[Music] [Music] all right good evening everybody Welcome to City Hall and we've got a public hearing this evening as you know um looks like we have a scout troop here so welcome always glad to see y'all down here um all right uh we have a first uh matter scheduled for public hearing is a street closing on East whiter Mill Road right of way and we should have Amanda Jones with our transportation good evening Madame mayor and council members my name is Amanda Jones with Transportation I'll be giving a brief presentation on a street closure for a portion of East whiter Mill Road so the area indicated in red is the closure area this is located on the south side of East wter camill Road um it's located just north of Capitol Boulevard and in between Carson Street and Center Road that's odd okay all right here we go sorry so the closure area is is approximately 141 Square ft there is a development plan in review for six unit Town Homes at this location and that development will be making improvements along eastw Kill Road eastw kmill road is an Avenue two-lane divided Street type and this closure is excess right away for that type of street and lastly the closure does align with our policy T 2.7 of the 2030 comprehensive plan all right and lastly here is a image of what it looks like today um so as you can see this closure would just be aligning um the RightWay with the adjacent property and that is my presentation right thank you do you have questions for Miss Jones okay uh if not then uh we can open the public public hearing uh for East whiter Mill and I have two folks signed up uh to support it Sam NY Samuel NY and Tim King right and y'all have eight minutes uh combined time okay thank you very much Sam n with the site group uh my office addresses 11-11 oberin Road and Raleigh I'm the civil engineer on the project and wanted to be here to answer any questions if y'all have any okay any questions all right thank you okay I Tim King I uh live at 10724 Beaver Pond Lane and Raleigh uh the reason for the street closure petition is uh to align the the adjacent lot that I also own to align it up and just clean it up because currently it does not run parallel with Whitter camill Road um so we did this uh same street closing petition back in 2010 on that adjacent lot so it's this same abandoned Street and the council approved it back in 2010 and we're just asking for that to get approved for this okay any questions yep any questions all right there's no other then I will close the public hearing uh is there Mo I'll make a motion uh moot to adopt the resolution ordering the closing and related actions with the conditions outlined second okay any further discussion if not all in favor of the motion I I I'll oppose nay right eyes have it thank you right next we have uh petition annexation ax92u Road and uh a number of different addresses on Old M Bernie Road good evening mayor members of council Pat young with Planning and Development I'm going to turn it over to Hannah reca of our team to present the annexation and Zoning case but I did want to very briefly uh draw your attention back to the conversation we had at your recent Council Retreat uh regarding growth and annexation um particularly at our Urban Fringe and the Northeast and Southeast parts of our community where there's so much growth this project is in the Northeast uh part of our community it is uh outside of the extra territorial jurisdiction and is uh relatively far from existing Services um so we I just wanted to take a moment to to um remind you that we have two things forthcoming the first is modifications to our um administrative processes to ensure that you all hear and get to decide on annexation cases before we have any binding commitments to applicants for annexation so that you all are in the driver's seat about how we grow where we grow um that that is um in process and you'll get a update and manager's weekly report in the coming weeks the second piece is that staff is working to identify what we're going to call Priority growth areas these are areas where staff believes and we're going to present you with criteria that that do help document this that based on prior Council actions and existing Services um prior Council actions meaning annexations in the vicinity that um we believe growth is um costeffective and reasonable because what it does is capitalize on the existing commitments that the council has made through annexing property in areas and to have more property under City control means more um Revenue means properties that are developed to City standards which um helps protect property values and helps uh Build a Better Community versus those areas where we have not made prior commitments to growth and we we would recommend through policy that you not uh Annex until such time as we have a fiscally constrained plan to provide services in those areas or until we find uh Partners in eastern weight County who may want to serve those areas so that'll be coming um within the next couple of month months we believe that the presentation that Hannah is going to present you tonight will give you enough information about the different service impacts for this property that you can make an informed decision in that regard and bamman I'll be happy to answer any questions on that bigger picture when Hannah's done with her presentation councelor silver uh Patrick just one question you mentioned priority areas is that in I'm assuming that's outside the etj these priority areas correct right so we we are we are analyzing the etj and outside the etj um etj is an area where we have um made a not legally bonding but a a uh expectation for property owners that they will be brought into the city we'll primarily will'll focus on these areas right outside the etj where there's a lot of interest to develop uh and that that's where we will develop these criteria about where we have existing Services where prior annexations as in this case for example there's a satellite annexation that's immediately adjacent called Rivertown that was brought into the prop uh the city limits about 20 years ago so that's um but but I hope I answered your question and I think we're going to be looking at the area primarily right outside the etj but we'll also look at some of the etj areas and talk about whether they are appropriate for for near term growth so let me clarify my question so I know there was a recommendation do a Northeast and Southeast study area are these priority areas instead of those study areas or I'm just trying to understand the sequencing so understand cuz we had a retreat we talked about the Northeast Study area the southeast study area so it sounds like the priority areas is just is that part of that conversation this is something that's trying to at least get ahead of it if and when that study those studies are undertaken yes yes sir so that's that's a really good point so we have two large areas each one is about the same size as inside the belt line so these are large areas um in the Northeast and southeast part of the community as Council M silver said they're called the southeast special study area cessa and the Northeast special study area uh Nessa the southeast special study area um was completed um last year or in 2023 um that that looked at um had a kind of Proto version of this priority growth area concept that we're bringing to you in the coming months the Northeast sting area um was out forbid when we when we decided to kind of put a pause on that and um before we do further study about the growth uh in both of these areas we want to bring you areas where we feel like there's um both value and a commitment to grow in the near term and then we'll we'll take we will do additional significant additional study in those areas where we have not made commitments to growth to make sure that you all have all the information you need to make good decisions about whether we should grow in those areas and if if so when we should grow in those areas does that answer your question yes thank you sir any other questions for Mr Young while he's up I do so in the beginning you mentioned commitments as far as annexations have there been any made because we're CH it's a policy change that we're making have there been any made to this one as far as connections I don't believe so okay um you were seeing the annexation in the zoning tonight right so um there there have not been any approvals to my knowledge um that would would bind or influence council's decision tonight okay thank you thank you all right thank you all right good evening Hannah Reco Planning and Development um so as I just mentioned this item is an annexation request uh for a large assemblage it's located outside of Raleigh's etj the item following uh is a resoning request for that same area so I have a joint presentation uh to cover both before you proceed with each of the hearings separately and then as a reminder because it is outside the the etj when you do act you'll have to ask sequentially starting with the annexation request so uh request ax 924 uh assemblage of properties a little over 240 acres it's outside Raleigh ZJ um but is adjacent to City Limits uh that includes uh satellite uh limits here uh and also a city- owned property uh to the north of the um Watkins Road Park property uh the proposed development is res residential uh the site is generally surrounded by residential um largely low-scale Rural and then Water and Sewer are not immediately available um waterers located off at Old Cruise Road and then sewer uh is available off of Buffalo Road to the South and then also Watkins road to the North extension of those Services would be um responsibility of the developer so current zoning in the area I'll cover this in more detail in a moment but the site has weight County zoning most of the surrounding area also being in the county has County zoning you can see areas of righ's corporate limits with Raleigh zoning here uh it's all residential in nature so given this is a larger request than typical outside the etj I'm going to walk through some addition considerations uh that may be helpful for your discussion of these items U it falls into two categories the jurisdictional context the impact of and on eligibility of annexation in this area and then the city infrastructure and services that would become available to the site upon annexation so first just to to situate ourselves uh the site as I mentioned it is between satellite corporate limits the Rivertown property uh to the sort of Southeast and then Northwest not shown here but oops that's not located at the very north of the property is uh publicly owned land which is what allows the site to petition for annexation um this is the Northeast special study area oressa and then the city has annexation agreement lines with adjacent municipalities you can see the rolleville annexation line uh following Mitchell Mill Road and the night Dale annexation line following Buffalo Road and then in yellow uh are the annexation since uh 2011 uh so that represents kind of our current ERA of annexation that we're in after the point that the state restricted municipality's ability to involuntarily Annex so the yellow properties are uh property owners that have voluntarily petitioned the city for annexation since that time as you may recall the city has several resolutions uh defining in what circumstances the city would consider uh annexation of property outside the etj one of those circumstances is when a site or assemblage of sites is adjacent to city limits or public land in this case as I mentioned it's the Watkins Road Park property uh which touches the very North portion of this assemblage if uh this were annexed it would connect you know that public land with what is currently satellite corporate limits uh to the southeast so to give you a sense of what is currently um pre this annexation uh eligible for um petition uh those are shown in red that that encompasses the current etj and then properties that are adjacent to uh corporate limits also wanted to give a sense of what uh the picture would look like uh if this property were annexed so the the picture of Eligibility would uh grow uh significantly so um the the gap between the Rivertown property and uh contiguous corporate limits um sort of bridged and that opens up um a sign number of other other properties shown in red here that could petition the city for annexation um I'll note that um and even in the before picture uh um it's really most likely to be the larger properties uh that would petition for annexation some of these um sort of smaller um uh County subdivisions are probably less likely to collectively petition for annexation all at once um okay going to shift now to um the look at sort of the Slate of City infrastructure and services that become available uh once uh a property is annexed um so areas in city limits obviously have Raleigh zoning um development is subject to the infrastructure standards in the Udo uh new streets uh are City maintained and everything else is in this picture um State maintained so the the the streets outlined in dark are a current city of rally maintained roads it shows kind of the picture of residential development uh in the area um what you don't see here are any streets on Rivertown obviously that property has not yet developed but uh once it does would contain City maintained streets um so to that point um at RiverTown was annexed in 2006 and so at that point that action represented a commitment to to serve um those properties um and um so the addition of annexation of additional land um could add additional potential future residents to the area and that in that way could make uh future Investments and infastructure and services in this area um more efficient in that way um and I think this is true of all all the services we discuss so parks and Greenways um you can see a number of uh City uh and County Properties here the the closest uh Parks facility developed Park facilities are along uh The Noose River on the Le hand side of this um image the Horseshoe Farm Nature Preserve and the Buffalo Road Athletic Park and of course the Noose River Greenway running along uh the River North South uh Watkins Road property as I mentioned and also the Hodes Mill Creek property are city-owned but there is no not currently planned for facilities at this time the closest property that has received um has some planning activity recently is the Forestville Road property so turning out of Public Safety uh on fire service this site is in an area with known fire service consideration so the response time standards are not currently met um there are um as you know ongoing uh fire service master plan uh to look at this issue um the two closest uh stations are at Forestville Road and Mitchell Mill Road and then down along Buffalo Road uh just east of the site is a Wake County station and then the next closest one would would is off to the East and lendell and also um mention that the River Town um resoning for that site includes uh condition that if the city um would like to take them the owners up on it of a uh a piece of property to locate a fire station looking at Police Service um uh based on the location seems likely to be in the Northeast District although it is also close to the North District um so exactly