[Music] Hey, good morning. Uh, good afternoon or evening. I know. Welcome to the public hearing uh for this evening. The first item is the proposed operating and capital budget and I know we've got a number of folks signed up. Uh we have said three minutes a piece for everybody who would like to speak. So we will start with Miss Octavia Rainey. Good evening everyone. I'm here to speak on three subjects. First of all, I would like to speak on the fire department. I think that the fire department salary should be the same as the police department, their starting salaries because you can't make a difference in police and fire. They are both important to the city of Raleigh, so they need to be treated equally. The second thing I want to talk about is fourth ward. I'm glad Ruffen Hall is here tonight because I even talked to Ruffen Hall about fourth ward and if he want to take a little bit of his time to talk about funding fourth ward $300,000 you are welcome to set it Ruffton. Okay. Okay. Now, okay. It is very important that the $300,000 be included in the budget. I have not seen it in the budget. You must remember that the city of Raleigh during segregation came in and wiped fourth ward completely out. It demolished three prominent churches that was over there. And madame mayor, you have to forgive me if I become a little emotional, but you treated fourth ward like trash. You really, really did. You didn't care about redeveloping it. You just threw it away like it was a piece of trash. You relocated 1,000 people. You demolished three churches. You demolished over 500 businesses. This is what you did to the black community and you left that bare bounded with no regrets. I've even talked to Dipsy Benton, Lawrence Ray, Russell Allen Mr. Hall. This is a disgrace and a shame. I'm asking you to put that $300,000 in the budget. You gave South Sanders Street $500,000 for redevelopment plan. Fourth Ward was sitting right there. Didn't give it one cent. I spoke before the council about that. I said that was racism. It was blatant. Blatant. Blatant. Just racism. I'm asking this city council to step up and make a wrong right. You have to do that. You can't move forward in this city without recognizing it. And Dr. Harrison, we'll be at your budget hearing saying the same thing, but we'll bring a smoky hollow with us to it. We have to make things right that the city did wrong. The Raleigh Development Commission was wrong. Clarence Lightner agreed with it in first, but in the end, he said it's wrong. Thank you. Next, we have Mr. Ruffen Hall. You can speak about Yes ma'am. Good evening. My name is Ruffen Hall. It's my honor and privilege to serve as the president CEO of the Dicks Park Conservancy here tonight to speak on behalf of Dicks Park. I did want to take a moment to also say that this is the first time I've ever signed up for a public hearing and the last thing my wife told me when I left was that she hoped that that someone would buzz me off buzz me out. So, I am not going to allow that to happen. Clerk's got a little twitchy finger over there. So, um with me is Bill Ross. He is the board chair for the Dixs Park Conservy. He's also the former secretary for Diner. So, we appreciate his leadership and service and is we are both here tonight for um the conservancy. I just want to say three quick things. The first is I just want to say thank you to all of you and the city staff in the city of Raleigh for your support of Dicks Park. There's a lot of examples from the purchase in 2015 to the parks bond in 2022, the staffing and maintenance to date, as well as the big transition that's about to occur on the property. So, thank you very much for your support. The second thing I wanted to say is we support the manager's recommended budget. We know that resources are are tight and difficult in the current environment, particularly with the uncertainty in the broader economy. We take that very seriously as well and the investments that are contained in that proposed budget is something that will help us move forward. So, thank you for putting uh that into the budget to the staff. Also would like to ask the mayor and council, we support the manager's recommended budget. Third, and finally, wanted to invite everyone in our community to the opening of the Gibson Play Plaza at Dicks Park this weekend, June 6th through the 8th, the afternoon of the 6th, all day on Saturday and Sunday. Uh in the basket, uh there is some stickers for Gibson Play Plaza as well as uh membership cards to join the conservancy. Uh the event is free. It's open to the public. There's no tickets. All the activities are free. Uh there are food trucks, there are his music, there's lots of fun and exciting things. Uh there is a word of advice. There are water features at Gibson Play Plaza. So if you come, you might want to bring a towel because it can get wet. Um if you want to get more information about parking and traffic and amenities and when are the various programs, I would encourage you to go to the city's website uh dickspark.orggibsonplaya. Again, dickspark.org. org/skibsonplayplaza. That's Gibson with a P as in Paul. Uh also encourage anyone listening, we'll have people there. You can sign up to be a part of the Dicks Park Conservy's membership program. So with that, again, let me say thank you. We support the budget so he can hit the buzz. Just come on. Thank you so much for this opportunity. I hope you have a great evening. Goodbye. Goodbye. Didn't even work. Wait, just wait. Yeah, there's no automatic buzzing. There it is. That was not for you, Mr. Brown. That was for Mr. Brown. Welcome. Good evening. Uh, thank you all for your service and thank you for letting me speak and thank you for uh this amazing budget that gives generous raises to all our city staff without raising our taxes. That was quite a feat. and must have taken some painful cut somewhere. Now, I have an idea for a cut that wouldn't be at all painful. There's an item in there for 3/4 of a million dollars for uh advanced planning for renovations to Nash Square. Now, Nash Square is wonderful just as it is. It's full of gorgeous old trees. It's one of the most beautiful places in the city. Now, I don't know exactly what they have in mind for renovations. I have heard playground. I have heard um active uses which might be playground. Um but I know one thing. If it costs threequarters of a million dollars just for the advanced planning, it must be a pretty big project. And you can't do a big project there without cutting down some trees. And if it's not a big project, why does it cost so much? Um, now I admit I may be a little paranoid because I I like many people am still traumatized by what they did to Morsquare eight years ago. They spent $13 million cutting down a whole lot of gorgeous trees and then they brought in a lot of uh concrete pavement and uh built that hamburger building that's sitting there empty. Everybody agrees it was a big failure. So, please, let's not have another big failure at Nash Square. Let's nip it in the bud. Y'all just just take out this one budget item. You'll be doing everybody a favor. Now, there's another thing that some people in the parks department want to do that's wonderful. They want to plant 24,000 trees in honor of Raleigh's 240th anniversary. I think that is an excellent idea. Let's use our money to plant trees, not cut them down. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next we have Ian Bernett. Good evening. Um I'm here to discuss uh Raleigh's budget and staffing commitment to vision zero. So every year there are more than 35 fatalities on our roadways, a third of which are pedestrians and cyclists, plus many more major injuries. And if we use DOT's price tag for lives lost and disability, roadway collisions cost our city over $400 million per year. And that stands in stark contrast to the city's budget commitment of $4 million to vision zero. So I believe the city's approach is off aim. Uh vision zero should be elevated out of transportation to take on a leading role in the city with an expanded budget and staffing to support infrastructure, public services, and public safety. So every department should prioritize making Raleigh's streets safe for all and our vision zero group should be empowered to support them with expertise and funding for test initiatives and pilot programs. This elevated vision zero group should be inter interdep departmental and staffed with not just traffic engineers but also planners, public health analysts, project managers, public safety officers, community experts and other specialists. To be clear, Vision Zero is not just about traffic fatalities and injuries. It's about giving a fair chance to Raleigh's people to walk, bike, and use public transit. It's about getting people out of cars to benefit our health, our sense of community, and our city's climate goals. It's about feeling comfortable to let our kids walk, or ride, or drive to school, a job, or to meet friends. Safe roads, but local businesses and our amazing park system in reach for more households. And actually reaching the goal of vision zero could make us peerless in attracting new companies, employees, and families. Traffic fatalities and unsafe roadways are a systemic problem and our current peacemail approach is not going to solve the issue or keep up with the city's growth. Raleigh has an opportunity to be bold and proactive to put safety first as we expand and develop. I ask that this year you expand the budget to hire or backfill the additional 10 to 15 FTEEs needed to build out a vision zero group suitable for a city of this size and ambition. Going forward, provide that group the necessary resources and institutional support to help the city achieve a safe