n our more urbanized areas. That was a great way to not answer your question. Yeah, I appreciate that. I think there's a, I can think of at least a little precedent. We required the developers across from Durham ID to make that open space there publicly accessible as part of, I can't remember if it was a rezoning or a... It's required of the design district zoning there. It's a requirement of the base zoning. Yeah. But in this case, we did something else where they actually had to move the open space outside of their, whatever they're planning to building internal there into an outside public park sort of on the outskirts of their property. So let's say that the small area plan made recommendations about transportation and sidewalks. Thinking about Olive Branch Road and Shin Page Road and Leesville Road. And what would be, well, let's just take Leesville and Olive Branch. How long would it be before we could anticipate any changes out there, given the constraints that Council Member Reese mentioned? So I'm gonna defer to my colleague, Bill Judge, and give him time to get his camera on and join us. But I will say that, the big challenge is that these roads are state roads. And so the city doesn't control them. It's when a developer proposes development for their frontage, we can require that they meet our standards. But there's a lot of gaps in between, right? And if those gaps aren't annexed and thereby giving the city an avenue to do something with them, then there's really no way to bring these up to speed. I will tell you that on the wake side, what Raleigh ended up doing as it grew on Leesville Road is once it had enough critical mass of neighborhoods, the same exact thing happened, they actually passed a transportation bond and did an incredible work modernizing Leesville Road. There is a marked difference when you enter the city of Raleigh limits on Leesville Road. But that's how they were able to do it. It took something large like that to effectuate that change. But I'll defer to Mr. Judge. Thank you. Bill Judge, transportation. Can you clarify exactly the question again? Sorry. Sure, Mr. Judge. So if we're doing a small area plan and it might recommend some transportation, strengthening of the transportation network, you know, could recommend improving the roads, could recommend adding sidewalks. And when I think about Leesville Road and Olive Branch Road, I'm wondering what is a reasonable timetable that you could expect work like that to be done after a small area plan was approved? Yes, so as Ms. Young indicated, I think one of the challenges would be the city limits and the annexations and piecemeal. So certainly as developments are built, they're required to build along their frontage, but it leaves those gaps. Assuming we're able to resolve the issue of completing or completing those gaps and bring them into the city limits so that the city could construct and maintain those sidewalks, it's typically gonna take probably about a minimum probably close to five years, three to five years to go out and do the engagement with the community, do the planning, design, right away, construction. So construction could start on the early end that at about three years, but more like closer to five before they'd be completed. So then we had all the funding and we're ramping forward, trying to get that done as quickly as possible, which is obviously a big assumption. And the funding would be, and so how does it relate to the fact that it's a state road? The, I mean, I'm assuming that this would be either a local area administered project that either the city would be funding it if we're waiting on NCDOT to fund it through a roadway widening or complete streets policy then obviously the funding can be even more challenging. There's gonna be very few opportunities to get funding through NCDOT for this type of project. So timing is not that much different but just the funding sources much more scarce. Thank you. Yeah. And then, and maybe this is from Mr. Kaltra. Planning commissioner Miller had comments about the open space corridor and placing amenities and storm work facilities in the open space corridor. What are our usual practices in that regard? Well, this is an interesting one because we don't see this very often. This area of East Durham is one that has these wildlife quarters within it and a lot of natural heritage areas. And the East Durham open space plan it does put into place that those areas should be protected and that there should be limited types of activity placed in those. It does identify that greenways can be placed within those stream profile corridors. It also talks about if there are transportation crossings they should be designed in ways so that the culverts could be built to allow for wildlife movement through those but there's very other little language to dictate that other types of improvements should be placed in those quarters. They talk about a 300 foot wide corridor on either side of the stream bank so that those areas are protected for wildlife. Ms. Young, did you wanna comment on that? I did, I just wanted to kind of put a plug in for a project that we're also working on simultaneously along with the COMP plan which is one of the challenges that we have with current open space plans is that they were never implemented in terms of ordinance requirements. So we have this really important kind of policy but no concrete rules about how it gets implemented. And so where you all will actually be seeing hopefully later this year a series of text amendments to essentially codify and put in practice the things with clear standards that are identified in open space plans such as this one. So that's the reason why we don't have clear standards because they were never developed. So we're doing that now. I just wanted to explain and give a little framing behind that. Thank you. And so will those text amendments, how do you anticipate those upcoming text amendments would treat an open space corridor with stormwater facilities and other amenities? It's more than open space, it's a wildlife corridor. Yeah, and I will say that one of the things that we're gonna be looking at is kind of comparing. So these are what I would consider enhanced corridors, right? They're beyond typical stream buffers. I will say that typically in stream buffers there are some minor intrusions that are allowed. And so one of the big tests that we have to do is to go back and kind of double check these plans and see if these are areas, if we still believe, because they're in this area, I don't think there's been a lot of degradation of the natural environment, but in some others there may have been because there's been some other areas with sensitive features that have had a lot more development than this. So double check the integrity and then see if we can have kind of a set of one size. It's all regulations or if we need to have different ones depending on how much degradation has happened where we would allow some intrusions versus not. So my guess and not knowing kind of where we'll land yet is that the purpose of this type of preservation is conservation, it's to be conservative and likely we would land in a more conservative place than we are today. More conservative in the sense that we would be more limiting of what could be the wildlife corridor. Less intrusions, yes. Thank you. I'm sorry to keep asking these questions that make you conject, make you, is that a word conject? Project out into the future, but appreciate your attempts to make your best guess. Thank you so much, more than your best guess, your best predictions. Okay, yeah, I'll have a few comments and I'm not really sure yet exactly where I am. It's a five minute drive from 920 Sharon Road, which is the next item on our agenda. To 1607 Olive Branch Road. And my strong expectation, the Planning Commission approved that 920 Sharon Road about 11 to one vote. My strong expectation is after we take a pause, after this item, we will probably come back and approve that item. It's hard for me to imagine saying that we're gonna put a moratorium on when we're about to approve that item five minutes away. And the one we just approved in many ways has very similar circumstances to the one