where that would um end up might depend on kind of Road circulation and the ability to uh serve that area um water and sewer uh is often the main service that uh influences that uh property owners are are seeking to connect to when they petition for annexation uh in the kind of big picture here I wanted to point out the merger communities the city's merger communities that rally water is already serving that includes Roseville to the north and ndale to the South uh the site uh is in the um long range utility service area and I think the the size of that area kind of reflects the um you know Raleigh waterers planning to serve this area regardless of whether or not the city grows into it and then uh I'll just point out closest uh treatment plants the EM Johnson water treatment plant and Smith Creek Water wastewater treatment plant off to the Northwest and then um future Li Little River Reservoir and uh treatment plant and Little Creek wastewater treatment plant in eastern way County oops and then um Solid Waste Services uh so trash pickup um again this map is really a map of residential developments in the area um if uh Rivertown develops it with you attached attached or in some circumstances townhouse development um you'd see um you'd see uh something on the map there too uh and as you can see it's a a Wednesday collection pickup and then finally I wanted to touch on uh the difference between Wake County and City of Raleigh development uh regulations so uh if annexed and if Raleigh zoning is applied um developers would come to Raleigh and it be held to the Udo standards instead of the Wake County Udo so this uh image here is from a uh County subdivision just Southwest of this site I think it's pretty typical of the density and infrastructure uh Road and storm water infrastructure that's um really typical under County development um more specifically um there are no sidewalk requirements curb and gutter requirements under Wake County development uh and then um you don't have the ability to connect to Public Water and Sewer uh it's well in septic or in some cases is private water and sewer and that really impacts the the scale int density of development that's possible uh so shift now to the rezoning request which is z124 it is the same assemblage of of properties uh they have R30 zoning underweight County zoning they're requesting R six conditional use for the majority of the site there is a small portion of one part property that would not the conditions would not apply to and that's uh existing residence that I believe the owner wants to uh maintain living there um another aerial context um as I think we've covered now there's a it's largely residential in the area but I think this shows um both the mostly undeveloped nature of the site and also the the lot lines here I think paint the picture of sort of the the surrounding subdivisions and scale of development want to point out a few other things so the hod Hodges Mill Creek uh bisects the the property uh there's Associated flood plane uh surrounding that um and then there are uh several Raleigh Street plan streets uh bisecting the the property from uh Watkins Town Road how obvious it is there to um to Old Cruz Road and then part of a a larger um future connection at Labrador drive off to the southeast so here's some views uh from the street um showing the uh sort of rural nature of the surrounding area there are 14 proposed conditions this is really the so high level summary there's much more detail uh available in the agenda backup um but uh first two conditions um pertain to open space so 40% of the site would be designated as open area minimum of 30% of the site would remain as undisturbed area and those those two areas could overlap there is a commitment to make a contribution to the city for uh to support fire service station or equipment in the area and then a a condition um specif if Ying the amenity areas that would be available on the site so one main and then two pocket Parks uh it um lists the types of facilities that could fulfill that condition and then also the the Sort Location of them uh so that Residential Properties are within a half a mile of of one of those areas there is a commitment to a wider Greenway Corridor uh easement of 75 ft uh and then a cap on on uh total number number of dwelling units 550 and then uh some specification by uh building type apartment building type is prohibited uh although an R six that's really um permitted only in a conservation development option so this condition takes that off that that ability off uh the table and then uh some landscaped protective yards uh established along adjacent properties and along Old mil Bernie Road those are roughly the sort of top uh West North and East part of the property part of the surrounding the site and then there are two conditions that speak to um traffic uh management and uh calming features that will be used along the internal streets that's condition 10 uh and 11 there is a commitment to install Double fencing uh at grading and construction phases uh commitment to uh establish uh dedicated electrical vehicle charging outlets for all units and then finally um additional storm water discharge management the addition of the 25e storm event so uh big picture going from County zoning to City Zoning um smaller Lots smaller setbacks and therefore um additional units uh could be established on the site the future land use guidance in this area is low scale residential uh with the exception of the the creek Corridor which is public parks and open space request is consistent with those designations uh but in the request is inconsistent with the comprehensive plan overall uh consistent policies again our future land use map and then really the increase in housing entitlement inconsistent policies is a touching on um infrastructure the timing of infrastructure and then the location of growth outside the etj and then finally the the Planning Commission recommended approval uh 6 to1 the one opposing vote uh the commissioner noted so the lack of um nearby commercial or employment centers to support additional uh residential and the lack of Transit service and so the combination of that um pushing this to be more car oriented development so with that I'm I'm happy to answer any questions you have okay questions from Mr Reco councelor Pat hi thanks um appreciate you mentioning some of the C some of the development standards that would be applicable under County zoning um do you know anything about I realize this is like not your field or not your jurisdiction but um anything about like the stream buffers that they have as compared to ours or flood plane regulations not off the top of my head I don't know if um I think stormw staff is some coming to help with that good evening Ben Brown storm water um the county doesn't have any more extensive stream buffer requirements than we do they they use the state's minimum neut buffer rules the same as we do in a non-w watershed area like this um as far as the um flood plane they wouldn't um they are not any more stringent like with our latest update either that equivalent to US yeah they're equivalent to ours for flood plane with our last update that we had so well you know I care deeply about the last update um all right cool thank you um and then Hannah do you know if I know Rivertown the Rivertown development which is sort of like catalyzing the whole reason why this case can even really be coming before us um was approved almost 20 years ago do you know if uh any activity has happened on that site since then there has been a few um development plans that have been submitted in recent years um I don't know any more detail about kind of status other than that but there has been some movement yeah and I and can you confirm my memory or phone a friend I think we confirm we like approved some sort of water pump or water infrastructure for them maybe in my past term Pump Station I believe what's coming down R water good evening mayor City Council with wheeler Raley water so yes um actually Raley waterer has a um a contract um to provide water and sewer service that would reach the Rivertown Community it was a mutual agreement that was actually part of the original um annexation that happened many years ago it's a continuation of that I do know that our office has approved construction plans for water and sewer infrastructure in Rivertown excellent thank you for confirming that I thought I remembered it but I want to make sure um and then Hannah can you confirm if a TIA will be required for this uh for this case later on down the road um I think Transportation staff can probably speak to that I did want to just go back quickly and add on the sort of development movement um forgot that the the last year was a a resoning for the southern part of the Rivertown that's right um paral so I think that reflects also some some stuff happening yes thank you for that rock paper scissors happening sorry about that Carter Robertson Transportation there was a TIA required for this site I'm not sure if the applicant is going to touch on that in their presentation okay and so maybe I misunderstand the process so tias that are done before the resoning is complete are exploratory and not legally binding and then another one has to be done with the site plan approval and those ones are uh regulatory is that correct I might have to defer to someone else in transportation but basically um what this Tia uh has is recommendations on how to mitigate um the development and other developments in the area a lot on Buffalo and Forestville Road um I'm not sure about which is regulatorily binding um may have to defer to Bradley here thank you sirk you Bradley Cal Transportation uh fantastic question uh Tia at the rezoning state helps us to kind of evaluate the increase in intensity proposed uh whereas at the site plan we're able to see actual projected trips how an access point uh how it would operate um how an intersection adjacent would also uh operate if there are any challenges uh because these are State facilities in and around the site we would also know that do would review that Tia and they would also uh provide requirements to mitigate the impacts okay so any information that's presented from a TIA existing is um hypothetical and then the one that comes one will be required later and that one will be binding at the development review stage yes thank you I'm good for now other questions okay so we'll go ahead and open the public hearing on Ax 924 and uh Coler Marsh good evening mayor Cowell members of council I am Coler Marsh with Parker Poe at 301 fville street here on behalf of the applicant I have representatives of lenar McAdams and kimley Horn our development team here as well to answer any questions you may have um this is a combined presentation for both the annexation and the rezoning um we've covered the site already in some detail so jumping to the comprehensive plan analysis to start we're we're spoton with the future land use map designation we're proposing R six single family homes town homes and large amounts of open space which is exactly what the plan calls for with this designation now when you look at this excerpt in the Northeast special study area uh it looks like we're an island in the middle of an undeveloped area but that's really not the case there's a lot of precedent for development and Raleigh approved rezonings and projects in the surrounding area I understand that the Rivertown project is in construction drawings and proceeding where there's land set aside for a future fire station um so the City of Raleigh has already set precedent for developing this development in this area and has kind of come up with conditions that are expected of developers to ensure that we're addressing the concerns that have been expressed related to the annexation and so we've heard those concerns through our resoning conditions we hope to establish that we're addressing them um very well um but again a lot of precedent for developing Raleigh but there's an alternative development pattern going on here as well uh there's an alternative to every case and that would be Wake County zoning here Wake County R30 would have 30,000 foot Lots large lot single family much lower density I saw the numbers you could have up to 300 homes that's assuming you develop every single possible acre what we're proposing here at least on the detached side is uh 5,000 foot Lots compared to 30,000 so there's a big change in the number of units that you can accomplish by bringing this into the City of Raleigh um just starting with the annexation to a couple things off the list here uh we do tie into the city of Raley's future plan park on the northeast but we're also taking that satellite Rivertown um limit and creating a more continuous connection taking former satellite and tying it in when you look at the city's 10-year fiscal analysis for this site we're Revenue positive from day one so for all 10 years we are re Revenue positive over $4 million and then uh about 2.5 when you count for CIP we address other service concerns through a contribution to the city of Raleigh's fire department we looked at what the other cases were asked to do and we met that same on a per unit basis that same contribution uh and then Public Utilities how are those going to be provided it's going to be through developer funded constructed improvements to the infrastructure that allows fut future capacity for the area and then the resoning itself offers a number of substantial benefits that go beyond what would be allowed if we were to develop in Wake County we're proposing R six conditional use um except for that one section in the northeast corner that's being kept by the homeowners and there's a cell tower at the rear that renders it essentially undevelopable anyway uh again single family homes town homes and open space are the defining features of this project but we have extensive zoning conditions um we started out with about a 100 plus Neighbors at a neighborhood meeting with a lot of questions and we have none here tonight in opposition because we've worked really hard on this uh substantial open space commitments and undisturbed area commitments we've covered fire contributions but we've also addressed Park service and we've had meetings with Parks and Recreation what we heard from them is that although there may be Public Service in the future future we want to ensure that this project provides park services for its residents and so we're doing that through main amenity as well as pocket parks that are committed through our zoning conditions uh We've also addressed Greenway comments from Parks and Recreation we have a unit cap that is one to inform the neighbors of what the actual proposal proposal and vision is here but two to inform the voluntary Tia so our project was not required to do a TIA because of the number of trips that are generated but we did one because we knew better and it was really important to the community and it led to a lot of important results apartments are prohibited and that is because of fire service concerns the fire department can know there will not be Apartments to serve with this project and then we have a number of concern commitments to address neighbor comments from buffers to traffic calming then