[music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] All right, everybody. Thanks for coming to the session tonight. Um, I guess first order of business, I want to turn it over to the clerk for uh a few words. >> Yes. Thank you, Mayor Cowell. Uh, mayor, members of council, I wanted to take a moment of personal privilege and ask that you join me in recognizing Assistant City Clerk Ralph Puchini sitting here to my right. Uh, as tonight's evening session represents Mr. Puchini's final session at a Raleigh city council meeting after 30 plus years of service to the citizens of Raleigh. Mr. Puchini began his service to the city in 1985 when the population of Raleigh was just about one half of what it is today. After a break in service, Ralph rejoined the city organization as a member of the city clerk's office in 2001. During his tenurs, Mr. Pacini has served under seven mayors, dozens of city council members, four city managers, but only one other city clerk. His [laughter] dedication, attention to detail, and overall helpful approach to the often difficult work of public service is commendable. And in addition to the city council and the city clerk's office, both the board of adjustment and the civil service commission are going to miss his presence as he heads off into retirement and the next phase of life. We wish him well. So, thank you, Ralph, for your service to the city of Raleigh. Good luck and best wishes in all your future endeavors, whether those be here in Raleigh or somehow involve Santa Claus and the North Pole. >> Congratulations and well done. [applause] [applause] >> Thank you, mayor. >> Yeah. Thank you so much. >> Uh next, before we start the public comment, I have a few uh just uh comments about the convention center fire last night. Um and some updates to share. Um said as as always, our first priority is safety and we have essential staff and vendors who are inspecting the damage at the convention center. Um have been working all day on that. Uh I will say one of the updates is water damage. Uh originally uh when the fire broke out last night, there was really it was contained to the roof and there were no uh internal damage, but because when they fixed the fire, they had to cut out some of the equipment. It rained all day. Uh sprinklers went off in the building, we now do have water damage inside. Um and we're going to be installing temporary roofing to prevent uh additional water damage. So, as you can tell, this is getting a little more complex. So, there's a lot of moving parts and um we're going to we're still in the review and inspection phase. Uh and once we know the extent of damage, uh we will do the repairs. I think you're you're looking at right um some some time to get this reopened to the public on a on a normal basis. I will say there has been some reports of um inspections and some violations. Uh we had routine inspections last May. There were a number of things that were cited that needed to be fixed. We did hire uh vendors to fix those items. The paperwork was not uploaded. So, we are working with that vendor to make sure that paperwork is uploaded to reflect that those uh violations, those citations uh in that routine inspection were fixed and that was, you know, not um not a major issue related to this that we know of. Um, and we are working with all the folks that have uh events at the convention center in coming days to find alternative space. Uh, I mentioned earlier today there's a cyber security conference. They're going to be finding another space, but we're working with all those individuals individually. So, um, if you have questions because you have an upcoming event, please do reach out to our staff and we will work with you individually. So that's uh all the major updates I have at the moment. Uh so thank you for the attention to that and we will move on to the public comment. First uh person signed up is Miss Octavia. Oh, we have instructions on just the microphone and equipment up here. >> Thank you, Mayor uh members of council. I'm Ran Northam from the communications department. Just a quick overview. We want to make sure that everybody uh can be heard and you're heard at home as well as here in the chamber. Um if you will when you come up uh adjust the microphone uh so it's just below your mouth here and speak over top. Um you don't have to lean into the microphone and you don't have to uh scream into the microphone either. It will pick you up. Um but we want to make sure that you're heard. So when you step up, take your time uh adjust the microphone and uh we look forward to your comments tonight. Thank you. >> Thank you. Okay. Next, we will call up Miss Octavia Rainey. >> Good evening. I have some concerns that have been really bothering me. So, I'm going get to the point. I have a lot of concerns about the BRT. I don't think that your housing is adequate enough to provide 30% of a person's ability to be pay because you have to go up two extra floors. But when you look at the overall, and I'm going I'm just going to be to the point. I'm black. I don't think you're providing housing for black people at all. And I think that that is a big problem with the BRT because black people ride the bus. They ride the bus because they have to. They don't have the luxury of a car. So, they're standing out there in the cold weather. They're standing out there in the rain. They're standing out there at snow. They're standing at these different bus stops. And God knows if the bus going to come. You just standing out there. But when you look at the BRT, you are taking black people off that major bus ride like bus number 15. Cuz when you add more upgraded housing on the corridor itself, it takes blacks off the bus. And I need to remind you there was a point in time when blacks couldn't even ride the bus. And when they did ride the bus, I rode the bus with my grandmother and we had to sit in the back of the bus. Octavia don't sit in the back of the bus. I don't do that period to this day. But I just got a lot of concerns about the BRT. And y'all need to explain to me how you can build 30 stories on a bus rampid transit route and you don't have no room for black people to live on those routes. I'm just me. I'm black. So, I have to speak from a black perspective. And I think that's all wrong. And I think I have followed this council for 50 years. So, I'm telling y'all, when Republicans was in control, they did that thing. When Democrats are in control, you do your thing. But what I'm seeing is all about the party and who's in charge. But I'm telling you, you got to do better for black folk. You've got to do better than what you're doing. And that has been on my heart. You did away with the scatter site policy and somebody need to explain to me. Ken Bowers and Larry Jaws had me up there on the sixth floor trying to explain it to me, but I didn't buy it and I don't buy it today. What happened to the scattered site policy? What happened to that? And it wasn't even a public hearing to explain it. Period. So, I'm just concerned and I am a concerned citizens and I have been with this city for 50 years. So, I'm telling you, when Republicans was in charge, they did what they wanted to do. Then you got Democrats in charge. Thank you. Next, we have Tia Robinson. Is Miss Robinson here? Okay, Kevin Kuang. >> Well, hello everyone. Today I'm here to express my sincere condolences and paying tribute to uh the fire which occurred in Hong Kong which uh causing a breaking news internationally because there were 156 people dying. Seven building uh were gone and the underlying reason of Hong Kong fire was compact still under investigation but it was about the underlying reason which I've sent you an email was beat ragging in the construction contract and uh violation of fire code which they turned off the fire alarm when the building was underway elevate ation and they use illegal material. They use cheap material. Use green netting which is nonvi resistant. They use uh fire uh they use plastic forum which cover the window and people in a 37 floor Gondo building could not escape because the fire spreading quickly with the green net and the plastic is also combustible too. So I would