we're talking about now. It's smaller, you mean the big difference is size here. I do think that the issue of, do we have enough staff in our planning staff is we just got a new city manager and we're gonna have to throw that one at her. I don't think we solved that by deciding about whether or not a moratorium is a good idea. But I do think we hear you. And we got a thumbs up from our city manager. So yeah, that's a whole other issue and a very important issue. We don't want you to work till 11 o'clock at night, although it sounds like tonight you're making us work till 11 o'clock. I am troubled by the stormwater, by what's going to be in the wildlife corner. And I think that that is an important concern. I think that waiting for the small area plan won't really, it will be good and it will help guide us but what's gonna happen as a result of the small area plan much of what can happen isn't going to happen for a long time. Sidewalks, street improvements, those kinds of things. And that no moratorium is gonna last that long for the years that that's gonna take. I think that's just a reality we face. These are state roads. And also colleagues, I would ask you if we pass an equitable and sustainable infrastructure bond, would the first place that we fund sidewalks be Leesville Road or Olive Ranch Road? I get that that's what Raleigh does but I don't really think that that's what Durham does. I've felt satisfied by the applicant's answers about the graveyard. It would have been, I'd be happier if someone from the family was here to tell us that. I am a bit troubled by that, so still a little torn. And I thought the Mayor Pro Tem, Council Member Caballero were making good points and asking good questions about what this area is going to be like, what is suitable here. And what I heard from Ms. Young is that this is an area where even after this plan would be completed, this is an area that will probably be best suited for those entity residential. And that's also important for me. I weigh that against the fact that we are putting a whole lot of housing out here and the infrastructure is not great. But I'm driving out there and, I've driven out there, I really made it my mission this week to go out there several times and here's what I see on those roads. I wasn't out at rush hour. Well, actually that's not true. I was out at rush hour one time, but here's what I see, no cars. I don't see any cars there. It's just, you know, it's not, I know that there are times at rush hours when I'm sure that those roads are pretty stacked up. That's not, we don't have tremendous traffic problems on those roads right now. Not at the times I've been out there, not in the past and not this time. So I'm weighing all these things and look forward to hearing any final comments from my colleagues, Councilman Frim. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, your line of questions just made me think of a few more questions before. I just wanted to know if on the side of having a small area plan in place, if it was possible to expand in specific areas a sidewalk plan or a sidewalk kind of requirements so it wasn't limited to the frontage because of a specific small area plan acknowledging that there were gaps in the development that was occurring. So I'll ask Mr. Judge again to join me, but my understanding, you know, the city has a sidewalk plan. Again, part of the issue is whether or not a street is a city street or not that we can apply our plan to. But there are also some limitations in terms of state law and case law about not imposing on a private development the cost or the burden of infrastructure, for instance, things like sidewalks that are not directly related to the development that they're doing. So that's something that we have to be careful with. But Mr. Judge, if you have anything you'd like to add? Yeah, Bill Judge Transportation, Ms. Shun covered most of that. I mean, we do have sidewalk payment and lieu funds. Occasionally where developers are unable to build sidewalk that we could look at prioritizing to areas like this. Unfortunately, those funds are relatively limited. Usually if they're not constructing sidewalk, it's primarily because there's major environmental features or other costs associated with it. So often even the payment and lieu funds aren't adequate to sort of fill in those gaps, but beyond that, it really just comes down the prioritization with the limited sidewalk funding we have, whether that's through city sources, state federal sources where we get a lot of the federal funds for a lot of our sidewalk projects, where to best prioritize those across the city. And then just one additional question in that same context. If there was open space that was donated or made available for public use, is there a way to define that use to like a rec center or a childcare facility or a pre-K facility? And that's something that could be part of a committed element on a development plan if it was proffered as part of a development plan. Thank you. I just wanted to make sure that my colleagues were clear on just how much could be added with a small area plan. And I appreciate your sharing. Thank you. Thank you, council member. Other questions or comments? Mayor Schultz, this is Neil Gaucho. I was wondering if there would be an applicant to address the council. If there would be an opportunity for the applicant to address the council again. Sure, Mr. Gaucho, go ahead. So now would be the appropriate time. Sure. Yeah, so a couple of things that we've been listening to the conversation and discussing on the side while we can do to address some of this. And one of the things we heard is that there is a need for open space out in this area, specifically public open space. So one of the things the applicant would be willing to do here would be, because the current commitment is for the applicant to dedicate a hundred foot wide easement to the city for a greenway or to construct the 30 foot wide greenway. And the applicant in this case will be, if it is important to counsel, which seems like it is based on the conversation, we'll be willing to just commit to building the 30 foot greenway, which is a public greenway on the, I believe it's on the open space and recreation plan for the city. So that is something that the applicant would be willing to do. And I also wanted to just revisit the grave site item from earlier. There isn't any family members here, or there aren't any family members here that can speak to it. But I will say, I wanted to, I think I, what I said earlier, I think was a little bit confusing. And I didn't mean to imply that the family ever suggested that what they were trying to do was put all the family members together. The research that we do have on this topic indicates that there are certificates which suggest that the people are buried in the May Family Cemetery. It's unclear which one of these two locations will be considered the May Family Cemetery, because both of them are plausible. I also did misspeak earlier. I said that the matriarch and one of her sons is buried at the Maplewood Cemetery. It's actually the matriarch and six of her children are buried at the Maplewood Cemetery. And there are six known grave sites at this location on this property. So the idea would be to move the six known grave sites from this property to the Maplewood Cemetery with the rest of the family. The current family members that have been consulted with are, I mean, there's no other way to put it. They don't know the people who are buried. They are far removed from those family members. But they were in agreement with the suggestion that it would be better for these family members graves to be in a graveyard which is permanently maintained. So I hope that helps clear up the discussion around the grave site. Mr. Galsh, what about, what is the level of necessity for the developer to keep the stormwater facility and other amenities inside the wildlife corridor? Oh, yeah. So that's another thing that we did discuss. The stormwater facility, I'm sorry, not amenity, stormwater facilities inside the wildlife corridor. And I can let Tim speak to this, but they don't actually pose any harm to the wildlife at all. And in fact, the stormwater facilities