finally at the end here we have three environmental commitments because we want to set a precedent for development in this area that we are going to be more sustainable we're going to have double silt fencing during construction EV charging on every single home and then enhanced storm water controls beyond what would be required in Wake County we had a concept plan to inform our discussions with our neighbors and I'll rotate at 90° and zoom in to point out a few items uh the open area and undisturbed area is what's shown in green the yellow is the areas where we envision development here kind of zoom out a little bit and look to the top of the page and you can see areas where there's existing Wake County development you can see that the ratios of developed area to forested area are roughly the same but on our site we're proposing up to 550 units and when we look to Wake County we got a dozen or so there's a a big benefit to bringing this into the City of Raleigh and having a much more efficient use of the land um we also have our our parks in open space shown with those blue stars on this uh to show where they'd be uh located throughout the community Tia was not required I've got another 20 slides on the back end that we could cover um but the point we want to make is that one of the big benefits of bringing these projects into the City of Raleigh and bringing this density are the privately funded con Transportation improvements that projects are bringing so we studied a number of projects uh in our Tia and this slide as well as this slide show all of the Tia improvements that those projects we studied are bringing then when you factor in our improvements on this slide as well as our improvements on this next Slide the result is really meaningful traffic improvements that go far beyond mitigating the impacts of this project and go towards addressing existing issues that the city is experiencing especially in that Buffalo Road Corridor so with our improvements they're shown in red other projects are shown in green um one that stands out to me and the three circles in the middle uh our red Improvement there is a left turn lane for vehicles that will never be coming going from our project because that is a left turn lane for folks to head towards our project and then turn left and go a different direction again just emphasizing that this is how we're addressing existing conditions through private development and the transportation improvements that projects like this bring we're also addressing an internal Road realignment building a whole new bridge this is a section of street that neighbors brought up as a concern for safety with uh accidents in the area we are literally building a new bridge next to that street redesigning it to be have a safer configuration um timeline wise I just want to emphasize this has been a very involved proc process with three formal neighborhood meetings multiple separate meetings with individuals as well as four formal submittals two rounds of Planning Commission to earn our recommendation of approval um so we think that the resoning and its conditions really set a high for development in this area but we recognize the bigger discussion that council's been having on annexation and we've done everything we can as a developer and an applicant to address that with this project again we're Revenue positive from year one through year 10 um and we think you know every decision a no to one project is a yes to another project if we wanted to go the way County Route I think that's a really bad outcome here one we're consistent with the city's future land use map which calls for greater residential density two we have all of our voluntary conditions that we're offering three Raleigh has has Transportation plan roads that don't get built if it's in Wake County or at least they're not required um I think most importantly is that more efficient land use pattern we're getting far more houses on this site smaller lot sizes it leads to Greater efficiency greater housing stock lower prices uh enhanced storm water controls again beyond what the weight County would require and I know that when we look at the outskirts and we look at vehicle dominated areas there's a concern about walkability but let's acknowledge that every single Wake County subdivision is unwalkable and streets don't require sidewalks we are building sidewalks and bike Lanes within this community and connections throughout that create walkability in a totally unwalkable area my last seven seconds I'll just point to the financial investment that this developer would have through Road improvements sewer improvements and all sorts of other improvements that provide future capacity to benefit the city uh with that we're happy to answer any questions that you may have thank you hey um can you go to the slide with the the aerial of the larger area with the traffic improvements I will do my best to go back the arrows this one um so just to orient my colleagues particularly those who served in the last term too and that larger oval toward the left that green plus sign uh that is where we've done all those where we did those delayed Annex ations and so the public a Publix is going in on that corner there are Apartments going in and town homes like all around that intersection and those are areas that have also contributed as future fire fund have had delayed annexation so I just want to kind of Orient folks who have heard me hammer on about this region for the last several years um so anyway there's that um I have a lot to say but no particular questions so I'll pass the mic if there are yep um councelor branch and then uh councelor Harrison um thank you couple questions I'm going to start with probably I think the easiest first Pump Station I know historically our staff does not like pump stations because of Maintenance and then this thing called odor that tends to come from pump stations um so have has this been vetted with our staff as far as the need for a show Pump Station instead of gravity so I know that there are discussions as late as last week as far as what infrastructure would be required and that I think there's some agreement and some understanding as to the scope which would require increased capacity for future development but I may lean to others that could answer that with more specifics if you need them yeah I I just wanted to just get an idea of of what's needed and that maybe a staff question as well um as far as if they've had a chance to look at this and and what's needed as far as far as um a pump station versus going with gravity flow uh council member Branch so far the the discussions have been very preliminary at this design stage um we always look for ways to avoid a pumping station um my understanding at this point it would include a pumping station unless we could find some other secure route down to Harris Creek I think I think we we've talked about maybe some improvements in Harris Creek to support the development but those the details of that have not been fully vetted but we are always looking for opportunities to avoid PK stations okay that's what I MIL my understanding so I just wanted to make sure that was out there definitely there'll be more conversation the other thing I want to talk about was the fire station um let me ask you this question what's your time frame or what's the time frame for the development of this project uh I've got a slide uh that came later on the buildout but I mean it's several years out is as the city knows there are um you know a number of approvals that that take time after this but I think we're looking buildout taking out all the way out towards 2030 and beyond for this project okay and I asked because obviously you offered because this is first time I'm talking to you about this case um you offered $50,000 towards a fire station equipment that might buy some boots um so I just want to just get a better understanding of whatever support you're looking to offer towards the fire station and the project also the reason why I asked about your time frame is because we have a fire study that's coming before us this spring so what I'm thinking is um and I had talked other counselors yet about this at some point maybe we need to get the fire study information first that way we have a better understanding of what commitment they're wanting to volunteer because like I said this is my first conversation with him hadn't talked to him prior to and I've never asked for any commitment towards a fire station but I just know based on the conversation we've had we're trying to figure out location of a fire station and we know costs are going up um they probably went up another million while we're sitting here so I just want to kind of put that out there and that's why I ask what's your time frame for the approval of this knowing that probably April or May we're going to get our fire study and our fire study may say it doesn't work on the locations that you're providing yeah and I guess I misunderstood the question when I said 2030 for timeline for approval I'm thinking construction buildout I mean obviously we we've been working on this for two years rezoning came after that and you know we had kind of waited for various studies to take place and we're hearing that they continue on so um we we we prefer not to just keep kicking the can down the road however it's a comment that really the monetary component hadn't come up um what we did was try to look at what other projects did and and meet that requirement okay but but we're open to other ways to look at it we don't have something quantifi other than the precedential cases okay that's fair thank you councelor Harrison yeah so this is going to be a question about some of the parks and I just want to tee up Stephen Bentley I'm going to ask a couple things to you in a moment um but I just wonder if you could first talk about um the pocket parks that you're proposing I believe each pocket park is required to be 10,000 square ft I'm not sure what you're thinking but also there was this potential Park land dedication and I know we've had other properties you know in East uh what became East Raleigh uh where there has been a potential dedication of Park land but I'm just trying to better understand what the potential is here what's the acreage whether Parks has an interest in this because no matter what if we take land then we have to manage it we have to deal with it and it's a great asset but also it can have its own cost sure um so for the the pocket par component the commitment is 10,000 square feet in the zoning condition with certain components that go into it um you know we've internally looked at that since receiving feedback about parks in recent days uh and and we can certainly increase that if needed we think that there's more potential and so you know we put again we had received some sample conditions from another case that was what parks and wre recommended as a condition so we matched that and hadn't looked at it again until till recently so um certainly something that we can take a closer look at um for other council members uh the question about uh Parkland covers that area right there so we went as far as to meet with City Parks and Recreation staff and we had a draft zoning condition lenar as the developer here is willing and intends if this project proceeds to dedicate that land to the City of Raleigh for future Park and that point actually connects to a future City of Raleigh Park so it makes a lot of sense we couldn't get the condition across because one of the property owners all of his land is encompassed in that and his response to us which I think is very reasonable is um okay I I think it's great that this could be used as a park but if you're unable to close on it I've just given away all of my land with nothing to to show for it lenar can't close on the project until after the rezoning so it put us in a little bind so we are willing ready able want to dedicate that we met with parks and wreck and understand that it's something they desire unfortunately we can't make it a zoning condition but we can give you all the assurances that that our team that's a frequent flyer in the city is able to and could we hear from Stephen on that I'm just curious again to understand if this is potentially desirable for parks and you know any concerns that you might have yeah good evening mayor and Council Steven bent with Raleigh Parks our staff did discuss it with um the proposed team one of the things we look at is a phase one is it flat people will like to give us Wetlands so we don't want to inherit something that doesn't have a true public benefit and if it's already contributing environmentally let the property owners take care but so open dialogue um but yeah we we're we're completely open to it but we want a little bit uh to know a little bit more what value it would contribute to the park system besides something we have to stop and mow uh once a month yeah are you aware is it Wetlands or anything else there are some there's some blue like in the rear but we actually studied to see it was feasible and it looked like you could fit a couple of ball fields and um parking to serve it as well it's about a 12 Acre Site so it is usable okay I mean I love Wetlands um but yeah I want to keep those there okay yeah that those are my questions and I appreciate the consideration for additional potential uh pocket Parks or thinking about the just the acreage because 10,000 square ft is I don't know quarter acre half acre something like that it's not much out of 20 what have we got 30 Acres but I really like the um uh open space dedication I like the density the way that you have uh the plan uh with all of that open space requirement I do think that is a smarter land use pattern than what we might otherwise see um so that I I am appreciative of um also I like your positive fiscal analysis over the 10 years I recogniz we don't know what it's going to look like past that but um that was something I was looking at do we have any more questions for Mr Marsh okay and I will close the petition annexation hearing you have a question okay and then I'm going to go ahead and open for the resoning hearing plus there's any okay so open the public hearing on resoning z12 12 24 same site um again we have ker Marsh and then Travis flu in support Travis is our traffic engineer so we're happy to answer any more questions thank you any further questions all right we will close the rezoning case for z122 24 yeah so I um just want to say like I I don't know where all the votes will lie but I want to acknowledge this is like a deeply imperfect situation we just had a large conversation at our Retreat about the cost of growth and the impacts of it and uh like our colleagues are the our predecessors in 2005 should probably never have approved the Rivertown development that is sort of creating the framework on which this C case can even really be heard um I do this job with enough humility to think that in 20 years people might say be saying the same thing about me but given the given the fact that this case is here before us I've been working with the applicant team for over a year to um make sure that any development here is positively serves the city I think we were both operating under the idea that