encourage Raleigh if you want to build more condo building of 37 floor south west and peace please inspect the fire situation the fire safety situation very carefully because I Hong Kong is not like United States. I think United States should do better in inspecting buildings like you have burn building fire in 2017 in London in New York you the previous uh and Paris too. So anyway so regulation and inspection is important to make sure the people in the construction and industry do their work. And I finally I want to wish every member of the city of Raleigh uh merry Christmas and happy new year. Thank you very much. >> Thank you Mr. Kuang. Uh next we have Gavin Wendell. >> Hello. So uh this is uh came here to talk about loose leaf collection that this is an issue that I have emailed members of this council and the mayor previously. um that the decision that to end loose leaf collection starting next year I believe is a mistake and I was addressing this um council to hope you would revisit that decision. I currently live in Oak Park. I've been a Raleigh resident for over 20 years. Um and as the name of my neighborhood suggests, we have a lot of leaves. I have personally put out one leaf pile or actually two leaf piles that are over 15 feet long, 3 ft high. Um, while I currently have a nice job where I get to work inside, previously I did work in landscaping for about 8 years. I can probably say I've moved more tonnage of leaves than everyone in this room combined. And I can say that the decision to move to weekly uh weekly pickup with just the containers themselves is not sufficient. Um, people won't use it. I can see that in my neighborhood right now. And people that I talk to, everyone is like, "What is going to happen next year? This is if this is going to turn out poorly." And I would, you know, I would really encourage everyone to rethink that decision. If it's not, I think there's a few things that are going to happen. One, people aren't going to use the weekly pickup like I think you're hoping they would. Two, they're going to just pile the leaves in the in the street like they are now. or three, they're just going to blow them into the street. You're just going to get a lot of nuisance reports and have the Raleigh PD deal with people blowing leaves in the street. Um, people are going to burn them. You know, you can't burn in the city of Raleigh as far as I know, but people are going to. You're just going to have more fires because it's a cheap and easy way to get rid of leaves. Uh, people are going to cut down more trees. It's 500 bucks to get a tree removed. Um, I'm pricing out getting uh loose leaf collection done privately. It's about $200 a large load. So, between 200 couple times a year, every year or cutting down the trees, return on investment. Cutting down the trees is easier. People are going to just cut down their trees. Um, also, I don't know how many people here visit the uh yard waste center off New Hope Road. They're closed Sundays. um try going on a Saturday afternoon. You're going to be waiting in a long line. So more people are going to use that facility and right now those hours are not conducive to a lot more people showing up. Um and also finally, I don't think it's been addressed just um along city streets where people don't live. In my neighborhood, there's long stretches of trees that there's lots of leaves that come and the city picks them up like they would in front of residences, but you know, there's no one in that lives along those stretches of road that's going to break those up. So, they're just going to sit there and turn to mush through the winter. So, >> thank you, >> Charlyn Parker. All right. Greetings to all. My name is Charlan Parker and tonight I've come here to talk about legacy. November 3rd of this year marks my 11th year of service for the city of Raleigh. November 3rd is also of this year the last day that I saw my mother alive. Althetheria Parker Canelius better known as Pumpkin. My mother worked full-time for the Duke County Services for the age and would be sorely missed. And I cannot thank the friends, family, and co-workers of hers as well as mine enough for the support that they gave me and my family during this time. But there were some constant themes that were always consistent about her when you listen to her co-workers, the people that she worked for, service, and basically anybody that she came into contact with. They said, "My mother was very articulate, highly intelligent, and extremely hard worker, very good at her job, and could do pretty much just about everybody else's job as well. and she had no problem addressing any concerns, correcting you if she thought you were wrong or she felt like you wronged her or anybody else, regardless of who you were, your position, your title, or whatever you thought you were. And she was consistent with that from her early days of school all the way up until her transition. [snorts] And with that, I just want to say I am my mother's child. But with that being said, the easiest thing to do is to tear someone down and to always complain about situations. And tonight, I wanted to take a different approach. And I wanted to honor my mother and her legacy as well as offer possible solutions to some of the problems that we face at Solid Waste Services. First, we've been told that we can't do a full task system. But when we get paid time and a half for working on the days everybody have off during the holidays, we operate under a full task system so everybody can go home whenever we're done. I think also a full task system would also or rather a room task system would be beneficial to solid waste services. It would greatly reduce the wear and tear on equipment. We have brand new trucks that we have just received that the cylinders already need to be replaced, which that is a sign of us putting too much work onto our trucks. And for those of you who don't know, those cylinders are $10,000 a piece and it's two cylinders for every truck and they should last at least 6 to 8 years before they go out. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Condolences on the passing of your mother, Dorothia Barrow. Miss Barrow here. Okay. Not seeing her. >> Oh, she is. Okay. I am sick and tired of being sick and tired. Quote by Fanny Liu Hammer. Hello. You may call me Doroththia Dixs 2.0, aka greenhaired lady, aka mental illness warrior, aka mental mama bear. I wear many hats and out and awareness outfits. I advocate for mental illness rights and bring awareness to the atrocities and disparities that plague the broken mental health care system which trickles down to the underserved and vulnerable community plaguing them. Also, Proverbs 318:9 says, "Speak up for those who cannot speak up for themselves, for those for the rights of all who are destitute, speak up and judge fairly, defend the rights of the poor and needy." That's what my grassroots group, Madonna's Voice, Mental Illness, Disability Advocacy, Awareness, and Network of America stands on. Raleigh Mayor in a September 2025 ABC11 quote talks about hoping to prevent what happened in Charlotte here. But the this ongoing mental health crisis is happening here in Raleigh, rarely televised and video, and when it is, only then we hear talk from leaders about mental health reform. But to truly reform the broken mental health system and prevent the following from happening again, Madonna's Voice implores Raleigh City Council to hold the Bad Apple Mental Health Agency Carolina Outreach 2023 act assertive community treatment team on 312 false death road accountable for gross mental health negligence, harm, danger, abuse, and causes substantial injury to their severely mentally ill and intellectually disabled 25-year-old African-American client of 2 and a half years who lived alone alliance TCL's transitional community living in support of housing with no prior criminal record because this incident was not televised or videoed like the Charlotte light rail incident uh mental health community worker from Carolina outreach who was grossly neglected her client's mental health crisis for months badly injured him in his own apartment and has not been held accountable for