e are a lot of hunters that hunt out here. And so I'm just really concerned about the wildlife and they're gonna be displaced and like what is gonna be done about that? I mean, there's really nothing that can be done. And it just seems like everywhere I turn there's a new subdivision coming in and that leads me into traffic and that's a major issue. We go up and down Carpenter and Farrell all the time because that's a cut through to 85. And it's already really highly trafficked from all the subdivisions that already exist on Carpenter Road and off of Cheek Road. And now they're talking about doing more subdivisions off of Cheek Road. So the traffic is already so crazy. People drive so fast and I just, I don't understand how the roads are just not gonna be able to handle another subdivision. And then of course, the well water and the aquifer is a concern and the flooding. So yeah, those are really my three main concerns I have about this development. And I hope that y'all will address them somehow. Thank you. The final three people who signed up, I'm gonna read the names. I don't see that they're with us but if you are, you can press star nine to raise your hand. Linda Duke, Taryn Kavanaugh and Andrea Sumner. That said, I do want to circle back to see if Diane Clements or Mary Wilkins are able to come off a mute.  Yes, I am. All right. Thank you very much. I had just signed on to attend the meeting in preparation for another meeting, I suppose will be held later about the development coming in out at Cheek Road and Redwood Road. But it was, you know, I could certainly echo the things that have been said and both of the proposals tonight as far as the concerns about development here. One I think that has been talked a lot about is the fire and burst responders. They will have difficulty getting to homes that they need to get to in a hurry. The other thing that I don't think it's been brought up during the meeting is the fact that a lot of folks have established their homes out here over the years. I know of three families in particular, one with a young child, one with a young adult and one gentleman that served in the Vietnam War because they have sensory issues and they chose to live away from stimuli, you know, all the things that come along with high density areas. And I just hope that we would keep that in mind as we consider all of these developments that there are people that have established lives and homes in the rural Durham County because they have a need to be away from all that. And this, just like we've talked about animals, it will uproot, potentially uproot these families because they will have to, I know the gentleman that served in the Vietnam War is post-traumatic syndrome that he deals with. So I just hope that we'll keep those folks in mind as well. Thank you, Ms. Clements. And Mary Wilkins, can we get you off of mute as well? All right, we'll respond. Okay, we'll sort of back one final time. I do wanna let the applicants know you did have a couple minutes left in your time, so I will circle back to you. If you have any final comments, I see a couple of you have your hands raised. Again, I'm gonna call in the additional folks who have not yet spoken who do have their hand raised. So I'm gonna start with Shane Price and then we've got a<PHONE_NUMBER> number. We'll let you both speak. If anyone else wants to speak, press star nine to raise your hand, but we'll start with Shane Price. I think you're off mute, Shane Price. I think they're unmuted, but I'm not sure we're not hearing their audio. Okay, Shane Price, we can't hear you, so you may have to, if you're muted, or you may have to hang up and dial back in, but we're not able to hear it at the moment. Chris, can we go to the 919 number that's listed who has their hand raised? Yes, making sure also please press star six to unmute. Hi, so this is Andrea Sumner. I'm at 6106 Cancer Average Court. I actually spoke during the partial letter K section and I had intended signed up to speak about this one. So I won't repeat my issues about the school overcrowding and the roads, but again, I just really want you guys to consider all of these developments in the aggregate. A neighbor of mine a few minutes ago spoke about the development off of cheap roads. Honestly, if you're gonna do one or the other, this one is closer to the Walmart in the school than the cheap road one is, but I'm not advocating either one of them. So thanks for your time. Thank you. All right, Shane Price, we're gonna try this again. Are you able to speak? It's still not working, unfortunately. We've got Taryn Kavanaugh also with their hand raised and I know you were signed up and you may not have been with us, but when we ran through your name earlier, we'd love to hear what you have to say. Hi there, Taryn Kavanaugh, apologies. I had to jump off earlier because I had a work commitment and didn't realize that this was still going. So I really appreciate you all still being with us and hearing everyone's thoughts. I actually live in Cardinal Oaks right off of Cheek Road. The one that is closest would likely be the Griffith Griffin. I'm not opposed to development. I just am, again, reiterating what everyone else has said in terms of the roads as well as the school. And I think someone brought up earlier bus stops as well because I feel like the only close one near us is the one near Walmart and there are just not many sidewalks near there to accommodate people who are trying to walk from home. So appreciate being here and listening. Thanks for your comments. We just kept stalling until you got on. So we're glad you came. Finally, we have Shane Price. We're gonna give you one last time. Are we able to get you on the line? All right, I'm sorry, Shane, we just can't hear you. I'd like to give the applicants any additional time for any final comments. You had a couple of minutes left in your allocated time. Yeah, thank you, Chair Buzzi. And also if we need another minute or two, the developer, Fred Shekels, would like to speak also if that's possible. But I wanted to just address some of the neighbor's immediate concerns. There's a lot of talk about stormwater runoff and again, just to reiterate, when we design these ponds for the 100 year detention, we do have to take into account that they're developed, that they're paved parcels now and that's all factored in to the design. So we take into account the added impervious and runoff in those calculations and I can assure you that post development, you'll have less runoff in the 100 year event than you do now. That's just the way the ordinance is set up. I also want to mention, I thought Ms. Lewis asked a great question about when the TIA was prepared and then COVID and traffic count. I thought that was a great question. It was prepared before we submitted the application. So it's been two, two and a half years since it was prepared. So it should be pre and kind of COVID adjustment necessary. And also just want to mention that the TIA is cumulative like we mentioned on the other projects that the TIAs have to take into account the existing projects in the area, the plan projects and that's all factored into the background traffic data. But again, if you give us a couple of minutes, I'd like Fred to take some time if that's okay. Yeah, you've got a few more minutes and Mr. Shekels, we value hearing from you. Thanks, Chair Busby. Fred Shekels, 4027 Hess Road, Monkton, Maryland, 2111. Tenor's Realty is a developer for Ryan Homes. We developed for them in the state of Maryland and state of North Carolina, specifically the Triangle region. So they will be the builder here. And so there's been a lot of discussion tonight about affordable housing and we are not a capital A affordable housing developer. My experience with affordable housing, capital A is mostly subsidized and we're not that developer. That said, with where this location and the density and the purchase price and the product line that Ryan Homes is gonna offer, I'd argue that it's gonna be a little affordable. We put $220,000 as the entry price for townhouses on the application, but you know that. We just lost your audio, Mr. Shekels. You got me now? You're back. Oh, am I back? You're back, again. I'm here. All right, sorry, my ear pods finally gave out. I apologize for that. So what I was saying was, Ryan Homes with their simply Ryan product line, it is a very efficient design that allows, and it's a very efficient design, but what it does is unlike most builders who started 29999 and wanna sell you up $30 or $40 or $50,000, they don't have those options available. It is, here's the price. There might be a couple thousand dollars of options you can add on, but within that entry level price, you're buying something that is new and energy efficient. You get washer and dryer and all your appliances, you have no deferred maintenance of a 50 year old house. So their target is first time home buyers, it's workforce housing, it's firefighters and nurses and teachers, and they've been successful because what they do is they look, when they do their analysis, they look at what the apartments are running for, and their target is to have a purchase price, a mortgage price about the same as local apartment buildings. So you're achieving your dream of home ownership at the same price as a rental apartment. So that's, again, it's little affordable, but they really do target that first time home buyer. Just to give you an example, I'm looking at a demographic model, income range up to $50,000 at a 4% interest rate can afford $218,000. So that's, we're targeting incomes, $45,000 and up. The other thing I wanted to mention was the alignment of the Northern Durham Parkway. We had the alignment that Mr. Eden's talked about and how it really was the same for two years until just recently with the adjacent property. We had a coming of the minds, thanks to staff, had a meeting for us late last week. We took the alignment that Mr. Biker's engineer, Kimley Horne gave to us and said, hey, can you make this work? And we made it work, even though we lost three or four units, we wanna get to you and say we had an agreement and both neighbors were happy. So I'm not quite sure where the controversy is with the alignment, frankly. And then finally, I'd really like to thank your staff, your planning staff. It's been a tough year to do what they do remotely. They're really nice people. I work in a lot of different jurisdictions in a couple of different states and they've really been a pleasure to work with in an environment that hasn't been that easy to work in. Great, thank you, Mr. Shackles. We agree about the staff. They do tremendous work in really tough conditions. So thank you for recognizing that. You got it, thank you. Mr. Eden's, any final things and then we'll close the public hearing. Thank you, Chair. I guess I'll point out the ordinance requires sidewalks to be constructed along the frontage of all of these projects. So there may not be sidewalk along ferrule and gear in certain portions now, but the ordinance requires everywhere we front those roads to install public sidewalks. So that will be installed as part of the project. Great, thanks for mentioning that. That is important. I don't see anyone else looking to speak. And so I'm gonna close the public hearing and commissioners, I'm gonna start with Commissioner Miller and other commissioners, please raise your hand if you'd like to be recognized following Commissioner Miller. Commissioner Miller, the floor is yours. Thank you very much. So I have a question for Mr. Biker. Is this controversy, let me ask a few questions. It's my understanding that there is a site plan submitted for Griffin Place and that site plan shows the alignment as it shows on the developer plan. If that site plan gets approved, that kind of puts the developer of Griffin Place in the catbird seat because they're vested and you can't get them to move it. Can you make us understand why moving this alignment is so important to the developer of your developer client? Which if I'm not mistaken, plans to build two million square feet of, is that right? Is that right? One million, between one, approximately one million to 1.2 million. Oh, okay, once you get into millions, I have trouble with them. A million here, a million there. Pretty soon you're talking about a real building. Yeah, that's right. So it's a great big industrial project and my small experience. And so why is the alignment of the North Durham Parkway through Griffin Place so important to your property? Mainly Commissioner Miller, because there is a three acre jurisdictional wetland that is directly across from the alignment shown on their development plan. There are in addition other streams on the property that need to be crossed at as close to a 90 degree angle as possible. We certainly appreciate the efforts that the Griffin Place team has made, but we have not had any of these reviewed jointly by our team and NCDOT. And at the end of the day, NCDOT has to give this alignment in terms of the design speed, which was obviously an issue in the last case and is obviously an important issue with Northern Durham Parkway, as well as these important environmental features. These need to be reviewed and analyzed by NCDOT to make sure we have an alignment that works. Again, I do have a lot of personal experience with Eno Drive, I'm sorry, Northern Durham Parkway. And it was a very, very contentious issue for our community approximately 25, 30 years ago. And I'm gonna miss it, I did not say, we have got to get the intersection of Farrell Road, which is a thorough listed as a thoroughfare on the CTP and Northern Durham Parkway. We have to make sure that alignment is done correctly. Otherwise the permitting becomes either impossible or egregiously expensive. And we're talking about environmental features that need to be respected. And so we're asking for this, continuance in order to have our team meet with NCDOT, make sure it is all done correctly. And just for the record are, we do have Kimley-Horn working on the design and the environmental features. So we do have a first class and engineering team looking at this to make sure it's done right. Thank you, Mr. Butler. So if it's my understanding from the little bit I was able to learn yesterday that your preferred alignment across Griffin Place would shift the road to the East. And this is a four lane divided highway, is that correct? It's 110 foot right of way and we would actually be shifting it to the West. Excuse me, to the West it would shift about 165 feet. It could be, but again, I'd be remiss. What we say and what the Griffin Place people say is all well and good. And we may reach an agreement, but that doesn't mean NCDOT agrees with it.  