transportation network for all Raleigh's people and meet the city's strategic goal. Will this be expensive? Probably. Is it necessary? Absolutely. Is now the right time? I think so. No major city has achieved zero roadway fatalities, but Raleigh is positioned to be the first, and I can only imagine how that would set us apart. Thank you. Thank you. Next we have Matthew Cooper. Uh good evening. I'm Matthew Cooper, the president of the Raleigh Police Protective Association. Um we have waited for essentially two years for the completion of the comprehensive pay study. We have not yet seen the detailed results of this study. It is possible that the recommendations and findings will be successful in placing our department with our peers both know nationally and locally. However, we will not know if this is the case until days before a possible vote on the budget. This leaves us along with the city council very little time to reconcile any failings of this study. Raising the entry wage is good and necessary, but veteran officers need to be rewarded for their loyalty. If top out pay for some classes are not raised, it will only result in bonuses for the veteran officers. Bonuses are not raises. Moving forward, Seagull suggested that pay ranges must increase every year to maintain competitiveness and that significant raises must also occur annually to be successful. A no tax increase is a good goal. However, the budget should not be balanced on the backs of city employees. Thank you. Thank you. Next, we have uh Lawrence Yelli. Good evening and compliments for the zero tax increase after 25% last year, 15% the prior two. I fully support competitive compensation for city employees, meaning salary and benefits. However, as councelor Silver and Mayor noted in March, questioned again in April, the comp study was salary only. city manager committed to a comprehensive response including benefits by midappril. This issue and an explanation for the study's disproportionate public sector skewing in the blended salary recommendation are unanswered. City benefits are a 50% adder to salary 10 to 20% greater than the private sector. They total $180 million and without benchmarking the salary proposal is unfortunately fundamentally insufficient. There has also been no accounting for the city's unique benefits and full employment practices not enjoyed in the private sector. The $40 million annualized salary adjustment is likely overstated without these reconciliations. The forthcoming staffing studies will recommend increases in RPD and operations. So, this salary decision represents over $50 million annually. Over the last decade, city staff has grown 8% faster than the population itself. And worse yet, public safety staffing and budget is degraded. Not visible because the city discontinued those unfavorable metric trend charts. RPD has grown less than 1% while overhead has grown 37%. 227 FTEEs added the last three years, 21 more requested now, including overhead and jobs that can be subcontracted at lower cost. 600 unfilled wrecks a year ago. Currently about 500 but only six vacant positions were removed and yet all city primary services except RPD is continuing as needed. Public safety is the number one priority but not reflected in the budget. The 40% shown in this budget obscures the steady state capital funding transfer and therefore overstates prior year's comparisons. Water and other fees are increasing again 3 to 7% yet the city is not committed to a $4 million opportunity for credit card fee recovery. The separation allowance for RFD is less convincing given the mortality rate data and forward-looking financials. There's no sensible justification for the other departments. The greatest asset work for force budget thing needs to be plural including the billpayers, our taxpayers. City manager advocates for employees, but council is fiscally responsible to advocate the balance with them and taxpayers. The salary plan needs to be reconciled with benefits. Some of the delta can be redirected to the 11 unfunded affordable housing projects or other uses. Extra thanks for all of those who acknowledge my feedback. Thanks to all of you for your consideration and action. Thank you. Next we have Kate Dixon. Madame Mayor, Miss Dixon withdrew. Okay. Okay. Larry Hant. Uh good evening, Mayor, Council, and Staff. After listening to yesterday's disappointing session, I'm here today to advocate for the Raleigh Firemen's request to add separation allowance. This critical need was omitted from the budget. Once again, I'm making the same plea of support as noted in the nearly 500 emails that you received. I know you didn't read them all, but the volume should tell you something. Separation allowance has been studied in numerous work sessions and has been brought up for each of the last three budget cycles. Despite having two budget notes, it has never been included in the budget by the city manager's office. This situation's got to change. Based on resident polling, public safety is considered to be one of the highest priorities for Raleigh. Many of you campaigned on this issue. However, yesterday's work session revealed that council appears to be unwilling to provide a separation allowance benefit for the firefighters who put their lives on the line to protect human life and property 24 hours a day despite risking their own lives and welfare. The city is facing an emerging crisis. As the city grows and density increases, there is a growing concern about fire protection. What happens when firefighters arrive late due to staff shortages at nearby stations? For the size of our city, the Raleigh Fire Department is at least 200 positions short. Currently, they show 50 vacant positions, but in reality, to have a city of our size, there should be a total of 250 vacancies. We're a long way. Raleigh has not added any new firefighter position since 2014, while experiencing rapid population growth and development. Let's be clear. The Raleigh Fire Department is requesting the same benefit paid between retirement and age 62 that the Raleigh Police Department has had since 1987. Mortality rate comparisons can be misleading. However, the following facts are not deceptive. The CDC confirms that among career firefighters, sudden cardiac death and esphyxiation are the leading causes of death. And FEMA states that coronary heart disease is the greatest risk to healthy firefighters. Firemen are a 9% higher risk of being diagnosed with cancer and a 1400% higher risk of dying from cancer than the general population. Please help fix this now. Add this benefit to the current proposed budget before another firefighter enters retirement, either through disability or earned service without any benefits until social security. If it helps with recruitment, that's an added bonus. Using the budget's key motto, our workforce is our greatest asset. Council has the means to show that appreciation by supporting RFD and including separation allowance. Now, the cost of the program is less than a half a penny or approximately $5 million per year. Please prioritize request and find these funds in nearly $1.8 billion proposed budget. I'll leave you with this comment. When RPD retires, they leave their threat behind. for RFD their bullets cancer still chase them for the rest of their lives. Thank you. Thank you. Next we have Mary Abrams. Good evening. I'm Mary Abrams representing Wake Audabon. We're a local nonprofit that advocates wildlife, nature, and environmental conservation. Um, our address is PO Box12452, zip code 27605. About half of our 2100 members live here in Raleigh. We're grateful for the city's investment in trees and all of the staff's work to develop the Leafout tree plan, and we appreciate the opportunity to be involved with that process. Um, we ask that you consider appropriating an additional $25,000 to help launch a public private partnership to plant 24,000 trees by the city's 240th anniversary in 2032. We know from the Wake County tree canopy assessment that Raleigh lost over 1300 acres of tree canopy between 2010 and 2020. More trees are cut down daily across the city. So, we really need to act now to remain the iconic city of Oaks. As the 2026 proposed budget states very well, our urban ecosystem, including trees, provides many benefits to our community. Trees cool our homes, help ensure clean air and water, reduce flooding, and improve our mental and physical health and overall quality of life. Trees also generate revenue. Bird watching and wildlife viewing alone is a1 billion dollar industry in North Carolina and much of that activity happens right here in Raleigh. Um places like Midpines Road, Lake Lynn, Lake Johnson have more birding visits than many of our state parks. So, an added investment of $25,000 to launch a goal of planting 24,000 trees will really provide a tremendous return on investment. We thank you for all that you do and we look forward to working with you to plant more trees. Thank you. And then finally, we've got Zoe Moretti Neber. Zoe here. Okay. That concludes the hearing for the budget. Next, we have the Downtown Municipal Services District and we've got Katie Conurs. She presenting. Good evening, Mayor and Council. My name is Katie Conjurs. I am the grants program manager in budget and management services. This spring, the city completed an RFP process to select providers to provide municipal service district services in our two municipal service districts, the downtown municipal service district and the Hillsboro Street Municipal Service District. As part of that process, we are required to hold public hearings before entering into a new contract with the selected providers. So, this is that hearing. Great. Thank you. Um, and we've got a number of folks signed up, so