the nesso was proceeding it is no longer and we are we are pivoting but I think when we weigh you know I don't think there's any way to read the tea leaves that this land stays undeveloped or stays Farmland uh and so the question is like what development patterns are better and Rivertown is going to get the infrastructure as we heard like it Rivertown is happening and police will serve it fire will serve it we are on the hook for that and so rather than allowing it to remain a completely isolated island draw drawing it into the city a little bit by making it a peninsula rather than an island I do think is a better of imperfect scenarios I think the 40% open space with 30% of that being UND Disturbed internal traffic calming the wider than average Greenway easement and then the traffic improvements that are going to be happening out here um these are all dot roads I drive them every day this is very much in my uh like three times a week area of town and these are on the bottom of do's list these are traffic improvements that are badly needed in this area already that would otherwise not be occurring for another 15 years um if we we wait for them to appear on the stip and so um I think there is sort of as much public benefit as we could hope given the sort of imperfect circumstances so with all that with all that Preamble uh I moved to I moved to approve the annexation of um the ax0 924 second I just want to add briefly um that in an isolated context this would be the exact type of development that I do not want us to see in the City of Raleigh um but we can't look at things siloed and to council member Patton's Point uh council members 20 years prior to our tenure did approve an annexation that created a an island with the um what is it River Rivertown I keep want to say Oldtown but that's a whole another one Rivertown um knowing that we do that does create this to be a contiguous annexation um I do like the density the ability to have Town Homes the open space and parks and the traffic calming the commitment to our fire department though um the scope and size of it may we could argue about how impactful that will be um and so for all of those reasons I will be voting yes and I also wanted to add that I really enjoy this discussion we're having that we've sort of daylighted now starting at our Retreat about how does growth pay for itself where does density Mak sense and we have to remember that every time a case comes to us and there's concerns about height or or scale anytime we're taking stories off of projects or voting down Towers downtown um that has to be made up for somewhere else and so if we are saying as a body that we do not want to see more of these sprawling developments we have to be willing to back it up with a willingness to allow development to occur in our Urban cores and in areas of existing employment and Retail and that's what I would like to see and so I hope that's where this discussion will take us long term and I also want to note that I appreciate our planning director bringing to us a new process for these annexations that will allow us to help better intercept or direct these cases before they get this far along so that said I'll be voting yes and I I don't remember if I second in the motion or not but I think I did second before I recognize others I want to say I was on this Council in 2005 but I got off in January I did not I did not vote for this you're not culpable just want for the record uh I think councelor branch and then silver yeah um I definitely I have my concerns here but but I do understand um the impact and the developer that's doing this project actually happened to be the ones who's built pretty much half of Oldtown um in lenar so I know the product they're putting down is good um and impactful and will definitely serve the community well um but you know as we look at the city and as we're growing um let's just continue to have these conversations and let's talk about fire and and the support we we had these conversations when we talked about projects down in my district and and we kind of slow some things down there um which I think was the right thing to do but we also like counselor um Melton Lambert Melton said we either grow up or we grow out and that's something that we really have keep in mind because we can't make decisions in silos so um I will support this um as we move move it forward but I definitely wanted to highlight The Pump Station the fire station um we have your conditions but I know you'll be good neighbors all right councelor silver well uh mayor I know you left just in time I was playing director when Rivertown uh was the annexation and resoning was approved I had recommend at the time uh that we' not do it it did go forward I thought it would take some time I didn't think it would take 18 years and counting uh first let me commend uh the applicant for really providing um a very complete U compelling case uh for developing the area uh but I also want to commend both the city manager uh for having this conversation about annexation at The Retreat and for the plane Department particular playing director for really fast tracking because we were talking about the Northeast special study area recognizing that AE uh that priority areas need to be identified um I am struggling uh I guess as a planner um that the site as it stated in terms of inconsistency is uh that the site is within the Northeast special study area and the confers plan recommends that the completion of that study before major resoning or annexation decisions uh occur within the study area boundary I believe in predictability and certainty to me that was a very clear message uh because I believe of Rivertown I think we've all agreed uh we're now seeing this contiguous annexation as a result of Rivertown I do believe we have to really plan for orderly growth there are many opportunities within our existing etj for growing uh but I have to commend everyone across the board there are great attributes to this project uh and so it disheartens me but I have to go with what I believe based on my planning principles uh but I will not be supporting this case councelor Jones thank you uh everyone uh especially the applicants we had an amazing conversation and I really appreciate the stuff that you added to your uh presentation tonight to address those concerns and that was that 10-year fiscal analysis that that counselor Harrison had brought up so I really do appreciate that for me I'm I'm similarly struggling uh like counselor uh silver because of the conversation that we had with staff and we have uh as we discussed on our call earlier we have multiple departments who are concerned with this and um and so for for me I I don't know that I can go against the the five I think departments that that did not go through with uh approving or suggesting this this case so for me that is is nothing to do I think it's an amazing development I think all of your your arguments as toose as opposed to having as a county land makes sense but our professional staff have have noted their concerns both of the council Retreat and in this case and so for me I will not be supporting this case either any other comments if not uh all in favor of the motion I I all opposed nay right so it's a 62 vote and then we have the uh zoning case I move to adopt the proposed consistency statement date of March 4th 2025 contained in the agenda materials and to approve the zoning Amendment with the adoption and effective dates described in the agenda item under recommended action second okay any other discuss on that not all in favor of the motion I I all opposed May okay so another 62 vote thank you all right we now move on to Z 3224 which is 4020 suner Boulevard uh at the intersection of suner and wake Hills Lane and Miss Rec Alat yes so Z 3224 a request to rezone one property 4020 subar Boulevard it's just under 2 acres in size currently zoned commercial mix use for stories conditional use requesting uh commercial mix use five stories conditional use so context this is North broy uh near the Triangle Town Center area you can see uh mix of undeveloped and developed um and sort of in progress uh developing mix of commercial and residential and then you can see on the site it there's been some grading activity but undeveloped site there are uh four proposed conditions uh the first prohibits some uses normally allowed in CX and then two three and four um pertain to the relationship between the building and the street so applying a build to range and percentage along the subar boulevard um Frontage prohibiting parking between the uh suar Boulevard RightWay and uh principal building and then requiring a uh at least one um building entrance facing SAR Boulevard so the big picture here is a relatively small change is the same base District it's increasing the maximum height by one story uh so sort of moderate increase all around future land use map designation is community mixed use the requested district is consistent with uh that uh there are a number of urban form map designations on the site uh the three of those conditions do mimic uh Urban Frontage for one of the the streets frontages on suar Boulevard but it would not apply to um the other Frontage and so inconsistent with the urban form designation for that reason but consistent overall with the comprehensive plan consistent policies here are touching on uh a number of topics including uh the uh Transit uh service to this area inconsistent policies are really about that Frontage um topic and then a response time standards which we see in a few places in the city and the Planning Commission recommended unan to um for approval and with that I'm happy to answer any questions you have great do we have questions okay I will open the public hearing on 4020 suar Boulevard and we had two folks signed up in support worth Mills and then Cal Patel good evening Madame mayor members of council worth Mills with long leaf law Partners here on behalf of the uh property owner and the applicant Kamal Patel uh with the ownership group is here as well this is a rezoning to allow for an additional story of height uh to go to CX5 conditional use to facilitate a fivestory hotel Hannah did a great job with the presentation and I'll note that the request is consistent with the future land use map and the comprehensive plan I do want to touch on the urban form map and why we are considered inconsistent uh with that policy guidance so the one thing that I will note is Wake Hills Lane is a private Street uh it was abandoned back in 2019 I believe and the last pieces of that ride of way were abandoned via VIA plat in 2023 so Wake Hills Lane not a public right of way if we applied a straight Frontage designation to this resoning there would not be any build to requirements or any sort of Frontage requirements associated with Wake Hills Lane when the city abandoned Wake Hills Lane in 2019 they did not amend the urban form map to match this shift in public right of way so you see the city replac Wake Hills Lane with triangle Ridge uh Road uh just to our West but the main street designation on the urban 4 map remained static and so therein lies the issues with us being able to meet the recommendations of the urban form map but again our our conditions strive to create a frontage along suar Boulevard as Hannah mentioned we have a custom build to range that's fairly similar to the urban Limited requirements and we've prohibited parking in vehicular surface area between a new building and the ride of way here's a look at uh proposed site layout you can see that the building is close to Su B Boulevard it is close to Wake Hills Lane as well there are some existing easements that prevent us from putting the building even closer to that intersection but I think as you can see here the expected footprint uh does create a more urban and more walkable environment for people in this area so just to provide a summary our request is consistent with the future land use map the comprehensive plan our zoning conditions strive to create consistencies with the urban form map and we think the request is reasonable and in the public interest happy to answer any questions that you have and appreciate the time this evening thank you thank you questions for Mr Mills Council P hey worth I got questions for you um so so this stated the intended use is going to be for a hotel it's right across the street from Triangle Town Center so I think there's a hope that there will be a lot of pedestrian activity people will be patrons of the hotel and they'll walk over to Triangle Town Center and eat dinner or whatever um when we were working on this case there was discussion about um pedestrian improvements and I know you answered but I have forgotten can you remind me what is uh so was discussed so we will have and I think maybe Hannah's photos showed it better there is existing sidewalk along suar Boulevard today I think our conversations were related to a pedestrian Crossing across Su Boulevard when we had initially spoken about that some months ago I was unaware that there is an existing protected pedestrian crossing here right at our shared boundary line with the apartments to our East that Crossing has The Pedestrian Refuge Island and it leads directly to that sidewalk internal to the shopping center uh north of su Boulevard and so our Our Hope Our intention is that the existing crosswalk uh leading across suar will serve as a way for folks to safely get get across Su um it's you know not a very far walk from um where our proposed entrance is right here so uh from there folks would just have to walk this short distance and then cross under Boulevard that's right thank you for that reminder I appreciate that um yeah and I appreciate the addition of the non-vehicular oriented uses um just around the corner from here there's some um nuisance behaviors that we we work on from time to time uh so I appreciate while I know you have an intended use sometimes I am trying to think of what would happen if your project doesn't come to fruition so I appreciate that um so if my colleagues don't I'm happy to support at the appropriate time if there's no other questions from my col any other questions thank you very much so I will close the hearing on z32 24 I move to adopt the proposed consistency statement dated March 4th 2025 contained in the agenda materials and to approve the zoning Amendment with the adoption and effective dates described in the agenda item under recommended action second all right any further discussion if not all in favor of the motion I I I'll oppose nay so that is unanimous thank you all right next we have uh rezoning Z 3624 9000 and 904 lford Road yes so this is a request to rezone two properties little under 2 and 3/4 acres in size they're currently zoned R1 and requesting r10 conditional use so locating this site this is off of lford road just South of the intersection with Falls of noose Road the mix of res um commercial uses along Falls of noose Road and then several different scales of residential in the area use uh of the site and then uh summary of proposed conditions uh there's one prohibiting the cemetery use and one capping the total number of dwelling units to no more than 40 so the picture here um from a um rather large lot residential district with