafts to be sure we were saying what we mean and compared the drafts back with the resident quotes. The objectives that came out of this process are stories for the kind of future we want to build for Durham. We believe these objectives and goals reflect our shared values as a community. We want those values to come through in what we're doing in this comprehensive plan and how we are guiding our future together. Next slide, please. So the community goals and objectives created through this process touch on all the top 20 topics from each engagement method, engagement ambassadors, workshops and online survey. Many of the top topics led directly to a goal and group of objectives or specific objectives. The only topic from the top 10 list that didn't result in a topic specific goal or objective was infrastructure. Resident perspectives under the infrastructure topic were heavily focused on aspects of our streets and those needs have been brought into the transportation goal and objectives as well as brought into other objectives as relevant. We expect infrastructure topics to come through in our policy work in more detail as well. So once we had draft objectives that we felt we're really focused on reflecting back what we heard as needs and priorities of residents, we brought these drafts back out to residents to help ground truth them, to see how well they reflect residents perspectives and hear how to improve them. So before beginning to share these more publicly, we worked closely with the outreach team over a series of four meetings to talk in detail about each of the drafted objectives. Their early feedback gave us an opportunity to make some edits to provide clearer drafts for the community to review. The outreach members have been great collaborators and their perspectives and experiences have been essential in this work. Early on, we also shared out groups of objectives with relevant staff to hear concerns, questions and feedback before the objectives were shared with the community. So as with the listening and learning phase of engagement, our focus and engagement was making sure to hear from folks who have been traditionally left out or excluded from these processes in the past. We also continued to focus on reaching young people, Hispanic and Latina residents and rural residents since we know we still need to get better at reaching these community members. Through engagement efforts from November of last year to this February, approximately 850 residents provided input on the draft community goals and objectives. We were able to have in-depth discussion on objectives with eight focus groups including about 55 residents. We heard from a total of 174 residents during the fall engagement ambassador sessions for the nine housing and transportation objectives and 469 residents during the winter sessions to review the remaining 24 objectives including topics on the environment, schools, jobs, sense of place, community relationships, and health and wellbeing. So we had great leadership by Ideal Ortiz for the engagement ambassador program during this time who also managed this program for both the transit plan and the comprehensive plan. And through our online engagement social pinpoint, we engaged 152 residents on all 33 draft objectives as well. So the summary of engagement on the draft community goals and objectives provides additional information and on how we engaged what we heard in the demographic details for those we heard from. This summary is in English and attachment one and in Spanish and attachment five to this agenda item. So before I hand it over to Lisa, we wanted to share some really high level information about what residents said about the objectives in this phase of engagement. Across all of the objectives, we received a lot of positive feedback with at least 77% of respondents noting they agree or strongly agree when asked does this objective feel true for you and your community? The combined disagree and strongly disagree responses was 8% or less for each objective. So we use this information and an understanding of the kind of open-ended input on each objective to prioritize which objectives needed the most revision work as we set out to incorporate what we had heard. So with that, I will hand it over to Lisa. Thanks, Brett. So through the various ways that we've engaged residents on the draft goals and objectives, we heard where those drafts resonated with folks and also where we needed to make changes to better align with resident needs and to clarify the language that we used. This input came from fall and winter engagement ambassador sessions, focus group discussions, online engagement, as well as input from the outreach team, the staff technical team and other community or neighborhood groups who shared comments through email with staff. As the engagement period was coming to a close in February, we started organizing all this input to be able to work through revisions. We again prioritize the engagement ambassador session and small group engagement input as we started this work. We developed insight statements for all of the input focusing on the recommended changes that should be applied to each objective as well as overall and big picture changes needed. The insight statements and resident quotes informed the revisions to clarify the intent and update the language. We work to make those revisions without significantly changing the content across the objectives since much of the feedback on the drafts was supported. We've provided several ways for y'all to review and residents to review the objectives in advance of this hearing. There's a marked up copy in the agenda as attachment to where words that are removed are struck through and new words added are underlined. In English in attachment three and Spanish in attachment six, we provided a clean copy of the revised document for consideration of your recommendation this evening. We've also posted on the Engaged Room website in English and Spanish PDFs that show older drafts next to new revisions to easily compare the two, hoping that this version is more accessible for residents trying to understand the differences. So we wanted to note some of the high level changes that we've made. We worked to revise our goal statements to better reflect that these are aspirational and describe a desired future in Durham that specifically reflects feedback we heard from our outreach team and engagement ambassadors. For all the objectives, we clarified language and wording to try and improve accessibility and consistency, included language, emphasizing the need for better land use and transportation coordination within the mixed use neighborhoods, resources for thriving lives and the intentional and coordinated land use objectives. We focused the innovative housing objective on providing affordable housing to residents. It's now called the creative and varied housing solutions. We addressed the contradiction between the formerly titled integrated housing objective and rooted in connected communities and removed language from the former objective that caused concerns from residents that integration of neighborhoods might be forced or lead to displacement. We also worked to highlight the need for a growth management strategy and the need for sustainability and resiliency across the objectives. So just a quick reminder about the overall content of the community goals and objectives begins with the introduction of what is the comprehensive plan, the guiding values section with our local government commitment to uphold values we heard from residents that they care most about, including equity, accountability, accessibility and resident wellbeing. Then has an introduction to the goals and objectives followed by the goals and objectives themselves and then closing out with a glossary of terms for where we did need to use some terminology that was not necessarily as accessible to residents that we tried to keep that to a minimum. Each topical goal statement is followed by the corresponding objectives in the document. The objective includes multiple parts, the title identifying the overall topic and values, the initial objective paragraph, a supporting background paragraph that provides context based on residents current experience, a final objective paragraph and then a group of resident quotes that were used to help draft the objective. All of these parts together make up the objective and are important in understanding it in its entirety. We don't have the, we still don't have the objectives in the form on the screen here, but again, we'll be working on a user friendly form for them once they're adopted. So all of the revised drafts reflect what we heard were most important needs and priorities for Durham residents. And we wanted to make sure those needs and priorities are addressed and highlighted. Some of those topics have direct land use connections, as Brooke mentioned earlier, and some of them don't have as direct of the tie. As we thought through the implementation of the objectives that have a less direct connection to land use, we created some classifications to help us categorize them. The first icon listed here is a gear icon that indicates that the objective can be directly impacted by work in the planning department. The second icon with the circle of people indicates that the planning department needs partnerships in coordination with other city and county departments and other agencies to implement the objective. And lastly, the communication bubbles icon is indicating the planning department will both share the goals and objectives and input data with agencies who have the greatest impact on these objectives and talk with them about ways to support and share out their work towards those objectives. Since our last meeting with you, we have revised these classifications primarily to better reflect the importance of collaboration across many of these objectives. We wanna note that each objective is important to Durham residents and that the icon listed next to it doesn't determine its level or importance but the way in which or the steps needed to work towards implementation. So we're gonna go quickly through these slides showing the list of objectives and their classifications to help show how we're sorting them and how much additional coordination we think will be necessary. So noting here across the sense of place, community relationships and housing and neighborhoods, goals and objectives, these are all things that we know will require significant interdepartmental coordination. On the next slide, the objectives here will require coordination with the transportation department and the sustainability office as some examples of agencies will need to work with. The jobs and training objectives will require coordination with the city's office of economic and workforce development, the county's economic development office, local employers and institutions and the public spaces and recreation objectives will require continued coordination with Durham Parks and Recreation and with cultural institutions in Durham. The education goal and objectives will require coordination with the Durham public schools and groups and institutions that support our school communities and the health and wellbeing goal and objectives will require coordination with the Durham County Department of Public Health with staff responsible for the county's master aging plan, office on youth listening project and more. So just wanted to highlight again how the goals and objectives will be used and there's two primary ways. The goals and objectives will be used to inform the remaining work for the new comprehensive plan, working to develop policies and a future land use map that help achieve these community goals and objectives. In addition, the goals and objectives will begin being used to review land use cases like zoning map change and annexation requests as soon as they are adopted. We're currently working with our colleagues and the land use team and the department to determine the processes by which this review will be done and reflected in the staff reports created for new cases. These next two slides give an overview of upcoming work. We'll be developing a place type guide that reflects future land use categories we've been using as part of the 2005 comprehensive plan but will include more information than our current land use designation describing attributes of desired land use including building character and placement, parking and street design and open spaces and more. We'll also be creating a new future land use plan in the form of a map that has those place types assigned to each parcel. The policies and implementation strategies will be ways to implement the objectives either through legislative processes, procedures and UDO amendments. We've received a lot of input that had great policy recommendations as we asked for folks to share what they thought of the draft goals and objectives. So we'll be working through all of that engagement as a foundation for continuing our work to develop policy as we move forward. And finally we'll need measures for how DERM is doing at implementing those community goals and objectives and the remainder of the plan. So the adoption process for the community goals and objectives begins with this public hearing tonight for your recommendation. We're scheduled to provide an informational presentation on the background of this project to the board of county commissioners on June 7th at their work session and to the city council at their June 10th work session before going to the city council and county commissioners together for a joint public hearing and consideration of adoption on June 15th. So that is the end of our presentation this evening to close this out. We're asking the planning commission to hold a public hearing to hear from residents and to hear from commissioners on the community goals and objectives and for the commission to make a recommendation to the city council and board of county commissioners. Planning staff recommends approval for this work and our team is available and glad to answer questions on any and all of this. Thank you. Thank you very much. Lisa and Brock, this is really great. And as Lisa said, I think we all