we can just move into that. Uh, we have Larry Miller for the downtown service district, followed by David Maker. Good evening, mayor and council members. My name is Larry Miller. Uh I live at 510 Glenwood Avenue and I'm president of the Glenwood South Neighborhood Collaborative. Uh I'm here to offer a few comments in support of the Metropon Service District contract being awarded to the Downtown Raleigh Alliance. I've lived in downtown for 11 years now. Uh six of those years I had the honor of being a board member of DRRA and I've seen firsthand uh as a resident and a board member how what DA DRRA has accomplished. and we'll cite a few examples from during in my limited time here today. In the area of area of public safety, DRA ambassador programs provide ambassadors who patrol downtown streets and parking lots to deter crime and provide assistance to visitors and residents. DN DR ambassadors have led the way in providing services to the unhoused population in downtown Raleigh by uh hiring two social workers to address their needs. DRRA has supplemented security patrols at high crime areas co in coordination with Raleigh Police Department. DRRA promotes economic development downtown Raleigh by working with new and existing businesses to find suitable office and retail space. DRA offers popup space for new entrepreneurs and offers grants for storefront improvements for small businesses. DRRA promotes downtown Raleigh with act activations such as first Friday illumination and other special events. DER DRRA conducts study surveys and and commissions reports to identify and address the needs of downtown Raleigh. The city of Raleigh is fortunate to have DRRA around to provide these services. The city often asks DRRA to assist by completing tasks and providing services based on DRA's unique knowledge of downtown issues and ability to respond in an in a expeditious manner. DRRA is able to respond and produce results even though they have a small staff. Bill King and his dedicated staff provide a lot of bang for the buck and the city of Raleigh reaps the benefits. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next, uh, David Mer and then we have, uh, Skip Hill after that. All right. Mayor, council, manager. Great to be here. Um, David Mer, 601 Virginia Avenue. I've lived downtown my entire life. Um, it's up for a brief stent in college. Um, and I've seen it go from a sleepy downtown to a thriving downtown to COVID and the unrest and now the comeback trail we're on now. Um, and downtown needs an organization like DRRA to be competitive with other districts around town that are similar like the Village District or North Hills. Um, there's some great things that come from a lot of different building owners, but having a coordinated um, spectrum of services from clean and safe to visionary projects, 5 to 10 year vision projects is really helpful if we want downtown to be competitive with other districts. We have three or four buildings in the districts now. In the district now, we are glad to pay the additional tax to the DRRA. Um, and to prove that, we actually have three or four districts that are on the edge that we lobbyed to get in the district last year and didn't quite get in. But that shows how valuable the services the DRRA provides to us. Um, so I strongly endorse the DRA serving the district and hope it continues going forward. Thanks. Thanks. So, Skip Hill and then Anna Grace Fitzgerald next. Hey, thank you for letting me speak. My name is Skip Hill. I'm the uh senior vice president and the Raleigh market lead for Highwoods Properties, which is a real estate developer. We're fortunate enough and we love Raleigh. We uh before COVID, we owned three towers in downtown Raleigh that we purchased. Um well, we built the PNC tower. It was originally RBC. Then we purchased one city plaza and put some investments in there. And then we we purchased a building at at the end of the street called Charter Square South. And so um we are all in since co we bought uh the former Wells Fargo building. So we're doubling down and we moved our headquarters downtown. So I've been uh in this market for about 20 years in this particular capacity and have had the pleasure of working uh with the DRA throughout that time period. And I and this particular staff that's that we have right now at the DRA is extremely uh talented and they really put in a lot of work. I'm I'm so pleased to be working alongside them. I'm not going to go everything that that Mr. Miller and Mr. Miker just said because they said it very well, but we are we strongly support Highwoods does uh renewing DRRA as a service provider in the MSD. Thank you. Thank you. All right. We have is Anna Grace Fitzgerald here? Good evening everybody. My name is Anna Grace Fitzgerald and I'm here to also express my gratitude and my enthusiastic support for the Downtown Raleigh Alliance and the work that they do for our community. I'm a Raleigh native. I'm a resident of downtown within the downtown MSD and the owner of Copperline Plant Company located just a few a few book blocks east on Har Street. I can safely say that I interact with the DRRA team, specifically the ambassadors, no less than three or four times a day, and I am very grateful for their presence. One of the first things that I do when I'm training a new employee is to have them save the ambassador's phone in their cell phones. I learned in a deescal deescalation training that we had in our shop about a year ago that you can actually text that number if you're unable to call them for any reason. Uh, and that has come in handy being a downtown resident and business owner. Each time that I've reached out to the team for help, I've seen the ambassadors respond with respect, with empathy, and with kindness. The DRRA team and the ambassadors have provided a safe walks for me, my staff, our customers. They've responded to my calls about folks who have needed help finding different social services. They've checked in with me directly via text to make sure that I'm okay after certain events have happened in the shop. And they've been a familiar face when I've been walking home after work. The ambassadors work day in and day out to make sure that downtown Raleigh continues to feel like the destination that we want our city to be. While my daily interactions with the DRA are more on the ambassador side of things, I'm also grateful and really, really grateful for the work that the full-time team does for small businesses here in downtown. Through our rag tag group of downtown Raleigh independent shops, we are able to meet with the full-time staff on a regular basis to voice concerns, to celebrate wins, to learn tips and tricks through their small business workshops. And we've received continued support for various events that we've planned throughout the year. The Downtown Raleigh Alliance continues to show up for small businesses, for downtown residents, and for visitors day in and day out. And I urge and thank you to continue to support them in the work that they do for us. Thank you for your time. Thank you. All right. Uh, next we have the Hillsboro Street Municipal Services District. Or do we want to uh take an action? Okay. All right. Closing the hearing for Downtown Municipal Services District and bringing the conversation back to the table. Yeah, I think this time we it from reading this we're to um if the council so moves to appoint um give direction to council to staff to work with Dr. on the contract um and moving forward and that would be my motion. Second, any further discussion? I can just say I serve right on the DRA board as the uh emissary of council and appreciate the work uh that they're that they're doing. So, uh, all in favor of that motion, I All oppose, nay. So, the eyes have it. Thank you. All right. Next, we have the Hillsboro Street Municipal Services District. And once again, uh, does Katie Conjurs, do you want to preface with anything from staff? Good evening again, Mayor and Council. U, very much the same as the last public hearing. Uh we held an RFP process this spring and we selected um the provider for municipal service district municipal service district services in the Hillsboro Street Municipal Service District and this is the required public hearing for that process. Okay, I will open the public hearing for Hillsboro Street MSD and the first speaker we have is Gregory Brown. Good evening, folks. Hello. My name is Greg Brown. I live on Criclewood Court in South Raleigh. My wife and I own Salmon Bills Hair Design on the 100 block of Oberlin Road. And Salmon Bills has been in business since 1968. I've served on the board and served as board chair of the Hillsboro Street Community Service Corporation. I've seen firsthand the benefits of this group and their leadership that serves our community. As a member, I've been introduced to and worked with fellow merchants, neighbors, NC State administrators, and City of Raleigh officials on important matters in our district. Jeff and his team were instrumental in working with the city of Raleigh's transportation department to optimize traffic flow and the installation of new parking meters in the district to encourage turnover and discourage long-term occupants. Another big assist was when this team began the discussions with city of Raleigh engineers to provide traffic ballards to our area when we were the unlucky recipients of a vehicle into the side of our building. Their clean and safe program runs a tight ship and is very responsive to any request or issues that need attention. Jeff and his team have relationships and experience with all the district stakeholders for nearly 15 years. They serve our community well and we are lucky to have them. Thank you for letting me