uh larger setbacks to a residential district that allows smaller units Full Slate of um building types allowed and and smaller setbacks um and so an increase in uh overall residential entitlement entitlement uh the request is consistent with the comprehensive plan that includes the future land use map designation of moderate scale residential and then consistent policies here uh touching on a number of topics including the increase in housing entitlement and there were no inconsistent policies noted for this case and then finally the Planning Commission did recommend approval unanimously happy to answer any questions thank you questions I'm getting a lot of uh mic time tonight so many cases um one thing I heard at the community meetings a lot around was around traffic on this road um do you have traffic information in terms of um what lford road is built to carry and what it does carry trip vehicle trips per day I think is um I don't know on the top my head I might ask Transportation staff to come help answer that thanks hello Carter Robertson with uh Transportation um yeah this section of lford um the average daily traffic is around 13,000 vehicles per day and this is in line with uh what our comprehensive plan lays out for three lane streets that's what lford is right now so those type of streets can handle from 8,000 to 20,000 vehicles per day so right in line there got it so un under capacity or or within capacity yes um excellent and then and how has that is that in L you know my residents will ask uh like what would you what what will happen when you add all these new residents is that talk do you have the historical data like how we're tracking and how we might continue to track the growth for the section of lford over the past 20 years has been very slow I believe the last or the most recent number we had um was around 11,000 in 2003 so pretty slow growth and if you keep that over the next 25 years uh still would be at ear capacity excellent thank [Music] you okay all right if there's no further questions I will open the hearing on z36 and we had uh two individuals signed up Jennifer Ashton and then Michael Burch good evening mayor and Council Jennifer Ashton Longleaf law partners and Michael bur is my colleague so I'll be the only one talking tonight I'm here toight on behalf of the applicant GLT properties that is actually the Taylor family uh they have owned 9,000 lford Drive since 1967 that was their mother grandmother's property for a very long time a lot of the Neighbors at the neighborhood meeting actually knew Betty Taylor uh she's still with us she's just not living there anymore due to age um and then they acquired 904 Litchford Drive in 2021 and they are looking to do 40 town home units on this side of for sale product um the nice thing about the Taylor family is they have a connection to the community but they're also going to be the developers and the Builders of these units they have a construction company as well so they're going to be Soup To Nuts um from development all the way through sales for these units so they have a very Community invested interest in making sure this product is a good thing for the community so as Hannah mentioned the property is about 2715 Acres currently there are two single family homes on it we have Frontage along lford Road the current zoning is R1 we do have that future land use designation a moderate scale residential and we're proposing to go to r10 with conditions just to give you all kind of an a layout this is a really what I consider a unique site in North Raleigh um it is close in proximity to a good amount of commercial I'll go more into depth in that in a moment um but there is easy access access to 540 uh the Wake Med North Campus is right there to the north on Durant Road and then we also have Durant Middle School that is pretty close as well so again kind of a unique situation just having so much in close proximity to this site for a North rally Town Home Development just to give you a little more information on the commercial that is within walking distance of this site we have two grocery stores which is very very unique uh we have a Sprouts grocery store and then to the north of us at Harris um there's a Harris Teeter as well and then there's a good amount of restaurants and Retail around us too um on our side of lford we are adjacent to two apartment complexes one is the mirfield Village Apartments to um closer to Falls of noose and then Brookfield which is a little more to our Southeast the current zoning is that R1 um but you'll see to the north those mer mirfield Apartments they're currently zoned r10 and then the Brookfield Apartments to our Southeast are six uh the future land use designation for this area is that moderate scale residential this is allowing for those Missy middle housing types like the town home units um you'll notice just from this map a lot of this area is single family so we would be providing alternative housing choices uh for folks coming in that maybe don't want to be in a single family or can't afford a single family and r10 is a corresponding District uh to this land use designation so we are consistent there Urban form map um there is no Urban form for lford but I did want to talk a little bit about Falls of noose as council member Patton had mentioned there was a lot of concern from Neighbors at the neighborhood meetings about traffic in this area and I just want to point out Falls of new right now is undergoing a major widening project so that may be adding to these concerns about the the perception of really bad traffic that project is supposed to be completed in September of this year um just to give you a frame of refence reference on when we would even be looking to go vertical for this project it probably won't be till the early part of 2026 so even if the Falls of news project was delayed a little bit it should be complete by the time we break ground the street plan for lford um and I'll talk a little bit more in a minute about council member Patton's comp question about traffic um lford Road currently is a two-lane road with a turn lane in the middle of it um it is slated to eventually go to an Avenue for Lane divided um and we will be contributing a lot of improvements along our front edge such as 6ft sidewalks eventually 5- foot bike lanes and there'll be protected bike Lanes along our front edge to make up that street cross-section there were some concerns from Neighbors about this perception that lford was somehow overc capacity however the traffic data shows that's just not the case um as was mentioned earlier lford is um around about 3,000 vehicles per day on trips and it's has the capacity to be at 20,000 per day per trips uh once lford road is eventually widened to that four-lane divided it can be up to 35,000 uh vehicles per day but based on the current trends of traffic on that road it has been a very slow growth on that road for capacity and as was mentioned it probably won't be nearing capacity until about 2050 so our little 40 Town Home Project is not going to be significantly impacting this um we're only adding 21 am peak hour trips and 25 p.m. peak hour trips this is just a showing you kind of what that new Street cross-section is going to look like with those wide sidewalks and protected bike Lanes topography just wanted to touch on this briefly there were some comments from Neighbors in the Woodstone Community they were concerned based on some past flooding situations they had at their site um we explained to them that just based on the to Topography of our two lots there's a 16t grade change from lford road down to the rear of our site so water is going to be flowing away from Woodstone so our development is not going to be impacting them from a storm water perspective uh as Hannah mentioned um we do have a condition where we are capping our residential density to 40 dwelling units this was in direct response to neighbor comments that they wanted to limit density uh 40 in our mind is what could actually be built on site um and still comply with all of the city regulations I think staff had estimated it could be 48 units but our development team thought 40 was probably more realistic and we are consistent with the future land use map and the comprehensive plan overall and we did receive that unanimous recommendation of approval from Planning Commission and I'll be happy to answer any questions you all have thank you right thank you uh questions for Miss Ashton nope okay I will um close the hearing for z36 24 and do we have a motion or discussion yeah I um I'll say that I I was appreciative that during the community meetings it surfaced some things that were not for the applicant to attend to but for the city to attend to and uh if you interact with the residents before I do you can let them know we're they're on it the line of site issues and some of the sidewalk issues and stuff um and to sort of as a pallet cleanser to all sprawl here we have an in town development on a road that's under capacity nice and walking distance to two grocery stores so uh we can balance balance the scales back a little bit um I will also tell Transit staff I think it would be great if the route two ran all the way up to wake Med North which would then also put Transit access near this new development um so just flagging that um but with all that I moved to adopt the proposed consistency statement dated March 4th 2025 contained in the agenda materials to and approve to and to approve the zoning Amendment with the adoption and effective dates described in the agenda item under recommended action second right all in favor of the motion I I I'll oppose nay all right the Boy Scouts are long gone I know we are making progress though we're going to leave District B and go to District D for Z37 24 and councelor silver has a just disclosure yes uh I learned a few hours ago that the company I work for McAdams is on a technical team consultants for this project uh I was not aware of it um and so everyone knows I'm no longer a shareholder in the company and I speak to the City attorney I have no conflict on this case I will be voting on this matter okay with that uh we will turn it over to Mr EO sure yeah so uh rezoning request Z 3724 one property uh 32 26 Chapanoke Road a little over 6 acres in size it is currently zoned industrial mixed use three stories parking limited with the transit overlay District they're requesting commercial mix use five stories with conditions and the to so situating ourselves this is in South Raleigh at the intersection of South Wilmington Street in Chapanoke Road um an undeveloped property um it is owned by wake County uh but the applicant in this case is a a potential developer um you see a mix of uses in this area commercial on the uh west side of South Wilmington Street to um supermarkets and additional commercial um several schools located along Chapanoke Road other light industrial uses farther east and then a Funeral Home and Cemetery to the north I'll note that uh this is uh the southern brt Corridor which will come right down this way and be um with a a proposed station on the other side of South lington Street on Chapo road so some views of the site you can see uh as I mentioned undeveloped largely forested there are two proposed conditions one sets limits to number of residential units no more than 200 and uh caps commercial uses to know than 12,000 Square ft and then there are a list of prohibited land uses on the site so um big picture both mix use districts uh they're maintaining the to Overlay um it's actually a a slight decrease in in units staying roughly the same um and then a decrease in the um commercial entitlement and not in this table would be a a defin decrease in in industrial uses permitted in ax so the site is designated on the future land use map uh business and Commercial Services which would normally Point towards uh current zoning the ex District uh the requested um CX uh allows more um residential than is really envisioned in the business and Commercial Services so it's inconsistent with the future land use map designation there are a number number of urban form map designations uh for this site being so close to a future brt site um no Urban Frontage um on the site but the inclusion of the to does apply uh Urban Frontage and so that is consistent with the urban form guidance so consistent overall uh with the comprehensive plan um consistent policies you can see there's three pages of these um touch on um policies around uh Transit um capitalizing on Transit access um managing commercial development impacts the the mix of uses that would still be permitted encouraging nodal development uh as well as um housing variety maintaining that on the site and then also uh some additional policies related to resoning away from Industrial in certain areas uh inconsistent policy that decided is really only the future land use map designation and on that note approval of the request because of that inconsistency would uh be a deao Amendment to the Future land use map in this case to community mixed use so it would it would turn red on the map uh and then finally the Planning Commission recommended approval five to zero there were two members that were Rec recused from that vote that I'm happy to answer any questions you have right questions okay if not I will open the public hearing on Z37 24 welcome and we have Jamie schwedler and then we also have what five other speakers who can split the eight minutes thank you good evening mayor C and members of the council I'm Jamie schler with Parker Poe my team is here with me and is available to answer questions um and I'm joined by my colleague Walker Abbott as well as our other uh team members including Michael vampin Adam Pike and will leworth all here on behalf of the applicant Raleigh Community Partners um this resoning is a request to accommodate housing and appropriate scaled commercial along a corridor that has increased in its commercial activity and its planning for uh transportation and infrastructure and is ripe for the time to place housing in this area it's also a special type of project because it's a unique public private partnership that's formed in this area along those Transit corridors on land that is deed restricted uh for affordable housing so the um this went through a uh RFP proposal and the selected applicant who will explain the partnership in just a moment um is subject to not only that deed restriction for affordable housing which is enforcable by the county as this land is owned by Wake County but they're also subject to that RFP process and making sure that they deliver on those um ultimately both processes are governed by the county and so we did not add additional affordable housing conditions that you've come to see from time to time by the city but that's because those additional um enforcement mechanisms Exist Elsewhere um and I'll turn it over briefly uh to Hunter snellings who explain uh the Raleigh Community Partnership and some of the members who are here with us tonight good evening thanks for having us um Hunter Snelling VP development with Harmony housing affordable development I'm one of um three legs of the Raleigh Community partner joint venture uh also joined tonight by um James Monty moniku with F7 development as well