are used by wildlife as habitat and for, that is an area that they can travel across. So the stormwater facilities don't exactly pose any kind of threat to the ability of that 300 foot corridor to remain a wildlife corridor. That having been said, I don't think, well, I'll let Tim speak to it because he was looking into what it would take to move the stormwater ponds outside of the 300 foot wildlife corridor. I'm gonna make another suggestion and I'm gonna ask my colleagues how they feel about this. Sure. You all have been, I don't wanna do this, that's what we're doing right now on the fly. I think these are important matters that need to be addressed. I know that would be important to me as I make my decision on this and I'm not interested in hearing some kind of quick and dirty solution to it. I'm gonna suggest to my colleagues that we keep the public hearing open and that you all come back to us in a period of time, a month or whenever the manager or Ms. Young would like to suggest. I think we'll wanna pick a date certain tonight but that would be my preference. I wanna, first though, before we do that, ask my colleagues how do you all feel about that? I see a couple of thumbs. I think we have mostly, we got all thumbs. So Ms. Young or manager Page, would you all like to suggest a date that in the area of a month when this could come back to us? I would suggest in terms of working with the applicant and having time to turn the materials back around at least a two-cycle delay, preferably a three-cycle delay would work even better. Give us just a little bit more time to work with to get agenda items updated and back in the system. All right, a three-cycle delay then would put this to the first meeting in May, is that correct? Yes. Okay, so we will, I'm gonna keep this public hearing open and we will plan to deal with this in the first meeting in May and we'll plan to deal with it in not quite as long a fashion as we dealt with it tonight. I'll just say, for the applicant and for Mr. Nill who was gracious enough to come here tonight as well, I'm measuring the need for housing which is a tremendous need. The fact that the planning director believes that this is an appropriate place for this level of density and that it's most likely that a small area plan will identify that. And the fact that I don't think we're gonna see improvement in these roads out here for a long, long time because they're state roads and that I don't think a small area plan that we hear in a few months will change that even though it might recommend it. And that, so those are important to me. I also think though that I am concerned about the, some of the other issues have been raised tonight around the gravesite, the wildlife corridor and others. So any of those things that the applicant could, yeah. And this hearing will be continued to Monday, May the third is the exact date. So this public hearing is kept open. Yeah, and just one final comment. I am very appreciative of the fact that people that live out there now don't want more housing out there, but we need more housing. And the 3,000 units that have been out there already, it's important that other people be able to move to the city and to be able to live in similar circumstances. So those are my thoughts. I know that not everyone shares them. Won't be the first time not everyone shared them. Okay, we are gonna continue this hearing to May the third. I wanna thank the applicant. I wanna thank Mr. Nill and we'll look forward to hearing from all of you all. We're now gonna take a break for our closed captioners. It's 1004, we'll be back at 10 minutes after 10. We'll take a six minute break. Thank you everybody. And remember, we're still on camera, so mute. All right, good evening again, everybody. It's late, but we persevere. And we're now gonna move to item 24, Consolidating Annexation 920 Sharon Road. And we will first hear the report from staff. Thank you, Mayor Shull. Danny Kulture again for the planning department. This request for a voluntary annexation, utility extension agreement and zoning map change I received from Jared Edens of Eden's Land Corp for two parcels totaling 7.67 acres located at 920 and 922 Sharon Road. The site is presently zoned residential rule RR, residential suburban 20 or S20 and falls Jordan Lake Watershed Protection Overlay District B or FJB and is located within the suburban tier. The applicant is proposing to rezone the property to plan development residential 7.171 or PDR 7.171 for up to 55 townhouse residential dwelling units. The property is currently designated low, medium density residential on the future land use map or flown. The property, the proposed PDR 7.171 zoning is consistent with the designated future land use. The zoning map change request has been reviewed by staff and determined to be consistent with the UDL requirements. There are several commitments in excess of UDL requirements which could be found on the development plan cover sheet and attachment 9B. The planning commission by a vote of 11 to one at their January 12th to 2021 meeting recommended approval of this request. There are three motions required for this application. The first is to adopt an ordinance annexing 920 Sharon Road into the city of Durham effective March 31st, 2021 and enter into a utility extension agreement with the Eden's Land Corp. The second is to adopt an ordinance amending the unified development ordinance by taking the property out of residential rural, residential suburban 20 and falls Jordan Lake Watershed Protection District B County jurisdiction in establishing the same plan as planned residential development. Development residential excuse me 7.171 falls Jordan Lake Watershed Protection overlay District B city jurisdiction. And the third is to adopt a consistency statement as required by NCGS 160 D dash 605. Thank you very much. Staff is and the applicant team would be available for questions. Thank you very much, Mr. Kaltra. Colleagues, you've heard the report from staff. I'm now declare this public hearing open. And I'm going to ask first, if there are any questions for Mr. Kaltra for members of the council. Seeing none, I'll now move to public comment. We have one person who's signed up to speak on this item, Mr. Jared Eden's for Mr. Eden's begins. Let me ask, is there anyone else here present who would like to speak on item 24? Anyone else that would like to speak on item 24? If so, please put your name in the chat or raise your virtual hand. Okay, Mr. Eden's, are you available to be heard? Yes, sir. Mr. Eden's, how much time would you need? I just a couple of minutes, Mr. Mayor. All right, thank you, Mr. Eden's, go ahead. Yeah, good evening, Mr. Mayor, members of the council, Jared Eden's with Eden's land. I appreciate your time and your attention this evening and you've had a long agenda so far. Appreciate Danny's help on this project. I'm just going to highlight a couple of points. I first want to point out this project is not in the Searles Basin, in case it was an item for discussion. We're on the west side of Sharon Road, so we definitely sewer in opposite direction. I thought I would clear that up before I even begin. I thought that would make sense. But as we're proposing 55 townhomes on Sharon Road, it's a very popular area, really nice part of town. I've lived out there a long time. But the one thing you'll notice when you look at aerial maps and things in this area, it's just single family city. It's a single family neighborhood on top of single family neighborhood. And we happen to have a large pocket of area here. It's about 1800 acres that Durham has designated for a little more density at 48 an acre. And this would be one of the first townhome projects to come there. So I think the alternate housing choice would be good for that area. We have plenty of capacity as far as roads, schools, and utilities per the staff report. We conform to the future land use plan, as Danny mentioned. We did add some tax commitments to the planning commission meeting. I just want to highlight a couple of them. Tried to add some specificity to the project a little bit. We did clarify sort of what we'd have in the active open space. We committed to a little bit larger open space than is required. The two conditions I really like is we're limiting the size of the units. It's hard sometimes to artificially to tell you what the market's gonna dictate that a unit cost, but it's much easier to predict what the per square foot cost of a unit may be. And I think that when you can limit the sizes and the width and the square footage, you're in a way, you're limiting how high of value that house can be. So it does tend to keep it more affordable. I do want to add two proffers this evening. We'd like to make a payment to the Durham, the school's fund for $3,000. That would be for the six additional students at $500 per student. And we'd also like to proffer a payment to the affordable housing fund. That would be $8,250. This is based on 55 units and $150 a unit. That's a rate that we've used on seven or eight projects. Now, both of these would be due prior to the first final plat. We did bet these with planning staff earlier today. And finally planning commission did approve the project 11 to one. We don't have opposition that I'm aware of. I'm glad to answer any questions you have. Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Edens. Is there anyone else that would like to be heard on this item? All right. Thank you, colleagues. Any questions or comments for applicants for the applicant or staff? Council member Reese. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I want to thank Danny or excuse me, staff for bringing this forward for us. Mr. Sivers, I have a question. What used to be on this property? I think you mean for Mr. Edens. I'm sorry, Mr. Edens. I'm sorry. Long night. Sorry. It's an improvement over what I normally hear. It's owned by the Sharon families, the Sharon Road, the Sharon family. And there was a home on it that was relocated recently, I think, to a parcel very nearby that they owned. So it was originally just one or two homes with a cleared area prior to this. That's all I wanted to know. It definitely once bore a couple of structures and now it's mostly a dumping ground. So this would definitely be an improvement over that for sure. Thank you, Mr. Reese. All right. Other questions, colleagues? All right. Mr. Edens, thank you very much. Thank you. I'm gonna now declare this public hearing closed matters back before the council. The first motion necessary would be to adopt an ordinance annexing 920, Sharon Road to the city of Durham, effective March 31st, 2021 and to authorize the city manager entered to utility extension being with Edens Land Court. Move is read. Second. Moved by council member Middleton, seconded by council member Reese. Madam Clerk, we'd please call the roll. Mayor Schuhl. Aye. Mayor Pro Tem Johnson. Aye. Mr. Member Caballero. Aye. Council member Freelon. Aye. Council member Freeman. Council member Middleton. Aye. Council member Reese. Aye. I think because we're virtual, that I think that is a vote of six to zero. Thank you. And now we'll move to motion two to adopt an ordinance of many of the United Unified Development Orders by taking property out of the residential rural, residential suburban are 20, Falls Jordan Lake Watershed Protection Overlay District, County jurisdiction establishing the same as planned development residential 7.171, Falls Jordan Lake Watershed Protection Overlay, District B, city jurisdiction. Move is read. Second. Moved by council member Middleton, seconded by council member Reese. Please call the roll Madam Clerk. Mayor Schuhl. Aye. Mayor Pro Tem Johnson. Aye. Council member Caballero. Aye. Council member Freelon. Aye. Council member Freeman. Council member Middleton. Aye. Council member Reese. Aye. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Clerk. The ayes have it, the motion passes six to zero. Motion three to adopt a consistency statement. Move to adopt consistency. Second. Thank you. Moved by council member Middleton, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Johnson. Madam Clerk, will you please call the roll? Mayor Schuhl. Aye. Mayor Pro Tem Johnson. Aye. Council member Caballero. Aye. Council member Freelon. Aye. Council member Freeman. Council member Middleton. Aye. Thank you. Council member Middleton. Aye. Council member Reese. Aye. Thank you. You're muted, Mr. Mayor. Thank you. Madam Clerk, thank you. The motion passes unanimously. Thank you, Mr. Edens, and good luck to you. Thank you, everyone. Well, now moved to zoning map. I'm 25, zoning map change, 4523 Hope Valley Road. And we'll first hear the report from staff. Thank you. Danny Kulture again for the planning department. This is only requests map change been received from Tim Syvers of Horde Bath and Associates for one parcel land totaling 3.44 acres located at 4523 Hope Valley Road. The site is presently zoned residential suburban multi family with a development plan or RSMD and Falls, Jordan Lake Watershed Protection Overlay District B, FJB. It is located within the suburban development here. The site was zoned previously with a development plan P9379 to allow for up to 21,900 square feet of floor area and for a congregate living facility. The applicant is proposing to rezone the property to the same residential suburban multifamily development plan, RSMD zoning designation to allow for up to 32,000 square feet for a congregate living facility. The use table and unified development ordinance, UDO 512 requires congregate living facilities proposed within residential districts to receive a minor special use permit or MSUP in order to allow the use within the district. However, UDO paragraph 3.5.6d10 eliminates the use permit requirement when the zoning is approved with a development plan where the use location, access, building height, and size are defined. The applicant has elected to rezone the property in order to eliminate the required use permit. The property is currently designated medium density residential in the future land use map or FLUM. The proposed RSMD zoning is consistent with the designated future land use at the density proposed on the development plan. The zoning map change request has been reviewed by staff and determined to be consistent with UDO requirements. There are several commitments in excess of UDO requirements which can be found on the development plan and cover sheet in an attachment five. The planning commission by a vote of 12 to zero at the January 12th, 2021 meeting recommended approval of this request. There are two motions required for this application. The first is to adopt an ordinance amending the unified development ordinance by taking the property out of RS, residential suburban multifamily with the development plan RSMD and falls Jordan Lake Watershed Protection Overlay, FJB and establishing the same as residential suburban multifamily with the development plan RSMD and falls Jordan Lake Watershed Protection Overlay District, FJB. And the second is to adopt a consistency statement as required by NCGS 160D-605. Thank you very much. And staff is available for any questions. Thank you very much, Mr. Caltra. Colleagues, you've heard the report from staff. I'm now going to clear this public hearing open. And I want to ask if there are any questions for staff by members of the council. All right, seeing none, I'll ask now if there are anyone here to speak on this item. We actually have four people signed up. Tim Cybers, Elisa Peterson, Rick Paquette and Kelly Agee. Elisa Pat Peterson, I'm sorry, is signed up as an oponent and the others are signed up as proponents. So let me first ask Mr. Cybers. Mr. Cybers, are you speaking for the developer? Yes, sir. Are the other two people that I read out, members of your team? Yes, as well as Eric Morton, he's signed up and ready to speak as well. Are you all planning all to speak or are they there to answer questions? I will have about four minutes presentation and Mr. Morton will have about two minutes. Okay, that's great. And then Ms. Peterson is here in opposition. Madam Clark, could you make Ms. Peterson available to be heard? Ms. Peterson, are you with us? Yes, I am. All right, good. Ms. Peterson, we're gonna hear first from the proponents and then we'll give you an opportunity, okay? Certainly. All right, thank you very much. Okay, first of all, Mr. Cybers, go ahead with your