speak on behalf of Jeff and his team and thank you for your service to our city. Thank you. Next we have Kari uh Bars. Is she here? I do not. Okay. I do not see her. Yeah. Uh and then we have Mahadev Prasad Raj. Good evening. My name Prasad Raj. I live in Kerry, North Carolina and I own couple businesses on Hillsboro Street. I am here to talk uh regarding the Hillsboro street, a wonderful street in the city. Um which which is which is organized by the maintained and organized by Jeff and his team. Wonderful team. Uh they are so very supportive for the businesses, small businesses we have and all the establishment they go time to time and taking care of us. In the meantime, they keep the Hillsboro Street which really really wonderful street neat and clean and very organized. Every time we need anything from them, any suggestion regarding the business to um how to promote and what what needed to be done, they immediately responds and they take care of us. I really appreciate Jeff and his team. Thank you very much. Thank you. All right, that uh concludes the folks that have signed up. So, yeah, I'd like to proceed with a motion to authorize staff to negotiate the 5-year term contract with the Hillsboro Street MSD. Okay, second. All right, motion and a second. Any other conversation? If not, all in favor of the motion, I I. All oppose, nay. And the eyes have it. So, thank you again uh for all your work, Jeff, and team from Hillsboro Street. All right, next we have street closing uh STC08 2024 Clover Lane right ofway. And we have Sorry, Amanda Jones. Thank you. Uh good evening, Madame Mayor and Council members. My name is Amanda Jones from transportation. I'll be giving hopefully a quick presentation on a proposed closure of right of Clover Lane. So the area indicated in red would be um Clover Lane that has been proposed to be closed and it is a culdeac off of Wake Forest Road. So that closure area is approximately 31 acre and Clover Lane was dedicated as part of the Forest Manor apartments which were built in 1967 and are still there today. uh but are now called the Morai on Clover Town Homes. ASR632024 has been approved for a fourstory multi-family apartment building at this uh um parcel around that uh right away. And development will be installing a multi-use path connecting Wake Forest Road and Witaga Street as well as a driveway access on Waga Street for emergency and utility vehicles per their reasonzoning 432022. And lastly, the closure aligns with policy T2.7 in the 2030 comprehensive plan. And this is the site plan that was approved with the ASR. So you can see um to the north is the multi-use path and then you have the driveway access um to the right side that goes out to Wataga Street. And that's my presentation. questions for Miss Jones. Okay, then we'll go ahead and open the public hearing. And we have two folks signed up. Rob uh Cadell and then Toby Coleman. Uh good evening, Rob Codle. Um I'm here with Withers Ravenell, the uh the engineer, the design engineer. So, I'm just here to to answer any questions that you have design related. Great questions. Oh, and Toby Coleman here as well. Yeah, I see you back there. Yep. Anybody have questions for either? All right, we'll close the hearing. Uh, do we have a motion for approval? Second. Uh, all in favor of the motion? I I. All oppose? Nay. All right. Uh next we have the resoning uh for Z1924 which is 109 Edinburg Road and we have uh Hannah is it Hannah Recal? Yes. Good evening. Hannah Recal planning and development. This is reszoning request Z1924 uh three parcels on Edenberg Road. This hearing was opened on May 20th and continued to allow time for the applicant to make revisions which they have done. Um there's a handful of revisions that are to clarity uh support the clarity of the condition. Um for example condition four the protected buffer has been clarified to be of existing plant material in that area. And condition eight um just clarifying the the proportion of the office uses for the uh gross floor area of the building. Um most notable changes to condition nine which is the uh amount of time that the office use can be uh located on the site. It was previously no more than 10 years and now it is no more than 8 years. And then um some more specification on um the single unit structure on 109 Edenberg Road. And that concludes the update to the to the uh revisions. Um happy to answer questions before you proceed with the hearing. Right. Do you have questions? I just want to clarify because I read through the report and a lot of it's hinging on this term model home. Putting that term aside, this is uh they're asking for this is ox, correct? Which allows a variety of residential and office. So maybe I'm not sure if you can answer this question, maybe the applicant. I'm just wondering with the ox first response to the model home. Is it true that there is no classification or is this just normally an office building that is permitted within the ox? Just want to understand that term model home. Um so I don't believe there is a a category for model home. Okay. Good evening, B and Walter Planning and Development. So, the way the model home is treated in our regulatory document, the unified development ordinance, is that is only allowed in a subdivision of a certain size, a a greater acreage than this particular site. Uh so uh to have a model home in a resi, that's the only way a model home is allowed in a residential district is in a larger subdivision where it's serving a a project that might develop over a number of years. So to be allowed elsewhere in in a in a smaller site, they need a a mixeduse district, a commercial district. Putting this aside, if I had a design studio, Yes. or if I had another type of office type use, putting the term model home aside, couldn't that use be permitted without calling it a model home? I guess we're getting hung up with the term model home. It is for people to, I guess, view. I don't know if there's material inside that people want to pick selections. So, I'm just wondering what makes the distinction between a quote unquote model home and what would normally be a design center. Yeah, I hear you. And maybe this is a question for the applicant and not you, but I know when I first gone through the application, a lot was focused on the term model home, right? And when I see 18 conditions on a very small site for a use, I just again bum them this may be question for the applicant but before uh people come up I just wanted that clarification as we start the and maybe the applicant is here in the room uh he'll probably respond to those questions but just wanted some clarification because a lot was you know not seen that term before in this context. So that's why I was trying to ask for clarification. So my understanding is the form of the structure is a single family house, right? No one will live in it while it's on display as the design center. I hesitate to say model home. It's the it's the floor model, right? It's the this is the showroom. Okay. And they anticipate having uh no more than 2600 square ft of office space in that structure during the 8-year period. Okay. Yeah. Does that help? Sorry to make you contort that way. I just when I was reading it, I was trying to put it into a mindset I could understand. So, so thank you. Yeah. Great. Thank you. All right. So, we This uh was a continuation of the open hearing. So, we have Mr. Charles Walker back with two minutes left on the clock. Wow. Two whole minutes. Okay. Madame Mayor, thank you. Members of the council, this is the extension of the of the case that we had last time. What we tried to do was to uh meet with the uh neighbors after the meeting and and try to answer some of their concerns. One of the one of which was this single family house that was going to be on 109 would give give us a trigger. They wanted a trigger. So, we've added a trigger that after no more than one year after the zoning case is done, the uh the construction will start on a single family house on the existing single family lot at 109. The model home, Mr. Silver, is it was the way it was described to try explain that it was going to be built as a house. It's not an office building. It's not a square brick and grass glass structure. It is actually a home that when this use is over, whenever it is over, it will be the design center elements will be taken out and will be converted to a single family home for someone to buy and live in. The lot number 107, which is in the middle, the parking that we have a an area for parking spaces because the neighbors were very clear they didn't want on street parking for any of these things. So we decided to put a temporary parking area between the two houses someday and then within 90 days of again the design center to be taken away. Within 90 days the parking lot will be removed and then a home would be placed on 107. So ultimately it will be three house three single family houses on three single family lots that are all existing. We are taking away the restriction or the allowance for uh up to eight town homes uh in that area. The o the ox designation was based on the fact that from basically from Oland Road to Glennwood Avenue, the vast majority of the sites of the the land on that side of Glenwood Avenue, ROX, there's OX next door. So for a consistency sake, that's what we chose because that was a zoning con a zoning category that could both straddle the future single family houses and the design center within the one house on 105. 