mental health employee misconduct and continues to work in a mental health field at UNC. This injustice is unaccept is unacceptable. Hold oversight entities Alliance Health Element MCO and DHHS accountable for poor response to the grievances and complaints made by the family of the client. Carolina outreach because we are sick and tired of being sick and tired of speaking up to no avail. In a grassroots initiative brought by the Madonna Group, we ask that you support the Madonna Smile Act, propose a community-based mental health workers to wear a body camera for both the protection of the client and the worker. The Madonna Smile acronym stands for severe mental illness lives equally matters. The mental health bus goes round and round, round and round, round and round. The mental health bus goes round and round all through the town except for the underserved communities communities. communities except for the underserved communities. Then the bus breaks down. It's time for all of us to fix the bus. Fix the bus. Fix the bus. It's time for all of us to fix the bus for everyone in. >> Thank you, Emma Kate Burns. >> Hello, members of the city council. Mayor Cal. Oh, okay. Sorry. [laughter] Thank you for the opportunity to speak today. My name is Emma Kate Burns. I am the director of government relations for the American Heart Association and a Raleigh resident living in District B. I'm here today to ask for your support in adopting the DHS model ordinance for tobaccof free places. I want to start by thanking the council for taking up this important issue and especially council member Patton. The existing ordinance on smoking in Raleigh was originally drafted in 1992, making it almost 20 years older than the invention of ecigarettes. As tobacco technology advances, so must government relation regulation um to protect our city's health. The DHS model ordinance would bring Raleigh smoke-free air into the 21st century. It will protect those who live, work, and play in Raleigh from the harm of secondhand smoke and secondhand aerosol, creating an environment that promotes healthier lifestyles and discourages behaviors that contribute to our preventable diseases. While many of us are familiar with the harm of secondhand smoke, I want to highlight the dangers of secondhand vape aerosols as well. Secondhand aerosol can expose people who who don't smoke, including children and adolesccents, to nicotine, ultrafine particles, and toxic chemicals that are linked to cardiovascular and respiratory disease. By permitting indoor vaping, we risk normalizing nicotine use and undermine efforts to prevent youth initiation and addiction. Adoption of this model ordinance would position Raleigh as a leader among municipalities in the state. While a handful of North Carolina municipalities have full tobaccof free protections in place for public places, many do not include protection from exposure to secondhand aerosol from vapes. I urge the council to adopt the model ordinance and show all of North Carolina that the city of Raleigh is a leader in public health. Thank you. >> Thank you, >> Liliana Marin. Miss Marin here. Okay. Not seeing her. Maria Actton. Uh members of the Raleigh City Council, thank you for the opportunity to speak today. My name is Mariah Actton and I'm here as a Raleigh resident and a mother asking for your support in adopting the DHS bottle ordinance for tobaccof free places. The science is clear. There is no safe level of exposure to secondhand smoke and that includes the aerosol from ecigarettes. These exposures can cause serious d illnesses and even premature death among non-smokers. children and older adults. Two groups that make up a large part of our Raleigh community are especially vulnerable. Parents in Raleigh should feel confident that when our children walk into any public place, they can breathe clean, healthy air. Smokefree and vape free spaces give families peace of mind and reduce their exposure to preventable health risks. Even though the secondhand smoke exposure has gr gone down over recent years, more than 20% of non-smoking adults in the US are still exposed. And many children in North Carolina remain at risk. In a growing city like Raleigh, one that prides itself on quality of life, this should not be something we accept. [cough] Strong smoke-free protection, also helps people who are trying to quit tobacco by removing triggers and temptations from public's places. That is why these protections must include all tobacco products, including ecigarettes. Allowing vaping indoors undermines quitting efforts and exposes others, especially children, to harmful chemicals. I urge the council to update and strengthen smoke-free and vapefree policies in our city using the DHS model ordinance. Clean air should not be optional. It should be a basic standard that protects every resident, no matter their age, neighborhood, or background. As a mother, I want my children to grow up in Raleigh where they can breathe freely without secondhand smoke or vape aerosol threatening their health. Thank you for your time and your commitment to making Raleigh a healthier place to live. Thank you. Next, we have Mama Kai Sanders. Good evening everyone. It's another amazing day in paradise. Um I met Santa and I made the nice list. I just want to let y'all know if you know, you know. Um thank you for your work in service. Um happy season of holy days. May you find favors and blessings um this month and into the new year. Also, Happy Human Rights Day, which is on the 10th, which is also my birthday, number 52. Perhaps my age will reveal why I'm not willing to settle for less than what I want or feel I deserve. It's me and Wisdom's birthday, month of miracles as well. His is on the 23rd. We are exceptionally exponentially increasing our ability to thrive and bringing as many along with us. I hope you'll get involved as you are able. Um, I have a few items to cover quickly. One, um, is will you please figure out a way to publicly honor staff who are who are retiring from city service? Um, we do articles for animals, but I haven't seen any for people and I know of Louise and Kathy from community engagement in particular. um to we heard ample testimony about Big Branch from residents of Anderson Drive, but when I um unexpectedly drove down there as a shortcut to Glenwood, I was shocked to see that most of the homes had their leaves in the street. Um and so I was wondering, and I even went back yesterday to record it. And so I'm curious, will the city eventually implement fines for homeowners or landscape companies who contribute to the deterioration of our storm water system? Um, of course before that, um, what can we do to provide further education and alternatives? And I think it's really interesting because every district during the, um, budget listening sessions asked for the leaf rem the leaf collection program to be removed. So all the people who are coming out now saying that they want it um, where were they at at that time in January? It's really interesting. Um, three, who can I speak to to get a deal on renting the first floor spaces of One Exchange Plaza? I know the city owns the building, so I'm just curious about that. And then I'm not sure if I'll be allowed to speak during the public hearing, so I just want to recognize Marinel Marinel Ubaldo from Power Up. She didn't sign up to speak. However, she did organize those who are here. She's an internationally recognized climate activist, having lost deeply because of actions we take lightly here on the mainland USA. We should be honored to have her in our city to lead by following. I hope the city will find ample opportunities to collaborate with her in the future. And then closing, I just want to remind everyone that our ecosystems don't receive eviction no notices when we destroy their habitats, and they don't give them either. Even when devastation comes with a warning, we will never know what the results will be. And finally, in the words of my young black male superhero, every time we cut down a tree, it becomes extinct. Thank y'all. >> Thank you. Happy birthday, uh, Manib Saha. >> Good evening. Before I begin, I would like to thank all of the council members