know this but it's just worth being explicit. This item is before us this evening. Our expectation will be to vote on this to send it forward to the governing bodies and you saw the schedule with the information item meetings at both work sessions and then the June 15th combined meeting and public hearing. So with that, I will just pause for a moment. And if commissioners, if there are any very specific questions you might have for staff, why don't I just see if there are any questions that we might be able to ask now. You can come back later as well, certainly but it may be useful to ask the questions now, open the public hearing and then we can have some additional time. Commissioner Baker, I see you got your hand up. We'll start with you. Thanks. Thanks for your presentation, Lisa. So one of my questions is you talked about the next steps, the policies, implementation actions, the future land use map and the metrics and indicators. And I'm just curious about the timeline for those. When can we expect to start seeing those? So we're gonna be, our immediate focus is on work with the Southeast Durham focus area. And so some initial recommendations and kind of general ideas of place types will come out of that work. I believe and team correct me if I'm wrong but I believe the timing for that is aiming towards a presentation to you all of those recommendations in September. And then I know my team spent a lot of time talking about schedule today while I was in another meeting. So I don't know if Kayla or Brooke wants to chime in on more big picture milestones. Sure. Yeah, we are working on a more detailed timeline so we can be able to tell you more about when we're gonna be going out for engagement and what strategies we're using. Should be in the coming weeks. Brooke or Lisa? Will that be on the website so that the community can see it? Absolutely. We wanna make sure that we're developing a good timeline that's accessible and on our web. Cool, cool. And I'm curious about these metrics because the metrics are very much tied to goals, right? Like an objectives and outcomes. So is that, at what stage are you expecting metrics and indicators or expecting to work on those? Yeah, we're planning to work on developing metrics alongside the policy development work. So in the, and essentially we anticipate the policy and metrics development to be kind of happening throughout the remainder of the plan development for a final group of policies and metrics to bring forward with the plan. Cool. Okay, I'm done. Thanks. Thanks, Commissioner Baker. Commissioner Miller. Thank you, Brian. So Grace, I thought a meeting or two ago when we were discussing this upcoming meeting, you said that one of our options was not necessarily to vote on this tonight. I don't see how we can be useful. I don't understand what the exercise is. I want to hear what people have to say and I want to discuss this.  If after what we hear and our discussion with each other indicates that we wanna make specific suggestions for changes or additions, I don't see how we can do that tonight. So that's, is it true? Nation to move forward. So why are we having a public hearing then? What have come for? To comment on this and put their input into the process. And we have plenty, I think in the email I sent to correct your comments and your thoughts, but we do need to keep on schedule. We need to have you make a recommendation tonight. We have actually gone through the quite onerous process of scheduling a joint hearing between the governing bodies. So we do need to keep this moving. I appreciate all of that. But it's like, pardon me for saying it, but this seems to be, I'm not sure why, it seems to be a little disrespectful of the planning commission and the role that it plays. If we're gonna vote up or down on a 50 page document with lots and lots of moving parts. I have specific comments and ideas and I'd like to have a meaningful discussion of them. And it doesn't look like that's gonna happen tonight or anybody's interested in having it happen tonight. Why don't we skip the public hearing and vote on whether or not to send this forward? We've advertised the public hearings. I would highly recommend that you have the public hearing and let the community state for the record their thoughts and comments. Like I said, it seems like the planning commission's role in this has been squeezed out. And I appreciate all the work that's gone into it. I don't wanna take a jot away from it. But I do believe that the planning commission has a role to play and we are not being given the time to do it. And I'm a little sorry because I have been speaking to people who are in the community who thought this was a shot at making a meaningful statement. Why are they making it to us if we're not really going to have an opportunity to figure out what's going on and to ask that something that resonates with us be incorporated? I'm just, I'm a little troubled by. Well, you can certainly ask that your comments be incorporated just like you have any other public hearing item. You have that option to incorporate comments as the item moves forward. Anyway, I'm not very happy. Thank you, Grace. Thanks, Mr. Pamela. And before I call Commissioner Durkin, my thinking for tonight would be, and Grace, if you can just make sure that I have this correct. I mean, number one, we can state a motion that doesn't have to be just a straight, we send this forward as is. We can certainly, you know, within reason have a motion that says, we send this forward, but would hope that X, Y, and Z could be incorporated. But, but Grace, my question to you is, we also will have as usual to confirm, we will have the ability to write our comments as we always do on any case that would be sent to the governing bodies in advance. Is that accurate? That's correct, Chair Busby. And, you know, the recommendation could be with your comments. You could have a consensus of some, there may be there's some main sticking points that you want to add into one's motion this evening. I'm not sure, because we haven't heard everyone's points or comments. Yes, you can always incorporate any concerns or comments that you have in your written comments. Those definitely go to the governing board, elected officials. Okay, thank you. And I think when we get to this point, obviously, I think it'll be important for us as a commission to think through and work through what might our motion look like this evening. But I'm with Commissioner Miller in terms of, I want to hear the public comments and then be able to offer guidance based on what we hear this evening before we do anything. Commissioner? Sure. I just want to just state my support for this format. And I think we have an opportunity to both hear the public and provide our own comments. And not unlike every other time we have a public hearing. So I'm completely comfortable with this and ready to keep going offer a recommendation on the time, Ken. Thank you. I don't see any other commissioner questions for staff at this point. Again, we'll open the public hearing. Everyone will have the opportunity to speak. We'll close the hearing and then we'll come back to the commissioners. So certainly looking for everyone's detailed comments as well as just working to offer our guidance on how to move forward. So again, tonight's a little different than most public hearings. What we sent out, allowed individuals to sign up to list if they were a proponent, undecided or opposed and then have the opportunity to say if they would like to speak or not. And in looking at who's with us this evening, I don't see everyone on the list, but what I'm going to do just in the spirit of full transparency, I'm going to read through every single name, even if someone said they declined to speak this evening just to give them the opportunity. We had 10 individuals who did sign up and we had four who listed themselves as proponents and six who listed themselves as undecided. We had three who said yes to speak, four who said they were undecided and three who said no, they were not interested in speaking. Again, I'm just going to go through the list because I want to give every single person that opportunity. I see five of those individuals with us in the meeting at the moment. Again, I'll just start with each name. Since it's such a small list, I want to give, and this is a big issue, we're not going to limit this to just two minutes. We're going to give plenty of opportunity for each person to speak. I will time it as we normally do. If we start pushing into five minutes or more, I'll just let you know just so you can help keep your comments focused as appropriate. The first person is Kuwara Mun. I don't see that they are signed in with us. Every person, there are 10 attendees and all of their names are listed, so I don't see them. Next on the list is Bonita Green and then we have Pat Karstensen, Vanessa Evans and Kamala Hayward Rotimi. All of them are with us. Chris, if you don't mind, maybe we can put those names in the chat since that can help move us along. But while we do that, Ms. Green, I will turn it over to you. Again, if you can give us your name, your address.  Thanks for joining us. Good evening. My name is Bonita Green. I'm at 831 Center Street in Durham. Can you hear me clearly? Okay, and I'm representing the Merritt Moore community. My time spent with the outreach team has been good. I feel that they are really listening and the way that they have conducted themselves in this particular project and plan, I think should be a blueprint for every government agency to move forward in having engagement with the community. They have very carefully listened and even taken our comments into concern. A lot of times we're in places where we're speaking and talking about our thoughts and our concerns, but we're not really heard in those spaces. So I think the team has done a really good job of listening and hearing and translating that into a working document, a way that Durham can move forward. The Southeast Durham plan, there's a lot that's kind of going on. So sometimes it can get a little confusing that we're thinking about the future and not actually what's happening right now. It makes me wish that this new plan that they're working on was adaptable now so that we can move forward with that. But I think as far as a future document, this one will be a great one to build from and to move forward with, especially when it comes to land use and development and really taking into consideration the areas and properties and lands that are being zoned, but as well taking into consideration the voices from the speaker, the people who live in those communities because their lives are gonna be impacted from whatever future plans that are going on, the quality of their lives are gonna be impacted, whether it's to a negative or positive, the quality of their lives are gonna change because they moved into the area for a specific reason and now that is all changing. And that should be taken into consideration like working on this, the comprehensive plan and the suggestions that they have made really taken into consideration the community voices. So I think they've done a great job of that. And that's all I have to say right now. Thank you, Ms. Green. And thank you for your, you've been just deeply engaged in this process. So really appreciate your work on this and your leadership. Next is Pat Karstensen. I'm gonna have to promote Patricia Karstensen to a panelist because their version of Zoom is not allowing the talk. Okay, can we do that right now or should we go to the next speaker and circle back? Here she is, he is, I'm sorry. Patricia. Hi, my name is Pat Karstensen. I live at 58 Newton Drive in Durham. And I have a couple of comments. One of them is that I'm strongly in favor of the emphasis on equality and on equity. Although I think in a few cases we're not being ambitious enough for one thing, a just transition on climate change aims not just to avoid disproportionate impact but also to find ways to benefit both wealth, residents and communities of color. And I'm also concerned that not only with where we have food apartheid now but we are creating food apartheid in some new developments such as the area between 54 and Farrington. Secondly, our aims for community engagement are far too modest. We need to seriously consider the recommendations made by the Interneighborhood Council for community empowerment and using the tacit knowledge that people who live in the area have that may not be easily gotten with any kind of data analysis. And third, the governor's committee on the ways in natural and working lands can help address climate change, has some great suggestions like protecting forest and flood prone areas, generally promoting urban forest and improving the site preparation and soil amendments during land development in a way that will preserve carbon. And finally, an open space. I think we need to strengthen the objective so that we're including the connectivity open spaces such as the work being done on the Eno New Hope Corridor and also looking at work around the Eno New Hope Corridor, making sure that we have good buffers around the green space and community and looking at what has happened to some park syndrome, community engagement on issues such as the materials used in playground surfaces. Thank you for all of your work and that's all I have to say. Thank you very much. Next is Vanessa Allens. Good evening, everybody. Good evening. I guess I will have to say that I thought when we started the comprehensive plan and it was to bring communities together to have their voices heard. It was because in 2005, there were no black, brown or indigenous people sitting at the table for people to hear their concerns of their community. And I feel when people are in a community, it's the people who stay within that community that can tell you what they need the most. Politicians and people when they sit behind desks, they make decisions for people that sometimes don't fit with that particular community. No respect to Tom, but he's worked with us from the beginning. He's come out and he's asked questions. He said he don't understand the comprehensive plan, but it's just a way of bringing voices to the table that have not been able to speak in past decisions. And I feel there has to be a table that turns at some point in time in life where all voices are heard and not just the rich. I feel like there has to be a space for everybody to be. It can't be just about the research triangle. The people I think that he's concerned about or that he feel may not be speaking at the table are the ones who have already been invested in. The people who have not been invested in are the ones who are on this call tonight or who have been speaking in the rooms that we've been in. And being an ambassador, I've been able to sit in different rooms or be in different spaces with people and hear their concerns throughout Durham, that they're concerned about how Durham is changing so rapidly and that there's not gonna be places for people to live. And there should always be spaces for people who cannot afford housing. It's okay for people to work for people, but it's not okay for them to live with you or live within your community. Something's not right with that picture. I think there should be spaces for essential workers as well as middle-class workers, people who are rich or have gone to college, have not gone to college. This world is a diverse place where all people should be able to live. So in the fights that we've been fighting for and the things that we've been going through with the engagement, I feel like if it's just thrown to the side and not thought about, it's like what was all that work done for? What was all those voices in the space for? So I hope that y'all take the time to truly listen to the people of Durham and hear their concerns about each community that is being affected and those that have been not invested in. And I pray that Durham will be more equitable and see things for everybody, not just a few. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Evans. And I wanna echo what I said to Ms. Green. I know you've been intimately involved in this process. Really appreciate that and your leadership in our community. I just wanna say one more thing, Mr. Bugsby. I thank you for the book that you have behind you because the book that's behind you, The Color of Law, it speaks to all the things that we're going through. So I have been reading the book and I hope that everybody else will take the time and read the book, The Color of Law. Thank you. You've got good vision. I'm gonna thank you. We're gonna keep reading the names. I think a lot of these names are not with us, but again, I just wanna give the opportunity. Kamala Hayward Rotimi, I believe she was on earlier, but I knew she had to drop off. Thomas Struseker, Larissa Seibel, they were undecided about if they were interested in speaking. I don't see them signed up here. Becky Winders who I know we got an email from earlier today. So I hope commissioners will read that email. Richard Frothingham and then the final name that is with us and I wanna give the opportunity if he's interested, Ricky White. I don't know if you would like to speak and if you would, you are welcome to do so. Sure, just real quick, can y'all hear me? Yes. Awesome. Hi everybody, I'm Ricky White. I'm at 1602 Delaware Avenue and I'm also the executive director of Albert Creek Watershed Association. I wasn't playing on speaking and I'll keep it real short. I have read through many of the goals and objectives and wanted to just reinforce my support for two of them in particular under the environment category and under the parks and rec category. In both cases, there is a strong emphasis on creating equitable green space across the city. I'm extremely pleased to see that. We have lost so many opportunities over the last five to 10 years to protect open space, especially in neighborhoods that we work in, like Goose Creek and East Durham. Brigham, Merritt, Moore are both seeing these unbelievable pressures for development. We need funding to be able to offer alternatives besides full development of some of these sites and working with some of these communities to do that. And I see flagging this in the comprehensive plan as one way to argue for that in the future. So I just wanna essentially support those two points going forward, thanks. Thank you, Mr. White, appreciate your perspective. And then we've had two other individuals. And again, I'll remind anyone, if you would like to speak, you can press star nine that will digitally raise your hand and we'll call on you if you haven't had the chance to speak yet. We've got two individuals who've raised their hand and so we'll start with Ethel Simonetti and we'll get you off of mute and then you can start your comments. Hi, I just wanted to echo very enthusiastic support for Vanessa Evans and Benita Green and their heroic work in our community. They've been real trailblazers and I have learned so much from them as someone who 25 years ago felt quite harmed by a small area plan to the point where I had to stop working and fight for my property. And because of that, I have learned how to be very vigilant, but to see the success that they have found by garnering their neighbors together is really quite remarkable. And I have also tried to organize people in the communities where I have lived to speak up and be voices for the very small aspects that give communities quality of life. So I am concerned about process issues if someone on the commission feels disrespected or some part of the process has been overcome by another priority by city and county government or there's been some misleading inferences about what we're trying to do. I'm supportive of pause so that those things can be clarified with other aspects of government. I'm not sure that the planning department per se is part of the disrespecting dynamic that may exist and it's none of my business, but I am concerned about anyone feeling disrespected in this process because the goal of this process quite frankly has been transparency and crossing every T and dotting every I. So I'm very hopeful for Durham as we confront this growth and we're dealing with opportunities for redress. I'm really interested in everything that Pat has said and also Ricky has said, we have some great resources here in Durham and it's time that those of us that have found ourselves in silos find more comfort around those tables that are moving. So I do appreciate the opportunity that our chairman tonight has given for once again, these experts to speak from the community and I wanna endorse what they have said and lend my support to the extraordinary work that the staff has put in to document everything that has been said and lift it up, give it relevance and then find how it can be paired with other like items for critical mass where voices are heard. So thank you for this opportunity and however you all want to continue on with the momentum or pause so that others that have feel like they've been slighted in any way, I don't think the plan will suffer. The plan has great integrity and the planners are trying to get it right and with community support and buy-in they're doing just that. So thank you for allowing us to come forward. Thank you. Thank you. And if you could share your address as well, we'd appreciate that. Sure. I'll have it, 2611 Vesson Avenue right down from Lakewood Elementary 27707, thank you. Thank you very much. And finally, we have Mimi Kessler. Hi, can you hear me? We can, welcome. Good. My name's Mimi Kessler. I live at 1418 Woodland Drive in Durham 27701. I want to say that I have been a part of the outreach team also and I feel that it was very, very bad luck that the pandemic happened at the particular point it did in terms of this process. I think the staff has worked really hard to reach out and to include the voices of a variety of people. The outreach team participants are remarkably diverse given the situation they find themselves in to do this work. My concern is that we're only reaching those people who are kind of digitally connected and that because there's not been any opportunity to do group in-person group activities, I worry that there are some people that are not aware and or are unable to participate. And I do think that a lot of that is from the issues of the pandemic. I support that goals and objectives but I think that the rubber meets the road in the metric. And so that's the part that I am really interested in because we can have lots of flowery language and end up with something that doesn't actually make us do anything differently. And I too am disappointed that there isn't more of a dialogue with the planning commission. I think that given how much you focus on land views and the pressures of development in Durham, I think it's really important the perspective that you bring. And I hope that you will write up a lot of comments in response to this evening's discussion. But I do feel that the work that's been done so far has been done well and that there are important voices. And I just wanna give support to Vanessa Evans' point. I think that's all. Thank you very much. Thank you, Ms. Kessler. I wanna just give one more moment. If there's anyone who would like to speak who hasn't spoken yet during this public hearing, you can press star nine. You can digitally raise your hand. We're happy to hear your feedback. Brian, is Becky here? She is and so I wanted to give her the opportunity. She had said she was not interested in speaking so I don't wanna put her on the spot but if anyone would like to speak, press star nine, we're happy to have you share your feedback. And Becky Winders, we would love to hear your feedback. I can't find star nine. Can you hear me? We can hear you. You're good to go. But the whole hand worked. Actually, I just got out of a meeting with the policy committee of the Coalition for Affordable Housing and Transit where we went through a million things at a high speed and I don't even have my comments in front of me. So is the two-minute limit, does it apply? Not tonight and not for former planning commissioners like yourself. So I went to the Northgate press conference last week on Saturday and I heard a presentation just now from Marsha McNally about she is a professional or a retired urban designer who worked with the north wall town people to come up with that plan. And I really think that it's a model for how we want to do planning and how we want to not just break down the barriers for people to participate in the kind of regular public input process that we have, by paying stipends and making extra efforts having help making extra efforts with ambassadors and everything. I thought the engaged Durham process as far as I could tell was really great. And I read and detailed the goals and objectives most relevant to affordable housing but did not get to the transit ones, unfortunately. But the, I really think that we've got that process thing down with the engaged Durham, although I'm sure it was quite expensive. But we, now we need to work on making, so everybody has had their say.  And I find that it's, I believe as a, sort of a planning wonk, I guess, that I know the theory about what comprehensive plans are supposed to be a guide for decision making and all. And I'm on board about getting the goals that will in the plan that will provide a rationale for what kind of decisions you want to make. And the plan helps you get around this thing about the state prohibition of inclusionary requirements for percentage of affordable housing and things like that. But we need to, instead of just thinking about giving people the, or giving the developers to the freedom to be innovative, we need to couple that freedom with the responsibility to provide for what the community needs. And I think this Northgate plan tells us what the community wants. Although this was only one neighborhood, there are some general things in there that could be worked in into the plan. And I hope that we can make the plan a better tool for not just when developments come up, not just refusing them and saying that like what happened in Braggtown, that just it was a community win maybe that the development could not go forward, but the kind of development of the community once still hasn't happened yet. So I'm just rattling on and on. Where's our drill? Jim, I'm on. Olivia needs to borrow our drill.  Well, thank you for your comments and for the comic relief. Okay. Thank you. And then we have Constance Wright has also raised her hand and Ms. Wright, we'd love to hear from you as well. Good evening, everybody. I was trying to debate whether I wanted to speak or not, but I will put my comments in. First of all, I agree with what Bonita was saying about how Lisa and her team has really done an exceptional job. They listened to us. They sympathized with us. And I think they empathize. They really made us feel like what we had to say mattered. So I just want to give my kudos to Lisa and her team. And I just want to say, I just hope that you all listen to what the 850 residents who gave their input, you know, I know you all broke it down to, you know, the comments, but I just want to say just dealing with different departments throughout the city, we realized that a lot of times underserved communities do not have a big voice. No matter how loud we speak, no matter how much we, you know, write memos, emails or whatever, no matter what we say, it just seems like our input does not matter. With this comprehensive plan, my prayer for Bradtown, for Merrimore, for all the underserved communities, that our voice matters to everybody on the planning commission.  