12 seconds left. Some fast talking. Any questions for Mr. Walker? Mr. Walker, I again I following the reasoning, this seems complex for what could have been a relatively easy solution. The ox allows both office and residential. So I'm just trying to understand the approach. There are 18 conditions for this case. Yes. And so I'm just trying to understand residential is allowed on here and office uses on allowed on here. I just I'm trying to understand the goal of the complexity of disclosing a model then a house as opposed to just saying there could be up to three structures on this property that fit within the allowed uses of residential and office. I'm just trying to understand this is very complex. Uh and I'm just trying to understand why you or your the applicant chose to take this route from from your mouth to God's ears. Uh what we tried to do was speak in in current terms and then future terms, which is why it ended up kind of convoluted. Uh there was a concern that because of its current zoning of R six and the fact it's on Glenwood Avenue, we could have up to eight town home units. There were several there were several factions within the neighborhood that didn't want any of that. So that's why we covered all three lots to take the town home question off the table. And then we wanted to again uh show that we wanted to have three houses ultimately three houses on three existing lots. So that's that's how what we were trying to do in this particular case. Copper Builders is is a is a executive style home builder. They don't buy subdivisions, which is the five acre trigger, which allows a model home within a subdivision. They don't buy five acre tracks and build 15 homes. They build one one here, two here, one here, all over the all over the county. So, this was this was a solution to try and uh to to to get that to work uh in lie of the of the city code being that way. I I guess my question was rather than having one condition that say there'll be three structures uh in the style of a single family home, however you phrase that what happens inside office or residential are permitted. I'm just trying to understand well I think you answer the question. I'm just trying to say that there could have been a more simpler path to describe the end use because whether it's a looks like just next door there's a dentist that could be a residence it's a dentist you know they both look similar it's not a flat top it's a pitch roof uh so I'm just trying to understand three structures with a pitch roof or in character of single family but in terms of inside the ox allows office or residential That's what I was trying to understand this complex route, but I'm going to stop asking you because I think you've answered it several times. I'm just was trying to understand this approach. We were trying to lay a blanket over all three that covered all the possibilities that got thrown at us. Okay. So that when the question becames we had we had some members of of the neighborhood was saying, well, if if they want to leave the building, then that means a Domino's can take over the 2500 ft. That's not possible because everything in section 6.6.4.1 is excluded except for those three uses. So it was trying to it was trying to answer concerns of the neighborhood. Thank you. All right. So Oh, yes. I'm sorry. I have one quick question. Um in the after eight years if if this goes through and you're promising 90 days, who is responsible for enforcing that? Because if you don't, is that now does that now fall into the planning department? And do who who's in charge of following through in 8 years when this condition expires? Considering that uh there would have to be some kind of minor construction to convert it from an ADA compliant place to take out maybe conference room tables and certain type of lighting permits would have to be issued. So the permit would be the trigger. Okay. And I just want to confirm that with staff. Is that other than that it would be in reaction to complaint enforcement? Okay. So it would be in reaction some neighbors would have to complain if it doesn't. Okay. All right. Thank you. Thank you. All right. So we also have uh three folks signed up in opposition. Uh Shephard Fountain, Avery Salmon, and William McGee. And you have the full eight minutes. Is that okay? Hello. Uh I apologize. I'm a little under the weather and um but I thought it was important to come uh and ask you and you know we appreciate the all of the consideration that y'all given us in our neighborhood and we um continue to oppose the reszoning because of the eight years. Um and I concur with you Mr. Silver. Why not? We prefer I don't know who who Chuck spoke with about the condominium. We'd prefer to keep it R six and have condominiums. Um we don't see the purpose of the the OSX either. And we see that as commercial creep creeping into our neighborhood. I do know that in Charlotte, Copper Builders has their design center in commercial real estate. It's not in a neighborhood. And uh you know, whereas they have been willing to to work with us that you know this taking the the two spaces off of the residential market for eight years is substantial. And our primary concern is the commercial creep. We see it as unnecessary and you know like uh Councilman Silver said, we can do it under R six and they can just do you know whatever they choose to do in that whatever you want to call it. Um but um but anyway, those are our concerns and as is we're opposed and if everybody that was my that's with me would stand and see I'm not alone. I've got you know my neighbors and I don't know who the people they spoke with with regards to the condominiums but it was not the the ones that are immediately adjacent to the property. we are the ones that are going to be most effective and you know we would appreciate y'all's consideration and whatever you may do you know to help us out with this time frame thing would be greatly appreciated. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else want to Yeah. speak uh Mr. Um hi I'm Bill McGee. I live at 115 Edenburg, a couple lots down from the the the sites. I just want to make one small point and that is um I know Chuck mentioned that the ox designations on Glenwood is simply like this is a continuation of those of that designation and it's not um the frontage for this prop this project is on Edinburg which is currently residential and that's the reason why we're so concerned about the creep and the fact that residential uh lots are now going to be converted to a commercial zone. which is something we don't believe is appropriate and that's the only point I wanted to add. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. Hi, good evening everybody. My name is Avery Salman. I live 310 about thousand feet down the street from the subject property. So, uh, I'll just say, you know, from a Raleigh housing crisising crisis issue, uh, point of view, this, uh, for decades, the property under reasonzoning request has supported, uh, two residential houses. They were middle market houses, and I know that a standalone single residence house is, not officially within the missing middle, but um, copper builders purchased this property and destroyed those two houses, right? and and also essentially clearcut. I think they've left a little bit on the back edge of foliage, but essentially it's been clearcut. So, there was very much an urban forest on this property, but that's gone. All right. And so, um, it's it's currently zoned for R six and it's 78 acres. So, 78 acres would support four residential houses. you know, they' be single standalone houses or they could be town houses. Um but so that four residential um pro potential properties are going to be lost for eight years. Okay. And so copper builder application describes that as temporary and but when I think of eight years I don't you know doesn't really sound that temporary to me. Eight years is a pretty long time. A lot of things can change, but instead of four residential homes, what you're going to get is this model homeoff. That's one. You're going to get a parking lot. And they already have 109 for sale on Zillow um through Coldwell Banker um as a sing as a $1.9 million home. This is what they build. You know, they build I think Chuck said the word executive. that's kind of fits there. Um, so my point of view from the just from the, you know, Raleigh's housing crisis, you've gone from potentially four houses down to one, right? And it just doesn't seem like that's the way that um, you know, that's not council approving this would would not be helping Raleigh's housing crisis. So that's it. Thank you. Sure. All right. questions for is that the last one? Uh, yeah. Can we still ask questions with the time remaining? Okay, go ahead. My first question is actually for staff because then my follow-up question is going to be for the folks who sign up oppose. And I don't mean to put anyone on the spot, but can you tell me what can be built on this site um under the R six current zoning? Yeah. So, residential, civic uses can be built um detached, attached, and townhouse building types. Okay. So town houses and detached single family, but nothing no larger than than no multi family larger than town houses. Um even if it's on Glenwood, it it is in a frequent transit area. So the frequent transit development option is also available. Yeah. So like so technically like a small apartment building could be constructed here too. Yes. Okay. And so and then the zoning conditions say that they're going to um reszone it and restrict it only to single unit living exclusive to town homes, meaning they're going to zone town houses out. and basically will only be single family detached houses. Uh, correct. Yeah. Okay. So, I guess my question for the the neighbors is understanding that if we deny this case, it's going to stay R six, which means it could be any of these other residential uses all the way up to even like a small condo building. And if we approve