for your commitment to the city of Raleigh. Um, my name is Mansip Sho. I'm a green I'm a junior at Green Hope High School and I'm here representing the PO youth empowerment team which consists of youth across Wake County and many within the Raleigh city limits. I'm here today because of the youth of Raleigh are watching what kind of community we are building for them and they deserve better than public spaces where tobacco and vaping feel normal. That's why I'm here to support this ordinance. The first pillar of this ordinance is protecting youth like myself. Tobacco products, including vapes, are all around us, and their visibility makes it easier for teens to try them. When public places are smoke free and tobaccof free, it sends a clear message. Our city values our health. It makes experimenting harder and it reduces the influence of adults using tobacco publicly. In fact, a youth at my school went down a really difficult path just because of how easy it is to access these products. She first tried nicotine when she was only 13 years old and what started out as experimentation quickly escalated. One day she unknowingly used a product that was laced and it completely derailed her life. She she faced multiple suspensions and was put into alternate programs from her peers and her addiction followed her into high school leading to more trouble and more time away from the classroom. She she's working towards a recovery now, but what would have benefited her was if these products hadn't have been so visible and accessible in the first place. The second pillar is protecting public health. Tobacco smoke contains 7,000 chemicals, at least 70 of which cause cancer, heart disease, stroke, and asthma attacks. Ecigarette emissions are not harmless either. They carry similar dangers. There is no safe level of exposure to secondhand smoke or emissions indoors or outdoors. This ordinance protects everyone in our community, especially those of us who are young, growing, and more vulnerable to these risks. And finally, this or ordinance creates a healthier environment for everybody. Most tobacco users want to quit, but quitting is difficult when triggers are everywhere. smokefree, tobaccof free, um, vape free public places help reduce exposure and support those trying to quit. Raleigh has done this before. Restaurants and bars have been smoke-free since 2010. And now it's time to extend our protections by adopting an ordinance that is the most comprehensive allowed under state law to make our outdoor spaces, government vehicles and buildings and public places smoke free, vape free, and tobaccof free. This will align with the policies with Wake County tobaccof free policies and reduce confusion among residents. Thank you for your time and thank you for prioritizing this issue and the health of our community. >> Thank you. >> Yes. Haspi Saxina. >> Good evening council members. My name is Yashasi Saxana and I'm a sophomore at Enllo High School and a youth leader with the Post Center for Health Education's Teen Health Advisory Council who I want to thank for giving me the opportunity to speak tonight about why the tobaccof free public places ordinance matters not just for adults, but especially for people my age. I want to share what reality looks like for a high schooler today involving substance use. Every single day, students can walk into bathrooms filled with vape clouds. We can see people vaping in parking lots before first period, on the way to sports practices, even at community events. It has become so common that many students think it's normal. And when something feels normal, it spreads. Most teens don't start vaping because they want to. They start because they are surrounded by it. They see adults smoking and vaping at bus stops, outside recreation centers, at parks, at public events. When young people see tobacco use everywhere, it sends a message. Everyone does it, so it must not be a big deal. But it is. Nicotine changes developing brains. It affects memory, focus, impulse control, and stress. These aren't just numbers or studies. These are real students sitting next to me trying to learn while fighting an addiction that they didn't fully understand when they started. Not to mention that in NC, 21.4% of high school students used electronic vape products, according to a 2025 report. It's not just the users who suffer, though. Students who don't vape still breathe in secondhand aerosols in bathrooms, locker rooms, and public spaces. When we're in places where smoking or vaping is allowed, we don't have a choice. Our lungs and our brains are still developing, and exposure puts us at risk, even if we're trying to make healthy choices. This is why ordinance is so important. Creating smoke-free public places make it easier for young people to avoid exposure and harder for tobacco use to feel normal. It reduces triggers, protects families, and sends a clear message that our community values health. It makes parks, sidewalks, and public buildings safer for children, teens, older adults, and everyone who uses them. As a youth leader, but also simply as a high school student who sees the effects of nicotine addiction every day. I believe in this comprehensive ordinance that aligns with Wake County. Protecting public spaces protects young people, my peers, my friends, and my community. Thank you for listening and thank you for prioritizing the health of future generations. >> Thank you. >> MSA Salari. >> Good evening everyone. Um first I want to rec recognize and thank the firefighters of Raleigh who responded to the convention center last night. Uh [snorts] their courage saved and protected our city. Yet despite their sacrifice and many of them cannot afford living in the city of Raleigh, the city they protect, they deserve a better ba pay uh better housing options and a city that stands firmly behind them. And that brings me why I'm speaking here tonight. Our government has provided 17.9 million billion to uh Israel in military aid. The funding is controlled at the federal level but it comes from the source our tax dollars from working families right here in Raleigh who are struggling with housing cost medical bills and raising everybody's everyday's expenses. At the same time, we are seeing devast devastation in Gaza and the West Bank, Syria and Lebanon where the civilians, including children, are being killed until today being leveled. Yet here in North Carolina, we are bound by 2017 state law that prohibits our state or local governments from boycotting or divesting from companies tied to Israel even when serious human rights concerns are involved. So while innocent people abroad suffer and while family here in Raleigh struggle to make ends meet, our tax dollar remain locked into supporting a foreign government. military and [snorts] policies and our state laws limits our ability to make ethical community focused decisions about how can we spend our public money. Let me put this into perspective. 