So let's assume that this gets approved with the right of way going where the development plan in Griffin Place shows it. That's going to run it across into your property right into the place where these jurisdictional streams come together in a pond, right? That's correct, but I do agree with the point that Assistant Director Smith made and I believe Jared Eden's made as well that if we're talking about a minor change in the location of an access point that's something that plan director Sarah Young can approve. I'm just nervous that we're talking about a much larger correction in order for NCDOT to approve the project to move forward in order to approve the alignment that works for everybody. Well, right, the point is this is the time to pause and to fix this, because right now we don't know whether we can fix it with a minor shift. Is that right? That's my perspective on it, yes, sir. And so I'm really worried. I mean, we've got two projects that are going to together make a big difference in this area of town on Junction Road. That in the corner of Junction and Farrell, two great big projects, a big residential project and a big industrial project, the biggest industrial project in my experience on the Plain Commission the last seven years. And they've got a parkway running through or a planned parkway. And your property, just like the Griffin Place townhome side is significantly impacted with environmental features that are protected. I think that we need to get this right. And it worries me and people who are watching are looking me, I'm looking at the development plan on the map here. I'm worried that we're going to have something that is to move, that might have to be moved in a way that cannot be characterized as an insignificant or an unsubstantial change to a development plan. How you've asked for 90 days, that seems like an awful lot of time. Is there a time less than 90 days during which you thank the two neighboring property owners and the city of Durham and the North Carolina Department of Transportation can all get together and fix this thing? We can live with 60 days, Commissioner Miller. And if by 60 days, NCDOT says we're still thinking about it, then we'll come back to you and say we need the additional 30 days. So I defer to the commission on that issue, but it is nonetheless a process that needs to be worked through. And I'm sure there are quite a few officials at NCDOT who need to review and analyze this particular issue. All right, thank you. And Mr. Chairman, I spent a lot of time on this because I think this is a first issue. Are we going to delay it or not? I have other issues with the Griffin Place project, but some of those relate to Northern Durham Parkway and I'm concerned that I don't see anything in the development plan that convinces me that the homes that will be on either side of that parkway will be organized in a way that if the parkway is built, because it's my understanding that this developer does not actually intend to build this section of the parkway through their property, but merely to reserve the right of way for future acquisition. I want to make, I would like the development plan to satisfy me that the homes that get built in close proximity to a four lane divided highway that evidently with a 45 mile an hour speed limit will be appropriately buffered and will, if the, if this parkway gets built at some point in the future that we will not, that it will not actually have a bad effect on the project that's up for approval tonight. You've heard me say it before, you will not hear me say it, I suppose much longer, but I believe every time we approve a new residential project, it needs to be a long, long range, desirable place to live for the people of Durham who live there, it's our obligation to them. And I hate to have to approve a plan that has ticking within it the seeds of its own downfall. And I would, I just think that a development plan like this and thank you, Mr. Cease for reminding me of the intense statement when I was new on the planning commission, I cited the intense statements all the time. We need to constantly go back to them because they're one of the few things in the UDO that I think are really good. PDRs are an opportunity, a tool to do really good design. And when we approve PDRs without actually achieving the goal of really good design, then we're misusing the tool and we're cheating everybody. So I'm in favor of the delay. I wanna get this right-of-way thing straightened out and then come back and talk about issues relating to design and the other sorts of things that really matter to me and all residential, especially these new suburban residential projects. Thanks, Commissioner Miller. So those are my comments right now tonight. Great, thank you. And Commissioner Miller, I just wanted to clarify, I know you reserve the right to speak on additional items but I do think you're wise to put that first question in front of all of us. So thank you for kind of keeping us on that first issue. I mean, again, commissioners, I wanna hear from you but I would still like to, I know we've already heard from them. I would like to hear again from Mr. Eden's and from staff just because this is highly unusual. This is just, I've not seen this kind of thing from one proponent of a case to a different proponent of the case. So I'd like to hear from Mr. Eden's and the staff just to give us additional guidance based on what you just heard and what can you clarify for us? Thank you, Chair Best. Can I speak now? Please. Yeah, so, yeah, I agree. There's issues with the Northern Durham Parkway Alarm their string crossings, there's wetlands and all those things, but all those issues are on the Southern side of Farrell Road. They're not on the Northern side of Farrell Road where our project is. And even if the alignment, even if we were to accept the initial alignment offered by Mr. Biker's group that shifted the our road connection over 160 feet, which is the max, we've already agreed to 90 feet with that same group. Planning staff has already said that a 90 foot to 160 foot shift in that location would not warrant coming back to the commissioner council. And regarding the site plan that's on file, it's true, we probably should be in the cat bird seat since we're two years ahead of the other project. But at the same time, while still being in the cat bird seat, we've already agreed to eliminate a handful of lots and make an adjustment based on what we were offered on Friday. So as of the end of the day, Friday, I didn't think it was an issue. I thought both sides had agreed and we were ready to go. So this is a surprise, but again, I don't think a deferral is warranted because whatever change that is necessary, that one to 200 foot shift is up to the discretion of Sarah Young and she's already, I mean, it would be allowed. So, you know, we're holding, trying to hold up one project while the other side works through all the stream crossing issues, but that's issues on the south side. And we've already seen even using their preferred approach to crossing those streams, that 160 foot shift falls within the range that planning staff is comfortable with.  Thank you. And then staff, any additional guidance and Commissioner Miller, it looks like you may have a follow up, but I'll come back to you in a second. Thank you, Chair Busby. Yes, we did have an internal discussion about this recently. And it was our determination that, and the planning director actually in the way to know this, that a modification of this can be actually approved by the planning director. So if it's within the general location, that a moderate shift can be approved by the planning director for the development plan. So without it having to be rezoned. So we felt like it would not be an issue to actually continue moving forward with the development plan as is. And also, I just want to point out, I'm sorry, but again, the only change that would impact our development plan is the very bottom portion of the parkway where it ties to Ferrell Road. So you have a slight shift, 100 feet here or there, but once you exit, come off of Ferrell, it's gonna tie in with the alignment that you see and 90% of what you see is unchanged. It's everything on the south side of Ferrell that has the issues, not the north side. Thanks, Mr. Regan. Commissioner Miller, you're recognized for follow-up. So Danny, I heard you when you made your presentation that the staff had discussed a shifting at 75 feet, but the folks at Sconell want a shift of 160 feet that would reach two thirds of the way up into the middle of Griffin Place. That's, nobody can call that an insignificant one. And I have find it, I just don't believe that if Sarah understood that that's what was under consideration, she would have said that that was a shift that she could approve as a minor shift. I'm gonna let Ms. Smith weigh in because I think she was in on the dialogue for all these meetings. So, sure, it may sound like a huge shift to be, to move to an access point, 100 feet, but looking at these development plans and how they're drawn, sometimes the arrow itself could equal 100 feet. I mean, we were looking at very, you know, very general locations of things. And this happens often with development plans once they get to site plan, especially if NCDOT comes back and tells the applicant, and it's already been an approved zone, and let's just say the site plan came a year later, if NCDOT comes back and says, yeah, I know it was approved like that, but it's gonna have to shift this way or that way as long as it stays on that same frontage. And you have to look at the frontage and the width of the frontage and then how much you're shifting. So there's several variables that the director would take into consideration when making that decision. So I think what we're just trying to say is what we've seen so far does not look like it would be something that could not be approved by the planning director. And I appreciate that, Grace. I just wanted to share that. But I'm looking at three alignments. The alignment of that is on the development plan and then there is a realignment, an alternate that would shift it over about 75 feet, 74 feet. But this canal preferred realignment shifts it over 165 feet and that shift actually starts almost up to gear street right down through the middle of the project. It's just not minor. And I think this needs to be aired a little bit because if I don't wanna drive a four lane highway on into the neighboring property right through the most environmentally sensitive part of it or require the developer there to essentially to make that four lane highway a curvy road through their property in order to avoid the environmental features. We have one chance to get this right. Can we not take 60 days and fix it and bring in all the parties who are necessary to fix it rather than to send this on for approval without even us knowing exactly where North Durham Parkway is gonna go through the property. I mean, our job is to advise the elected officials on the projects. I have a hard time making it advising the elected officials on a project that is the proposal for which is perhaps incomplete or subject to what I think is a pretty significant change, regardless of what the planning director might ultimately be able to do later at site plan. I mean, we're supposed to be settling a lot of this up front as early as we can. Just one last thing and I just bring to your attention that Erling Thomas does have her hand up and staff would just say that this is 100% the decision of the commission, whether or not you do a continuous or not. Staff is not in one way or the other trying to advise you on that. We're just trying to give you all of the information we can so you can make a decision. And I see Sarah is here, so that would be helpful too. Yes, I was gonna recognize since Sarah Young is young is with us. I don't know if she would like to offer any feedback. I also do wanna recognize Ms. Thomas. Ms. Thomas, why don't we start with you? You've got your hand raised and then Ms. Young, if you would like to speak, you're welcome to come off from you to raise your hand and we'd be happy to hear your thoughts. I thank you, Erling Thomas, transportation. I just wanted to share just with how projects are developed on the long range transportation plan. They are not final locations of ultimately what would be built since the detailed environmental analysis is not done at that stage. We do typically work with applicants at the site plan stage to develop the best alignment through their site. So the alignment that you see even on the CTP or on the development plan is illustrative that they're committing to do to either construct that improvement or reserve right-of-way forward. However, that typically is not the ultimate location of where that line ends up. So I just wanted to share that information with you. Thank you. Well, if I may. Yeah, Commissioner Mellon. Graphic representations on the development plan are committed. They're not merely illustrative. And while I appreciate that it may be necessary to make some minor shifts here and there, there's nothing minor about this. And Ms. Young, I see you're on video. If you'd like to speak, I'm happy to recognize you. Thank you. My ears were burning, so I thought I would join the meeting and just share a little bit about Ms. Smith. Try to explain that when we look at deviations since external access points are required to be shown in their general locations, what I would look at on a site like this, which I already have, is kind of to what extent would the shift occur? And so knowing what the maximum extent that one party would like, ideally, versus what was originally proposed by the other party, that is still generally located in the center of that frontage. That, to me, is not a significant change. So that, while hundreds of feet may sound like a lot on a frontage that has thousands of feet, it's not that much. This alignment is not going to shift all the way to one side or the other. It's gotta stay roughly in the center to work. So I am confident that both parties are going to come to an agreement. I know there is some concern on the part of one party that the other party may get ahead and preclude development to occur the way that it should on the Southern property, but I have talked to both sides and I feel certain that both sides will come to the table. I know that may not be much consolation to folks, but I do have faith that we are not going to let one party preclude the successful development of an industrial park in an area where we've been eyeing this type of development for quite some time. Okay, thanks Ms. Young. Good to know that we mentioned your name when you appear, that's pretty cool. Commissioner Sees. Thank you, just one procedural question and one I guess comment that I don't feel like has been, it was stated at the outset of this whole discussion but hasn't returned and maybe Ms. Thomas could comment on it. Maybe Ms. Young could and that is that we're talking about two parties here, but as Mr. Beiker noted, there's really a third party that's decisive and that's NCDOT. And I just wanna make sure we don't lose sight of the fact that we're not looking at this or the ultimate decision will not just boil down to a local one, but there is that third party involved. And there are some alignment issues with Farrell. The further you've moved west, so I suspect there's some pretty definitive technical opinions. And interpretations that could go along with NCDOT's decision. But the procedural question I had is with regards to the comments in the prior case and the document that was shown with essentially the bubble diagram with showing where single family mixed use, I'm sorry, single family and multifamily work to be located in the attachments here, we have the storm water, I'm sorry, the utility impact statement. And that has the site plan or a version of a site plan on it. So my question for staff is that's shown, the comment made in the prior case was anything that's shown is committed. What's the interpretation with regards to, accessory documents or attachments like that? And specifically what's the interpretation relative to that as part of a site plan that's shown? Clearly, I don't think that's the intent, but help us all understand how that works with the development plans. So the unified development ordinance specifically it's about when you present graphics, if an applicant were to present graphics at a meeting. And those graphics, I think that you're referring to, I'm gonna have to look a little closer, but it sounds like those were some staff attachments to the statement of utility impacts maybe. If that's the case, then that's not a graphic that the applicant presented. So I'm gonna take a look real quick and I'll be back in a moment. It's the attachment eight. Commissioner Seath, any additional questions or comments at this point? No. Okay, thank you. And as we wait on Ms. Smith, I do