as uh Bob Tangen with Gil Bane development um again the three makeup Raleigh Community Partners um just excited about the opportunity to work with Wake County on uh Redevelopment of this site for affordable housing um hope to have your support tonight happy to answer any questions you have Hannah did a great job going through the site overview and I think it's notable just to just to see that it's directly south of Mont La Cemetery um in the vicinity of where that brt line is is planned to be down Wilmington Street it's also just roughly one mile south of both 40 and the edge of downtown Raleigh um in an area that has largely been industrial and was zoned such in 2016 but has changed somewhat over time and that's shown here in the future land use map on the left side of the screen where we see the purple design ation of the business and Community Ser Commercial Services excuse me roughly aligns with the majority of that area that was industrial at the time and was was translated in that mapping in 20 20 13 to 2016 but the commercial in the red um is largely designated the community mix use and that's largely how it has developed since that time now since then because of the Tod overlay and because the investments in brt it begs even further um compliance with the comprehensive plan because of where you want residents to be able to locate close to that that line is really the impetus for that RFP and placing Wake Tech students in close proximity to the Wake Tech building um which is just to the south of us there on chapeno um in terms of the urban form map there's several different policies that um bring guidance there for where you want to invest in in transportation infrastructure we within the transit station area the frequent Transit area the brt area and a mixed use Center so all guidance that says this is where we want new residents as well as providing that appr rate scaled commercial um that we've included in our um conditions the small area plan in this area is a southern Gateway area plan you may remember this from the South Wilmington uh resoning that we had several years ago um it's envisioned as that kind of Southern Gateway into town um and has a policy AP SG4 that you'll see on the screen that uniquely places this this type of project within that policy guidance because it envisions coordinating uh development with Transit investment um through public private partners Partnerships which is exactly what what we've delivered here the resoning request as such is complying with all of those um policies from the comprehensive plan and taking this to a CX5 CU with to the CX permits the residential to go on the ground floor wouldn't otherwise uh in the existing zoning the five stories is in line uh with your height guidance between two and 12 stories uh because this area is in in proximity to that brt station and is eligible for additional height uh the CX would update The Flume to the commercial mixed use as Hannah explained but because as you can see on the screen that's largely consistent with not only the commercial designations right across the street but also in the proximity of where you're going to have a new station area and is where we want more commercial uses to be as a city transitions from that industrial to the east uh the Tod prohibits certain uses and automatically applies here but we've included several others in our conditions um which I'll go to in just a second um I wanted to point out why we didn't add the um Urban or the specific Frontage that will automatically apply through the Tod but the site does have some significant site constraints in that 70 foot trans uh transition line easement that goes straight through the corner of the site makes it bit difficult to fit build too um and we're trying to avoid uh any delays so that the project can go forward and obtain its financing for the affordable housing um the zoning conditions Hannah went through we capped ourselves at 200 units and 12,000 square feet um to kind of establish where we think the yield will go and the appropriately scaled commercial um uses that could go on the site and then we included several additional um uses that would otherwise be permitted under CX to be more consistent and to address some of the concerns that were raised um in our community meetings and so with that we're largely consistent with the comprehensive plan those policies are all noted in page six and Page N9 of the staff report um the last one I'll note is just uh policy Lu 11.4 which supports rezoning and development of industrial areas specifically in sites immediately uh in adjacent to planned trans transit station which of course is what we're doing here um with that we received unanimous approval from the Planning Commission we're very much looking forward to move this case forward and hope we have your support tonight and I'm happy to answer any questions thank you thank you we have yes just saying this as a matter of sense of humor I'm noticing cemeteries as this prohibited use is that just a a trend I'm sorry I was just saying that because it's literally next to a Taxidermy was interesting no Taxidermy I think the public will be entertained by all these prohibitive uses but I just noticed this case and the other case had cemeteries as prohibitive uses but I don't have any questions thank you for your presentation um Jamie could you speak to the affordable housing um plann you know at what levels um is this every unit that's going to be there you know for how long that kind of thing yeah I'll speak to it generally and then can provide it's a pretty complex uh formula but the deed restriction on the land is for all of the units to be affordable it doesn't Define what that is and so the RFP did go through that process um and Hunter can explain a little bit about that and why that's more appropriately left in the RFP than a than a zoning condition it'll be 100% affordable uh range of incomes from 30% area meean income up to 80% so a mix of incomes in the development um I did point out but I think Jamie mentioned as well that there would be a soft set aside as well for Wake Tech students that are Income eligible um households 30% of the units will be set aside for for those folks great and I'm prepared to make a motion question can you go to side about the transmission lines I'm assuming these are overhead transmission lines I just want to go back just to see that slide and I'm assuming that that is you will not be able to develop it to that location are these very large uh transmission I don't know what's in this particular area I believe they're overhead and and it's typical with the Duke easan that you're not allowed to put structur so you could Traverse it with maybe a a driveway or certain low-lying shrubs and trees but you can't place buildings typically with oh these a larger metal structures or something that's not at that large scale I'm not sure that there's any metal structures on the site I think it's just a just an easement it's not it's just an easement at this point correct okay thank you but still has those restrictions of of where you can't build do you have to close the hearing or I don't know yeah thank you closing the hearing for Z 3724 and I will yeah I'll make a motion to approve I move to adopt the proposed consistency statement dated March 4th 2025 contained in the agenda materials and to approve the zoning Amendment with the adoption and effective dates described in the agenda item under recommended action this approval is also deemed an amendment to the future land use map to the extent described in the adopted consistency statement all right any further discussion if not all in favor of the motion I I all oppos nay all right so that's unanimous thank you all right final case of the evening is uh District C uh rezoning Z 4024 2340 compassionate drive and we have Miss R Al again good evening yes this is a rezoning request for one parcel 10 acres in size currently zoned R six with the special Highway overlay district one they're requesting removal of the overlay and resoning to residential mixed use four stories conditional use so site context this is um compassionate Drive off of rock Cory Road um really mainly residential in this area particularly north of Road Southeast Raleigh Magnet High School to the South and some additional commercial uses there um I want to point out that um can't quite see on this area um compassionate drive is not a dedicated Street um although the parcel is addressed uh and named off of it uh to the north um is uh the church proper Church um specifically uh the um oops I apologize my notes got on the uh sorry to the north is the compassionate Tabernacle of Faith Missionary Baptist Church which also owns this property although the um applicant in this case I believe is the potential developer so here are some views of the site uh the top right corner uh shows compassionate drive and then proposed conditions uh there are six of them uh the first prohibits uh some uses includes all commercial uses uh that would be normally permitted in RX and then uh a list of um residential uses including single and two unit living um residential units would be limited to no more than 225 units total uh the conditions also uh require dedication of at least 25% of the net Site Area as open space there is a proposed condition specifying affordability requirements uh term of 30 years and then a commitment to perform a signal warrant analysis A compassion of Drive in rock Cory Road prior to the first certificate of occupancy and then finally a Comm commitment to host a neighborhood meeting um after the submitt of the first development plan so uh existing uh versus proposed there's a removal of the the shod one this is going from a residential district to a mixed use District although all of the non-residential um would is is prohibited per proposed conditions uh the total number of units is also uh formed by the proposed conditions the site is um designated low scale residential on the future land use map the requested District uh establishes residential at a higher intensity than that designation en Vision so it isn't inconsistent with the future land use map but it is consistent with the comprehensive plan overall uh some consistent policies touching on um managing commercial development impacts housing variety uh open space uh that's um required through the developments through the zoning conditions rather and then um the uh mix of housing that would still be allowed under under the requested District inconsistent um policies uh this is uh really pointing towards uh how different the proposed uh development u under this District would be to the surrounding area and then there is the future land use map in consistency and response time standards as well so uh being inconsistent with the future land use map uh it would uh approval would amend the map in this case to medium scale residential and the Planning Commission recommended approval uh five to2 um the two uh opposing uh votes noted um concerns with the proposed um Building height and um potential storm water implications to the neighboring properties um I should also mention that the recommendation for approval came with a recommendation to consider addressing the um Building height and storm water issues that the commission discussed so with that happy to answer any questions you have okay thank you questions yes um excuse me can we have staff um and I've already briefly talked to Wayne talk about storm water in this area and the concerns that the neighbors have and what requirements any property or development must take in order addressing storm water if there's anything else the city's doing outside of this project to address those storm water concerns sure yeah storm staff can address that evening Ben Brown storm water and W right behind me so if you want to hear from him too so good uh no there there um are are a couple uh complaints out here and one uh structural flooding drainage drainage complaint which is key because that's going to kick in a Udo restriction that they will have to detain up to the 100-year storm for their storm waterer runoff leave the site so and uh the um structural flooding in question is is near the potential outfall of where the site would be outf falling their stormw water drainage so it would obviously qualify and hit that Udo um uh escalation there so but the others were more Channel erosion but there was was one structural is there anything that can be done to do with the channel erosion um hopefully holding back the uh runoff to that to that higher level will definitely help and keep that and keep those velocities down so that's what okay but just the channel Rion on their own wouldn't have kicked in the Udo protection so got it but because of the known flooding in the area we're requiring them to build to the 100-year storm water if there wasn't any flooding what standard would they be building towards to the two and 10e storm standard two and two okay and so and and we would hold them to the 100-year standard whether they resol the property or not if they developed it today as by right then it would hold it to that as well okay so regardless when or if or however this property is developed it must be built to the 100-year strong water standards correct okay other questions okay well I will go ahead and open up the hearing for z404 and we have 10 people signed up in support with eight minutes and I know we we have Pastor Michael Humphrey is one of them and then I'm not you know how y'all are dividing your time good evening mayor council members my name is Amy Kraut I'm a attorney at Smith Anderson I'm here today on behalf of the applicant uh we will be splitting our time I'm going to reserve about a minute for Reverend Burgess he is um the pastor of compassionate Tabernacle of Faith who is a property owner here so I'm here on behalf of standard communities uh we do have the project and engineering team to help answer any questions that you have we do really want to thank staff for their work on this project we've been working with them since last June on several of the issues and concerns um and they've helped us get the request to it to where it is today terms of property location and Zoning staff already went over most of this just wanted do highlight that the church owns this two 20 uh two tracks totaling 20 acres uh standard communities under contract to purchase this lower 10 acres highlighted in red um we are going from R R6 to rx4 this is really uh for density and stories um but as you'll see in moment we've really restricted down the uses here um to make it more consistent with the area we understand that it's low Den density residential on the future land use map um but Apartments can be appropriate appropriate in these areas especially um in areas of frequent Transit and we're right outside a frequent Transit area and a Transit emphasis Corridor um and overall it is consistent with the comprehensive plan and the city's goals for affordable housing This truly is an affordable Housing Partnership site selection for affordable housing as you know can be difficult just trying to Cobble together enough land that's vacant or to make it work or find something in a QTC District um that's eligible for affordable housing funding so here Partnerships between