17.9 billion just in recent eight could pay for over 230,000 firefighter salaries nationwide. affordable housing for hundreds of thousands of families, major upgrades to school, public, transit, transit and emergency services. And here in Raleigh, that that could do dramatically increase firefighters, first responders pay, [snorts] and expand affordable housing across the city, strengthen a mental health program, rebuilding in aging infrastructure, support and moderates our public schools. Instead, that money leaves our communities while our residents are asked to do more with less. And because of the state anti-boycott law, Raleigh is restrict restricted from refusing contracts of investing. But when they conflict with Thank you, Hannity Ali. Okay. Not here. Okay. Alexis Kennedy. Good evening, council members. I still have yet to see you come down and feed your communities on Sunday. If your excuse is you don't know where to go, I would like to remind you that you do have my contact information. Um it's on when we're signing up for stuff. So um also I would like to second May. Um, I would like to thank our firefighters for taking care of that, being a speedy response, for putting out that fire. They totally deserve a raise, and it's unfortunate that most of our fire department cannot even afford to live in the city that they protect. Since May and I thought alike and pretty much wrote the exact same thing without even telling each other, I'm going to tell you a story instead. It's called Israel Breaks Their Bones Policy. In the late 1980s, Israel broke their break their bones policy was ordered by the defense mi minister aimed to physically disable Palestinian protesters as they form a deterrence. Human rights groups estimated that between 23,000 to 29,000 children required medical treatment for bones, bone fractures, and severe injuries. Mind you, this was 1980s. Um, this was not a random violence. It was a calculated method to crush both resistance and hope. [clears throat] Soldiers often targeted arms and legs, striking repeatedly with batons, rifle butt but butts to cause fractures. [clears throat] These were documented and actually filmed. So in believe it was 1985, CBS television crew captured the Israeli soldiers viciously beating two Palestinian children using rocks to smash their bones while filming a protest near Nabulus. Mind you that the United States had that information and still felt that it's important to keep sending Israel money and still are. And right now, Israel is trying to petition to get more money because their 20-year security agreement is about to expire and they want another 20 years. So, they're proposing $4 billion annually to be sent to them starting in 2028. So, my demand is that the city make a stance that our money needs to stay in our community and make a public statement like we see on your Instagram posts um demanding our federal government and Deborah Ross to push for an arms embargo on Israel and no more money to be spent on foreign governments. Our investment needs to stay and invest in our children, our public servants like the fire department, bus drivers, mental health resources, and proper resources for our houseless. Thank you. >> Thank you, Sophie Burgess. On the evening of November 11th, Dr. Natalyia Duk Wilkins was walking home from work when she was struck and killed by a pickup truck at the intersection of Pogan Clark at 6:11 p.m. I used to live five doors down from that intersection. And while I wish I could say this tragedy comes as a shock, it doesn't. Reckless driving, speeding on the hilly roads, and dangerous vehicle behavior are frequent occurrences in that neighborhood. Accidents, both vehicular and pedestrian, are not uncommon there. Had action been taken sooner to address the safety of this area, Natalyia's death could have been prevented. My name is Sophie Burgess and I'm an undergraduate researcher living in the Raleigh community. I had the pleasure of working alongside Natalia. This tragedy was not an isolated incident. A previous fatality occurred at the same intersection in 2015, and three serious pedestrian injuries have occurred every year for the past three years along Clark Avenue. All drivers stated they reportedly did not see them. Every statistic represents a real person. Someone walking home, someone heading to work, or someone going to class. Before I continue, I want to acknowledge that the value of someone's life is not measured by their achievements or service to their community. Today, I share Natalya's story not to prove her worth, but to give a face and a name to a preventable tragedy, and to honor the vibrant life that was taken from us too soon. Natalya was a brilliant assistant professor and principal investigator in the biological sciences department at NC State. She was a devoted partner to her fianceé Trevor whom she was meant to marry in two months and a ch a cherished daughter and sister whose ch childhood was spent in Chile. A colleague wrote, "Natalyia had such a profound impact on my life. When I first arrived at UC Davis, I didn't know anyone and I had no money. She brought me in, cooked for me, and made me feel at home. I called her my sister for a couple of years because I truly wanted her to be my older sister. She meant so much to me. Natalya touched the hearts from Chile to California to North Carolina. She frequently walked the roads and trails around campus. Natalya was always active and always on the move. So much so that she kept a standing treadmill at her desk. No one so full of life should have been taken this way. Pedestrian safety must be our utmost priority. Over 50,000 students, staff, and faculty commute to and around campus every single day. Whether drivers are unfamiliar with the area or have grown complacent on roads they drive frequently, the result is the same. An unsafe environment for pedestrians. With 50 crashes last year and 48 projected this year along Clark Avenue, it is time for immediate reform. In the evening, the intersection has almost no functional overhead lighting. The downhill slope approaching the intersection encourages higher vehicle speeds and reduces reaction time. During daylight, overgrown trees block sight lines to the crosswalk and its signs. Relying on painted lines and a single stop sign is no longer adequate for an intersection with this level of pedestrian activity and crash history. To mitigate this, the city should prioritize installing a rectangular rapid flashing beacon, hawk beacon, or pedestrian activated signal at this location. Tools that are proven to increase driver awareness. Other improvements could be made such as trimming vegetation, enhancing lighting, or adding speed calming measures. These will further ensure pedestrian safety and driver visibility. Now, we must honor Natalia by making our roads safer. Thank you. Right, that concludes our public comment this evening and we will move on to matters scheduled for public hearing. The first we have Ashley Tucker from Housing and Community Development to talk about the 2026 27 federal annual action plan for the US Department of Housing and Urban Development. Good afternoon or evening because that's what it is. [laughter] Evening mayor and members of council. I am Ashley Tucker with Housing and Community Development and I will be providing an overview of the annual action plan for 2026 2027 prior to the public hearing. The annual action plan is required by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development every year and it is a subset um of our consolidated plan which is required every five years. So the consolidated plan outlines our five-year goals and strategy while the annual action plan describes our programs and projects. So the purpose today is just to share our funding priorities, our accomplishments and next steps for the annual action plan. >> [snorts] >> So these are the three goals from the consolidated plan that inform the annual action plan. Increasing affordable housing options, increasing housing stabilization and supportive services, and preventing and reducing homelessness. So staff is just seeking feedback on these goals to help refine them, and we'll use those refined goals for the draft that will be released in the spring of 2026. These are some selected accomplishments reported to HUD for the fiscal year 2021 2025 federal reporting period. Um, and it's just a subset of all the data that is available on our website at our affordable housing dashboard. So during this time, we supported [clears throat] the creation of over 2,000 affordable rental units, over 200 down payment loans provided, and over 5,300 individual provided individuals provided shelter. With that context, here's an overview of the federal and local resources that are dedicated to those efforts. So we have um a total of about 16.6 million in anticipated funds, 2.8 85 in community development block grant dollars, 1.35 in home investment partnership dollars, and about 250,000 in um emergency solutions grants, as well as 12.13 in local general funds and bonds. So to close, I just want to briefly outline our timeline here. So November through December is for public input. We had two meetings in November and we have one coming up this Wednesday at 6 PM. There's more information on that on our website as well as a survey that will be running through December 31st. And we just like to, you know, extend to the