believe Ms. Smith is probably right. I think that was a staff document, not from the applicant, but let's wait and get official feedback. So commissioners, we're still just talking about the request from a proponent of a different project to this project. I agree with commissioner Miller that it's important to get it right, but I'm also at the moment inclined to be ready to move to the merits. The neighbors, all the citizens who spoke tonight asked us to vote against the plan. They did not ask us to defer it for 60 days. And Mr. Biker spoke pretty early. And so I think his concern is on behalf of his client, which is fair, but I am ready to debate the merits and to vote this evening on the case up or down, unless someone has a really good reason to convince me otherwise. That said, Ms. Smith, I see you're back and you got your hand raised. You may have an answer for us. Yes, thank you. I just wanted to double check the attachment. And it was actually an attachment that was included by the water management staff. So it's not the same. Thank you. Like Mr. Miller. Mr. Bosby, I'm interested in the merits of the case too, but I'll point out that if we voted on the merits of the case, it doesn't buy time for the parties to fix what I think is a big issue for both projects. If we delay it, then it can get fixed. And then I think we will have a case right for decision on the merits. Right now I don't think that we do. And while I appreciate what staff is saying, and they will acknowledge that for as long as I've been on the commission, I've expressed to them great discomfort with the idea is that after a development plan is reviewed, that our UDO purports to invest in the planning director remarkable discretion to allow for changes which are done without any public hearing or public input. I'm uncomfortable with that system. I realized that some adjustments are necessary, but I don't think even under the UDO, the way it's written that this can be characterized as an insubstantial shift. And I certainly would never agree with the interpretation that you can move a roadway connection up and down a road frontage 175 for 165 feet. 75 feet, I wouldn't fight about 160 feet, I would. And that's a fair point. And I can be convinced. So I'm gonna recognize commissioner Amandoli and hear what he's thinking. Thank you, chair. Yeah, I think it's helpful to zoom out of it and recognize there aren't just two parties in this case. We're talking about the development of an entire neighborhood. This is gonna be a space where it looks like we're about to have residential, commercial and industrial all within a few hundred feet of each other. And I think taking the time to make sure all the parties including the residents are on board with that and are in line is important. And I hope the 60 days wouldn't be just a conversation with NCDOT. I hope it would be an additional conversation with the neighbors who showed up in clear opposition tonight and who and emails to us refer to being ghosted by the applicant. I think there needs to be more intentional community engagement done, not just to get this specific issue right, but to make sure that we're building a good neighborhood. The way that this area is looking to develop, if it were to go this way, it would become an area that would increasingly see development and would become a bit of a cluster in itself. And so how we begin that cluster is an important consideration. So I'd be in favor of a 60 day deferral to get some of these, I should say, continuance to ensure that we have some of the initial details clear. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner Armandolia. This is a great opportunity if any other commissioners would like to speak. You can raise your hand. If not, I mean, we have two commissioners who agree on an item. And so I'm gonna recognize Commissioner Lowe, but then you're welcome to make a motion Commissioner Miller, Commissioner Armandolia, but Commissioner Lowe, why don't you go ahead first. Thank you, Chair. I agree on the, that we need to adjust the merits of this case. But also I'm in agreement with Commissioner Miller and Commissioner Armandola for this 60 day extension. I think that's reasonable. I think that's something that we should consider. And I will go for that. Thank you. If I may, and Mr. Chairman, I move that we continue this case to our regularly scheduled meeting. This is April. I guess it would be the June meeting. I don't know the date. Grace, what would that be? Can you help? I believe it's June 9th. Let me double check. Second. It's June the 8th actually, June 8th. There you go. June the 8th. So moved by Commissioner Miller, Commissioner Armandolia, did you second? Yes. We have a motion on the floor. If anyone wants to debate the motion, please raise your hand. And not seeing any hands raised, we'll move to vote on the motion. This is a 60 day continuance to bring this back at our June 8th meeting. Okay. Armandolia. Yes. Baker. Yes. Let's be. Yes. Sorry. Cut right? Yes. Durkin. Yes. Kenshin. Yes. Lowe. Yes. McIver. Yes. Miller. Yes. Morgan. Yes. Cease. Yes. And Williams. Yes. Okay. Passes 12-0. Thank you everyone. We'll look forward to seeing this back on June 8th. We'll move to our next case. This is our final case of the evening. And then we do have some additional items after that. It's case Z2 quadruple 028, it's 1051 Olive Branch Road. And before we move to the staff report, I'm just gonna note, we got about a half hour before we're gonna have to take another 10 minute break. So I just wanna note that in advance, but let's get as far as we can. We're not gonna finish this in a half hour. So let's just know that that's the situation. But with that, we'll move to the staff report and Mr. Kultra. Yep, is that visible? Thank you, Danny Kultra again with the planning department. This is a case Z2-0-0-0-2-8. 1051 Olive Branch Road has been received from 10 Cybers of 4Vap Associates for one parcel located at 1051 Olive Branch, totaling 79.478 acres. The site is within the county's jurisdiction in the Suburban Development Tier and in the Falls Jordan Watershed Protection District B, FJB Overlay, and annexation petition BDG 20-0-0-0-1-6 is associated with a case must be approved prior to the rezoning approval. The applicant proposes to change the zoning designation of the site from Rural Residential RR to Plan Development Residential 3.700 or PDR 3.7700 for up to 284 residential dwelling units consisting of a minimum of 15% of each single family and townhouse unit types. The future land use map or flume is designated very low density residential. If the zoning is approved, the recommended flume is proposed at low density residential. The aerial map shows the site in this configuration here it fronts off of Olive Branch Road to the north for reference, this parcel fronts off of Wake Forest Highway. So Wake Forest is just to the north. Site photos indicate the majority of the site is currently undeveloped with the mixture of mature pine and hardwood vegetation. Surrounding sites, wooded land, vacant land is to the north, south and east across Olive Branch Road to the west is construction is underway for a previously approved PDR development of approximately 600 plus dwelling units. So in the context map does indicate this site zone RR and you can see the PDR zoning to the left that was previously approved. And as noted, the flume is designated very low residential and would be proposed to go to low density residential. Development plan shows riparian buffers is a small area of flood plain up in the northwestern corner. Stream buffers here, there is a connector road that's shown to be proposed up in here shows access points on the development plan and potential stream crossings. Also the dotted area is the area of proposed development. There's some small areas of project boundary buffers and then the asterisked areas are in the street riparian buffers are where tree coverage would be located. The applicant also is showing on the development plan for maximum impervious surfaces of 50% where they can go up to 70% in the FTB watershed. Some key commitments on the development plan are a minimum of 50% of each, a 15%, excuse me of each unit type shall be provided within development. A minimum of 21% tree coverage in the air in the site will be provided. Minimum of 25% open space shall be provided in compliance to meet the Easter room open space plan a minimum of 50% of the committed open space will be located adjacent to stream buffers a minimum of two of the following elements shall be provided at the time of first site plan with structures dog park, top lot, disc golf, playfields, pocket park, community gardens, nature trail, pool and clubhouse. Also in order to promote variation home appearance no homes will be constructed with a front exterior valid elevation or a color palette identical to home sites on either side average block links shall not exceed 700 feet. Prior to certificate of occupancy one time $5,000 contribution to the Durham public schools prior to certificate of occupancy provide $28,400 contribution to the city of Durham dedicated housing fund. Also maximum 90 units may receive a certificate of occupancy prior to completion of a second point of access. And also there are many traffic commitments listed on the development plan and in the staff report that resulted from a TIA that must be completed with this development. There are 12 different comp plan policies proposed with this development and they're all being met except for the flu policy and that would be consistent provided that the digital anti-smap is adopted at time of the zoning map change. And staff is available for any questions. Thanks, Mr. Kulture and Mr. Kulture, thank you.   Sometimes it works out that way. The fact that you smile when you say that is remarkable. No, well done. We're gonna move and open the public hearing. We have 10 individuals who signed up in advance, four who are proponents, six who've signed up in opposition. So we will start with the applicant and the proponents. We've got Tim Syvers, Jamie Schwedler, Baohang Wan and Jamie Davis. And so I'll turn it over to the applicant team and you'll have as usual a combination of 10 minutes between all of you to make your presentation. Thank you, Chair Busby. This is Jamie Schwedler with Parker Poe at 301 Fayetteville Street here on behalf of the applicant. The other members of the team are on the line to answer questions, but I'd like to cover the application presentation that we sent in, if that could be pulled up on the screen please. Just to orient the commission, this request is about half of the size and intensity and or intensity of the other two projects that were before you. And it's in the Searles Basin. And so it provides the needed homes at a density consistent with the surrounding development and in a manner appropriate for land use and infrastructure in that Searles Basin. Last fall, Sarah Young and staff did a, next slide please. Last fall, Sarah Young and staff did a fantastic presentation on land use and infrastructure planning in Eastern to accommodate the southeastern regional lift station. And we provided a link of that presentation recording before the meeting. If you were able to watch it, this $40 million city project was anticipated to be paid off over time with infrastructure fees and utility extensions paid by developers, building homes at low to moderate densities like before you tonight. The staff explained the type of development in this area can support due to its environmental limitations and explained that this density in development was anticipated when Searles was approved over four years ago. This request aligns with that expectation and is the most likely use of how this area will develop. This map on the screen is of the Eastern area and the Searles Basin area. The site is shown in the center and the blue on the screen and it's surrounded by approved site plans in purple, approved for your zoning and pink and close to several other proposed zoning in yellow. As you can see how this completes the continuous pattern of development. The infrastructure lines on this screen, note areas of utility extension planned to be funded by the city in green and red and then other utility extensions in orange anticipated to be funded by developers in connection with the development. Those extensions are needed to pay for the Searles investment and to offset the costs to the city. So in addition to making those extensions with this project, we are offering our share of utility and transportation improvements and commitments that Danny did a great job outlining tonight. These commitments go over the UDO requirements and exceed expectations based on our experience with the planning commission. Next slide please. The request involves a slight change in the future land use map from two units per acre and the hatched yellow to four units per acre and the solid yellow. And as you can see, it's consistent with the designations to our West and East. Next slide please. This helps us to provide continuous patterns of development consistent with the comprehensive plan. And in similar vein, the zoning change from rural residential in yellow to the PDR in blue is also consistent with those developments to our East and West. The annexation of this parcel would further fill the donut hole left by the surrounding improved developments, which have already been annexed into the city. Next slide please. Our rezoning includes a development plan and Danny did a great job laying out the existing stream buffers to be preserved in gray, the opportunities for tree-save areas with asterisks and points in sight of access. Next slide please. I'll focus on the key commitments that the request exceeds the UDO requirements and that we are committing to a mix of product with a minimum percentage of each. We are going above the preserved tree coverage area of 20% committing to 21%. We're going above the 16% open space requirement to 25%. And after discussions with staff, at least 50% of this open space area is adjacent to stream buffers consistent with the Durham East, the East Durham open space plan I'll talk about in a second. We're also providing an additional lane for bike lanes and contributions to both the housing fund and Durham public schools consistent with this 15 students generated by this change in zoning that we're requesting. Next slide please. We're also making significant design commitments. Again, these are also on the plan summarized here. They're in your packet report and were conceived from the outset knowing what the commission had given guidance on before. These include higher quality building materials, distinctive architectural features, again, distinguished from the earlier cases, amenity programming, home variation, block length and appearance of front facades and garage doors. Each of these help to distinguish these cases from the other two that before you tonight and provide more exceptional design than the other standards. Next slide please. The development plan is consistent with the East Durham open space plan. I think go to the next slide please. And it's shown on this screen to the left with our site in blue in the very center of that open space plan towards the bottom half of the screen. The plan's policy calls for preservation of wildlife habitat by using cluster development open space requirement and voluntary agreements. And I've just outlined how we're doing that with that increase to the open space commitment and then clustering that open space around the habitat. So increase the opportunities for wildlife to congregate and to use those natural corridors. These elements are also consistent with comp plan policies based on increased environmental protections. Next slide please. We talked a lot about traffic tonight. This slide shows the traffic commitments we are