churches and developers are becoming more common and that's what we have here today standard communi is just a little bit of background it's a trusted Workforce affordable house residential developer across the country they have 190 communities and over 27,000 units um they have values and those are that they act with kindness they sweat the details and they move with urgency and I can tell you from experience um we've really sweat the details in this rezoning request we've done a lot of leg work up to this point um to make sure that it's consistent and we've got good zoning conditions here that address some issues uh the church is founded in 1988 um they've been an active part of Raleigh community and they're supportive of this request and have been working with us hand inand on it I just want to briefly go over the six conditions but the biggest one here is this is a rezoning to facilitate that missing middle housing uh it's 100% affordable it's built into the zoning conditions and it'll be an average of 60% Ami examples of those missing middle work workers are poster workers School teachers police officers so and social workers if you want to look at the numbers um Raleigh's average annual income is 122,000 um the 60% Ami level is about 67 68 and the workers that we really Target are in like the mid-50s a rental rate for one-bedroom is about 12275 under this affordable housing and a two-bedroom is $1,550 so it's about 10 to 20% below kind of non- affordable market rate talked about just kind of limiting impact through use and layout um we heard concerns about the residential mix use we've taken out all commercial uses uh you know this area isn't appropriate for commercial or retail it's set back far from the road and that really wasn't the purpose here so we've taken all of those out uh We've limited to 225 but based on litech guidelines it Max is 200 so it'll be at that rate if not a little under that that uh dedicated 25% open space this is just a concept plan subject to change as we go through the um affordable funding kind of process but uh it does preserve that 20 25% open space through the conditions taking a look at the view um this is just kind of a height and mass rendering these will look like traditional three-story Garden Apartments the reason for the four isn't for the height I we understand for stories allowed 68 ft in height uh these will cap out about 52 1/2 55 which is closer to that three story um but there's some topography on um the property that makes like a half basement apartment possible here which is why we've requested the four stories one of the things that is really important to us is smart improvements to existing infrastructure um standard communities has committed a lot of time and resource to reviewing potential improvements to compassionate Drive um it's private road you can see um it's not really paved or developed right now and access is essential um we have this here we want to be cautious and um sorry I just gonna give you a time check if we have Reverend Burgess here yep yeah I have two minutes and 40 seconds yep we're good yep um and I've reserved one minute for him so we've talked about it so we're good but thank you uh yes so compassionate drive it's only 50 foot right of way we've already talked to Raleigh Transportation about a design alternative that would potentially put a two-lane in and out with a sidewalk on one side and buffering on each side also in talks with NC doot um about a traffic light at compassionate drive and rock quy that's really important here um standard Community wants the traffic light we've we've just got to go through ncdot processes to get that finally Community engagement we've committed to do another neighborhood meeting after rezoning before site pray approval want to touch briefly in my last minute about storm water and height there were the two Planning Commission concerns um council member Branch asked torm water about this we do trigger the additional um Improvement requirements under the Udo so we will be treating to 100 Year FL event um when we've taken a look at the numbers really this means that we will have no impact or if potentially improve flooding in the surrounding areas we are willing to kind of go back and look at potential additional conditions but based on our conversations with storm water they don't really move the needle much beyond the additional requirements in the Udo in terms of height again uh we're targeting 52 and 1/2 ft um but we're willing to restrict that further down if that is what the council needs for approval instead of that 58 so with that I will turn it over to Reverend Burgess thank you good evening Madam uh mayor and counsel my name is James Burgess and I am the pastor of compassionate Tabernacle of Faith Baptist Church here in Raleigh I am representing my congregation but uh I have many others in the audience uh if I could have them stand real quickly all right thank you thank you our church mission vision statement is intentionally connecting others to God's Amazing Grace we attempt to do this by ministering and serving our surrounding uh communities our primary focus is on our youth and our families we were not seeking to sell any of our almost 20 acres and have dismissed many suitors stard Community communities offer was different in that it proposed a project that complemented our church ministry vision they have been most cooperative and have Incorporated our expectations into their plans so tonight if you could give me so tonight we stand firmly with standard in partnership with a shared vision for the affordable housing for a very critical segment of our community that has come to be known as the missing mle thank you for your consideration of this resing resoning request hopefully and prayerfully another public private partnership will emerge as the city of Raley seeks to address this growing need thank you thank you all right uh we now have uh a number of of speakers uh in the opposition there are four people signed up um for 8 minutes total so we'll go ahead and call up uh we have Octavia Rainey Kesha Lovelace Greta Gill and Virginia tally good evening my name is Kesha Lovelace I am here with my mother Naomi Lov who resides at the property closest to this development at 2117 TD Street Raleigh in the Rock viw subdivision she has owned that property since 1973 um I'm going to try to reserve my comments to two minutes because we have other um speakers however I want to point out that we just had a very wonderful presentation about what the church and standard communities want to do but during the two public meetings neighborhood meetings with more than 80 people combine there we asked for this information and never saw it this is the first time many of these residents you see them not in their heads have seen this and that is concerning because most of the property owners there in the Rockview subdivision have lived there for 50 to 60 years the Granite Ridge Subdivision has been there for about 30 years we have a 50 year storm water problem there my father who passed away in 2019 was a packrat I went through his old files this is a letter from 1974 from the City of Raleigh former city councilman Williams writing to the city manager asking County engineering to go out and deal with the drainage problem in my mother's backyard nothing was done at that point in time the second letter is from 2009 when the city entered into a contract to try to deal with the drainage problem my parents house is at the bottom of two Hills if you look at this property it's like a bowl when it rains the water comes down into our home although they were not here because they're not within the notice of the hearing Fon Circle off a Southgate Drive they have had issues where the rain has come in and it's like a waterfall coming into their backyard there is a drainage issue a storm water issue in that area um when my parents built this house in 1973 they had to dig down until they got to dry land because it's water underneath our house but put two cement poles incase it in and the foundation was built around that and so what we have now 35 years 2009 is when the drainage issue with the water going down the hill in 50 years the water that is on the old golf course this old historic black golf course the first one in Wake County it was the tea off golf club when it was built back there it was water issues there there's water that comes down through there Granite Ridge Subdivision when it was built changed that land and property the church built a or dug a huge drainage ditch in the middle of that property to deal with the storm waterer runoff after the first public Hearing in this matter they filled it in and so now when it rains it's like a river flowing on that water the apartments that they're talking about building will be built right where that water flows is so where will it divert to it's going to divert to mother's house possibly Miss Davis's house which is two houses up our neighbor's house this is an old community that was built before Rock C Road was paved there's whale water there in between my house and the neighbor's house there is a whale I believe Greta's house or the Williams house has whale water so when the storm water runs off it's going to contaminate or possibly disturb the whale water that is there some of them have not connected to city water is my understanding so it's a huge water issue was not addressed when we went before the Planning Commission there was a lot of flurry back and forth we're now just hearing tonight about building to this 100-year standard our concerns were not addressed the other issues and I will leave it at that um one it is completely landlocked compassionate drive is not able to get two-lane traffic in there you saw in the city's report that it does not meet the National Fire standards for fire response there is no way for a fire truck to get in there frankly my mother and had a conversation I don't know how they're going to build back there because there's no way to get back there it's a very short street that the church uses probably not even a tenth of an acre tenth of a mile rather to get into the property is almost like an Alleyway and so the road is not wide enough we don't uh do oppose and I believe the Granite Ridge neighbors also oppose only one sidewalk we want two sidewalks Southeast Raley High School is right there less than a tenth of a mile from my mother's home what has happened over the years when it was built in 1997 the kids would C go through my parents yard go up Brenda drive and get to the high school it is contemplated that they will travel up and down what was what will be compassionate Drive however it needs two sidewalks you're talking about school children walking across busy Rock cor road traffic signal analysis that is good but you also have Coastal Creek Amphitheater down there it does not meet the peak standards when you look at Am Pm Peak standards and that sort of thing you have to take consideration April through September when the concert series are going on and traffic is backed up from the amphitheater down rock Cory Road onto the Belt Line and you cannot get in and out of any of those subdivisions it's a blind spot leaving my mother's neighborhood where with increased traffic you will not be able to see um talk about traffic the character of the neighborhood these are older houses Halfacre Lots all 2,000 uh square feet or more I'm just going to give you that youve we have two minutes and 30 seconds stop but I will say this this matter and this property is not the first time it has come before the Planning Commission and the city council when preeminent charter school was established in the late 1990s it came before the city council and the Planning Commission and conditions were put onto this property I don't see any of that there dealing with the character of the neighborhood um and changing it from an area that within a mile of this or single family detached home the only apartments are one level at most I don't know what they call Fox Ridge now but it's only two stories if they are saying it's only going to be 52 feet if you're inclined to do this change the conditions 200 is the max they can do change the max to 200 if it's 52 feet that they're saying the max will be change the condition to that our preference is that the zoning remain where it is and that a significant study be done to look at the storm water issues there it's been 50 years and it has not been addressed for any of the surrounding communities thank you thank you yeah do you have a another speaker Miss Rainey Octavia Rainey I do oppose the project because I think that not only is the storm water important but the traffic is awful it is awful I served on the altel Pavilion board with Dr Alan mass and traffic was my baby and the people couldn't even get through to go to their houses it was awful I think they need to move the alel Pavilion out to Dick's property now I think that it's time to move it you haven't done nothing for the altel Pavilion in 30 years time to move it it's time to address the traffic and I'm not talking about peace Milling the traffic you have to address the traffic for all those neighborhoods and that is not being done I don't understand and there nothing to the church but I don't understand how you could get this far without addressing the traffic pedestrian friendly no it's not been addressed bicycle ain's not been addressed so I don't understand how we got this far with this project even with like Kesha said the storm water is awful but the traffic is terrible you got all those schools out there now you have build up out there now but you're not doing anything anything for the older neighborhoods you're not doing anything to preserve them and I don't understand about this missing midle stuff I don't understand it because you still need housing based upon 30% of your ability to pay and I'm and I'm quite sure there somebody in that church that needs 30% y y'all can have an extra 30 seconds if you want because I know we went over with the other side but just checking are there two speakers that were yeah could we do a minute each for them and then give two minutes on the other side y good evening thank you for the opportunity to address you mayor cow and uh members of the city council my name is Greta Gill 2400 Brenda Drive I am in the Rockview subdivision I also speak in opposition to the project my primary concern is the traffic the sentiments that have already been echoed I took the opportunity just to drive around the area within a thre M radius of compassionate Drive I went past 19 different neighborhoods most of them depend on Rock choire Road to move move into and out of the city uh the other issue that is concerning is the uh safety for students at Southeast Raleigh High School since the school has been there there have been sidewalks on one side of the street but not on the side with compassionate so and there are things that could have been done like the signal that's on um at Borland and and Western Boulevard that stops traffic in both directions so that people can cross into the dicks property things like that have not been done there are only three traffic signals that I can think of right now in that whole stretch from um um coming off 40 going out towards um Sunny