public and let them know that we are very much looking forward to more feedback on our engagement methods and how we can better be of service. And that information will be really vital as we go through the draft plan period December through February. In March, we'll have the comment period. In April, there will be a second public hearing. And in May, there will be the adoption of the plan. This concludes my overview. I'm open to any questions. And our request is that council hold the public hearing. >> Thank you, Miss Tucker. Any questions? >> All right, we will open the public hearing and we have Octavia Rainey signed up to comment. get out of here early. >> I'm Octavia Rainey and I have about 10 comments. So, I'mma get to my comments. Number one, she mentioned the consolidated plan, but the citizen participation plan is also a part of the consolidated plan. The citizen participation plan tells you how to participate and to give comment in the plan itself. I'm recommending that you have hold a public hearing strictly on the citizen participation plan. I've had the opportunity to work on 75 citizens participation plan across the United States. So, I'm very familiar with the citizen participation plan and I don't think the city of Raleigh follows the citizen participation plan to the guidelines that they can follow the citizen participation plan. For example, number one, you have a lot of people that's not on the internet. These are the underserved communities. How do the underserved communities participate in the plan? That really bothers me. How do they participate? But you don't even know the citizen participation plan yourself. Under the citizen participation plan, the relocation act must come to a public hearing. And I'm ready for that public hearing. There's a lot of discrepancies and deficits that must be addressed. I am very familiar with the CDBG rules. Very, very, very familiar. I have strong concerns about when community development start building housing. Race is very important. Race and black people are not a part of that. Under Larry Javas, whenever I would ask for the race, he wouldn't give it to me. But I told him that's a public record. You got to give me the race. And when I looked at the race of all the housing that was built by all the developers, do you know it was only 12 houses bill that was sold to black folk? You tell me something wrong with that picture. So I'm suggesting that y'all use the home mortgage disclosure act from there on. It's better than the census because with the Honda data, it goes strictly to race and income. And that I think is very very important. I don't think my opinion you don't enforce the fair housing act. How can you have a citizen partition plan citizen participation plan the consolidated plan but you don't have fair housing but you enforce under the police department but you can't enforce under fair housing. There's something wrong with that picture. Also, which you failed to mention, I have been following you on all your mental health programs. Not once did I hear about fair housing for the mentally ill. All right. Thank you. All right. That's the only speaker we had signed up for the action plan. So, I will close the hearing and Is there any action required? Okay. All right. Well, then we will move on to the demolition of unfit buildings. Bryce Abernathy. >> Good evening, Mayor, City Council. Uh Bryce Abernathy with Housing and Neighborhood or excuse me, housing comm community or development department. Community development. Good gracious. It's been a long day. Um, first property we've got here is 1910 West Milbrook that I'm bringing to you. Um, actually both of these properties are on the same parcel owned by the same property owner. Um, the intent to repair this property is is not there. The property is for sale. Um, even it's even listed as land only. Um, there's really uh we've had hearings with the property owner and they did board it up. It was wide open, but as you can see, it's in pretty poor condition. and broken windows. The inside is uh as you can imagine a lot of HVAC HVAC issues, electrical issues, plumbing issues, all that kind of stuff. Um so I am asking council to adopt a demolition only um for this property. Demolition only ordinance for this property. Um and that's based solely on um we we assess that property is it's going to cost more than half of what the tax value is for the dwelling to repair to bring it back up to minimum housing standards. So with that, I will be asking for a demolition ordinance for this particular property. >> Do you want to go ahead and talk about >> Yes, we can. >> I guess I can 1908 and then we can do both hearings. >> Yeah. [clears throat] >> So 1908 West Milbbor again on the same piece of property. Um, this property, the story that I heard was a tree tree had fallen on it, but the tree got removed pretty quick. Um, however, the the damage is still there and this is kind of an unsafe situation. Um, not really any way to board it or secure it. Uh, the probably the the best thing to do is to to demolish the structure. Um, again, I'm asking for demolition ordinance on this property also. Okay. Um there's about three different storage buildings and disrepair all over the property and that would be included as well in the demolition. >> Okay. Um I will open the public hearing for 1908 West Milbrook and there is no one signed up. So I will close the public hearing. Is there a um a motion? >> I have a question first. >> Yep. >> So this is the one that's for sale. >> Okay. Is the other one for sale as well? Yeah, the the whole parcel is for sale and it includes both of these these. >> And how long how long have they been on the market? >> Um maybe six months. >> Okay. Is there a motion move to [snorts] >> second? >> All right. Any other discussion? Not all in favor of the ordinance? I >> All opposed? Okay. So, 7 to one on that one and then I will open the hearing on uh 1910 West Milbrook and I will close the hearing. Is [clears throat] there a motion? >> Move to adopt the ordinance. >> Second. All in favor of the motion? I >> All opposed. >> All right. 7 to one again on that one. Thank you. >> All right. Next we have uh the resoning uh Z925 on Western Boulevard and Matthew Clim. Good evening, Mayor and Council. Matthew Clim, Planning and Development. Uh here to present the resoning at 4500 Western Boulevard. This is a request to reszone uh a little over 12 acres from commercial mixeduse with the fivetory height limit with the uh special highway overlay district to the special residential parking overlay district and the transit overlay district to a commercial mixeduse 20story district with zoning conditions and retaining only the transit overlay district. The request is consistent with the 2030 comprehensive plan in the future land use map. Your planning commission recommends approval 7 to zero. Um so just a quick look at the site. This is the site of the old Kmart at the intersection of Western Boulevard of Blue Ridge Road um and the belt line. Uh you can see that the site is currently developed with uh structure that used to house the um Kmart and the associated parking. Uh Western Boulevard is also planned for a bus rapid transit corridor. Um and at the location of the intersection of Western Boulevard and Blue Ridge Road is a uh transit median island station. Um so the BRT service will have a center running lane in this section and a transit station um at Blue Ridge and uh Western Boulevard. The reasoning request has a number of proposed zoning conditions. one, prohibiting uses. Two, laying out a series of development scenarios uh laid out here uh in six bullet points. Um and a third condition that limits building height uh to 12 stories within 150 ft of properties um within 150 ft of properties to the west across Blue Ridge Road. So, uh on this map, it would be um 150 ft uh from uh those properties there. And let's see, erase this stuff. Got a new uh monitor tool. I apologize. Okay, so the zoning entitlement is changing here. Uh maximum units uh for residential use are going up to 3500. Uh that's the highest of any of the scenarios. Uh office square footage um is going down slightly. Uh and the retail