making at our site access points on olive branch which consists of additional turn lanes to maintain traffic flow and increased traffic flow. But we're also making not only improvements adjacent to our site but offsite into our north. Next slide please. This slide illustrates where those improvements are located. So what you see on your screen in the one and the two are the adjacent site access. So the additional turn lanes that allow for turning movements and through traffic, increasing the flow and on olive branch road and allowing for safe staging areas as folks try to turn in the site and can still pass cars that are waiting to make those turns. These are commitments on the development plan and should also be in your packet. Next slide please. This slide shows the offsite improvements I mentioned and they're significant. An additional turn lane on olive branch road at 98, the widening of highway 98 itself and installing a new traffic signal at 98 income. As staff noted in the East Durham work session presentation, these improvements are not funded by the city or NCDOT or on any timetable. So this development provides a means for completing these in the nearer term to ease the existing traffic congestion concerns we've heard about in other cases and mitigate new trips from this development. Per our TIA and the attached staff report, the improvements improve the level of service for each intersection at build out to a better level of service throughout. And we can discuss specific questions on that with Mr. Juan, who's also on the line. But because these road improvements are not funded by the city or state projects, the DOT reviews our TIA and request developers make the improvements based on their proportional impact on these roads. That is how we make the infrastructure sufficient. Not approving projects until infrastructure is here will just mean passing bonds for existing taxpayers to fund those improvements or waiting for DOT to get the funding. In the meantime, no improvements will be made and the continued lack of supply and housing will tend to increase prices of homes in Durham built due to the continued lower supply. Next slide, please. As noted on the first side, this site is in the heart of the Searles Basin area and development at this density is consistent with the intent of the comprehensive plan and utility plans. The Department of Water Management has shared that utility extensions and the fees charged to offset those costs were based on the basin developing in low to moderate density, which is consistent with the request before you tonight. Planning director Young noted that it's actually better for the environment in long-term to have the public utilities that this development would provide instead of the existing septic, which was what would be developed by right, because the septic is more likely to fail over time and it cannot support non-residential uses. We've shown how the request would bring this development in line with the lane use patterns of the surrounding area and kind of accommodate the increase in density while offsetting any adverse impacts because we're making our proportional share of the traffic improvements. Next slide, please. The project is as consistent with the comprehensive plan and the low density designation is consistent with the PDR and the intent that was outlined earlier to have those commitments go above and beyond the baselines and have design commitments incorporated. All of this will provide more housing on smaller lots and result in more affordable supply than what has been developed across the line in Wake County. Next slide, please. Consistent with the expectation of growth in the suburban tier, this provides the correct amount of density to balance out where most of the growth isn't anticipated to happen in the comprehensive plan. Next slide, please. The request is also consistent with the policies of a continuous approval and adjacent parcels. This project commits to extension of water on Kemp Road and connecting to the surals, which is all consistent with the comprehensive plan. The transportation and bike lane improvements are all consistent as well. In sum, this request is consistent with the comp plan policies, UDA requirements and the land use and infrastructure that went into the surals planning, but it responds to the growing need for housing at an appropriate density. We consciously made commitments upfront that we know this commission cares about and we didn't wait to do it at the table. Waiting on plans for funds for the roads and land planning will likely result in plans aligned with what the planning director outlined last fall and what is before you tonight. It will only exacerbate the supply and costs of existing and proposed housing in the meantime. And so we respectfully request recommendation for approval and we're happy to answer any questions. Thank you, Ms. Schwedler. We're gonna move to the other individuals who signed up to speak. These are folks who listed that they are opposed. We're gonna start with Stephen Mill and same as before, if you can give us your name, your mailing address and you can take two minutes or so to share your feedback. Stephen Mill, 1021 Restoration Drive in the Courtyards of Andrews Chapel. Seems like there's a lot of discussion tonight about the aggregate about the future of Southeast Durham. So far in Olive Branch and all this since October of 2019, four developments have been approved about 1,400 homes. Besides this one, there's another one sitting in front of council. One thing that's not been clear on this is that they're showing that residents on Olive Branch will go to Doc Nichols. They'll also come south to Carpenter Pond and Leesville. When they go to Doc Nichols, they're gonna dump into Leesville, which we've already shown. And the last discussion is close to maximum road capacity or they may come down Andrew Chapel Road. Just if they're gonna be going to 540 or Briar Creek, they're not going the opposite direction to get to that. I actually spoke at the March 15th city council meeting where they talked about the other Olive Branch development and I asked them to do a moratorium on all building and development approval in Southeast Durham until the small area study is complete. And there was a lot of discussion about that. One thing that was kind of telling to me is that Bill Judge says that we won't see any new roads for three to five years because NC Dot has no money. And with more discussion, Mayor Schultz said, well, sorry, but Durham needs the housing and they couldn't stop approving these developments. And I kind of go back a bit to Commissioner Baker talking about these cookie cutter developments without retail, without transportation, without anything. And why are we continuing to look at the same old, same old when we should be looking to the future? And just my last comment is that in a previous discussion about an Olive Branch development that the council approved, Mayor Pro Tem Johnson asked and she was somewhat facetious but actually straight ahead, she said, so why can't we get a bodega built right in the middle of this road here, this street so that people can walk and get a gallon of milk? We need something close to these people. Just having more communities where people are driving distances is not really gonna be the future of Durham. So my point here is that it's gonna add more traffic to Leesville again by dumping cars onto dock nickels and onto Leesville versus Carpenter Pond. There's no money for roads at this point and we're gonna have a period of two to three years of a nightmare of roads and then two to three years of road construction if they even approach it, approach doing it. So thanks for the time. Thanks, Mr. Nell. We've got a few other folks who've signed up. I think they have now left the meeting given the late hour, but I'm gonna read their names just in case Shauna, Glassby, Monica, Zabo, Nieste, Charles Huber DeVoe, Diane Clements, who is with us, and Andrea Sumner, who was with us until just a moment ago, but Ms. Clements, why don't we have you go ahead and share your comments since you're still with us? Oh, I already spoke, thank you very much. Okay, thank you. If there is anyone else who would like to speak on this item, please press star nine to raise your hand and we'll give you the opportunity to speak. Okay, I don't see anyone else so we're gonna close the public hearing. As I mentioned before, we are due to take another break by 9.40 and so commissioners, we could start for 10 minutes or we could break now. I'm inclined to take a break right now before we get into things and we'll take 10 minutes and we'll come back and we'll pick this up and we'll finish the rest of the evening, hopefully before we need to take another break. So we'll see you in 10. All right, welcome back. It looks like we've got most commissioners here. If you can come back on video and we've finished the public hearing so this will be opportunity for commissioners to ask questions or make comments. So if you wanna just raise your hand, I'll recognize you and we'll go from there. Commissioner Morgan. Just trying to unmute there. Thank you, thank you, Chair. Again, this is kind of a concern of mine from a traffic perspective. While a lot of the proffers have been moved towards going north to 98, there seems to be more of a desire with the traffic going south into into Wake County and to the city of Raleigh. My concern is, is that there is sort of a plan that the city of Raleigh has for New Leesville Road. There's a right-of-way that goes to Carpenter Pond and again, it comes back to infrastructure commitments for this area. I live in the Delweb community. I see a lot of the traffic I travel on this road. And before COVID, the intersection of Olive Branch and Leesville Road narrows very quickly. There's a lot of, it's a four-way stop and it does back up quite a bit during the rush hour going into Shady Grove Road, which is the four-way stop and then it continues into Wake County. My concern is just what are we doing to the south? I know we're putting a traffic light on Andrews Church from another thing and another development that's going on. There is another development that is on the enclave right there on Leesville that's gonna start to open up. It's in staff report for another 149 units. The big concern is really just, you know, again, getting the infrastructure in place to do it. I understand the funding and the need to say, well, let the developers pay for some of it, but I think we still do need a plan and it seems like the plan's been developed without a lot of citizen input. And so that's my big concern is, is that I am familiar with it with given living in the area that I am knowing the community around us that they do have a wanna input into, you know, what is really going on and where can we actually improve the area, especially getting to grocery shopping and other things. There's just not a lot of options other than driving in your car and getting to the Briar Creek for going north to 98. And most of the cases, most of the community is going south into Briar Creek or onto Leesville Road and going in towards 540 rather than going north. So I appreciate the proffers along 98 and some of the improvements that have been made. I know we approved another community that was gonna be putting stop lights along 98 as well. I think that's a great opportunity to certainly improve that infrastructure, but we're really stuck with all these new homes going in and automobiles going on these country roads. So that's my concern and my, you know, my take on it. And I do think I kind of agree with one of our, you know, Mr. Nell's concern of putting a moratorium until we can get the small area plan together and get some feedback from the community and then see if we can actually build out some kind of plan for our area, much like we've done with other areas in our city and then maybe put together some kind of design as far as this community and how this is gonna grow rather than just sprawling out into new neighborhoods, new roads and unsure where we're gonna go with all that. I know there's some connector roads that are being planned. It would be good to have the bigger picture rather than each individual application that's coming before us. So I don't fault the developers, they're doing what they're needing to do, but what I also think is we need to take a bigger picture, a bigger picture view of the thing. That's my comments. Thanks, Commissioner Morgan. Commissioner Miller. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Well, it's Ms. Schwedler, there she is. Jamie, did I hear you say that the development plan for higher quality building materials? In terms of, correct. We have, we have text commitments limiting or committing to a pallet of materials and having a series that Mr. Kulcher read off. You've got every material on there, but weather. It doesn't, it looks to me like you can build these buildings out of anything. I don't see, I don't, you used a comparative higher than the previous projects. The previous projects have the same list you do. Well, I misspoke there. I was trying to compare to the lack of architectural commitments and some of the earlier projects and the comments that were made on that. I'm sorry, I drew the wrong comparison. Thank you. And then, so one of the things that disturbs me about this project and I see it as being different is almost all of it is in the national heritage area. And the only commitment that we have that that recognizes that is a commitment to use half of the 25% open space and to cluster that up around the stream buffers well, given the way that this property is affected by stream buffers, I think it would be very difficult not to do that anyway. It doesn't seem like much of a commitment. And then, so one of the things that I would like to go over for all the commission members is when we talk about a project like this and we talk about the various kinds of open space, what are we talking about? What are the base requirements? What are, what are the kinds of open space and what kind of space on the map can do double or triple duty as open space? In other words, can stream buffers also be open space and those kinds of things. And I'd like to have access of staff earlier this week and I'd like to go over it again in front of the whole commission if we can so that we all understand what we're talking about because we have, you know, there are project boundary buffers and all these kinds of things when we're talking about this 25% open space, what in fact are we talking about? What will be open? Commissioner Miller, is that a question for me? It's for the staff. Oh, I apologize. I wasn't quite catching that. Yes, well, open space is required for all of these residential type developments. If they're proffering 25% of the site in open space at least one third of that would have to be recreational. The rest can be in anything and it could be more. Anything like what? It can be vegetative, which means some of their open space could be in their tree coverage. It could be, and it could be located within the riparian buffers. It could be in the flood plain. It could be into any of those areas. Now, if they're proffering to have 50% of that open space outside of those riparian buffers, then it's gonna be upstream of that, those riparian buffers. So at minimum, they're gonna have 50% of that 25% or in other words, 12 and a half percent of their proffered open space is going to be upstream of those riparian buffers. So, but I read the, so I read the actual text of the proffer is is that it will be clustered adjacent to. So I'm just, I'm having a hard time understanding or visualizing how much open space we're actually talking about that isn't already compelled in the form of riparian buffers or tree save or wetlands or something like