What about downtown? Downtown is vibrant as far as building billions and billions of dollars going into downtown. You know, what about RTP? What about the different areas that are just thriving? What about West Club Boulevard? I just, I always say, you know, I live, I'm sorry, and I didn't tell my address. I live at 26 on 5 DeMille Street and that's in Bradtown on the East Club side of Rocksboro Road. So, you know, so when you go to West Club Boulevard, you know, it looks like Fifth Avenue, the top part of Fifth Avenue, the best part of Fifth Avenue is what I compare it to. And then when you cross over Rocksboro Road and come down East Club Boulevard, we look like, you know, some homeless folk throw it out in the middle of the street with no hope at all. Although our tax dollars and everything, you know, y'all take that. I'm not seeing y'all, but I'm just saying this, we pay our tax dollars. If we didn't pay our tax dollars, where would we be? We would not be living in Eastern, I mean, in Bradtown, I'm sorry, in Bradtown. So my thing is, you know, I've been out here for 34 years and, you know, for all the money that has gone out of my pocket to go into the taxes, property taxes, and everything for Durham. We have not benefited from anything. I did a study online. I went online and I pulled up the property taxes that the people on my street have paid in the past four years. I pulled up nine houses on my street. In the nine houses that I pulled up in the past four years, we have paid more than $47,000 in taxes. Now, can you imagine all the houses in Bradtown who have paid taxes like that? You know, why don't we have anything? You know, you ask people for sidewalks. Oh, well, we have plans to put sidewalks, but it's on the wrong side of the street.  You to call up there and you tell them, look, we need speed humps. Oh, the study says we can't have speed humps. We need this, we need that. The study says, the study says, but you don't live out here. And see how our children play just as well as the people who make the money and live in all these high expensive places. And then you look at the comprehensive plan from 2005 and realize that the things that are happening in Durham are from that comprehensive plan. So from this new comprehensive plan that's coming in with our goals and objectives on there, are our goals and objectives going to matter?  You know, I know a lot of people say, well, you know, what about my community? And then when you go in their community and they have everything better parts better streets, safety, there's safety, common street, common things, you know, curves, everything. You come into our community and if you turn a curve, you're subject to driving to a ditch, literally, you know, of a dangling land, you're subject to drive into a ditch. So what I'm saying is with all the input that we have given out here, myself, Vanessa, Benita, all of us have, you know, hit the streets running, engaging people, asking questions. And the first thing a lot of them say is, oh, it's not going to matter. And I cannot argue with them because from what I'm looking at, it hasn't mattered. What we say does not matter. From this point on, the city has a chance to get it right, starting from this comprehensive plan we as a underserved, underinvested community should be prioritized. And it's not being, and that's being equitable if you really think about it. Because after my 34 years of taxes and not getting anything from it, you know, that's being equitable. So, and I know a lot of people say, well, you know, everybody needs to be equitable for everybody. Where does it start? Because the people who have gained the most have always gotten the equitable, whatever equitable treatment that they wanted. We haven't gotten anything.  And then you get a letter from a developer saying, paraphrasing, oh well, hey, you need to talk to the city about what's going on with these lot with the policies because we can do what we want to do. And it's not anything that y'all can do about it. You know, so when you get, see emails like that, you know, that breaks you down too as far as not having any hope for your area to be investing in. So, you know, the policies, that's my biggest concern, changing. They need to be changed so that we as a community can benefit from just as much as everybody else.  Then when you ask them what their profit is, you know, or we can't tell you that, but if we have a plan and it might infringe on what they're trying to do, they want to know ABC and D about our plan, you know, where's the fairness in that? I mean, we don't tell them, but I'm just saying that that's what they want to know, you know, but... Thank you, Ms. Wright. If you can wrap up your comments, we'd appreciate it. I'm done. Thank you for listening. Well, thank you. I mean, I appreciate your comments. And as I said to Ms. Green and Ms. Evans and all the other speakers really appreciate your active ongoing participation in this process. I don't see anyone else who is looking to speak. We've actually, most of the folks who are with us have already spoken. So I'm going to close the public hearing portion of the meeting and we will go to the commissioners and I'm going to call on you in the order that you raised your hands. So we will start with Commissioner Cameron. Commissioner Cameron, are you available? I am. I did not raise my hand if it was an accident. Sorry. Okay. Not a problem. All right. Commissioner Miller. So thank you, Brian. I have a number of things and they're, they're not all connected and there's not necessarily a theme. I have to say that generally I support all of this across the board and I respect the work that was done under the worst possible circumstances. I was terribly afraid of the effect. That the pandemic would have on having this process be effectively deliberative because I believe the best work happens is not just when members of the community speak to the planning apparatus to people like us and to the staff, but when they have an opportunity to sit down together and, and work things out and, and correct misunderstandings and those kinds of things and then convince each other the deliberative process. I would like to see community engagement function more like the jury in the jury room. And the pandemic made that difficult, if not impossible. So I'm deeply respectful of what, of everything that's been done. And I don't disagree with hardly anything on the plan. However, I have some, some concerns. And one of the first one is as a reference to mixed use that is added in. I become suspicious based upon my experience on the planning commission, whenever anybody says mixed use, when those words fall from the lips of developers or planners, simply because I'm not sure we all mean the same thing when we say it. And I know that in Durham, mixed use as a concept does not live up to what the, what most people think the words mean. And if anybody wants to see an example of it, the project that is at the corner of Frazier and North Duke Street near the hospital is an example of mixed use. It is a rectangular piece of land that has a townhouse project going up on the north end and has a sheets on the south end with a buffer between them. That is mixed use in Durham. We do not need more of that. And I would rather see us come up with words that are not already laden with confusion about meaning, which means maybe more words. But I think what I would like to see is, is that our residential communities need thoughtful and intentional and supportive commercial development nearby integrated, if possible, or at least nearby. But these need to be properly sized and properly planned. We cannot continue to create new grocery store shopping centers.  And then we build another one. We can't do that either. So I would like to see that reworded somehow and get rid of that mixed use language. That bothers me. I'm afraid that if that stays in the comprehensive plan, the people who are the initiators in the land use process here and everywhere will take those, the mixed use words and run with them to accomplish results we do not mean or want. So I would like to see somewhere in the language, not necessarily a new objective, but I believe that Miss Green hit on it. There needs to be somewhere where we need to say out loud that the, she said, you know, people are intentional about the places that they choose to live in by their houses and they had things they wanted. And then they're stressed with change. And it's, I think we need to say something about reliability of zoning regulations. Now it's true that they can always be changed, but I think that a neighbor's or neighborhood's consideration and interest based upon reliability are real. And that the reality of those interests should be expressed somewhere. So that in the rezoning case that comes up five years from now, somebody can point to the, to this plan and say, reliability is a real thing. It's a goal. It's an objective that is desirable. And that I'm not being, I'm not out of the woods when I, when I call upon you to consider it. So I think Miss Benita for, for raising that, because I think it's very important. My biggest disappointment in these objectives is, is that we don't address process. I want a sea change in the way we do things in Durham. As I read this comp, these objectives in this comprehensive plan, I see it still being based on, on a cases driven process. And that community engagement happens at cases. Now the word ongoing was added. I'm grateful for that. But what we don't have, what I want to see are new structures. And I want to see resources. Developed to, to keep ordinary folks for one of a better term for people who's, who are not developers and, and, and real estate people and lawyers and land planners and all those folks for whom it's a business for everybody else, for whom it's a living. I want to see some mechanisms, especially for those people who really care and want to be involved. And I want to see some of these people who, I mean, we're developing with this process, the best, the best dividend out of the process that Lisa, you and your colleagues in the planning department are, are creating for us is a whole cadre of people. Who are now engaged at a higher level. And I want to see us have institutions in the planning process in Durham. And we're talking about the total number of people. When we start to do that, we're going to want to do, we're going to have to ultimately create more of these people and keep them engaged that do not want to have the whole apparatus be one zoning case after another. And, and so. I would like to see some way of beefing up that community engagement thing so that it's not an input or feedback. go, but I would like to see the institution there. I think we'll have a much healthier community if we share power that way. Right now, we don't share power. The development community, even by law, decides when we make changes. And for anybody else to decide when we make changes, it's a much harder process. But I think if we build institutions around it in Durham, we can lower those barriers and have a healthier community. So the other thing that I think is missing from this is some sort of goals and objectives that envision Durham County as a built community. I think it's necessary to be in there at this level. In other words, our current comprehensive plan starts on an idea of tiers. And I'm not saying it's good or bad, but it starts with geography. And then everything else that we do is supposed to be informed by geography. However, we hardly ever talk about the tiers very much. We probably should talk about the more to give a meaning. I think at this level, at the goals and objectives level, there should be and we should think it through goals and objectives that have a vision of what Durham as a built community, a developed and developing community looks like. Because then I think that when we read everything else, we will have a better idea of what, how to interpret our goals and objectives when we get to cases. Because cases aren't going away. I just don't want cases to be the only point of contact with the community. I don't want to slip back into where we have been. I know the Interneberg council submitted somewhat confused, massive comments. And I was wondering, and that's because of trying to meet time constraints. But I can tell you that the people who were involved in putting that together, who involved a lot of the speakers tonight, were very sincere in the work they did, and they met over and over and over again, again in a deliberative process to come up with carefully worded comments, even if they were missing. And I was wondering, if somebody on the staff, when I'm done, can tell me how the changes that were made were informed by those comments, if at all? And because I was disappointed not to see more things in them that I recognized. And then finally, before I surrender the floor here, Mr. Chairman, I know that Becky Wenders talked about the Northgate situation in Braggtown. And of course this weekend, the Braggtown neighborhood and their neighborhood allies had an event and expressed a community vision for the Northgate property that can only be described as remarkable. The problem is, it can't happen. The developer has decided to try to develop the property under its existing zoning. That does, will not invite any kind of discretionary review of what's going to be built there. The Northgate developers recently as yesterday issued a statement, essentially saying that these community goals, especially the ones concerning affordable housing are all well and good, but that they're misplaced. The private landowners are not responsible for the housing affordability problem and that the neighborhood should engage with the city to solve those problems and not look to private developers. This is indicative of the problem. And we need to restructure the way these decisions are made in Durham so that we are not confronted with this situation. If someone comes in and buys 60 acres or 55 or whatever it is acres for redevelopment inside what is now called the urban tier, I think that is a community, the community interest in that is appropriate and that community input and decision making, some sort of decision making process that can take those community interest into account need to be structured, whether we do it in the UDO or and in the comprehensive plan we need to think about these things, but I don't think it should be possible for somebody to talk about so massive a project without being reasonably accountable to the community for how it's developed. I was disappointed in the statement and I applaud my neighbors in Walltown for the incredibly hard work that they've done and the sincerity with which they've done it and to make everybody understand how difficult it is for any community here to rise up, get their arms around our UDO and the planning process and the law and all these other things to engage effectively and we should in every instance open doors and reduce thresholds so that