square footage is going up as well. Um again, consistent with the community mixeduse designation on the future land use map, consistent with the urban form map as well, the transit overlay district comes with the requirements of uh the urban form designations, uh the frontage designations in the code. Uh this map also shows the quarter mile walk shed from the planned bus rapid transit station at the intersection of Blue Ridge Road and Western Boulevard. Um so consistent policies related to transit oriented development, compact development, um consistency with our future land use map, reducing vehicle miles traveled by encouraging uh multimotal transportation, capitalizing on transit access, of course, reduction of greenhouse gases associated with um more dense development, shared wall construction and apartment type buildings. Uh and of course adjacency to the transit service. Um again consistent with your future land use map in urban form. There are also several uh small area policies area specific guidance policies associated with the site from uh a number of studies conducted over the years. Se several of them referencing the Kmart site specifically um for a redevelopment opportunity. Um so those are listed here for you. um inconsistent with uh zoning and infrastructure impacts related to uh fire service response times uh and also a policy related to forested buffers. Uh that's inconsistent for the proposed removal of the special highway overlay district 2 which would require preservation of potentially preservation of some of the trees on the site. there is less than a third of an acre roughly of a forested area at the northeast corner of the site that could qualify as tree conservation area. The special highway overlay district also comes with a a tree planting requirement. Um and I have a map here showing that. Uh so this uh area in the upper right hand corner is forested and on-site. Um the uh green line is not to scale or drawn with a survey but just uh showing where the planting would be required from the shod to um if kept in place. Again, your planning commission recommends approval um citing that the resoning change would help support the transformation of what is a suburban style big box development into something more urban intense to help serve um uh new residents and other users using the bus rapid transit route. [cough] >> Thank you. >> Great questions for Mr. Clem. >> Yes. >> Hi, couple. Can you go back to the shod slide? >> Yes. >> I forgive me if you said it. Um the shod has a replanting requirement. >> It would along where the thick green line is is shown. >> So there's no because there's no trees there now, but they would have to add some. >> And that's [clears throat] right. And so it's a 25 foot wide area and um there's a planting schedule for it. It's roughly 1,000 ft long, maybe a little shorter. So would be something like 30 canopy trees and evergreen trees and other um types of planting required. >> Got it. Okay. Helpful. And then um the TOD is being added to the site. Um I know some of the TOD rules like you you do affordable housing, you can have a a height bonus. So theoretically, if this case were approved at 20 stories with the affordable housing, they could go up to 30. But there are other features of the tod and there are also like form and massing things you get from doing. So what um can can you just kind of brush on the to? >> Yeah, absolutely. So uh the tod is currently in place. So it's not being requested for addition. It's already on site. Um, what I'll say about the bonus is the structure of the the incentive in the height bonus is to unlock units you could otherwise not build based on the height restriction. Um, in this case, the residential and office entitlement, both which come with height bonuses in the todd are already capped at the levels outlined in these zoning conditions. So, um, no new square footage of residential units or office space would be unlocked by building a taller building. Of course, they could build a taller building. They could build a 30story building, whereas 20% of the additional units um would be qualified as affordable based on what the ordinance says. Um, but they're not gaining any new units. So the incentive for them is is gone because they've capped themselves. And these numbers uh were backed into from uh when we do a resoning request, we conduct what's called an envision tomorrow analysis where staff provides an estimate of how much development can occur with a 20s story zoning on this site. Um these conditions are less than that. So more than what is on the screen now can be built at 20 stories as it is. So there there really is no incentive for anything taller. But if they did build taller stories, they would be required to to discount the 20% for affordable housing. >> And that like um do they get different dimensional standards or or something? [snorts] >> Yep. So the TOD comes with the requirement of um the frontage the urban limited frontage requirement in the code. So it requires buildings to be brought closer to the sidewalk and the intention of building things closer to the sidewalk is that folks are more likely to walk in and out of those buildings because of their placement near the public realm. Um so that's that's the key um factor of urban form that baked into the TOD. When you see other zoning cases that have UL or UG, that's urban limited urban general. Those are additional add-ons. Um, but we baked that into our TOD ordinance. >> Got it. Um, and then last one for me. Sorry everyone. Um, can you go to the area the aerial there? Um, okay. So, they're at Blue Ridge and Western. Um, currently no sidewalks along the Blue Ridge frontage. Would those at what point would those be required to be put in? Under what circumstances would they be required to put in sidewalks? >> Believe there's there are sidewalks on Blueidge Road on the eastern side of the of the street. Thank you. Yeah. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Any other questions? All right. Well, we'll go ahead and open the public hearing and we have uh two people signed up in support, Jason Baron and Hunter Winstead. Uh good evening, mayor, members of council. Jason Baron with Morning Star Law Group here on behalf of the applicant and owner, City Plat, and it'll just be me tonight. Um Hunter is not joining me this evening. uh staff has done a thorough job of running through the details of this proposal and weighing it against the city's adopted plans including the comprehensive plan and the future land use map. So I really want to highlight three areas where from a big picture standpoint we believe the reasonzoning as proposed makes a lot of sense for this area. First, we believe it's where density wants to be and we'll walk a little bit through that here momentarily. uh it's the rehabilitation after decades of underutilization of a site that we're all intimately familiar with if we spend any time in Raleigh. And last, uh we've received widespread community support through our neighborhood meetings. Uh and we've received really good feedback from folks who are just, I think, excited to see something coming to the old Kmart. So, density where it makes sense. Uh you know, it's at not only the intersection of Western Boulevard and 440, but as noted in the staff report, it's in a frequent transit area. There's a transit station area and a BRT that's planned for the hard corner. You know, these are the areas where independent of any comprehensive plans where you want to put people. As was noted in the staff report, there's a current entitlement generally speaking for the office and the retail that will result from this resoning. Ultimately, what this resoning is intended to do is to allow for residential, and we believe that introducing that residential in concert uh with future mixeduse development on the site will u will highly complement the city's long-term plans for that BRT stop in this location, will promote walkability, and uh it will will overall be a benefit to the community as a whole. uh the transit station area recommendations. Again, from a building height standpoint, this is really where the emerging urban center designation