it, it'll forever be it's it's pretty it's basically a massive downzoning if we approve this. And it'll only be single family homes. And you're fine with keeping the R six in place? Yes. That was the only question I had. I have a question for staff. While you're here, while you're standing there, could th this be a residential home with a special use permit to run an office out of I don't know the answer to that off of my head. I don't think so. I just Sorry, I don't I just want to emphasize one point. This property Okay. Okay. Thank you, sir. And and and my question that may be only for mixed use, but I'm wondering where residents have a have a home and they're running a business out of it. How do Yeah, council member, this Pat Young with Planning and Development, only a home office, which has significant limitations. I think it's 600 or 800 ft of the of the unit can be used. Very limited number of employees. I think it's three or less. It might be five. Um there's no other other than the home office, there's no other way to get office use in this uh district, which is why they're before you tonight. Well, I'm thinking if I have a home and I make an office and part of it is my small office and my office is selling homes. Mhm. And that's the office, the rest of it is residential. If someone were, I guess, live there, then if they let people walk through their home, then they would just let people walk through their home. Correct. Right. So, you're certainly correct. Have to live there. So, as I as I said, there right there's significant limitations including that it be occupied as as residential. Okay. That in that um I think one of the and the applicant could speak to this obviously. I think one of the other issues is there would really be no way for them to do the small parking lot they're trying to do. Sure. With a homebased business. So, Okay. Thank you. Yeah. Councelor Silver, Patrick, can you just come up for a second and hold on to that piece about the parking lot? The ox would allow you to have three structures, let's say, that look like single family. One could be an office and the other two could be residential. And that office over time, because office and residential is permitted in OX could be converted to residential. Yes, that's the point I'm trying to make. And I want to be clear um to the neighbors. I I would support an ox because it allows both the office and the residential, the R six, and I don't know if you understood to council member Lambert Melton's question, the R six allows for town homes, which it sound as if the community was opposed. You're not. Okay, then I stand corrected. So just to be clear, the proposed zoning allows for both office and residential. If there were three principal structures, one could be office for a period of time. Don't have to do anything and get the building permits and and the COO to convert it certificate of occupancy to convert it from office to residential. That would be correct independent of all these conditions that have been offered. So the conditions limit that, but otherwise yes. Now, of course, the parking area is something different. Uh, so that I think would require some conditions for that temporary use, but I just wanted to clarify because I just think these conditions made things for me at least overly complicated. Okay. Okay. Do we have other questions or conversation you have here? I don't have any questions. I have some comments. Um, I can do that now or you can close. All right. I'll go ahead and close the hearing if we don't have any. Anybody have any other questions? There's two There's two things that I just want to make clear. Okay. Does he have any time left? His time's gone. I can do it in 20 seconds. So, do you have a comment or question? I just two comments. Hang on a second. We have to put 12 seconds back on the clock. Well there's it's 12. Okay. He's trying to like finigle you back up. We want you to have four seconds. I appreciate it. I appreciate it. It's going to be a FedEx commercial. If I count, it shows eight. I can probably I'm trying to do a naked two two things. Office creep is not possible because the only place it's allowed for the office case is on 105 completely. It's it's not allowed anywhere else. And the other thing is this since Glen the size of Glenwood is in the frequent transit area. So it allows eight town homes, not four. Thank you. Okay, thank you. And we will now uh close the public hearing and bring it back to the table. Councelor Jones. Sure. So, um I really do thank neighbors and the applicant for for the conversation. We've been talking since last fall. Some struggles that I have with the case are the fact that we are pulling housing stock off of the market for a council that wants housing and we know um it's not just about affordable housing. It's about all housing and this does that it it is being built right now. It'll still enter our tax um whether or not this case goes through it will enter being taxed uh after that. So, I'm struggling with saying, "Okay, we're going to put a hold on this and say no one can live there for 8 years when we have the potential to have eight town homes there." Um, the other struggle that I have is the fact that we are saying, "Yeah, do a service parking lot." I mean, we've had many conversations at this table where we don't want parking lots and here we are in the middle of a residential neighborhood saying, "Yeah, let's put a parking lot there." Um, so I struggle with that. there is the copper building does already have an office space up on Glennwood Avenue and so this is an additional um office space uh that I don't think is necessary. Um so for all those reasons I am struggling with uh with with approval for this. Um I'd love to hear your thoughts before um any motions go through. All right. Yeah. Um start with councelor Lambert Milton. Yeah, I went back and forth on this case, but I'm going to be voting no. Um I if the neighbors had said, "We really only want single family homes here," then I could have gotten behind approving it because really what they're doing is a massive downzoning. They're forever taking these lots out of what would be a frequent transit corridor, which could provide more dense housing, and restricting it to just three single family homes. And to get there, the trade-off would have been they use one of them as a model home for 8 years. But y'all are telling me you're perfectly fine with whatever can be built by right under R six. I would under no other circumstances ever approve or support a case that takes the work we've done to provide more dense housing on transit and to reverse that on three lots which is essentially what we're being asked to do. So I will be voting no on this case. Okay. Uh councelor Pat. Yeah. Um maybe similarly kind of adding a exclamation mark on some of these things. I've I've been going back and forth, right? I I the recently assessed property values of many homes in this area are $1.5 million. This is going to be a structure that looks like a $1.5 million house so that people can come in and pick crown molding for things that will be $1.5 million houses elsewhere in the city. So, so I don't know that I think there's public detriment. I also don't know that I think there's public benefit to taking so much housing stock off the market. Um, and there's also not like some massive tract of land waiting to and this is so this is not accelerating housing production elsewhere. Um, so for that reason, I'll defer to the district member and likely be a no on this case. All right, councelor. You heard a lot of what I had to say looking at his location. I personally don't have a problem with the ox covering this property. It's extending the existing uh oax district that exists to the south. I am struggling with the conditions. Uh I believe that you know I I wish you know I I can't say I wish um you cannot take conditions back once they're offered but I would have advised a much more simplified approach as I was stating that was looking for three principal structures. office residential could be flipped without complicated conditions and uh for that reason I will struggle to support this case. Uh for that reason, uh we had an early conversation as a former plan director here for the city. Uh most people may not know, but when you have a conditional use case, those 18 conditions is a customized zoning district that goes along with this property as long as it's zoned. And the plan department has to look at all those conditions and track them over time. And you know, I think fewer is reasonable. Many becomes very complicated. So if there were more simplified conditions, I could have supported this case. Uh yes, given the location, a frequent uh transit corridor. Uh it is next to a shopping center. It is in an area that's both residential and somewhat mixed use and commercial. Uh so I understand my colleagues point of view, but from my point of view, having a more simplified, cleaner application with simplified conditions uh is something I could have supported. Any other comments? No. Then I move to adopt the proposed consistency statement dated June 3rd, 2025 contained in the agenda materials and to deny the resoning uh amendment, the zoning amendment. Second. All right. Uh all in favor of the denial, uh please say I. I. I. And then all opposed. All right. So it will be a unanimous denial. All right. Uh next resoning Z4324. Right. Hannah Reco again, planning and development. This is case Z4324. It is two parcels on Athens Drive. They are a little over 2 and a half acres in size. currently zoned R4 uh with the special residential parking overlay district and the request is for residential mixed use three stories conditional use um keeping the overlay. So