presentation for yourself and Mr. Morton. Thank you, there was a PowerPoint presentation that was provided if that can be brought up, please. Good evening, Mayor Schull, Mayor Pro Tem Johnson, members of the city council. My name is Tim Cybers with Horavath Associates, located here in Durham at 16 Consulted Place. We do have multiple members of our team connected virtually this evening and will be available for any questions you may have. Next slide, please. The primary intent of this rezoning is to allow additional building square footage from the current development plan allowances. With that in mind, I do wanna clarify a few items. Yes, the current zone is RSMD and our proposed zone is RSMD. There's no proposed change to the future land use map. The current building shown on your screen has 32 units containing 52 of the 60 beds that are permitted. The development plan allows a maximum of 48 units to allow all 60 beds to be used. The difference and reason for this rezoning is to allow an increase in the building square footage of a maximum of 32,000 square feet. Currently, a site plan is under review for the building expansion located at that northeast corner of the existing building. This expansion is not visible from NC 751 but will architecturally coordinate with the existing building. Next slide, please. A summary of our key text commitment and design commitments include maximum of 48 units, 32,000 square foot building area maximum, tree coverage area representing 20% in three different locations surrounding the existing building, project boundary buffers, right away dedication. We are doing a construction of an exclusive southbound left turn lane on 751 which will also include the widening for a five foot bike lane along the site frontage. Next slide, please. Prior to and during the planning commission hearing, additional design and landscape buffer requests were made from the planning commission members as well as the neighbors. This list in front of you contains the updates that were made prior to the planning commission vote for approval. The maximum building height of 40 foot in one story, landscape buffer opacity was increased and the material be installed prior to the first building permit inspection approval to help minimize construction visibility and noise to the adjacent landowners that are. The also, we also removed vinyl siding as an optional building material and added five or cement siding to match the existing facility. The commitment was added to confirm the building expansion will contain similar architectural materials as the existing building. And during our site plan review, city stormwater required an analysis to demonstrate that we will not increase the outflow from the existing stormwater pond. They also required an analysis that during the 100 year storm event, we will not increase the water surface elevation of any downstream properties. Those reports have been provided to and approved by the city stormwater department through the site plan. I do request that you follow the recommendation of the planning commission and vote in favor of this development to allow the existing congregate facility to expand and increase their level of service to their residents. Thank you for your time. I'd like to hand the presentation off to Mr. Eric Morton, the co-founder of Navion Senior Living for a few words. Yes, thank you very much, Tim. We're, thank you so much to the Durham city council for the opportunity to be heard here tonight. We're really excited about this project and the opportunity that it creates to expand our ability to offer badly needed senior living options in Durham. As many of you may or may not know, there has been a shortage of housing for senior, seniors with dementia and Alzheimer's in Durham and the broader triangle. This building was constructed nearly 25 years ago by a different company. It has a 60 license beds and only 32 rooms. So many of our residents are in double occupancy. This project is an opportunity to add additional single rooms that our residents strongly desire. And we're excited about the opportunity to deliver the living options that our residents will want. In addition, we're adding a great deal of common space to the community and upgrading what is existing, making more wonderful spaces for our residents. So, you know, overall we think this project is going to have an incredible impact on the quality of life of our residents and the availability of high quality senior care options that we need in our community. Thank you very much for your time. Thank you, Mr. Morton. Alrighty, we'll now hear from Ms. Elisa Peterson. Ms. Peterson, are you available to be heard? Yes, I am, sir. Great, thank you. How long will you need for your presentation? Just a few minutes. All right, thank you. We're glad to have you here. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The, I am for the project. I think it's a great idea to help the elderly. I am approaching that age as well. So I may one day need to use the facility, but my two concerns, fortunately, Mr. Severs did connect on the opacity that they did increase that. And so he has addressed my concern about that. The other one is the stormwater. I disagree on the stormwater situation simply because right now we still deal with their stormwater issues, which has eroded areas of our community at the back of the property line. And I have sent pictures to Mr. Severs and to also Commissioner Tom Miller at one point. I also forwarded them to whoever sent me this link to attend the meeting. So now we're going to be adding, we're taking away trees and we're adding more building, which is going to cause more stormwater or rain issues. So I just see this as a concern. And I think the direction of how this water is let off of the storm pond goes directly into our building. If you walk behind their building, which Commissioner Miller did and I have done, it shows it leads right into our property. And I think this needs to be rectified. That's my only comments. Thank you. Thank you very much for being with us, Ms. Peterson. Is there anyone else that was like to speak on this item tonight? I believe that there's no one else actually attending. So I think that would be it. Okay. And now I'll ask colleagues, are there any comments or questions for the applicant, staff from Ms. Peterson, council member Freeman? I just wanted to just get some feedback from the applicant on Ms. Peterson's questions about how would it be addressed if there's already a current stormwater concern. Thank you. Cybert, could you comment on that please? Yes, sure. Thank you. Again, we did review the pictures that Ms. Peterson sent. We appreciate those during a specific rainstorm. We don't know what rainstorm that was or the date of that time. So that could have been a slow storm. It could have been a very fast storm in the amount of water that was provided. We do, we did meet and discuss this concern with the city stormwater during their reviews, which is what during the site plan review, which is why we provided those extra reports to them and they have subsequently reviewed and approved those reports and analysis to not increase that the issues that are downstream. And in addition, as the council is likely aware that the city and county do require annual inspections of these to make sure they are operating correctly to make sure that there is no increased impact downstream. Thank you. If I could just get a response from staff on the last time an inspection was done, because if Commissioner Miller and Ms. Peterson, I can say I have not walked behind the building, passed by and checked out the frontage and around, but not behind the building. I just wanted to know if the last inspection did show whether or not there was some water running towards their property, towards Ms. Peterson's property. Council member Freeman, that's information that I, as planning staff, we do not have, but we can follow up with stormwater services and get that information to you all, since they would be the ones that conduct those inspections. And just in light of that, I would just ask my colleagues if it might be possible to hold off on moving forward with this item, acknowledging that if the developers