that. Well, they haven't identified the actual open space upon the plan. I know, but help me conceptually. Maybe in other words, what does this really mean, this 50%? What is it not then? It means that 12 and a half percent of that 25% open space would be adjacent to those riparian buffers. But could it also be tree save? If they're, well, no, they've identified their tree save within the riparian buffers. Let me look at the development plan to be sure. It is, you're right. And except for one place outside where there is whatever that dotted area is that's outside the riparian buffers up in that corner where there is a potential utility crossing. And I'm not, what does the legend say? Building and parking envelopes. So that's, no, that's not what that is. I'm not sure what that dotted space is. It doesn't appear to be a legend for it. Yeah, I'm happy to have the applicant team answer. Are there any of these questions if you like? Maybe that would be better. I'd like Tim Cyvers to be unmuted and speak in riparian buffers. Yes, this is Tim Cyvers. Good evening, Commissioner Miller. Thank you for the question. So to clarify that, yes. So the intent of the 50% of the open space being outside or adjacent to that stream buffer is to be able to referring back to the Durham Eastern open space. I know what it says. I just want to know. What I'm trying to just get a handle on is how many acres that are not already required to be open space by some other provision in some code somewhere, are we talking about here? So our 25% requirement is a minimum of 20 acres. So at least, I guess if maybe, and I'm not sure if this answers your question fully, but the commitment would state that at least 10 acres that are outside of that stream buffer area, riparian buffer area. Does that help quantify your answer? Out, but outside of it, but adjacent to it. Because the- That's correct. And the point of that is to refer back to the Durham Eastern open space plan that says to cluster your homes away from those stream buffer areas for the Durham Eastern open space plan. So that commitment was tried to emphasize that we're meeting that cluster request of the Durham Eastern Durham open space plan. Right. And so, I mean, but I look at your building envelope and it's big, it covers pretty much the whole property outside the buffers. What is the dotted area up in the northeast corner where so many things come together? The proposed site access for the public street across the northern part of the property and then the potential utilities crossing and you've got tree save up there. That's a complicated corner on the map that I'm looking at. And you've got a dotted area in there. What is that? Are you referring to the northwest corner, the top left of the- I'm sorry, northwest corner. Okay. I've had my eastern west mixed up all- No problem, sir. So that area is into the floodplain and wetland area. That hatch is identifying some wetlands. So would that area also be part of that 50%? It could, yes, sir. Okay. Thank you. That's what I was driving at. And then, is there any reason why this access points of that heavy dotted line going across the property does it have to be there in order to line up with similar heavy dotted lines on already approved projects nearby? Yes, sir, it does. Okay. I thought so. Thank you. And then I'm very concerned about the cemetery. You've got a small cemetery. I don't know where it is because you did not show it on the existing conditions map and there are recommendations from the State Historic Preservation Office about its preservation and buffering. And you've got no commitments about that. And if I understand the cemetery correctly, it's the Shaw Cemetery and it is Mr. William Henry Shaw and his family and maybe other people are buried there. The state recommended that there be a pedestrian survey by an archeologist. And as far as I know, that hasn't happened. So tell me what you plan to do with regard to that cemetery. That's for you, Mr. Saunders. Sorry about that. I was waiting for Jamie to answer. So we're in the process of going through that now. We do understand the process and working with professionals and doing the full research to determine if that cemetery truly is there. And we'll go through similar process that we've talked to recently about in other projects as well. I don't know what that means. You got to protect the cemetery, you got to move. Undetermined at this time. Most likely the cemetery will probably need to be relocated. The location, approximate location is in the really the very southern corner. If you will, that is close to... How close is it to Olive Branch? It's pretty close, sir. And it's pretty close to the southern property line. My understanding of the general location is that it nearly aligns with the current access point with the access... One second, go in my plan. Access point number one, which has to remain in that location because it is the fourth leg of the intersection for across the street from the Mungo Homes development. So it's with that alignment that's being required, and of course, which makes more sense to make the fourth leg of that intersection, it is potentially possible that that location of the cemetery will have to move to create that access point in alignment with the Mungo Homes development. I mean, I'm assuming you saw the report of the folks you hired that found the cemetery and took pictures of it? Yes. Okay, because I thought I heard you to say that you weren't sure it was actually there. So we're still going through that research and working through that report, yes. All right, so I encourage you to save the cemetery and guard it. This notion of moving cemeteries is, in my opinion, damaging to our public history and shared history, certainly was not the expectation of the family when they buried their loved ones there. I do not like to see cemeteries removed. I have not heard good reports about the firms who take this on as a job. I've already got complaints from people concerning the cemetery on the property next door. So, anyway, I encourage you and I would like to, I would prefer to see on this development plan some sort of commitments with regard to the preservation of the cemetery. It appears to be a very, very small one. And the State Historic Preservation Office made recommendations that did not to be particularly onerous given the size of this property. And then finally, with regard to the design of these units, do you have a builder for this project? Yes, Pultee Homes is anticipated to build this and we do have Jamie Davis with Pultee who is available tonight. And are these going to be garage dominated facades? So one of our tax commitments, as you've seen on recent plans is for the town homes to provide a certain number and off the top of my head, I can't remember the percentage of single car garages to help minimize that. We've also provided some tax commitments with Gable features to help provide that architectural variance within the development and the commitment of not having any home that's exactly the same directly next to each other to providing vertical, horizontal, different materials and colors that help provide variation through the development. And I appreciate all of that, but you can still dominate the facade of the residential property with a single garage bay. And I believe that our comprehensive plan does not favor that. And I know I don't favor it. I do not believe it makes for a project with a long life in the marketplace or in essentially kind of good social engineering, which all good land use planning is. So Mr. Chair, I note that we as a planning commission have turned a lot of these projects down and the city council votes for them anyway. I guess they have their reasons. And I suppose you could say, well, since they have pretty much approved everything out here anyway, we might as well go ahead and approve this. That isn't the way I see this. The city council has its reasons for making the decisions it makes. That doesn't mean I believe that the decisions that we make and the reasons for them are wrong. I have misgivings about this property. It has a very tiny connection with a real public street. It is in almost entirely within the national heritage area. And I don't think the 50% of their required open space requirement is much of a response to that situation. And although I would agree with Ms. Schwedler, there are design commitments for these units and materials commitments for these units. I don't think they're as meaningful as they could be, but I do appreciate the effort. So it's obvious that this team has been paying attention. I will listen to what the rest of my planning commission colleagues say before I vote, but I find all of this a little disappointing, kind of dismal actually. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner Miller. Commissioner Cabrera. Thank you, Chair. You know, as I listened to Jamie's presentation, it struck me that you did a very good job of sort of outlining where your plan aligned with both UDO and the comprehensive plan in a lot of areas. But what's striking or what hit me is that it's a dated comp plan and UDO. And so we're sort of operating, even if you're aligning to these things, we're not operating for the future. You know, there's, I think in today's age, there are ways to get really creative and commit to some of the things that we've been asking for. Specifically, I'll address affordable housing.  There's a lot of units here. Have you thought about that? If so, why, that's, I don't think it's really worth discussing the $28,000 commitment to, I think it was 28,000 commitment to affordable. But I mean, true affordable housing in terms of some significant percentages and getting creative, whether it's financing acquisition costs, I understand math, but I think there are ways to get there. So I don't know if you can speak to that and reasons why you don't have that, understanding that that's something that's important. It's been important for a long time, but we're just not seeing the commitment. Thanks. And that's for either Mr. Cybers or Ms. Shwendo. I'll take that. This is Jamie. I mean, I think we always consider each of the aspects that are important to the commission and the council. And of course, we're aware of affordable housing being one of them. I think like many projects, it's difficult to factor that in and make that work with the rising costs of land in Durham and the pressures to incorporate many different things into the development that we have. And so instead, we've proffered the Affordable Housing Fund and we've looked at price points that can make this affordable to folks, even if it's not a committed percentage of AMI or a certain number percentage of AMI. Any follow-up commission recovery? No, I'll leave it at that. Thank you. Commissioner Lowell. Yes, thank you. This is to the applicant, Ms. Jamie, looking at the development plan. I believe I said that the assets on the development plan symbolizes reserve tree coverage area. You tell me what's the total of these assets? I really can't make it out on my copy all because my eyes are not that good, but it looked like I'm looking at five assets here that represents for reserve tree coverage area. And I think I'm looking at the total five assets what's the total land or acreage with the total five assets? This is Tim Syvers. I'll answer that, Commissioner Lowell. Our minimum commitment is the 21%. At site plan stage, we can always go above that, but we'll have at least the 21%, which is 16.7 acres. And we were talking about a little over 79 acres, I believe, is that correct? Yeah, okay. Ask me that, thank you. Thanks, Commissioner Lowell. Commissioner Durkin. We can't hear your audio, Commissioner Durkin. Can you hear me now? Yeah. Okay. I just wanted to echo, shockingly, I'm going to echo the concerns raised about affordable housing in this project. And I understand that this project is smaller and scaled in the prior to, but it's still almost 80 acres, which is a lot of land with an anticipated number of units of 284. That's also a lot of units. I also appreciate the difference between having rental in the project, the K Street project, or parcel K. It's different to provide affordable rental housing, which then it is affordable home ownership. But I think developers need to figure out on a creative solution, because we are bringing this up with every case that comes before us. And I think it can be done, but it's on the developers right now to figure out a way to make that happen. And we're happy to brainstorm, but I think we're all demanding more now. Thanks. Thank you. Commissioner Armandoli. Thank you, Chair. I just wanted to return to this idea of a moratorium on development in this area. I think that's something we should be pursuing every time that we, or every time that the council makes a choice to approve one of these cases on Olive Branch Road, they're making a choice to approve to build out suburbia and Durham. And I do not think that is the Durham that most folks want. And I know it's the one that I don't support. So I'll be voting no in this case tonight. Thank you. Thank you. Commissioners, if anyone else would like to speak, please raise your hand. Commissioner Cease. Just one quick question, perhaps for the applicant, perhaps for staff. There was a reference or a question earlier regarding the location of the future collector street that's indicated on the development plan. And I'm trying to find any approved plans off to the northeastern parcel that's adjacent to the site. I don't see any indicated on that particular parcel. And I'm wondering if there is one. This is Tim Cyvers, if it's okay if I could answer that. Sure. So there's approved plans to the west, the parcel that connects the future collector road directly to the east. There is no approved plan on that. That location and connection location follows the transportation maps that have been the regional transportation maps. Thank you for that answer. I think that's one of those instances where the scenario that Erling Thomas described to us earlier with regards to that level of planning with those early stage transportation planning maps doesn't delve as deeply into specific site or environmental characteristics as one would do in looking at a particular development plan. And so I would just express a concern regarding showing a collector road slicing across a stream buffer which are considered with great care from a regulatory perspective and otherwise in Durham when it could be shifted a bit further south and have zero impact as far as I could tell even looking at the topo maps of development to the east in the future. So that's just one observation. Just a quick question, why the 15% commitments relative to townhome versus single family? That seems pretty lenient in terms of a proposed mix. That's not a judgment, it's just a question. It's a commitment to confirm that both uses will be provided with just making a statement that this would be single family and townhomes without putting a minimum percentage on that. You could have one. So we want to provide a minimum commitment that states both items, single family and townhomes will both be included with the development. I guess I can understand that answer. It just strikes me in terms of portraying a project to the public that there's a lot of uncertainty associated with what will ultimately get built. That's just an observation. That's all I have at this point. Thank you, Commissioner Sees. I don't see anyone else raising their hand, so I think this is an appropriate time for a motion. Mr. Chairman, then if I may, please. With regard to, I apologize. With regard to case Z2, 0, 0, 0, 0, 2, 8, concerning the property located at 1051 Olive Branch Road, I move that we send this forward to the, is it the city council? Yes, it's city council with a favorable recommendation. Seconded. Thank you. So Commissioner Miller, I think I heard Commissioner Morgan, is that you? Yeah, I know. One of the roll call vote, please. Edmondoia? No. Baker? No. Bussby? No. Cutwright? Jerkin? No. Kinchin? No. Low? No. McIver? Nope. Miller? No. Morgan? No. Cease? No. And Williams? Is Commissioner Williams still on the call? I see Commissioner Williams. Yes, I'm here. Okay. I'm sorry, I thought I was talking, I was on mute. Okay, no worries. What was your vote? Yes. Yes? Yes. Okay. All right, it fails one to 11. Thank you. We're gonna move to our final two items under new business. And the first is the FY22 planning department work program. Neither of these are public hearing items, but we have staff reports and offer feedback. Good evening commissioners. I know it's late, so I will be brief. As you all know, we are required, the planning department is required by virtue of the interlocal agreement that creates the Joint City County Department to submit an annual work program to both governing bodies every year.  