some context here. This is in southwest Raleigh. You can see a little corner of the belt line up in the top right. It's at the corner of Athens Drive and Athenswood Lane. um largely residential in this area. Some civic uses. Athens Drive High School located um right to the south of that intersection. There is one proposed condition currently prohibits some land uses normally allowed in uh the current zoning um that you can see here. So view of existing versus proposed. So this is going from a residential district to a mixeduse district. Um so an increase in the amount of units that could be built um apartment building type townhouse of Albert uh uh townhouse building type uh would be allowed and then at the corner of Tupo streets a small amount of non-residential would also be allowed. The request is consistent with the comprehensive plan overall. It is inconsistent with the future land use map designation which is low-scale residential for this area. See a list of consistent policies here and then inconsistent policies uh in addition to the future land use map designation. You also see uh response time standards. So approval of this request because it's inconsistent with the future land use map would be a map amendment. they would be amended to a medium-scale residential map would look something like this. And then finally, the uh planning commission recommended approval and a split vote. Um they also made a um recommendation for um some additional um apologies conditions and then um some reasons for opposed votes here. um citing mainly the future land use map um inconsistency and um potential impacts to the surrounding area. So with that I can answer any questions you have before you proceed. Questions for Miss Reco? Yeah, just one question. Um both with the current zoning and proposed could a library be built? Yes, that is considered a civic use I believe. So, so in both cases R4 or RX3. Yep. Thank you. Yes. With based on the conditions of what cannot be built here, what else can be built here? So, um, RX mainly allows for residential uh, civic uses and then a limited amount of commercial use. So outside of these listed um here that could include personal service, could include office, um other commercial uses that don't fall under eating establishment or retail stores. Okay. Any other questions? All right. Uh so we have or was it already open? No. Okay. So, we are opening the hearing on Athens Drive. We did not have anyone signed up in support. Um, I do want to note the applicant is here even though they did sign up for to speak. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. All right. Well, we don't have it on here, but um they they are the applicant mayor. So, yeah. So, get Yes, please. Uh both of Arthur and Anya Gordon, if you want to come up and then we do have uh opposition signed up um after y'all have your eight minutes. Welcome. Oh, we have eight minutes. Great. Hi, my name is Arthur Gordon. I live at 428 Emerson Drive here in Raleigh. And as I'm fond of saying that the comment used to be that you're not from here until you have family members buried in the cemetery. So I'm proud to say that my grandparents are residents here in Raleigh for eternity. And uh but what I mean by that is is I'm not an out of town developer. I'm not coming in trying to put something in real quick and leave and make some money and go on my way. Um, I ran the Ireardless Cafe for 50 years or 45 years here in Raleigh. And if I told you 50 years ago that I was going to open a plant-based restaurant and tell you that you couldn't smoke cigarettes in public, you wouldn't have given me any chance at all. Well, 50 years later, everybody knows what vegetarian and vegan is. Um, non-smoking has become statewide. That same instinct that I had 50 years ago about what was possible is the instinct that I have about this piece of property today. So, um, we bought the property in 2012 when we were running the restaurant and we grew produce that we served at the restaurant. In 20 um and 20, we I sold the the business and still own the uh property that we're talking about. Um, for the last few years, we've actually employed a farmer to run the garden. And last year, the garden generated $90,000 worth of sales at the Kerry Farmers Market. The point of that is is that it's not a pie in the sky type of thing where we want to put a garden in. We already have a garden. We know how to manage it. We know how to run run it. The idea being that with the idea of this project that that in a sense is a paid employee, you now have somebody who can manage the garden around uh what we want to think of as affordable housing. And so the um the the idea is not for it to only be affordable, but the idea would be that people who live on this property would also be asked to work in the garden for reduced rates. And what we feel is missing in our culture right now is a sense of purpose. People are desperate for housing, but they need community. They need a place to hang out. They need to know who their neighbors are. They have to have something to do. They may not have the wherewithal to maintain that or manifest it, but we like to think that the overall project brings all of this design into play. Um, and from I'm not sure of the the specifics, but we had another um condition that we wanted to add, which is a 20-oot buffer around the property with um with uh trees and bushes. We're trying to run a garden. It's not a big problem planting more trees and bushes, trust me. Um, there is a bus stop right out front, so you don't necessarily have to have um a car to live there. It allows you to connect to the to the city itself. Um, the neighborhood has R10 zoning. It has a lot of um uh two-story apartment type buildings on it that I would think of as as affordable. So, we didn't put it in as a condition, but again, the idea of having a garden on this property, whether it's with a library or whether it's with housing, we feel like that this could literally become a model that you could try to use in other parts of the city. If we could make this work, and I'm always the guy, as they used to say, you could always tell the pioneers, they're the ones lying on the side of the road with arrows in their backs. So, I'm always willing to try something. I'm not trying to be a traditional developer, make a quick buck and get out. I'm trying to help the city, the city that I love, to understand other ways of getting people on the property, other ways of affording housing. And we've already been contacted by a number of agencies here in town that are willing to partner with us if we can get finished with this zoning case. So, in conclusion, I would like to think that this could be the beginning of something really big for the city at this time. Thank you very much. Thank you. Any uh questions? Just to clarify, it's going from one level of residential to another and you're referring to a community garden. This resoning is for a more intense residential development that exists there. RX, it goes to RX. So that's a mix commercial and residential. Uh so can you explain a community garden purpose of this? Uh cuz that I'm just trying to understand is it housing with a garden there? Correct. Just you can explain that concept. Yeah. So the idea would be that it would be um one idea that I had would would be that elders could live on the ground floor, families could live on the first floor and dormitories maybe on the top floor and um it would be a combination of people's ages and vocations and they could live there and we already have a third of an acre plus a high tunnel on the property that produces produce. So the idea would be that we would have a farmer who would manage the farm itself and then incorporate the people that are living in the property to be able to work in the farm and have a sense of place, be able to eat the food that they're growing themselves, just a a real sense of well-being, I guess. So again, I'm I'm the from the architects that I've spoken to, they say don't be too specific because the person that actually develops it may or may not um be able to follow through on all of this. But this is this is the our thrust, I guess, on what we're trying to get started on. The reason why I ask is that I was looking for some type of open space condition associated with this that provides additional land. If this one is fully developed, it could be fully developed at its maximum withever the density that is permitted. And this one uh would allow um trying to look for the unit count up to 67 units. Correct. That could fill out the entire site. Uh I don't if the vision is for community garden and again I don't know how that's once it's if you are successful reszoning it you know that is a very strong condition on the property but is that what you're saying is that it doesn't limit down the 67 units because right now it is inconsistent with the future land use map is looking for low density. This is more moderate. It doesn't have any recommendation for open space. So you just clarify this this vision and explain why the conditions don't match your vision. So Councilman Silver, you need more conditions. So I I think I think the the main condition for this one. I think I think the main condition that we're trying to operate under is um affordability. And this seems to be the major theme of of you guys sitting up here that we have to be able to create space and you don't always can come up with 5 10 15 acres of land. This is the idea of trying to take a small piece of land 2 acres 2 and a half acres and see if we can design a building that fits on the property and then tucked in on around it would be the gardening part. So, I don't know that we would go into production in terms of trying to raise