Brook maybe four uh even down to uh Jones Sausage that area in the morning from 6:30 until 8:00 the traffic is horrendous uh there's a problem with people dropping their children off at school the entrances and the exits have the barricades so they can't go in certain driveways so they pull up in front of the barricades put their flashes on and let their kids out and so it is a terrible situation that needs to be addressed before any other um development occurs I think that deserves attention that and the storm water thank you thank you mayor yeah um the clerk's office put two minutes on the the clock and um I think Miss skill used all two so I I I think we should let Miss tally speak and then just maybe give four minutes to the other side other side yeah okay good evening mayor and council members I am Virginia tally and I am a native of Raleigh and a resident of Atkins Drive which my family and I have lived there for over 40 years I am representing the residents of the community who live within 500 ft or more or even less from the property on compassionate Drive many of us homeowners are senior citizens who have worked tirelessly to keep up our property that we are proud of and are finally able to enjoy the fruits of our labor which we would also like to continue before leaving this Earth we are deeply concerned that a proposed construction project of 200 plus apartment units consisting of three and four story buildings could potentially and drastically impact our existing community of single family homes with the construction of these enormous units and their location we anticipate many safety challenges just to name a few increased safety congestion especially at Key intersections safety concerns of higher traffic volumes landscape buffers water retention fencing traffic patterns at entrances entrances and exits and the list goes on but we have other concerns uh that at this time will not permit us to share regarding the proposed construction project therefore until our concerns are properly addressed we are in opposition to the resoning and construction project on compassionate drive at this time and we are specifically represent uh requesting a review of the site plan prior to final approval of the compassionate Drive project we recognize the need for additional Housing and Development in our community however it is essential to ensure that infrastructure keeps Pace with growth to maintain the quality of life for existing residents we respectfully ask this Council to consider working collaboratively with our community members developers and others who are involved to create a solution that would benefit everyone thank you for your time and effort with all of our community please stand we just want to to show Who You Are thank you we had one to go out thank you all so much again thank you thank you all right so now we'll put I would say four and a half minutes yeah um back on the clock for the uh um for Miss Kraut and the other yeah so four and a half minutes um first we just thank you for the additional time we on both sides we know there are big issues here hang on one sec it was four and a half sorry oh sorry I can I can wait we have to be very precise with this because it's a public hearing that's you know that but just for the yeah you're good all right all right um no we understand these issues and we've we really have been working to address them um in terms of you know standard communities is a partner and they're neighbor they're here for 15 30 years in the community they manage this they have active role in this community so they're committed to being a good partner and a good Community member um we do want to touch briefly on traffic and storm water uh traffic we understand the issues with compassionate drive it's why we took so long between the first neighborhood meeting and submitting um the rezoning application we studied ownership we studied potential design alternates because if compassionate Drive doesn't work then this project doesn't work and it doesn't just not work for this project it works for any project in the future here um so in order for this property to be developed ever um it's a 10 acre vacant tra of land uh compassionate Drive needs to be improved and so we're working hand inand with ncdot um and Raleigh planning staff and transportation to figure out what that looks like and we are a th% supportive of traffic light at this stop uh it's just a holistic conversation we had a plan a conversation with uh transportation and ncdot last week and this entire area as you heard is under study um so it's not a question that's can be resolved in the next 3 four weeks uh it's a question that we're committed to working with NC do and transportation over the next several months um and we're willing to do that we want that we want to frontload it we want to have this conversation now you know once the rezoning is done to make sure the project works so safe access is is our goal for storm water same thing we understand the storm water concerns uh we have talked with storm water staff about it we have um Engineers here on both the traffic side and storm water side to answer any specific questions but right now there's no treatment controls on this property with this development we would then be treating for the hundred-year flood of event that would hopefully improve and give this water somewhere to go um so we're willing to work on that we're willing to treat it I would also just note um we are under uh deadlines for the affordable housing funding uh we've been told by Raleigh FTA that we need an approval in hand um by April 1st um so while we're willing to come back uh we would ask that we could come back at the March 18 hearing if you want to see additional conditions related to storm water and height um we're also willing to tweak that uh traffic light condition uh to kind of signal that we're going to frontload it toward in the site planning process and not kind of further on but a lot of these concerns we understand them but they're major site site planning concerns that we can't even get past a preliminary site plan review until we address them um and they're appropriate for that that process versus this rezoning but we are committed to addressing all of them okay thank you um mayor yeah thank you um I know that you we've had some conversations as well and um you know given some of the comments tonight uh it sounds like some folks in the community have not had an opportunity to hear um about the proposals relates to the 100-year storm U maybe some of the anticipated tweaks as relates to traffic analysis and the height um um understanding that you want to come back on the 18th um would it be possible for you to do some type of quick meeting with the folks in the community to at least walk through some of these proposals and give them opportunity to better understand what you've got um what you've got planned in the additional conditions that you would submit sure in terms of timing we'd have to submit any revised conditions by Friday so that conversation would have to happen in the next couple days but if we can put a zoom call or something together to make that work we'd be willing to do that these conditions are the same that were fully presented and talked through at the Planning Commission as well but we wanted to have conversations with you before we made any tweaks councilor Lambert Molton yeah I just wanted to add that you know normally this should be a case that the entire Community can join together and celebrate but I understand that there are some Legacy concerns here with the storm water and the traffic and probably a part of the city that's been ignored for a really long time by by previous leaders and so you know I I think the faith-based Community Stepping Up and saying we want to provide Workforce housing on our land is exactly how we want to move forward but I also hear the concerns from the long-term community members and a lot of it I think becomes really technical we talk about udio and all these acronyms that um council member silver has pointed out I and what I heard today was a few things one that some of what was being presented today some of the community members are saying they're seeing it for the first time and so if there is an opportunity just to have a conversation and explain things in simple terms to people cuz I don't even understand half of this half of the time um about what will happen with the storm water how could this actually maybe improve the area and then the other part of it is I did hear some tangible feedback from the first Speaker about if it's going to be 200 units condition it to 200 if it's going to be 52 um feet condition it to 52 feet and those are things that I think you could submit before Friday because those are pretty clear um there were simple things like can there be a sidewalk on both sides of the street I don't know if that's I understand anytime you're adding an improvement you're rising cost and this is an affordable project but those are just some tangible things that I heard plus the the what we can do to work together on the Legacy concerns about the traffic and the storm water okay thank you counselor branch and then counselor Harrison so a couple things I definitely agree with putting those limits in um that you saying you're going to have to do um but also I want to ask on staff if staff can get with the community to talk about their storm water issues that have not been addressed cuz some of these things are items not related to this project um that you know need to be addressed um you know some of these things I'm just going to be honest with you some of these things I just heard tonight since I've been on Council because no one's brought it to my attention so um I can't address what I what I don't know about um so if we can just address those issues um as far as the storm water I do want to ask if traffic staff Transportation can come up and just briefly speak what goes into what are some of the requirements that would go into this Redevelopment um I I heard there was no traffic light I know there's a hwai that's right almost 500 feet um from this area so that allows students to cross the road but I know any Improvement at that intersection where a compassionate comes out there's certain things that are required you you mentioned design alternative alternative that's with the one sidewalk but it's can staff can start with what's required and then everything else is technical are you asking what's required at the compassionate Rock querry intersection right so that rock quarry being at NC doot road that access and final say is going to be up to them and so we won't have any say um about that decision until we can look at the traffic study and give feedback see if that's appropriate in that area and that'll be for any type of project at this area correct yes all right and do we know I understand from the applicant there's already a warrant that you're planning or have started can you give sure um it's in the conditions that we have we've conditioned it to do a traffic signal warrant analysis and if it warrants it we've committed to building it um so so and we've already started those conversations with ncdot to get that rolling and you're willing to put that on the front end of your project instead of later Absol is what I'm hearing yes okay Harrison yeah just a couple items um I do agree that I think the heights should be conditioned Down based on what is actually proposed to be built I'd like to see that um I am concerned about just traffic in general in the area and I don't know the area well enough except for I think sometimes when I've gone to the amphitheater and had a lot of issues where I couldn't even get to a show until it was halfway over um and I can only imagine if you live there and you're trying to get to your home so I don't totally understand or know much about any plans for improvement there is that something you can speak to so December of 24 we the state actually completed the road wiing project so this will be our first year that will know the impact of the improvements of the roads with the concert series okay great that's great to hears already got the they push the button it comes on and you still got disrespectful traffic that runs it won't even stop so again thank you for that info um our new police chief is here can you follow back up on traffic with the district captain on that um as far as is what's happening at that Hawkeye and cuz we we need to fix existing issues but then there's some things that we have to deal with as far as this case I would like to just give it some more time um to hold this until the 18th um please reach out to the neighbors meet with the neighbors I think you have contacts you can meet T scheduled tonight on how to move forward and then staff if staff can hopefully by the 18th I'm just asking if staff can also reach the NCD and give us an idea of NCD requirements that would be needed so that would be on my motion to hold us until March 18 second your motion yep uh councelor pton uh unrelated to the motion just another thing that I heard in the community conversation is um that might be actionable is that it sounds like maybe like some work with the school on the traffic queuing for pick up and drop off would be um fruitful it sounds like there's people pulling over because maybe the carpol line is not so the the ash where they're talking about where people pulling up is not where the school wants people to drop people off it's people breaking the rules yeah and know to say that uh in other areas of the city we have put like no parking or no no stopping no standing zones things that there's no parking on that street yeah the people breaking the rules are not going to abide by the yeah they're breaking the rules that's the problem to get out these are not all the way because they get out easy droing them off real quick and hopefully I can get out real fast and go to work as a see now we got Chief Boyce on on on board so it's all gonna be yeah okay thank you so I think we've I mean we've there's definitely a lot of issues between the storm water the traffic the school you know uh signals so it sounds like uh I appreciate councelor Branch your suggestions and others um so we will leave this open uh until the eight okay oh to leave it open okay so we will vote on the motion to leave the hearing open uh all in favor of that motion I all opposed and we do understand the time limitations and I would also just say I think we've we're appreciative that a church is is doing this I mean that's the faith community and looking at housing and we also appreciate some of the Legacy issues that exist in this area and um we will look forward to uh working with you over the next few days uh and coming back on March 18th and I just want to add um just for consideration we could take some of these issues perhaps to committee you know that are Beyond this case around the traffic to understand all of the different factors or storm water for example to go to growth and natural resources yeah let's let's deal with the current thing first and then you know work through all of these issues okay so with that thank you all for being here and uh that is the last case of the evening so with uh no objection we are adjourned [Music]