more communities can engage like Walltown and that when they've done it, we take what they've done seriously and I'm worried that with this Northgate thing it may not work out very well, but being pessimistic. So those are my comments and I would like to see us have joint recommendations about some of them especially if any of you agree with some of the things that I've said, I would certainly invite your support in any kind of form of motion that we may make. So thank you Mr. Chairman and thank thank you Grace and thank you to all the members of the staff. Thank you. You did have a question for the staff and so I want to give the staff an opportunity to offer any feedback. You're kind, thank you. Thanks Chair Busby. So yes, we went through all of the comments that were submitted from INC and appreciate the time that you all spent on a time frame that was challenging for everyone. There was a lot in what was shared that was in common with what we had heard from residents through other forms of engagement. So there might not have been exact language that you all used because we were pulling from resident language. So that definitely we saw a lot of commonalities in what was coming up in those conversations. There were a number of suggestions around the specific objectives that were observations that I think are important to have in mind as we're continuing to work towards policies. And there were some things that I think were actual policy recommendations that will be part of that basis for starting to work on drafting policies that are working towards those goals and objectives. And I think specifically around some of the objectives that were suggested were missing. We didn't necessarily see them as missing, but maybe had a difference of opinion about where they might fit in and if there are ways that we can strengthen some of the language. I think some of your comments this evening were getting at some of the ways that we could strengthen language in the existing objectives that get at some of the things like planning infrastructure, community planning, continuity, and then the living document, the final plan is definitely going to include mechanisms for updates. I know that's a concern with our existing plan that we've gone so long without significant consideration of the impacts. And that's really gotten us to a point in what's happening with development in our community that's really making us all really struggle. So that's definitely going to be part of the final plan. Great. Thank you for offering that guidance. Commissioner Baker, you are next. Thanks. So I just want to start with some of the things that I am pleased by with this process and the work that's been done so far. First of all, I mean, this is just a ton of work. I mean, no one can deny that this is so so much work. A lot of effort. And that's it's it's great to see it. You love to see it. And I love the work that has been done with the outreach team. We talked a lot at the beginning of this comp plan process a couple years ago about wanting to see a working group or a steering committee. And we were told no, that's not going to happen. But I think that the outreach team has essentially function like that. And so I am pleased to see that that's been the case. I'm also really impressed with the Spanish accessibility. That's just a lot. That is a lot of work to make it as accessible as it is to the Spanish speaking community. And so I mean kudos kudos to the folks making making that possible. Also, the the goal of carbon neutrality and making Durham a carbon neutral community, it just says it. There's there's no messing around. That is the goal. Carbon neutral community by 2050. That's a bold goal. I think in the first set of comments, or in the first version of of the goals and objectives, I actually read read through the entire document actually kind of felt like it wasn't being bold enough, except for the the the carbon neutral community by 2050, I thought was was was getting was getting us there. Also, in the first version, there were there were, it was a big, you know, big document, there was not a single time that the word walkable was used. And that has been added throughout the document. I don't think complete community, which is a really important concept is is mentioned in the document. Multigenerational community. That was not an original document that's been added. I think that's really important. Transit oriented development is not mentioned in the document. And I think that we should should focus on transit and transit oriented development and transit planning. You had mentioned a staff had mentioned the inclusion of growth management as a concept in the document. And I I must have missed it because I didn't see a lot of a lot of mention of growth management or managing growth. That is a really important concept. I hope that you'll double check and make sure that it is there. Complete streets is not mentioned at all. Interjurisdictional, regional, metropolitan, none of these are mentioned at all. Really, really important concepts in especially in the triangle, where we have a lot of centers of growth and activity. The word intentional, fantastic word, I love that word. It's used 28 times in the document. Someone got really excited with that word and used it all over. And I think that some of those could probably be replaced with with some other some other concepts, not just complaining about the language, but actual expansion of concepts. And same thing with the word innovative, which is just kind of like a difficult kind of abstract word that can sometimes actually kind of mean nothing. That one is used a lot. Parking is not mentioned in any objectives. And that's I think currently a major hindrance to sustainable and equitable development. And so I think that that's that's an important concept. And of course, I'm sure many of these things are going to be included in actions and policies. But I think that these are elevated concepts and worthy of being included in the goals and objectives. The concept of housing, plus transportation, so the cost of housing plus transportation, which is a really important concept in in planning, not just spending over 30% on of your income on housing, making cost burden, but the concept of spending over 45% of your income on housing and the transportation that used to get around. That's that's a really important concept. And I hope will be included in in the draft. I also think that getting very clear language about mock lengths and short blocks, I think connectivity is in there, but but block length and short blocks is is really important. And I would like to see that elevated to to the goal level. I want to second what has already been said about measurable metrics. I think that's absolutely critical. Cities and counties are doing that now all over the country. It wasn't something that we used to see in comp plans, but it's important for accountability. So for example, I would like to see, you know, x percent of residents live within a quarter mile park today so they can out walk there and get there and access green space. And then the goal is for x plus whatever percent of residents to be able to live within a quarter mile of park by 2035 by 2040 by 2015 and hold ourselves to that as we grow and change. It's a way of measuring progress and being accountable to ourselves. We're not if we're not succeeding, then that would show up in our in our metrics and objectives. I would like to see the concept of cooperative ownership, cooperative housing mentioned. It's not mentioned. I think it's a really important form of housing tenure so that we don't just have housing people renting and helping to pad the pockets of landowners. It's becoming increasingly larger of a problem around the country and in Durham as well. What else? I think that there needs to be more that's mentioned about new neighborhoods. You know, obviously talking about existing neighborhoods, existing communities is really important. But on this planning commission, our job is to look at giant new sprawl developments that come in that are unsustainable, that are not walkable, that are completely inaccessible by transit, that don't have a public open space, you know, that lack all of these things. And this is a really urgent problem. And and it needs we need to see Tom mentioned the word sea change. We need to see a sea change that needs to be evident and apparent in this document. And that's that's really a huge opportunity for a community. You know, it's difficult to change things that are already on the ground. It's a lot easier to build it right the first time. And I want to see that come through in this document. I will I can't I can't support what Tom Miller has said enough about community empowerment and community planning and completely changing the way that we do things in Durham, looking at Walltown as this example of kind of how this community that's incredibly resilient and hardworking and they've sunk all this volunteer all these volunteer hours and have not really been receiving I think the support the support that they need to be receiving from city from the from the plan department. And I think that that's a good example of something that is not working very well. It needs to change. Coming back to the draft, the glossary of terms includes a term food apartheid, which is a bold term. I've definitely heard food deserts. I like the term food apartheid. It sends a strong message. But then it's not actually included in any of the goals. So it's just kind of there floating around in the document not being applied anywhere. I would like to see it. I want to see bold statements like we're going to eliminate food deserts. These are these are really important. These are tangible things and they're actually possible. So we should at least at the very least achieve things that are possible. And that's that's a big one. So I would like to see that change. Right now, and I mentioned a little earlier, our city really functions just for cars.  Like if you want to get around on a daily basis by bike or by walking or by transit, like it just doesn't work out that well for you. It's really hard. It takes a really long time to get around by bus. If you're disabled, you know, it's going to take a really long time. You're going to have to rely on other people. You know, we often see people on really busy roads walking down the side of the road, you know, without without without sidewalks. And it's it's not just about the actual transportation infrastructure, which is itself a huge issue. It's also the built environment. And and so I think this document, you know, obviously there's going to be the future land use map. Obviously, we're going to see the implementation actions and the policies. But I think this document could do a little bit more to make it very clear that we want to see a and I'll use this term again, see change in the built environment and making it more walkable so that not just 4% of people living in this city are able to walk to work on a daily basis, but that most people are able to to walk to work. And that's going to take time and we have to change the way that we're doing things now because the way things are going now is not working. Process for this, I would like to see at least one joint session between the planning commission with city council. There's a huge disconnect between the planning commission and city council right now. We're just not seeing eye to eye. I think that we actually probably in reality agree on a lot of things, but our messages are not lining up. I think that if we work on things together, that we can actually accomplish a lot more. Obviously, we can't do that every month. We can't do that every other month, but we can do it every once in a while. And on a lot of plans, on a lot of comp plans that I've worked on, that has been a meeting that has occurred is is a joint session, at least one joint session between that both included planning commission and city council sitting together, working together, having conversations together. One thing I want to say is that the current comprehensive plan is antiquated and probably was the day it was adopted. It does include some not so useful goals and policies, but there's also a lot of really good goals and policies and even actions in it. And things, some of the good actions, implementation actions were actually never implemented.  That's something, you know, hopefully we can we can get done soon, maybe even this year or next year. But you know, just something that I that is always going on in the back of my mind is that there were good actions there are good actions that haven't been implemented. And I don't want to see that happen with this comprehensive plan. I want to see actions and outcomes. I want to see actual change result result from this comprehensive plan. Again, just want to emphasize what what Commissioner Miller said about the structures and engagement and empowerment, not just listening to people, but listening and acting and empowering them in ways that they can act. Town the town little town of Wake Forest down the road from us is right now as we speak doing both the comprehensive plan and doing a small area plan for an historically black community. It was a value to them. They did it. They are investing in it. And I think that that we can do we can do the same if and when we want to. And I think that might be it for me. I just I think that this is a really important document. I think this is a really important process. The subsequent processes that you all go through is really important. I have gotten my hopes up many times over the almost three years that I've been on the planning commission. And frankly, I've been burned several times. And so I don't want to get my hopes up with without thinking that I might be burned again.  