This year is much like last year's kind of a hold even work program. As you know, most of our discretionary time as staff is devoted to work on the comprehensive plan. In addition, there are a few smaller projects that were put on the work program. Last year, pertaining mostly to text amendments that will continue to roll over, but there is not staff capacity to take on substantial projects outside of the comprehensive plan. There is one very small addition to the work program, which is a inspection for bus shelters that are being built in the right of way. We have an engineer on staff that has a little bit of capacity to take that on. And it's a relatively small workload that needed to be accomplished in cooperation with transportation and GoTriangle. So we agreed to take that on under existing staff capacity. But having said all that, I am happy to entertain any questions. Like I said, it's really a no change year for us on the work program. Thank you. Commissioner, is there any questions or feedback? Commissioner Miller. So I have to observe, I just have to, my disappointment with the work plan. And I realized that the planning director and the planning staff probably do not have a whole lot of leeway in the way this is presented. But my goodness, we have talked for a long time about a lot of things over the years about affordable housing and about community engagement and about gentrification and displacement and all the things that the community are crying out for us to address. And we have a work plan in front of us that is essentially a development services work plan where almost all of the energy and effort and resources are devoted to the things that the staff has to do. And a lot of what the staff has to do, I mean a whole lot of what the staff has to do is to tend to development submissions initiated by the development community. And that's where energy goes. And we have got to figure out a way to change that. And I note that we have in Durham created and probably in every other city in North Carolina as far as I know, but in Durham we have created a situation where we fund the department to some significant measure by the fees the development community pays. And when we ask the planning staff to take on and do work for which there's no fee revenue stream, it's difficult. And I think that as a body politic, Durham has got to break out of this mold. I really believe this. There has to be a fair chunk of our energy and resources and people that work on these other issues. I read all the way through the development plan and I never saw anything in it that addresses the concerns that I know big aspects of the community are struggling with. I'm talking about Braggtown and I'm talking about Waltown and Northgate. We've got to carve out of our resources some way of putting some portion of the driving hand in planning in the hands of people who are not developers. The ordinary people of this community cannot just sit back and wait for cases. They do not initiate and respond to them. That cannot be their only role. And if it's not going to be their only role, then the entire political apparatus of the city needs to change and insist on change. And I'm not looking to the planning department necessarily to start this or to be responsible for it. They have a list of things they have to do and they've barely been given the resources to do just those things. And that's why we see a same as last year kind of hold our own work plan. And I take as a member of the Planning Commission and as a member of the community, I take my full share of responsibility for letting things just continue on the way they have been going. It's got to be different. There have got to be ways for ordinary people. And when I say this, I'm not running anybody down. I know some people object to my use of the word ordinary, but I'm referring to people whose interest in this entire process is where they live. The home they've purchased, the home they rent and the surroundings and the environment they build for themselves to live their lives, to raise their children, to grow old in. And to me, that's the most important consideration of the work that all of us do together. And I don't see it getting the attention that I think it deserves. And so this is the last time I'll comment as a Planning Commission member on a work plan and so I'm going to express disappointment and I hope keep everyone awake to the fact that we have got to do this better. Thank you very much. Commissioner Baker. Yeah, I thought that those were really thoughtful comments provided by Commissioner Miller and I think that I agree with them. Just two things that I wanted to bring up. One is that I did want to see, was hoping to see something about Braggtown, historically black community that has been fighting for equity and fighting for justice and Waltown who is a small community that's sort of battling a major developer on the Northgate side. So I really wanted to see those communities and some acknowledgement of institutional support for the work that they're doing and the work that they want to be able to accomplish. And the other thing that I wanted to address was the actual document itself. And this is the, I think the third time that I've seen the work program as Commissioner Miller mentioned, the work program as it is now is a long list of things that we see the same thing sort of every year when we get it, it's a long list of things that the city does, permits, all those things. And we've talked a lot on this commission about making planning and zoning and development much more accessible to the community. And part of that is making these documents a little bit more user friendly, a little bit more accessible and not just for the community but for us as well. And I think part of that would be making this document or maybe making a similar type of document that speaks to a work program more accessible. For example, having a sheet that on the y-axis has a list of the projects that the city is working on and on the x-axis has time. And when is, can we expect engagement? Maybe it has to be a dynamic spreadsheet and changes over time. When can we expect things to go to public hearing? What's the timeframe for the different projects that are happening? And just making it much more visual and much more accessible to the community. So yeah, those are my two comments. One more on the content and one little bit more on the actual document and framework itself. Ms. Young, I see you've got your hand raised. Yeah, I just wanted to take a minute and address. First of all, Commissioner Baker, I really like the idea of making the document more visual and more accessible. And so hopefully that'll be something we can work on that I think would definitely do a lot for transparency of the document and also just having it be something that's more understandable to everyone. On the point of some of these particular neighborhoods that have development pressures that they have been really struggling with. We have said time and time again that we are going to work with those as part of the comprehensive plan focus area approach. So we're currently working with Braggtown to develop the scope for their focus area. We have been meeting a little bit with Walltown but our goal is to work with as many groups as we can through the comprehensive plan process. And then obviously as part of that, we expect there to be a whole series of follow-up projects with specific communities and specific geographies that we will undertake as well. So they're not forgotten. I wanted to make that clear but I do think that some of this gets buried when you roll it up into the work program. So I appreciate you bringing that up. Great, thank you. Any additional comments or feedback? Great. And just to be clear, this is not an item that requires our vote this evening. Is that correct? This is an item where you typically will recommend approval. Okay. I believe it's a recommendation goes with it. Well, thank you. This would then be the appropriate time for a motion for recommendation. Mr. Chair, I move that we send the fiscal year 2022. Is that correct Sarah? Fiscal year 2022 work plan forward to the elected officials with, that's the city and the county with a favorable recommendation. Chair, I think I would second, but I think Commissioner Amandola had his hand raised. I don't know if he's had a question before that you may have missed him. I'm sorry. Thank you. Let's take your second and Commissioner Amandola, first of all, sorry I totally missed that. If you do have a comment, let's have it as part of the debate before we vote on the motion. Sure, I just had a brief question. I'm aware that this year is kind of a tight fiscal year and I was curious if there were things that were like wish list items for the department work plan that we're not able to make it. I will say that I have a long list of wish list items and we are, I will say this, there is always a little bit of staff capacity available. We tend to not want to over commit, but you will notice that there are many small projects that get done throughout the year because we have a very dedicated staff that finds time for things. We're not able to bite off huge things through that method, but there are, and one of the things the next item is that you'll hear after this is one of those projects. So we do, I think the staff can attest that I have a long laundry list of wish things and that may be something that, I'd be happy to share with you all at some point if you're interested. We can have a, maybe at one of your retreat sessions where we talk a little more informally about kind of what we want the city and the county to be in terms of a planning vision for the future. I would love to engage with you all in that conversation now that I'm in a different role than I was before, but yes, to answer your question, there is a long list of the staff. I would say one of my biggest things is looking at our processes and particularly our regulations through a racial equity lens. There are a lot of things in our ordinance that really have a lot of negative impacts on folks. And we really need to prioritize getting to that even while we're in the middle of a comp plan. We know what those things are. They've been there for years. We're not kidding anybody. So that's one of the things that's high on my priority list just by way of example. Thank you. And as I'm sure many folks on this call are already aware and maybe folks will watch the speculator and see this but we are in the budget cycle right now. Both the city council and county commissioners are in the process of developing in a budget. Their proposals out there and O'Bragtown is pushing for the city to fund staff dedicated time for them to have their focus area. The racial equity task force has called for a racial equity fund which part of that work could be looking at the ordinances of that come through the planning department through a racial equity lens. These conversations are happening right now. And oftentimes the reason things don't get done in Durham that we wish could get done is because we don't have the budget dedicated to them. This is something that I'm sure will be referenced when we discuss the new comprehensive plan later this month. But I know that one thing that I have been noticing is how limited we are in our resources for a city in the county that exudes this idea of progressivism. We need more funding to fund our planning practices and all the other things our city needs to do. We need to frankly raise taxes and provide assistance to those who cannot afford their property taxes so that the people are paying their fair share and are able to provide the services that we need to have a good and equitable city. Thank you, Chair, those are my comments. Thank you. Commissioner Morgan, I'm gonna recognize you as well and then we'll have the vote on the motion. Thank you. I'll just be real brief. Sarah, I really do welcome your wish list and your interest there. I think anything that we can do to help advocate for some of the items that you have on your list would be most helpful. So if you're willing to certainly share that laundry list of everything and maybe prioritize what you would like us to advocate for, I'd like to be part of that and be able to help you. Sounds good to me. Great. And I also like your recommendation of being able to have a longer free flowing discussion at the next, our next retreat, virtual retreat, but we can work to start to set that up because it's probably about time to do that once we get through the backlog of these twice a month marathons we're having. Okay, with that said, we had a motion by Commissioner Miller, seconded by Commissioner Cutrate. And this is the recommendation of the FY2022 Planning Department Work Program and we'll have the roll call vote. Amondolia. Yes. Baker. Yes. B. Yes. Cutrate. Yes. Durkins. Yes. Inchin. Yes. Lowe. MacIver. Yes. Miller. No. Morgan. Morgan. Yes. Cease. Yes. And Williams. No. Okay. It passes 10-2 with a recommendation for approval. Great. Thank you. So under our final item, this is the land use engagement initiative. This is information item. I got to see this at the Joint City County Planning Committee meeting a week or two ago. It's cool and it's exciting. So I'm looking forward to seeing it again and hearing from all of you. So I'll hand it off to staff to walk us through this. Great. Good evening, Chair Busby, Vice Chair Kinshine. Honorable commissioners, Alexander Cahill with the Planning Department and along with my fellow department colleague, Chris Peterson, who you all know very well, we're excited to provide information on this information item. Thank you for staying up late with us. I will try to move expeditiously through this item, but I will make sure it gets the thought and the intention that it deserves as we go through this. So planning staff have been listening to the feedback that y'all have been providing. City Council members have provided county commissioners, advisory boards, partner departments, community members and those involved in the engaged term process about things that we need to do to improve the outcomes for land use cases and the process by which we get to these cases. We even heard tonight that we need to break out of the mold, that we need to ensure that we don't continue to do things as business as usual. And under Director Young's direction, we have come up with a land use engagement initiative that hopes to start centering some of these ideas that you're talking about. In multiple mediums, venues and formats, we have heard concerns from community members, especially at public hearings, at planning commission and City Council, and each and every time have taken them to heart. We've taken this feedback and we've created what we believe is a vision and initiative that captures the array and richness of the voices that we have heard so far and then also maintains some spaces for the voices that we have not yet heard. As we've seen tonight, great transparency and the information that we provide to our community is imperative and really helps get a development proposal to a project that can work for everyone. What you're gonna hear tonight is a land use engagement strategy that is adaptable and responsive to the changing nature of the current pandemic environment and really hopes to help vision for what the post-pandemic environment could and should look like. We may not have all the answers tonight and we shouldn't, but we do hope and anticipate that today we'll begin to change the narrative around development in Durham by adding richer, deeper and harder to reach voices to these proposals of development that come into land use and move us towards more proactive land use planning. So I'm just gonna quickly go over our agenda for tonight. It's a nice short one and it's gonna be a little interactive to get our juices flow right before we go to bed. We're gonna talk about the initiative goals and guiding values. We're gonna talk about the phase of this project proposal.  