money by running a garden, but that we would go into production of trying to get everybody involved with working in the garden as part of the design. Thank you. Does that answer your question? All right. So, now we have uh William Mitchell who is in opposition and you will have eight minutes. Good evening, honorable mayor Cal and esteemed members of the city council and the city staff. Um, my name is Bill Mitchell. I'm a longtime member of the Athens Woods HOA board and I live at 1401 Grecian Woods Place and I speak on behalf of my neighborhood and some fellow members of the neighborhood are here in the audience today. Um the current zoning application for 1321 um Athens Drive requests a change from R4 to RX zoning, one of the most intense residential designations in our city. RX zoning is not appropriate adjacent to R4 without specific conditions to regulate the increased density. The reasonzoning would take the property from a density of approximately four units per acre to potentially 32 units per acre or allowing up to 67 apartments on this 2 some acre site. Given its proximity to NC State, it's highly likely this could become student housing, which would be almost the opposite from affordable housing and the way it seems to have come in our area. uh avent West the the broader residential area which is designated in Raleigh's comprehensive plan deserve protection from this overdevelopment um so we can preserve the existing smaller more affordable homes certainly in this area there are no McMansions a lot of ranches split levels older homes um and those can be more affordable these homes allow families to have yards and space and in some cases provide room for elderly relatives uh to garden or age in place. Even if the current property owner, Mr. Gordon, Mrs. Gordon, um has different intentions, reszoning to RX sets a precedent that corrode the very character of AIT West and this area or towards other people to possibly group homes together and get it re um reszone to RX. If this change is approved, it sends a message that highdensity multif family housing is acceptable in area has long been guided by R4 zoning. This can encourage developers to consolidate nearby large lots or even to build apartment complexes or other more intense um um living spaces. It's making to hard to to maintain affordable housing in that area, small single family housing. And additionally, increased density will add traffic to an already hazardous intersection near Athens Drive High School. This is where all the students leave for lunch uh and at the end of the day. Um usually at high speed um this route this route is also used to access the Athens Drive athletics complex, Lake Johnson pool, the Thomas Crowder Woodland Center. Side streetet parking would become a growing concern um with high density at this spot with parking on the side streets and feasibly Athens drive. Um this all this added impervious surface would also would fear could overwhelm the storm drains especially in our neighborhood which is downhill from the site and ne negatively affect the local creek at the bottom of our community. Currently, the property in question is poorly maintained at homes resembling an abandoned site with a permanent portaotty on site, industrial fencing, and various fixtures. The appearance at this point does not align with the characterist standards of the Avent West neighborhood. Um, in in, you know, certainly the affordable housing aspect, I respect the Gordons for this this aspect of it. Um, we just see that it possibly could be without conditions be 67 apartments, the top of our neighborhood, which would be three stories tall, be overwhelming if you would um towards our particular neighborhood downhill from this spot, but just be different, completely different than what Avent West seems to trend towards. Um, in conclusion, reszoning this property from RFord RX conflict with the city of Raleigh's historic comprehensive plan and the Avent West area plan, both of which were strongly supported by former District D Councilman Thomas Crowder. Our our neighborhood stands for responsible affordable housing that supports families and remains consistent with Raleigh's long-term vision. sincerely the residents of Athens Woods in the Avent West area and thank you for all of your time and service. Thank you. All right. Do you have uh questions for Mr. Mitchell while he's up here? I don't have any questions for Mr. Mitchell. Just kind of a general set of comments. Okay. I'm gonna I'll go ahead and thank you. Uh go ahead and close that uh hearing. All right. Yeah. Um, I just want to kind of summarize what I've heard and um, I appreciate uh, the applicants uh, vision, your all's dream. Um, it really does um, it does speak to me. I love the garden. Um, I think a lot of different folks living around that garden space would be fantastic. Um, I think what is hard for us up here is we really have to go off of what's on paper. So, what is in this zoning, you know, application. So, I appreciate you all being willing to look at additional conditions. I know we've talked about that already. I don't expect us to take a vote uh today, but rather to give some more time to the applicants to consider what the neighbors are asking for. And so, I just want to reiterate what I've heard and then if other counselors have ideas for improvement or consideration. Um, you know, right now the application is asking for a change going from, you know, lowcale residential to this more, you know, moderate or medium uh, density. And so that's from 18 units to 67. If you don't actually plan to get to 67, um, if you can bring that density down or think about the building massing, the height, um, certainly the setbacks because the setbacks are quite different. In the current zoning, it's 20 foot front setback, 20 foot on the side, and 30 foot rear. And it's almost nothing for this new opport, you know, new option. So, I think there just has to be a little bit more of a mirroring of what is there already if you want to go this route. It may ultimately not make sense for the area. And I recognize I have heard a lot of concern from residents on this particular case. Um, I hear the concerns about parking. I don't know where folks park if there isn't a parking lot or something there for that because on Yeah. Athens Drive, there really isn't an area for parking. Um, it's not a safe place to park. Um, there's a lot of school traffic, bus traffic. Um, and otherwise everything is kind of a neighborhood side street and some of the streets are private because they're HOAs. Um, or there just really isn't much room. So, I don't know. Again, if we had 67 units there that didn't have parking, where would folks go? So, there's just a lot of details here that I think could be fixed. If a garden is planned, an open space condition would certainly make sense. If affordable housing is planned, that condition could make sense. Um, but again, you know, we don't want a case that's so complicated that, you know, is hard for us to make sense of. And so I think there's just a number of factors here that make this one a little challenging to evaluate. Yep. Uh council, I do appreciate the applicant's vision. Uh in a case like that, if you have that vision, you may have to be in a position to actually execute the vision. You're asking for resoning. uh which it's a map change that runs in perpetuity with the property unless it's changed. Uh although I made reference to the condition I will struggle with this case of going from low uh to moderate. It seems that Athens drive is a clear delineation between R six, R10 and then the R4. So I'll personally struggle not looking for the condition. Uh, I would certainly figure out a way you can sell this property with the vision of getting the 18 town homes. Uh, not get 18 with the parking and a community garden. So, there are some tough choices on this one. I don't believe I could support this case even if there was an open space condition uh with the the RX. Uh, it would allow an apartmentt type building which is not in character with the surrounding area. had it been on the other side of Athens Drive, you know, that's something that seems more consistent. But I just don't believe we should start the domino of establishing an RX and then you could start seeing others pursuing RX and would not want to destroy the character of this community. So I would struggle uh with this case. I'm not sure under the current R six as proposed with the condition. There would be other conditions that would satisfy me. I just can't reconcile that density and the open space and the parking working themselves out on a site of this size. So, uh, I'm just putting my thoughts out there as this goes up to the next level. And any other comments from the table? All right. Do you is there a motion to uh My motion would be to is it to hold the case until July 1st? So to give the applicant a month to look at this to consider new conditions. Um I would also encourage y'all to talk with the neighbors again to see if there is any common ground. I don't know if there is. Um but I think we need that month time and I believe you all are available on July 1st. Is that correct? The applicants. Yes. Okay. Great. So that would be my motion. Or evening. Um evening. 7 p.m. Second. Okay. Can I make a just a clarifying question if was the hearing left open? No, the mayor closed. I I did close it tonight. If you're going to have that, I'm out of time. Oh, okay. So, I know I need to reopen the hearing. Thank you. Okay. And so, we have a motion and a second. Uh, any other discussion? All in favor of the motion? I All oppose, nay. And the eyes have it. Thank you. And that concludes our business for this evening and we are adjourned. [Music]