opportunity to present a solution to Ms. Peterson's question is now and if we move forward, that kind of dissipates. Council member Freeman, this is Tim Syvers. I can answer that question, actually last fall, there was an inspection that was completed. It was done in November. And at that time, the city asked the property owner, Naviance to just simply clean out. There were some leaves and a little bit of debris that were in it in the facility. So they did a little bit of cleaning. And that was the extent of the inspection and the items that were requested at the time. But it was in November of last year. So simply just four or five months ago. Thank you. I would just ask Ms. Peterson, if you noticed the difference after they did clear it out, I just wanna make sure I do pause and nuke that with climate change and the rapid shift of how our weather has been changing, it's likely to have more fast and slow occurrences of rain that could create more problems. And issues like this are going to become more pronounced. And if there's a way to kind of rectify it beforehand, I definitely wanna do that. But Ms. Peterson, if you could just share whether or not that helped in November, I guess they're saying that there was a clean out of leaves and debris. It's the position of the pipe that's coming right towards our fence line. So it's the positioning of the last pipe where the water comes out of. So it was, I don't know if there needs to be a curve put in the pipe to push the water more another way. We ended up having to put in rock and a drain in order to release the water and bring it out to our storm pond in order to alleviate that water coming in to our area. So I have not, it does not affect me directly, but I'm the HOA president. So I don't see when a rainstorm is happening, like the rain that we've had lately. I guess I would, I don't know if it's gotten better.  So I don't know what else to say. I'm just trying to watch out for our community. I appreciate that. Thank you. I think you're, you made the point that it's definitely not just the debris and the leaves. So thank you. Thank you, council member. So the, I might understand that the site plan, what's the state of the site plan review at this point, Mr. Kultrup? Mayor Schuyl, the site plan is actually in mid review. It cannot be approved until of course the development plan is approved. Sure. But I guess I'm trying to refer to something specific, which is what Mr. Savers said about the stormwater approvals. Can you speak to that at all? I can't actually, that site plan was under my purview and since I moved to the land use group, it's no longer under my purview. So I don't know everything going on with that site plan anymore. Okay. All right. Thank you. Mayor, would you like me to clarify that? Yeah, I would, Mr. Savers. Thanks. Sure. So Mr. Kultrup is actually 100% correct. The site plan's current status is that it is ready to be stamped and signed off as soon as the rezoning is approved, if that's the view of the council tonight. So all comments have been addressed and all departments have been approved it. It's just simply waiting for the approval of this development plan, if so approved, that the site plan can then be stamped off potentially tomorrow, if that answers your question. Thank you. And can you describe again the stormwater, one of the stormwater standards that you've got in the site plan? Sure. They required the stormwater department required the analysis to demonstrate that will not increase the outflow from the existing pond. And they also required an analysis to showing that during the 100 year storm event, we will not increase the water surface elevation of any downstream properties. They've reviewed that and accepted that as existing and approved it based on the site plan. All right. Thank you, Mr. Savers. You're welcome, sir. Thank you. Any other questions or comments, colleagues? Council member Freeman. Just a note that I just want to be clear that in the previous work session, we had a similar situation where we had to come back and spend money to buy a property where there was a mist. I want to be clear, like this should probably go to our stormwater staff for review so that they can make sure and certified because I don't feel comfortable. I love the project. I think it'd be a great to have the additional single rooms for a senior living facility, but I don't want to negatively impact a residential neighborhood with this development plan, acknowledging that it's been brought to our attention here in this meeting, that it's already creating downward flow, like downflow. Council member Reese. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I want to thank council member Freeman for raising the important issue of stormwater. Also want to thank the president of the HOA for being present to make sure that this development doesn't negatively impact the folks that she represents the homeowners and property owners there. I think it's important to remember that the issue with stormwater is not, does water flow from one property to another? Because that happens. The question before us today is, will this development increase the flow of stormwater onto these people's property? And according to what's been represented to us, it can't or the site plan won't be approved. Council member Freeman wants a review from our stormwater staff. Could be wrong, but it sounds like they've already approved that. That's why the site plan is in the situation that it's in. And I see our cleaning director nodding her head vigorously because it wouldn't get up to that point without that. So I'm not sure what an additional review would accomplish except to say that I totally get the concern. It makes a lot of sense. I have been behind the building of this property. Took my 12 year old there a couple of weekends ago because it's never too early to learn about stormwater retention. And there is an existing facility back there. It actually looked really good to me.  That's wrong, that's wrong. But it was one that Mayor Bell used to complain about all the time in Southern Durham at any event. This was not that, but it's smaller because that's a smaller building and footprint. But I'll just say that if the site plan is up to that point, and the obligation of the developer is to make sure that the stormwater protections are even greater than they are now and that's what the commitment in the development plan is. I'm comfortable at this point moving forward because that all makes some kind of sense to me. So that's all I had to say about that. Thank you, Council Member. Any Council Member Freeman and I'm hoping this will be our last comment. Thank you. I appreciate your comments, Council Member Maurice. I think specifically what I'm raising the question on is whether they reviewed it based on the information that Ms. Peterson shared this evening, acknowledging that it's not just the increase but also where this already the water's running off. And so I hear you in saying that we're not responsible for addressing that, but I'd like to think that we could take the time to at least try and see if maybe a curve and a pipe versus nothing would be helpful. That's all. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member. All right, anybody else? Okay, I'm gonna now declare this public hearing closed and the matter is now before the Council. The first motion we would need would be to adopt an ordinance admitting the unified development ordinance by taking property out of the residential, suburban multi-family with development plan and falls Jordan Lake Watershed Protection Overlay District B and establish the same as residential suburban multi-family with development plan and falls Jordan Lake Watershed Protection Overlay District B. So moved. Second. Moved by Council Member Reese, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Johnson. Madam Clerk, please call the roll. Mayor Schuhl. Aye. Mayor Pro Tem Johnson. Aye. Member Caballero. Aye. Council Member Freelon. Aye. Council Member Freeman. Aye. Council Member Middleton. Aye. Council Member Reese. Aye. Thank you. Thank you very much, Madam Clerk. The motion passes six to one and now we'll move to motion two to adopt a consistency statement. So moved. Second. Moved by Council Member Pro Tem Johnson, seconded by Council Member Freelon. Madam Clerk, please call the roll. Mayor Schuhl. Aye. Mayor Pro Tem Johnson. Aye. Council Member Caballero. Aye. Council Member Freelon. Aye. Council Member Freeman. Aye. Council Member Middleton. Aye. Council Member Reese. Aye. Thank you, Madam Clerk. The motion passes six to one. Mr. Severs and Mr. Morton, good luck to you all. And Ms. Peterson, thank you very much for being here with us. I appreciate and we all appreciate your advocacy for your neighborhood. And Mr. Severs, I hope you will, I know you will take the stormwater considerations seriously. Thank you. All right. We're now going to, before we adjourn, Council Member Middleton. Mr. Mayor, thank you. I just wanted to take a quick point of privilege. I just want to give a word of commendation and thanks to our incredible city attorney, Kim Rayberg. Very often I'll raise points of parliamentary inquiry. And I just want to state for the record that a question of parliamentary inquiry is not necessarily a question of jurisprudence. And having a JD does not necessarily translate to acumen or expertise on parliamentary procedure. So she's actually mastering, we've got a whole, another set of books and she does it wonderfully. So I want to thank her for not only what she does for questions of jurisprudence, but how we've kind of, maybe I've kind of made her our parliamentarian as well, which is a beast unto itself and a separate skill set unto itself apart from her incredible demonstrated acumen and jurisprudence. So I just want to thank her for abiding us and for being the great city attorney that everybody in the state knows that she is, but we got her. Hear that, Charlotte, we got her. So thank you very much, Councilor. And I just wanted to put that in the record. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you, Council Member. Colleagues, I have one more Madam Attorney. I just wanted to say thank you to Council Member Middleson. I appreciate that. I learned so much from you all the time. It's the constant process of learning. And I also want to give a shout out to other department directors, particularly Ms. Young who helped me along the way because they've been through so many hearings and they know how processes unfold and they're just really wonderful and gracious at pointing things out to me. So thank you to all of you for all of your support. Thank you, Madam Attorney. Colleagues, I just want to raise one other issue. And I'm sorry that I haven't gotten around to individually call each of you yet. I'm in the process. And this is that you all charged me with polling the Council on when we thought we would like to come back in person. And for the folks that I have talked to, which is a bare majority of the Council at this point, most folks are saying they would like to come back after our summer break. My thought is to, and the manager page has asked me about this as well. And they would feel comfortable with that timeline. My thought then, and we can have thumbs on this in a minute, is to ask our staff to prepare the protocols for us to come back after our summer break. Yeah, if things really improve, if everyone gets vaccinations, if we're all feeling good, of course we could change that and move it up some. But that that be our target. And so, as I say, I'm sorry I haven't been able to reach all of you yet. Not that I haven't been able to reach you yet. I haven't tried to reach all of you yet. I was going to plan to do it, but then I realized I thought it would be just, let's go ahead and talk about it for a minute. And I wonder, is everyone have a pretty high comfort level? Yeah, and Council Member Caballero says that's just for council, not boards of commissions, right? Yeah, we're just talking about council right now. So can I just hear if folks have a high comfort level with that schedule? Okay. Council Member Freeman, are you good with it? Okay. And Council Member Ruiz, I don't know if I saw your thumb, but I think you are good. Okay. So we're going to ask our staff then to be thinking about that timeline. As I say, we don't have to, that doesn't have to be written in stone, but let's, we'll know that that's what we're aiming for. Okay, thank you. So if I haven't called you yet, please don't expect a call. This was your call. Okay. Thank you all so much, colleagues. I think we've done it. And I'm going to now adjourn this meeting at 10.50 p.m. with another congratulations to our fabulous new city manager, what I'm talking about. Awesome. And we're all very excited. And we'll see everybody, we'll see everybody on Thursday. Thursday. Congratulations. Good night, y'all. Good night. Bye.


Welcome to the David Wong Entrepreneur Show. I'm David Wong, martial artist, entrepreneur, and a peak performance innovator. In this video, I'm going to share with you 10 reasons why you're never ever going to become a millionaire. If you want to get more tips on how to become a millionaire, how you can be more successful, actualize your full potential, and even get martial arts lessons, then make sure you subscribe to this channel, click the bell and get all the awesome content coming out on a weekly basis from me. With that said, get ready for the show.     Number nine on the list is that you're an expert at making excuses. You're really good at it. When something happens and then it doesn't go the way that it should, you make excuses. Either do that or you blame somebody else. You never take responsibility for the results or for your actions. Number eight on the list is that you justify why money is not important. A lot of times when people don't have money, in order to make themselves feel better, they say, oh, money's not that important. We don't really need money and we can just live on love. Love doesn't put food on the table. Love doesn't pay for the mortgage. Love doesn't pay for the rent. Love doesn't buy dog food. You need to feed your dog. So money is important. We need money to live. We need money to survive. We need the money to have a good lifestyle. But don't let money become more important than something. For example, your family and your morals and integrity. Number seven on the list is that you want to be a millionaire, but you don't know how to get there. There's so many fake gurus out there telling you that their way is the best way. Here's how you can get rich quick. Here's how you can make hundreds of thousands of dollars in like a week. I know exactly how you feel. I used to be poor and broke and I was able to transform myself to become a millionaire and more. The way that I did it is completely different from how all the gurus that you see out there are doing. It's a five-step process. I'm going to teach you how you can transform yourself and the inside out. How to transform your body and your health. How to transform your mind and how to transform your spirit. And also how to attract abundance and prosperity effortlessly. I'm going to show you how to use meditation and chican practices and behavior programming. And also some technology you can use to hack your mind so that you start thinking like a millionaire and starting doing things of a millionaire and becoming a millionaire. So make sure you don't miss this event. It's at shelifebasket.com. I'll see you there. Number seven on the list is that you go into debt to buy stuff that you don't need. To do what? To impress people that you don't even like. Does that make any sense to you? Spending money that you don't even have. Buying stuff that is going to lose value like the day that you buy it. Just so that it can make other people jealous or fit into a crowd of people that you don't even like. Or get some kind of social acceptance to make you feel better about yourself. So that just shows that you have very low self-esteem. And with a low attitude like that, you're not going to become a millionaire. Number six is that you don't have any financial goals. If you don't have a goal to be a millionaire, then what's your chances of becoming a millionaire? If you don't even know what the target is, what are your chances of hitting the target? And also you don't have any incremental financial goals. You say, I want to be a