And then we're gonna ask for feedback from y'all. So as you've heard in past sessions from the conference of plan team and the goals and objectives for the conference of plan, we wanna make sure that we're centering community input into this process. So what this process for land use engagement is gonna do is we're gonna use the guiding values of the conference of plan to make sure that we have a gut check on everything that we do moving forward. Is the work we're doing in land use equitable? Is it accountable? Is it accessible? And does it enhance the wellbeing of the people at impacts? These goals have been shared with you in draft version by the policy and urban design team. And the two goals that we're especially gonna focus on making sure we adhere to our informed and involved community engagement process and then intentional planning and decision-making. This will allow us to help center community voices in the process as we move forward. So we've been thinking about what this first phase of this land use engagement would look like, what it feels like, what it sounds like. And we're starting with some surveys to residents and surveys to applicants. Find out what do they know? What are things we can do better? What are we missing the mark on? What are we nailing that we need to enhance or expand? We are going to focus on pre-submitted meetings that discuss community engagement at the pre-submitted meeting. In the past, we may have talked about all the technical aspects of the UDO that apply to a case. And now we've moved towards centering a collective determination about what's the best way to engage the community in these conversations at the pre-submitted stage. We know that once an application is already submitted, it's already in a stronger, more permanent form than it is than when it's in a pre-submitted session. And then this first phase will also have an educational strategy where we want to understand our community, what they need, and then help them learn about what we do so they can become more involved members of this process. We're looking at ways to make our neighborhood meetings more robust and engaging, moving them and pivoting them away from being Q&A sessions about a project to really finding ways to engage the community in them. We are unrolling a record of community engagement to provide transparency to residents about how a project or development plan has changed since a project has gone through the review cycle. And then one of the most exciting things is what you'll see tonight is the social pinpoint interactive mapping and input tool that along with Chris Peterson, we've worked hard to hope center and provide transparency in these land use processes. And then of course, on-going is we're always gonna be doing stakeholder interviews. Anytime we get a chance to talk to someone in the community, we do take that feedback. We're pretty good in documenting it and we're gonna keep doing that and having those conversations because we know that this process is not going to have an endpoint. So one of the cool things that we've done is start a land use engagement initiative site. And this is a site that came out of the comprehensive plan process. It was procured for the comprehensive plan to help engage residents. And we decided that as an implementation tool of the comprehensive plan, we could use the site to reach our residents. It is a vision to be a one-stop shop for where the community can find resources on a project. They can answer questions and surveys. They can find out answers to FAQs, which we will adapt and change as we move forward. And they can stay engaged in land use in general. With that, the most exciting thing that I wanna talk about today and then I will soon turn it over to my colleague, Chris Peterson, is we have a new tool that we launched that essentially hopefully answers all the questions that y'all have been bringing up and they've been absolutely great questions about transparency, accountability, how do we incorporate community voices into the process before they come to Planning Commission and City Council? And so we've worked really hard to develop a tool as you were direct to young say, often in our quote-unquote spare time or after work whenever we can, because we know how important this work is to centering our community's voices in these projects. So with that, I'm gonna actually turn it over to my colleague, Chris Peterson, and he's gonna walk you through an interactive demonstration of how this new land use tool works. Thank you, Alexander, and welcome, everybody. And my name is Chris Peterson with the Planning Department. It's a pleasure to present to you. Normally I'm the voice behind the Zoom meeting, so now it's a pleasure to be in front again. So this is our new interactive tool as Alexander has mentioned. It's a wonderful mapping tool that we've developed with the help of social pinpoint to kind of, once again, engage the public. When you first open the map from the land use page, and I can put these in the chat in a moment, you first enter the map, the website. Sorry, my mouse keeps moving. I'm gonna have to stop control for a second. Okay, so when you first enter the website, you are welcomed with this. I'm sorry, my mouse is going really crazy right now. Bear with me one second. I'm gonna stop and reshare again. Okay, I apologize about that. You're welcome to do the website with given instructions. And then you see the map of Durham with various orange parcels scattered around the county and city. You can navigate to the various parcels in three ways to find your case. As many of us know with maps, you can just kind of scroll around and navigate to where you need to go and maybe click on the case that you're interested in. If you know relatively geographically how to get there. You can go, if you know the case name or the case number, you can scroll through the list of cases on the left and find the case you need. Or the third option is to just search for a case. So maybe I don't remember where exactly I saw that zoning notification sign. I don't know the case number, but I know where my address is and I know it was really close to my house. I can use the search function and I can search for address. So this case, I'm gonna use a school that's close to a few of our cases. So the spring value elementary school. I can zoom out a little bit and, aha, there's the case I'm looking for. And then I can see there's other cases around here too. So I'm gonna click this one case that's really close to spring value elementary. And so you can see that it changes a little bit. So this allows me to indicate that I'm on this case and I'm looking at the various elements of here. What pops up on the left is the current description of the case, the various steps of where we're at in the process. So we have an application that's submitted. It's under review and the data that's going to plan and condition when it's made and then also to the council. And below it are supplemental information. So your application, your development plan, the public interest statement and the link to the online zoning GIS. We link to our Durham Maps page because as good as this tool is, we can't put all of our files and all of our shapefiles on here yet. We are working with the developer to or the vendor of this application to try to have a direct link but we can't put zoning on here yet but we are working on that. You also see there's a few other waypoints that popped up. So when I look on this particular case, we have a few waypoints here. Those waypoints are drop pins that individuals can use to comment on this case. So for instance, I'm in this neighborhood and I'm really intrigued about this, maybe a neighborhood coming in here. And I see a school. I can drop a general comment here and I can say, let me move this out. I can say, will there be any trails to the school? And I have to put in my email address so that I can't just answer anonymously. Or at least when I say anonymously, I'm not going to facility to the staff. So there is a record of comments. And so that way it prevents us getting like spammed and getting just other comments that aren't necessary to the case. I had a comment and it's on there. So now what other people can do is they can click on my case and they can see my discussion and they can like dislike just like you put on the most social media you can share on social media, Facebook, Twitter or I can add more discussion to this comment. And I can say, I hope so as well. So there's lots of the various options with the comments. You can also add photos to comments. For example, for this over here, I dropped a transportation-related drop-in. And here, I say, well, this would be in the intersection of this case like this photo right here. Photos do get approved by staff. So when someone does upload a photo, we have to look at first. But then once we approve it, then it's online. So that what others can comment as well. Another option for engagement with this is filling out the survey. So below every case with all the additional information, you'll find survey bits where you can select the case that you're on. For example, here we're on case Z08. You can set your stand sign for or against or I'm not decided yet. Do I live near the project area? Do I agree? Tell me why I agree. Do you disagree? Tell me why you disagree. And then arrange different elements of this case that are important to you in chronological order. So or hierarchy for you. And any other additional comments. So once again, like the drop-ins, we need you to submit your emails. That way we can follow up with you or if there's any other questions or concerns. This website does allow for translations. So it does have Google automatic translations and it does it in almost all the languages here if there's another language last no, but there's about 50 of them right there. And we will continue to keep cases on here. So as we zoom out, we'll see that there's one case in gray located below. And that indicates a closed case and we will put the decisions by the various governing bodies on that case. So here we have an approved 13 to zero for their planning commission as well as the seven zero city council. We, that kind of quick wrap up. I know it's kind of late so we don't want to take up too much of your time but we can come back to this during our discussion if you want to see other tools. I'll kick it back off to Alexander. Great, thanks Chris. I appreciate that. And we will come back at the end if there's any questions. I just had a few more slides. I know one question you're probably gonna have is how far back are we gonna go with cases when we upload them? We just started with 2021 cases as an example but we have made a decision to go back and add any case that has not yet been to planning commission. So as you can imagine, that's quite a few cases that we are working on in the background but I'm pretty confident between the people that are working on this project can get that done in the next couple of weeks here. So we'll be able to look forward to that. So one of the things is that how are different stakeholders gonna use this tool or how can they use this tool? So one of the things that this could do for elected and appointed officials such as yourself is it can really help keep you apprised of one new cases that are coming. Sometimes you're hearing about a case and you send us an email, what's going on with this case? We haven't heard anything about it, we haven't seen it. And you might be able to just go to this site and see, okay, where is it at? What have they submitted? And then you can look and see what are people saying about it? What's the narrative that's going on? Now we get that this is just one narrative. We have a lot of barriers that we need to remove to get people to participate. But as a starting point, we at least are able to see what is missing in this conversation. There is some future functionality with this tool as well where we may be able to have you respond as a planning commissioner and be able to have each of you jump in and help each other and support each other in those responses. So there's just some things that may help y'all. For the community, they'll be able to respond to cases that they care about, cases that have meaning to them, cases that they just wanna know more about. They'll be able to, from application submittal to adoption or denial, they'll be able to stay engaged with that case. And that is something that we know has been missing, we've been hearing has been missing. So there is an opportunity for someone now to be involved in a case from start to finish. Should they so choose? They'll also be able to use this hopefully as a way to stay engaged. So by the time we get to a public hearing, hopefully a public hearing then is a final overall policy discussion or decision or how are we taking everything we heard in making a final decision. One of the things that we don't wanna do is have to make applicants or the community members stay up all night talking about this along with y'all. So we're hoping that's one of the benefits in a way that the community can use this as well. And then one of the ways that applicants can use this is they'll be able to look at the comments and they'll be able to see what's going on in the area. They'll be able to look up past cases. So if they have a case adjacent to a privately approved case or deny case, they'll be able to look up the narrative around that case and see what were people saying back then and start thinking about how to incorporate that into their development proposal. And then staff are able to use this in so many ways. Really the tools for us are limitless, which is super exciting for us. I'm a little overwhelming sometimes, but we'll be able to gauge community concerns, identify community input and expertise that maybe we don't necessarily have access to now. We'll be able to use this to inform the project and apprise the development or the applicant of this. At each round of review, what our intent is is to look at the social pinpoint narrative, pull any comments or concerns or feedback that we've gotten around a project and use that to provide advisory comments to the applicant for them to address based on the community reactions and concerns. Now we know that we can't require them to do something with these, but we think if we start changing the narrative around this that along with the work that y'all are doing and changing that narrative, that they will start accommodating some of these requests, listening to the community. And if they're not able to provide something, really providing a