And let's say Oh, the last thing I wanted to ask here is will we be informed? This is a question to staff. Will we be informed when you make changes to this document that are changes that that are will go forward eventually to city council? I think depending on how you'll make your recommendation today might inform our strategy for bringing your recommendations to the city council and the county commissioners. But regardless, we will absolutely keep you all in the loop about what's happening. I just don't want to make a statement about what we'll do without kind of knowing what the overall commission's perspective is on how we move forward. But absolutely there will be communication. Okay. Thank you for that. If we send you me and my fellow my fellow commissioners here, send you comments and things to incorporate. Are those going to be incorporated? So I think what we want to avoid just to be really honest here is that we don't at this point in the process change the way that community perspectives have shaped what's here. So I think depending on what there's a lot of things that folks have shared that I think are good tonight so far. But I don't want us to be making changes coming from this group that are not in alignment with what residents have said. So I think we need to look at what comes out of this conversation and we need to look at what we've heard.  And then looking at things to incorporate into edits is going to depend on an alignment between those things. Right. That's that's what I mean is, okay, is with a judgment call from like I'm not expecting you to just take everything that we say and incorporate in a document with with a judgment call. So I guess my question is, are you going to incorporate some of the things that you see as worthy of being incorporated between this meeting and the adoption hearing? Yeah, I think we're going to want to be really clear just with the elected officials. This is what was presented to the Planning Commission. Here are some things that could be modified to address some of the Planning Commission comments that that we think are in alignment with what residents have shared. Right. Yeah, cool. All right. That's all for me. Thanks. Thank you. So before we move to Commissioner Durkin, who is next, there are multiple commissioners who are looking to speak, which is great. That's the point. We're about to hit the two hour mark. So we are going to need to take our 10 minute break at around 730 or so. So just to flag that in advance, Commissioner Durkin, why don't we start with you? And then we can assess where we're at, but around 730 we'll want to be ready to take that break. Mr. Chair, is that fair to Aaron? I would hate to have a break in the middle. Well, that's why I wanted to give her the heads up. Is that is that where Aaron, we can't hear you, but does that work? Yeah, that's fine. Okay. Thanks. So I had a question. So I do think it's pretty clear that a lot of us Planning Commissioners are excited for the future steps that include actual metrics and action items and policies. And I think this is a really great start. And it's a good foundation to build all of that on and just gives the future phases of this more credence and and just a good place to start. I had a question about the engagement ambassadors. And I think from, I think that Vanessa Evans mentioned that maybe she is an engagement ambassador. Is that right? Is she still on the line? Is Mimi Kessler also an engagement ambassador? No, okay. Is Ms. Evans still around? We're going to keep rolling. It looks like she's still on the participant list. Are we allowed to can I ask her a question? I just was curious to know what her experience is like as an engagement ambassador. And if she felt like she was able to bring in voices from people who weren't comfortable or wouldn't be used to engaging in this kind of process. Yes, being able to speak with different community members. And not just in Bradtown but throughout Durham. In the work that we've been doing, you hear different people speaking. It's sad to say a lot of black people do not trust the city of Durham or the engagement that we are doing because we have been so disinvested and lied to for so long. And even with us trying to engage with them, it's like the process isn't going to work. It's just like hearing Tom in the beginning of the meeting saying what he said that he was disappointed. I feel the same way. I'm disappointed that we are not able to move forward with something that we know that needs to be done. It's not just me. It's many black and brown and indigenous people that we've spoken with who feel that their voices is not being heard. Do you feel like you're able to kind of bring their voices to staff and to the institutions where they're not typically heard? Yes. One way is through the surveys we've been doing. Other ways is just through us having our meetings and bringing back information from different conversations that we've had with members since COVID. But before COVID hit where we would have meetings like at Southern High School and other spaces like at Pearson Town School people were coming out. People were wanting to have their voices heard. COVID changed a lot. It flipped the table upside down. But although there is we were still living in times of a pandemic we still are able to gauge through Zoom and you know through our emails and communicating with community members in open spaces now that it's kind of like not wanting to say winding down but we're able to be a little bit more able to go out and be amongst each other. So yeah, people are still concerned about what's going to happen with the future of Durham and those who are like essential workers because even when we get to $15 an hour people are still going to be living like they're living on $7 an hour to be living in Durham because you know working with John from DataWorks with his data that has been given to us people in Durham need to be making between $25 and $35 an hour to live in Durham. If we're going to stay in the spaces that we're staying in the data also showed that in every black community the taxes went up 100 to 300 percent but our income didn't change but the taxes went up. So it's like those are burdens on top of burdens and when communities are not invested in it's not helping it only hurts and harms us more. And this is not just me speaking I'm speaking for people who have come to me and said why are we doing this if we're not if nothing's going to change. Well I'm really appreciative and I imagine that I'm not the only one on the planning commission that's appreciative of your time that you're taking and your role in this process and also that you're bringing the voices of the people who are not either comfortable or don't have time or for whatever myriad reasons are not engaging in the process directly that you get to be their voice because I think people trust you and your fellow engagement ambassadors as they should and I'm really happy that that's part of this process and I agree like there's no there's no reason that a lot of communities of color should trust the city of Durham I mean 147 has destroyed a very historic neighborhood and it's an image both metaphorical and literal that exists and are downloaded on a daily minute by minute kind of faces so I'm helpful that the work that's being put into having the community engaged in this process will start to heal from that in a way and I think it's important and I appreciate also in the goals and objectives that the shortcomings of past projects was stated decisively and it's not acknowledged it's not ignored so we can hopefully learn going forward and my follow question this is for Lisa and what the what is the role of the engagement ambassadors in the future phases about the plan I want to answer the question when she's finished well statement so we're working through what engagement is going to look like on the remainder of the plans but we definitely are planning to continue to work with engagement ambassadors where the way that it's been structured currently is you know a group of people that are kind of engaging folks on the same thing across the community in their communities we still think it's super important for residents to be engaging their fellow residents because of that lack of trust between staff and many folks in our community imagine that it's going to look different as we're getting geographic based so trying to find folks within a particular geographic area and working with them around you know the mapping of place types on the map for that community and looking at policies and things so we don't have that 100% figured out but those are all part of what we're planning to include as we move forward okay yeah I think that's very important I expect that the elected officials will echo that as well and Ms. Evans do you have another question or comment? This is a statement because Thomas said some earlier about like scrapping this particular thing but if we scrap it I know in talking with City Council they were saying that we were supposed to be doing through our engagement we're supposed to be doing not a small area plan but it changed it to a focus area plan so if we scrap it that means that it's like everything that we've worked for wouldn't go forward so I'm just having concerns from all the work that we've done and the engagement that we've done and if it falls through that means that the city's not going to be what we're working with with Lisa is not going to this is going to feel so it's like Constance and I and Benita putting our faces out there for everybody and we're telling them that the city's going to work with them but then if they turn around and don't it's like everybody who's been we've been talking to what they say it's actually hey I don't even want to say it but it's coming to fruition and I don't want to see that happen I want to see there be space I don't either yeah I want to see spaces for everybody and Leah I agree thank you again so much for all the time you're putting into this and I just have one other quick comment and then we'll be perfectly in time to take a break 730 just on the comments from individual commissioners personally I would rather have those comments be in our the written comments that we submit to the city council and border county commissioners with our recommendations I just kind of worry for submitting individual comments to planning staff that they're going if they're incorporated they're seen as comments from the planning commission and they may not reflect us as a body versus us individually so I I prefer those comments to be in what we submit with our recommendation to the elected officials that was it thanks Commissioner Durkin and you were right on time so it's 730 and we are going to take a 10 minute break for our closed captioning staff to be able to have a stretch break we'll be back in 10 minutes and we'll pick up our commissioner comments welcome back everyone we are in the middle of commissioner questions and comments as we move toward a vote and so I'm just working through the commissioners and next is commissioner cease thank you and I just want to say a couple of things that are in their entirety very supportive of everything that has occurred the investment in time that the community members have made in this process and certainly the investment and care that has been given to the process by staff and you know I've had some certainly some questions about the process that are similar to things we've heard from other commissioners and some of the members of the public who spoke mainly revolving around timing and what happens when after this meeting tonight and what else happens in the process having said that I have a pretty high level of comfort with where we are and with what we're doing and with what we're being asked to do tonight and what we're being asked to consider because it's the draft goals and objectives that's these are goals and objectives and obviously there are a lot of subsequent steps that will address things like metrics things like specific policy statements etc but this is really a moment in history I think in Durham that is that is worth celebrating from the standpoint of really elevating voices that haven't been part of processes like this for a long period of time if ever and maintaining number one acknowledging that number two embracing it and number three maintaining the energy and sense of having been heard is a really important consideration for how we progress now when I say progress I mean how we move through this process so this is draft goals and objectives I'm gonna start with just two things that are specific that are problematic from my perspective down to a very detailed level but in the grand scheme of things they're minimal and then I'll progress to some things that I think are important to say that about my own thoughts from reviewing the document and some responses to some of the things we've heard so the two things and this is going from hopefully constructive criticism working to a real enthusiastic enthusiastic endorsement of what we've been presented and the two things that jumped out at me that I felt weren't needed to be addressed literally the first sentence in the sense of place goal the statement that by the 2050 the history and culture of Durham will be fully told and celebrated and I think we're all I'm not a historian but I've dealt a lot and taught a lot with urban history and history is an evolving thing and I think we need to acknowledge that I don't think history will be fully told in 2050 I think there's another way of expressing what we're after with that sentiment so that's one specific observation the second specific observation or question was pertaining to the statement that was actually dropped from I think it was the creating varied housing a creative and varied housing which is on page 11 of the comparative document the side-by-side comparisons under creative and varied housing solutions for the objective I don't have a problem with what's written in the new document but they're what was dropped I'm curious about and that was the reference to we need rules for development that allow for new and creative housing options in other words a very specific reference to and Commissioner Sees we lost you there commenting on rules for development is Commissioner Sees we we have lost you your feed so we'll give it a moment to see if we get you back Mr. Chair President it looked like he accidentally dropped out of the meeting may have been his internet connection yeah I'm going to give him just a moment and see if he's rebooting and rejoining us why don't we we will circle back and Vice Chair Kenchin