millionaire. Well, if you're only making $10,000 a year, then it's a really big gap between $10,000 million. How are you going to get there? So set some incremental financial goals. Say, okay, I want to make $20,000, or I want to make $30,000, right? Or if you make it $100,000, how are you going to get from $100,000 to $200,000? If you're making half a million dollars a year, how are you going to get to half a million to $750,000, right? Half incremental financial goals and an action plan to achieve it. Number five on this is that you focus on saving money rather than earning money. Now we all need to save money by just a penny pincher instead of making dollars, and that's not going to help you become a millionaire. Well, we need to save, but make sure that priority is to increase your income or increase your revenues and profits for business before you think about saving. Saving is important, but it's not the primary goal. Number four is that you're not investing their money. Actually, you're spending money faster than you can make it. You're buying stuff that go down in value, and the investments you make aren't actually real investments. They're just toys and gizmos that just make you look good. If you don't have a mindset of investing like a millionaire, you're never going to become a millionaire. Number three on the list is that you don't spend any time learning, especially learning on skills for making money, skills to build businesses. These are skills that you need to learn either the hard way through experience or you can learn from someone else who's already done it. You can even learn some of these skills at school, but let me tell you I've never been to business school and today I make way more money than people who have MBAs or whatever you call them. So if you don't spend time learning how to make money, actually getting skills and understanding and knowledge and learning from people, then you're never going to become a millionaire. Number two reason why you're never going to be a millionaire is that you're not obsessed with your craft. Every millionaire has something that they're really good at. So if you don't have anything that you're obsessing over, that means you probably don't have anything that you're really good at. Now if you focus on your strengths, focus on that craft that you're really good at, put hours into it, put effort into it, improve it, become one of the best in it, then it's a really good way to become a millionaire. But if you don't have that, then sorry, you're not going to be a millionaire.  You may not know it, but you actually have a relationship with money. What is your attitude? What's your mindset? Many people think that money is the root of all evil, but that's not what the Bible says. The Bible says that the love of money is the root of all evil. Is there fear, anxiety, or self-doubt that's associated with money? If you have those emotions, then that's your relationship with money. Take some time to really understand why you're feeling those emotions and reassess them and ask yourself, is that really true? Is that really true about money? Then that's the beginning of changing your mindset so that you become a millionaire. And unless you can change your mindset and your relationship to money, you will never become a millionaire. Hey, the content doesn't stop here, so make sure you click the videos here to keep watching and get more awesome content like this video. If you haven't subscribed to the channel, click the subscribe link here. And if you want to know what your energy score is, click the link in the description below to take the quiz.


Today, I have the pleasure of speaking with Greg Andrews of Search Minerals. How are you today? I'm great. Tracy, thank you. We're in the last day of PDAC and we're trying to attract cannabis investors who've made more money than they know what to do with to diversify and go into some things like rare earths. Yes. Well, rare earths are obviously the vitamins of technology and especially for the millennials. They're a big consumer of all these electronics and the new cars and electrification of vehicles and that's what's really driving our rare earth space right now. The vitamins of technology, I got to love that and of course we've had a lot of interest in our site recently, trending number one, interest in rare earths. Is the market about to turn around and explode like it did in 2010? Well, we believe it is. The electrification is what's really driving it, both from vehicles and wind turbines and back when you're talking about that spike in 2009 and 10, there wasn't any big push behind it other than, oh, maybe we'll buy more cell phones, but with electrification, it's going to really put a constraint on the supply that's out there right now and that's what Search is trying to fill that void when the time comes in the next few years. And for our new audience, we're trying to attract a rare earths. Just want to mention that currently China controls almost 90% of all produced rare earths in the world. Is that correct? That is correct. And so, you know, we've started off in 2009, the rest of the world problem and having a safe jurisdiction in Newfoundland Labrador is very key as a safe jurisdiction to produce that product for the other markets other than China. And of course, other elements that contribute to stock activity or issues of sustainability and geopolitical issues, can you tell us how rare earths play into that game? Yeah, so we look at China being an end consumer of their own electric vehicles, they're driving the force in that space and so they're going to consume their own raw materials first and so there may not be products for the rest of the world also and they're also looking to be maybe net importers of our rare earths, so they're out there looking outside the world also to ensure they have a supply for their growing needs also. And there are very few projects actually in North America, is that correct? There's projects but one thing that puts search above some of the other projects is we have a technology that allows us to be a low cost. So for a thousand tons per day production, that's 152 million, which we've always worked to make sure that that's a financeable number, you know, it's always going to be tough. But our product is scalable so we can start at a thousand tons per day, go to 2,000 and grow up instead of having to spend a large capital and have a large capital base that needs to be paid for with a large production rate. So Greg, would you mind giving us kind of a 10 story overview about the search projects? So Deep Fox, which we just announced those results last week, which we do, when we do our exploration, we do a detailed channel sample program. So that means what we see on top, we want to prove down below. So the difference between Fox Trot and Deep Fox is Fox Trot was 400 meters by 10 and Deep Fox is 400 meters by 30 meters. So conceptually that could be up to three times the size of Fox Trot. So the drilling needed to prove that that 30 meters extended down below, which it has down to the 200 meter level. So what that does for a game changer is take us from a Fox Trot 14 year life mine to possibly 25, 30 plus generational type play. And that's really excited the local communities and the both federal and provincial government. Search Minerals has got everything lined up right now. What should we anticipate as shareholders in the upcoming quarter or two, Greg? Well, our next piece of work, it's all about the Deep Fox right now. We're going to get a resource estimate on that. We're going to update our PEA from there. And what our PEA is going to do is take both Deep Fox and Fox Trot because they're in close proximity. They're 13 kilometers apart from each other. And that PEA should show those economics that we're looking for and the long term extension life of the project. From that, we will go through it, initiate the environmental stage for Deep Fox so that we have both Fox Trot and Deep Fox both going through the environmental process to get the permitting done in about two years. So we have technology, we have clean tech, and we have rare earths with search minerals. Thank you so much for joining us today, Greg. Thank you, Tracy.