clear and transparent reason why they can't. And the other thing staff will be able to do is see geographic development trends and those pressures in kind of live time. Right now, we know that if something comes in that olive branch, there's so many cases in olive branch, right? We just kind of have that background knowledge, but we'll be able to do is see it in a geographic illustrative form and see that, oh, North Durham has a ton more cases coming in or maybe Braggtown has several cases coming in. And we need to get with our Braggtown community and our friends and start working with them to talk about this development pressure that's coming. So this is a tool that can really help us help alert vulnerable communities and figure out what to do next. And then as I talked about earlier, there's a new record of community engagement that we will roll out. We will ask applicants to track changes on their projects when it changed from each level review to the next, whether that was based on staff feedback or community feedback. And then we didn't wanna go through and design the whole project or process changes yet. We really wanted to hear from people before we do that. But as this process of improvement unfolds, we will see our toolkit expand and we'll keep y'all apprised of it. And then just a quick reminder or maybe a new information for some of y'all, some of the things that we've already done and tried to improve land use cases is we've moved to an implementation of an online scheduling system. We've really worked to change staff reports. So when we hear feedback from y'all, such as you wanna see comparative home or rental prices, we are working to incorporate things like that into the staff report where feasible. We are doing the process improvement surveys which we have rolled out and we'll be doing a messaging push on those soon. We'll be attaching neighborhood meeting information to the planning commission agenda item. So we've already been doing that with minutes but we'll start providing even more robust commentary. We have been using the public interest statement which is essentially the interim goals and objectives of the COMP plan in our staff review. And we've really focused on the process of community engagement with applicants at pre-submitted meetings. And so next steps, we could get some great feedback from our elected officials at JCCPC which we've already tried to work to incorporate and will continue to incorporate. Asking y'all for feedback as well. We will definitely send up a follow-up email to y'all. So if you're eager to get out tonight, you'll be able to respond to that email and provide feedback on what you've seen, you've heard what it sounds like, right track, wrong track. And then we'll also send a link to this information. So one, we can help you get signed up for an account if you're interested. And two, at least have the link to the website you can see, you can share with constituents. And then we are going to share this out via multiple mediums and platforms with the community. The COMP plan has a very robust community communications plan that we are using and following to make sure that we reach the communities identified as having barriers to participation and communities that maybe don't necessarily always receive messages that they should be hearing. So those are our next steps. Like I said, we'll send up a follow-up email, but at this point, of course, if y'all want to provide whether this is right track, wrong track, or you have any guidance, feel free to let us know. Or if you want Chris to pull the tool back up and just play with it, we can do that too. We both love getting in there. So thank you so much for your time. We really appreciate you staying up with us. Thanks for both of you. Again, a really great tool, very excited commissioners. Welcome your thoughts or feedback. And Commissioner Williams, you've got your hand up so we can start with you. Yes, I'm extremely brief on this one. I absolutely love the way this is presented. I know that it's going to change the way that people get their information, how they interact. They're gonna feel way more informed. They're gonna feel like their input is live. It's not that I send an email, I gotta wait five to seven days for somebody to send me an email back. And it's going to encourage community engagement on a lot of different levels in which I'm not gonna say it's gonna eliminate the fact that they're saying that they can't reach community, or we mailed out a letter and no one responded, but it's definitely gonna make the process between the planning commission, city planning department, permitting department, developers in the community a lot more fluid. And that is essential to actually creating an environment that is welcoming to the community to make them feel as though how they feel can be easily addressed. And I honestly cannot wait to play with this tool on multiple levels. So thank you so much for the time that you put into developing this. Great, thanks Commissioner Williams, Commissioner Miller. So thanks a lot. I'd like the idea of being able to get so much of this so handily as somebody who is not particularly technically skilled being able to have a map and see things highlighted and hover over them. But I do have some questions. So when we talk about cases, what kind of cases are we talking about? Resonings? That is a great question. Yeah, for now it will be any tier changes, zoning map changes or annexation petitions. Okay, and so one of the things that I wanted to ask you about, maybe not so much about this tool, I've been concerned for a very long time about what happens at neighborhood meetings. I've attended a lot of them, frequently have to run out of the room with my hair on fire. That's why I don't have very much. How can we make those? I see that there's, I mean, it's clearly you're thinking about better neighborhood meetings. How can neighborhood meetings be better? Because right now they're developer run. And I've seen, it just seems odd to me that a neighborhood meeting is actually being hosted and managed by the group that the neighborhood is suspicious of. And they frequently are not happy occasions, not that I expect them to be, but how can we make them better? And there are frequently times when I wish a staff member was there to say, wait a minute, that's not right. Cause I hear that all the, I hear developers get it wrong or bend it wrong. Yeah, that's an absolutely great question. I can provide a little context. So as you heard from Director Young, we do have limited resources, but along with you, I've audited a few of these neighborhood meetings. Sometimes applicants invite me to attend or the community invites me to attend. And of course it's all, we don't have a lot of time. So it's hard to attend more than one month, but I've observed the same sort of things and we have, and we kind of know the concerns in the department. That's something we're gonna think about. We're gonna work to address. We've talked about different ways to do that, ways to create education elements for applicants if there's a different role staff can play. But I think for now, the direction received from JCCPC is to focus on the community centered part, which is this tool. And then once we've really flushed out some of this work, then we would come back and maybe find a way to partner with applicants or partner with people that are in neighborhood meetings to make them more robust. And I think at that point, we'd love some feedback on that. And if you have ideas, feel free to email them to us so we can start working on. Yeah, and if I may, one more thing, Mr. Busby. And I note that while I see all of this is really good and it is still casts the community. It still is based upon the assumption that the intersection between the community and planning is cases. And it casts the community in a responding role. The developers initiate and the community responds. And is there a way in, as we talk about community engagement to figure out vehicles where the staff routinely is working with community groups outside the context that this cases kind of thing. I would love to get to the point where the zoning notice that comes in the mail is the worst thing that happens in anybody's week because they know a little, there's no panic associated with it. I would love to have, I've been active in the Interneberg Council for years and it's had successes and it hasn't had successes, it has no resources, it's all volunteers. I mean, there are all kinds of weak points about the Interneberg Council. But I think that an Interneberg Council that was staff supported could be a fabulous thing that meant regularly and you could build this big cadre of people who were versant and conversant in the whole process. And I believe if the staff supported it, there would be huge participation. So I just throw that out there as an idea. And again, maybe it's not the best idea, but it's based upon my experience and what I know. So those are some of my comments. I look forward to a day when community engagement isn't related to cases and when the players aren't already precast in their roles. I hate the idea that the people of Durham are responders to planning in their own community, just responders. And thank you, it's late. And if I would talk about this all night long, I probably would not be very good company. I'm not good company now. Thanks, Commissioner Miller. Commissioner Emondolle. Thank you, Chair. I have a quick question. So the memo we received has like a phase one and a phase two aspect of it. And based on the, I guess response to Commissioner Miller's question, sounds like focus right now is more on phase one and phase two is kind of a down the line consideration. So I'm just curious, first off, are you seeking comments on phase two tonight or those things you'd prefer? Like, will we hear more about that phase at a later date? That is an absolutely great question. Thank you, Commissioner Emondolle. We did get some feedback from JCCPC that we should focus on phase one and Senator Community Voices, which we absolutely agree with and work to, as Commissioner Miller was saying, work to build relationships first. So we are gonna go that route that does not mean that we can't start visioning and thinking about what phase two looks like. We think that we do have some good ideas around applicant certification, applicant training, but a way to do it where it's not applicant driven to Mr. Miller's point, where it's really community-driven. So maybe the community is the trainers or the leaders in it or maybe there's a way to stipend them. Maybe there's a way to engage volunteers in the work. We've seen that comment come up over and over again enlist volunteers in the development process. So we won't be focusing on that for a little bit, but definitely welcome ideas. The more concretized it is before we get to it, the easier it is to implement. Sure. Great, thank you. I was just gonna say, Sarah, that's how you popped up, did you wanna? Yeah, I just wanted to share that another, of the millions of ideas that are kind of floating around, I'll take you back to the original concept behind our planning academy program was to teach folks about planning and what that means and how to be engaged and to be able to send these folks back to the community to build capacity that we could kind of call these folks back to help us with small area planning or the comprehensive plan or particular engagement reaching groups. I think that that's an untapped resource. That part of the original plan behind the planning academy has not yet been realized. So I think there's potential there for those folks as Alexander was alluding to maybe training, developers or being kind of the conduit to neighborhoods for developers with proposals come through, just really trying to get more resources into the community and power the community, both with information and process and opportunity. Yeah, and just like reading over phase two, it excited me as well. And so I look forward to hopefully hearing more about that in the future. And I just wanted to say briefly, I also am excited about this tool. You would be able to tell if it was like, 9 p.m. and not 11 p.m. But I've been anticipating it for a while too because you all have been alluding to it. I'm really happy to see it here. And I just want to thank all the staff time you all have put in. It sounds like you're already thinking through this but I just want to emphasize the importance of having a good rollout system on this and using all resources possible. I have too frequently seen amazing tools come out of the city and the county to just be somewhere on the website but nobody can ever find where and eventually they seem to disappear. So I appreciate, else force that on that and hope to see it executed well. Thank you. Thank you. Commissioner Baker. Yeah, I'll be brief. First, I just want to give kudos to Chris and Alexander. I think you guys did great work on this. So good job and continue to do good work on this. And I have a lot of faith in your abilities to make this even better. I think this is a great tool. I think it makes the development process a lot more accessible to members of the community. I think that for me, sort of observing what happened in Ragtown and what's happened in a few other communities, I would be interested in thinking a little bit more, Commissioner Miller touched on this, kind of thinking about at what point does the development become so large and so impactful to a community, a special community with limited resources that it does require some intervention on the part of the city using the city's resources to play a mediating role in that process.  It's gonna be able to make you spend more on the car than you should be. If you have someone with you who can help you in that process, then you can get a better outcome. So I think that's sort of an analogy that could apply here. Also, just again, to go back to one of Commissioner Miller's comments and this is sort of inside, but I don't want us to confuse this with actual, a long range planning, community engagement, community planning. This is reactionary to development proposals brought forward by developers. A separate component, and I think an even more important component that's not part of this would be developing a system where communities are empowered to actually envision the future and not just react to a developer's vision for the future. So, and that could take many forms. I personally think that we need to focus much more on small area planning. So that's all I have. Thanks. Thank you. Commissioner Morgan. Thank you, Chair. Just a couple of real quick things. I clicked on the links. I played around with it a little bit. I'd like to learn more about it and how to use it. I think it's easy to use. Certainly, I think it's encouraging that you can visually see where information is that is. I know Scott also gave me a link for the Southeast Durham small area plan and there was ideas floating around as well and some of the community members are engaged there. So I do think just very quickly, just get on, use it. I've already bookmarked the links that were in the chat area and I'll provide comments as I play around with it further. Great, thank you. Any additional comments? All right, well, in summary again, I just want to echo everyone who particularly who are thanking the staff for doing really great work and I'm excited to have this tool available for us for the electeds and particularly for the community to just be able to get good information and to be able to begin to understand what's happening and to have that information early. So this is really great looking forward to the rollout. Alexander or Chris, any final comments? Brian, Carmen's hands up. I think it was up from earlier, but Carmen, are you still looking to speak? No