you're next in the queue if you want to make your comments and if if he rejoins us we'll make sure that you get to finish and then we can circle back to him if that works for you yeah thank you Chair now I'll be brief I want to echo what Commissioner Durkin and Commissioner Sees have said I want to just thank the staff and the folks who were engagement ambassadors for this process you guys done a great job I'm really impressed with what I see here and I want to echo something that Ms. Constance Wright said also you know one thing that has really concerned me about Durham is you know the uneven development almost the banana collectors I've seen and throughout our city you know you drive around you see just entire communities where there's no investment and and I'm just thankful that's that's changed and I know there's lots of distrust right now that's why I think what staff has done for the past year or so is so remarkable despite the fact that it's a pandemic you know going out to engage with people and hear from people and I'm pleased to hear that folks have been pleased with the the process and and that we're hearing from them that's so important so I think we're reversing a lot of things happening in the past I'm hopeful you know I don't know what's going to happen I'm hopeful and I'm thankful for staff and for the engagement ambassadors for really digging down deep and and putting this together so there's things that could be improved obviously always but I think it's a great start and I applaud the staff I applaud the engagement ambassadors and I'm excited that we that we turn the corner in Durham and I want to start to see some investment in places that haven't had it for a long time so I'm just full of hopes just want to say thank you to those who have been involved and I look forward to seeing how this plays out thank you chair thank you vice chair kenshin like mr cut rate you're up next thank you chair buzzby again I'll go all of the congratulatory talk about sort of getting where we are the hard work that's been done so far I guess I'll start with just an emphasis or re-emphasis some of the comments that have been made I won't elaborate on them as people already have but one of the most important things for me as I look at these goals are that a lot of them aren't the smart goals if you will right so looking for metrics that's been said I just want to emphasize that that's critically important as we think about accountability you know in three four or five years whatever we've done has this plan been effective all of those questions will be answered I agree with Tom Miller commissioner Miller as it relates to giving the residents voices sort of the ordinary people if you will voices in this process outside of their opportunity to respond to a specific case that's been put in front of them so I agree with that we're all coming that's diverging from what everyone else has said is around the definition of equity that we have here it's really soft it doesn't speak to centering the the people the voiceless if you will it doesn't speak to centering them you know it talks about potential opportunities none of those things are geared towards actually moving us to an equitable environment if we're not going to take a hard and fast position on centering some of the underserved community that we have and so to me that creates a flaw or a disconnect in the entire document as we talk about equity throughout the document we're not going to center those people that don't have sidewalks and we deliberate and say we have a group of uh we have a set of funds this group doesn't have sidewalks this group does we have to be deliberate and say we need to move funds from the advantage group say explicitly saying no to the advantage group saying yes to the disadvantage group we're not taking that position and we're not truly trying to create an equitable environment so that's my main comment is is that our sense of equity may be a little soft it's not flawed as we navigate and think about this document and that's all I have thank you Commissioner Covray Commissioner Armando Lea thank you chair I'm going to start off by talking about some of the things that I really like about the document and what we've been presented with tonight I first off just again want to echo all of the thanks and praise to staff and the engagement ambassadors for all of the work y'all have done it's an incredible amount of work y'all have done and I can see the intentionality off taken and crafting the document even reading the tract changes version of this document you can see I can see how you are being very intentional about the words you're using and I really appreciate that I also appreciate just like how this document is framed if you look at the old comprehensive plan it kind of like has an intro and then it jumps right into like land use housing and then this laundry list of issues and to me the thing that is notable about this document is it grounds itself in the history of Durham as best it can and just to shoot few short pages and then it grounds itself in community engagement before moving on to some of the issues that are important for folks I think that framing for the document is really useful and will be helpful moving forward I also think I'm impressed at how explicit y'all are in the document about historic acts of racism, systemic inequality I think that is very rarely found in government documents in general and I appreciate that that is being pushed forward by the planning department some of the other things I want to appreciate I like that as you go through the document you don't see the chapter number with each goal because that can create this implicit like this is the most important thing to us I think the old comprehensive plan does that where you start with land use is number one and then housing is number two but when you're reading through this document as it currently is you don't see that and I appreciate there's no ranking in that I also appreciate the fact that we're connecting some of this work to mental and physical health that we're looking more at the social determinants of health and not just siloing ourselves into land use but looking at all of the broader ways that we can influence can influence people's lives I appreciate the mention of a 15-minute city I like that how that concept is explicitly written in there and I also I was thankful and surprised to see that the issue of property tax assistance was mentioned in the updated version and I'm happy to see that in there I have some high-level thoughts that came to my mind as I was reading this and I allude to these and not kind of the last meeting these are not necessarily thought-structured at the planning department they're directed just at the larger structure that we're in and it's more just a note for us to all like remain involved in the different systems and structures around the planning department that can either help or hamper this work so first off like these goals and objectives are like everyone's mentioned are only going to be as successful as how they are implemented and that often comes down to the budgeting around them and the funds that are allocated to be able to make these goals happen and as Vanessa mentioned earlier in this meeting we're in a situation right now where low-income individuals are paying a higher percentage of their income on property taxes and high-income households people in Durham do not pay their fair share in taxes and this is often this is because of systemic practices and how homes are valued and we we need to be providing property tax low-income individuals and I begin with that because I want to say we also need to be raising property taxes we need to have some more funding for our government to be able to create this vision of Durham we don't make it to this great vision of 2050 without paying a couple extra dimes for it and so that means that those of us with more means will need to suck it up and pay higher taxes and those of us who have less means need to receive assistance from the local governments especially the county commissioners and I also thought that I can't come to this meeting tonight without just like mentioning the fact that our state government has hampered us in so many ways both through policies that they do not allow us to implement but also through decisions such as spending 850 million tax dollars to bring Apple to Research Triangle Park just across the border from Durham with an average income of $186,000 which is more than five times the median income of Durham resident those forces are things that planners end up having to deal with because that influences our housing prices that's going to influence our transportation systems it's going to influence the way that we've developed in southeast Durham the pressures are already facing there and so I raise this to zoom out for a moment and encourage us all to remain involved and vigilant not just in the specific work and the good work that's happening here tonight but in the larger systems and structures that are potentially hampering our work apart from that I did have a couple of questions one is around kind of like organization and organizational responsibility the first is I'm kind of curious you all mentioned having to partner with other departments to implement portions of the plan and I'm curious in your presentation tonight you specified some of the departments that would participate in that I'm curious kind of like the communication lines going there are is the plan a department kind of like leading on that and reaching out to other departments is the onus on the department that you're reaching out to to kind of like take a lead on that like how is that by the communication working and also is there going to be like some kind of page matrix table that points residents to which departments have responsibility on some of these goals and objectives they're great questions so we are taking responsibility around communicating what we've heard through the work that we're doing that we know is larger than just what the planning department can impact and implement to you know whether it's other departments in the city and county or other agencies like Durham Public Schools sharing what we've heard not just the goals and objectives but we also pointing people to the source of where those came from the input that we've heard so that folks as they're thinking about these things a lot of what we've heard in conversations so far is that you know with in particular a conversation with parks and recreation department for the city and with the Durham Public Schools folks a lot of this is in line with what they've heard and what they're starting to try and work towards and so one of the ways that we see our work functioning is to point to through our comprehensive plan work as we're sharing that out through our website and everything point to the policies or engagement that's happening what whatever those other partners are doing towards those goals to encourage folks to get involved to understand what's happening with them and for kind of that community accountability around that and so yes we envision that we'll have a way of kind of tracking who are we talking to around this in order to try and work towards these goals and what have we heard so far about what they're working on and who can you talk to to get more information that's all part of kind of what we're envisioning as part of that communication awesome thank you and then a lot has been said about the developing metrics for each of the goals and objectives tonight and I'm curious I've read a lot of strategic plans where they have a set of metrics but they don't kind of go the next step and say okay here's what happens if we don't reach these metrics or here's who who's like on the spot if we don't reach these metrics and so I'm kind of curious about that accountability piece what that will look like and the plan hey I'm what you are thinking on that I think that's a really great point the accountability piece and kind of understanding the cost of not accomplishing these things is really important and I think that's definitely something that we can work on incorporating as part of that work but is part of the body of work that we're kind of filling out the full scope of right now and we'll plan to share both with you all and with the larger community shortly as Kayla mentioned earlier but we'll keep that in mind for sure awesome and then so okay I have like a practical question when is the next time we'll hear from y'all so y'all gave us that lovely schedule but then there's going to be some more work happening and I'm curious like if you have a timeline that's like the next time you'll come back to a planning commission meeting or we'll have a retreat or anything like that so the next time a formal presentation would be planned as I mentioned was in September but I think having conversation with you all around the things that we're filling out the scope for right now would be really helpful we haven't talked about that internally or with your chair or anything to figure out how that should happen but I think that that would be really beneficial for all of us in our trying to work together thank you and then I have one last comment and I don't like to disagree with Commissioner Miller but I do have one point that I think I have a different perspective on and it's really just the beginning framing of the document I know Commissioner Miller raised having this kind of like high level county geographic view laid out at the beginning I think it's important to include that perspective in the document I personally prefer the or I I appreciate the way it is now where it's kind of centering the human experience at the beginning of it so I don't think it's necessarily an either or there but I like the prioritization on how people's lived experiences are there I just wanted to raise that those are all of my comments thank you all yeah and I'm looking forward to seeing how this gets moved forward into some action items thanks thanks Commissioner I'm Mandolia Commissioner Cease we were sorry to to lose you earlier we are glad you are back and we want to give you the floor to continue your comments clearly my suggestions were not viewed favorably by the technical staff here in my own house or somewhere else I'm not sure but we'll leave it so yes literally those were my only two specific criticisms that I was speaking about and I'll pick up then with with Commissioner Amandola's comment just now and that is I only heard one well I don't think we ever got the second one I'm not here the second okay so I was talking to a blank screen the first was the comment the reference to history and the second was just under the creative and varied housing solutions objective there was a reference in the prior version to rules we did get that I'm sorry yeah that was the second one and and maybe allow is too strong of a word but I did like the reference to rules because that is directly in the purview of the minutiae of what this board is tasked with dealing with on a regular basis so those were the can I share real quick Tony the reason for that so we we think absolutely we need to be looking at the rules as part of this but one of the issues with the current comprehensive plan is this kind of idea that we're creating a UDO homework list we don't want to confine ourselves to we're only looking at this through changing the regulations we want to be able to look more broadly but that will absolutely be one of the things that we think we want to look at that's a good explanation thank you for that and I really good explanation yeah but being one that's immersed in the rules on a daily basis I'm I applaud any place they can be can be referenced because they are so problematic in so many ways but but I'm not I'm not suggesting it has to be that way it's just my opinion in that one point everything else that I have to say in a way dovetails again with the last comments commissioner closed with and that is that I really applaud the way this is oriented towards the lived experience of places and the lived experience and and the historical experience of that is expressed through the voices that are captured here and I think that's really powerful I think that's exactly what would be most beneficial within the draft goals and objectives as part of this process it's a way to elevate and and to kind of crystallize the the praise that's been afforded to the engagement process to date is is is present in this document and I and I think it's important to to to be cognizant of that as we're considering you know our steps tonight and how and as council and the board of commissioners considers matters going forward a couple of just general comments then the transportation goal and the specific objectives that are articulated in there I I I just want to applaud the the specific wording in each of those objectives there's there's some repetition but there's repetition that's essential to kind of shaping the public spaces shaping the neighborhood shaping the the ways in which people experience and go about their daily lives and I think that's what this this whole process that we're engaged in right now should be about and that comes through very clearly in the document so I'm very supportive of that I'm also supportive of kind of the balance that's represented between the goals and objectives or you just look at how the number of of the concerns or the specific objectives are distributed across the different categories you know I think just sheer in sheer numbers the preponderance of the the objectives are squarely within kind of the purview of what a planning department and planning commission should be should be addressing not to say that the others are less important but I think there's a really good balance to to how the weight just in words alone is is distributed across the document distributed across the goals and objectives and I think that's that's important one kind of comment that that we heard some concerns about tonight both from commissioners and and others is just this the issue of neighborhood engagement and how that is is captured going forward given that we have both a model engagement process I would call it that that we're immersed in and we have some other engagement processes we've had failures in terms of community voices and I think an important point to make is that simply outlining ways in which neighborhoods have a more specific voice in the planning process and in land use decisions is a bit of a quandary with regards to the equity question and it manifests itself here in Durham frequently it manifests itself in many municipalities where there are large spreads between economic socioeconomic categories within the same municipality and so I think what we have within this document is a very clear emphasis on equity it's a very clear emphasis on elevating voices that have been left out of the process in years past and decades past in acknowledging in very specific terms the ways in which diversity and accessibility and equity should in principle and should in practice be addressed as part of this comprehensive plan and the things that spin out of it and spin out of this process and I'm not only am I comfortable with the way that it is articulated at precedent I think to to your concern Lisa about making sure that this document represents what voices what the voices that have been part of the process to date have stated I think that's a very valid concern but I think this is just one of those specific ways that if we begin to give more emphasis to speaking about neighborhood interests there is a risk in which that privileging ends up privileging those who have already been privileged by you know by a lot of different systematic issues and so I I think the way it is addressed in that regard is is squarely on target with kind of what we've heard from council what we hear from the community I think it's it addresses the matter very well by elevating these concerns but not you know not empowering those who are already embedded in systems of power so that's one general comment that kind of last comment or two and this dovetails with some of the things that we've heard from those who's joined us to convey their experiences of being part of the engagement process and being ambassadors and we're hugely appreciative of that that's a right an incredible contribution to our community that that folks have participated in that way and or coming here to to share their personal experiences as part of that process because that's that's how that's the only way we can begin to get a sense of what it's like from a personal perspective even being there doesn't doesn't kind of convey that and and those voices matter and and so those voices as represented in this document read read clearly I think it you know it represents Durham's aspirations it represents Durham's history it's not flowery language at all it's also not planning language Commissioner Baker gave us a really good list of a lot of things that are often in comprehensive plans and that are certainly often part of policies and and I suspect there's general agreement around many of those if not all of those things that that you articulated Commissioner Baker but I think this document is is a different thing serving a different purpose and and I think it has a chance to serve it really well and by that I mean to provide a real reference point for how both in a professional sense planning staff practitioners in a political sense how elected officials and in a community sense how neighborhoods and and you know respective groups around our community get a sense of of what's important in the planning conversation and to me that's that's um there's there's a lot of powerful potential in this and so I I wholeheartedly endorse the direction that this has headed and I wholeheartedly endorse these as draft objectives for the comprehensive plan so those are my comments thank you Commissioner Sees I don't see any other commissioners who have asked to speak and I just wanted to take a moment to really second what I've heard from so many of my fellow commissioners about the the real positives in this vision document and what heartens me the most is the public hearing that we had earlier tonight hearing from community members many who have been deeply engaged through this process and who were who came tonight to say I believe that we're heading in the right direction and this document is is encapsulating what I've shared and so I'm going to plan to support it I do want to remark that I did think we got some good comments from the Appearance Commission the the Environmental Affairs Board as well I think some of those got captured between the first and the second draft I will mention that in my remarks I thought they had some additional good feedback that that was coming from the community and other bodies in our community and then I think the biggest challenge is and we've heard it from many of us tonight this is the easy part I mean I think we have we have a vision that I hope will get approved by our governing bodies on June 15th but then we have to do really hard work to make sure that this vision becomes a reality that we move toward that vision and that we have the goals and then we set the benchmarks and that this becomes a a guiding set of rules of the road so this this planning commission and our community will engage very differently with how development moves us forward I know the staff is up to that task I know our community is up to that task and I look forward to being a part of it on this commission and as a citizen of this community so anyway with that said I will be happy to entertain a motion and yeah please go ahead commissioner Durkin I can make a motion if everybody's ready for it go for it I make a motion to send the draft goals and objectives for the conference plan to the governing bodies of the city council and the board of county commissioners and also encourage my fellow commissioners to submit any written comments they would like to regarding that recommendation so I can the motion is for a favorable recommendation to the governing bodies thank you I heard a second but I'd missed who it was I'll second okay thank you commissioner Cease so moved by commissioner Durkin seconded by commissioner Cease before we vote I see commissioner Miller has his handrails and other other commissioners may also want to make comments before we have the roll call vote commissioner Miller so I have no objection to what's in the document but I can't vote to send it forward as long as it envisions after the comprehensive planning process is completed when we approve the final thing a relationship between the developers planners and and the community that is the same relationship we have today commission members Cease talked about privilege in the process the privilege in the process is 95 percent reposed in the development community what little is left may be unevenly distributed among the rest of the community but that isn't where the that isn't where the problem lies and I would vote for this if there was a an objective in the community relationships section or perhaps change language in the existing objectives that envisioned a new relationship among those parties where the community outside the development community has an a serious ongoing relationship with the planning department so that we balance out these competing interests and so without that I'm I have to vote no however in my comments I will make it clear that I would would have voted yes voted yes if that had been present thanks mr. Miller that's that's good clarification other commissioners any other comments commissioner moe did you just raise your hand again no okay okay I see no additional debate on the motion we will have the roll call vote please yes banker yes busby yes Cameron yes cut right yes okay Durkin yeah kinship yes MacGyver yes Miller no Cease yes and Williams yes it motion carries 10 to 1 then we'll still need a motion for the excused absences for commissioners Morgan and Lowe mr. Chairman I move that we excuse the absences of commissioner commission members Morgan and Lowe second thank you commissioner Miller and seconded by commissioner Baker and we'll have the roll call vote okay and medallia yes Baker yes busby yes Cameron yes cut right yes Durkin yeah kinship yes MacGyver yes Miller yes Cease yes and Williams yes okay thank you is unanimous thank you before we sign off for the evening just two quick things one I certainly want to continue to hear from all of you but definitely heard tonight the interest and I think it's right that we we would still like to be engaged with the staff as this works its way through the process so I don't expect we will be getting any updates until after the June 15th joint meeting of the city and the county but I definitely would hope that we would be continuing to get updates and work with the staff to move this forward in the next steps before we get to September so just want to make that commitment to all of you and encourage all of you to share any thoughts on how we might want to continue to move the work forward but I appreciate that the staff has offered to keep working with us on that and then the second thing is Grace if you just want to give us a heads up for the next meeting we're back to monthly meetings again so it's only in two weeks but we only have one May meeting so our regular meeting is on May 11th and just anything you can share with us and you're muted sure yeah yep hang on one second so we have got for you in May it's not a very it's not as heavy as an agenda as we had anticipated so you are getting off rather easy in May we'll have cases that you will review 405 TW Alexander and courtyards at Doc Nichols and those packets will be going out in the next day or so so you should see the packets and the online information very soon great thank you question is the courtyards at Doc Nichols a case we have seen before it is not there's a lot of courtyards cases it's this is a different one that's in the basin though it is thank you great okay thanks Grace you said we got it we got it easy in May and that feel that's that's a music to my ears after March and April well it's just two items I don't know that they're necessarily easy but there's two items that makes sense no promises all right anything else for tonight all right well thanks everybody good work and this meeting is adjourned right