exists and notes that 20 stories is the recommended height in these locations. And that is the nature of the request that is before you tonight. We have a number of zoning conditions as was noted. Uh with respect to that condition three, I just want to touch briefly that 150 ft within the eastern property line that really is acknowledging the transitions that are wired into the UDO and in adopting that as part of the zoning ordinance recognizing that those are going to be required regardless. And so that's a that's that 150 ft from those low to medium density uh designations rehabilitation after decades of underutilization. Uh so the Kmart, ironically enough, Kmart at one point was the number one retail in thei retailer in the United States on a per per sales basis. Uh I think from like 87 to 90 uh which just preceded when I was shopping there for my necessaries as a college freshman at NC State in 1994. Uh but as we all know, the precipitous decline that Kmart experienced nationwide hit this site earlier than most. It hung on for a long time. It was open until 2019. I had to look this up. I did not know it was open until 2019, which is fairly astounding. Um, but it has lived in kind of a blighted state for an extended period of time. We think that the overwhelming support uh that we've heard from the community is a something's happening, but b what's happening today. And so, if you've driven by the site, the the front of it's already come down. The existing owners have spent or are spending between roughly five to six million. You've heard these things uh in various newspaper articles kind of refacing and and re-imagining what we can ultimately get from the old Kmart shopping center. The biggest challenge they have is recreating patterns associated with visiting the old Kmart. And so this this first phase of development introducing kind of lifestyle and active uses is intended to get people used to going back to the center. The zoning that's before you tonight is designed to complement the investment that's being made today. And that is once we kind of they they establish and and get comfortable with the idea of retail being a success here, these lifestyle uses being a success here, then they plan on coming through with a mixeduse development that will be heavily residential that they believe will be highly complimentary to the uses that they're putting on the site today. And so this is just some of the work that's already being done. And this is a recent picture that was taken. As you can see, they've done some refacing uh of the surface of that parking area. uh a lot has been talked about with respect to future landscaping and I just would note that basically for any vertical project on the site those urban frontages and urban urban limited requirements of the TOD would kick in and so any future site plans that are going to be submitted on the site consistent with the zoning that you all are reviewing tonight are going to kick in landscaping requirements for streetscapes and sidewalks and planting areas and uh and whatnot. And then again widespread community support. We had two neighborhood meetings. Uh we visited the West Raleigh CAC. We've got a unanimous recommendation from the planning commission. And ultimately, this is a site uh that again, it's been blighted for a long time. There's a reason for that. It's been sitting vacant for a long time. There is a reason for that. It is a dynamite site. I mean, it has been it is in an incredible location from an access standpoint. That has been true for a very, very, very long time. And yet, it's a site that has been passed over over and over and over again. And the reason why is because it sits in an area and it has a reputation for being an a site that has challenges. And so the flexibility that my client is trying to seek with this development is really a recognition of the uphill battle that they fight just trying to get people to come back to the site. Just trying to get people to invest in this site. it. It's not a site that's located in one of the existing urban centers where values are high and rents is high and they're confident, you know, investors are confident that they're going to be able to get a return on their investment. This site has a lot that's working against it. My client is very optimistic in the future redevelopment of this location, but the flexibility that they're asking you all for in trying to avoid a lot of conditions associated with the case is really embedded in this idea of trying to make this site one that will be highly competitive in the marketplace when those developers are looking to develop in the city. And so with that, we're here to answer any questions that you might have. And these are just some uh some of the tenants who have signed up for this uh for the phase zero. But ultimately, you know, we think it's the right case. We think it's the right place for density. It's squarely consistent with the city's long range plans for development of the area, especially with the conditions that we've asked for and we would respectfully request you all's approval of the case. Thank you. >> Thank you. Questions for Mr. Baron. Yes. >> Um definitely thank you for the presentation and the work. I've heard the new businesses that are already coming to the existing building. Um for the part that you're you're looking to build um out in front of the the current building has the to which brings it closer to Western Boulevard, but there's a shod that's currently there that you're removing. How does the shod impact your development if it were to remain? >> It it just creates a further encumbrance on where the buildings can be located. It just limits the flexibility that I was alluding to. As was mentioned there, it's essentially going to create a 35 ft band along the front of the site where from a flexibility standpoint, from a where things are going to be located standpoint, it just creates an incumbrance that makes this site one that is tough to compete with sites that have natural kind of value built into them as compared to this old Kmart site. So, it it it is it's just an incumbrance on the ability to plan the site. >> Okay. Um I have a question kind of for staff around that as well. Um with a shot and a TOD I see a conflict. So how does that could you have both the are would be the recommendation be one or the other? >> Yes they could both development can occur with both zoning overlays on the site. Um I would go back to an aerial and show this is a slightly different view but I'll draw roughly where um I had shown on the other map. So this is like 1,000 ft. It's 986 ft as I measured on IMAPs earlier. Um so that's where the planting requirement would be. Um so of course that leaves all the other frontage on Western Boulevard and um Blue Ridge Road as well to occupy buildings and and enhance the DoD. They can both exist. >> So the shot is only in that area. >> It it's mapped over the whole site, but the the requirement is for um the frontage along the highway. >> Correct. And for the first 200 feet from the intersection of the highway and the street it intersects with because of the geometry of the site does not have a corner right like that is the 200 ft is somewhere in this area. Again I'm just drawing roughly here but but because like say the shot goes away the North Carolina Department of Transportation is still going to require a certain setback. Correct. I'm not sure that NC DOT what their setback requirement would be from 40 the cuz that ramp's there. So they're they're not going to let you build up to the ramp. There has to be >> That's right. There there's there's right of way outside of where the ribbon pavement exists where buildings couldn't go where the >> So the shod could be part of that rideway. Correct. the Shod would be required to be located the protective yard required by the Shod will be on the the property not in the right of way. >> Okay. Okay. That's help. >> Yeah. >> Thank you, >> Councelor Harrison. >> Yeah. I just want to add a little context to this Shod um conversation. We discussed it at the West Raleigh CAC meeting and um I know I had talked with the owners about um including the Shod, keeping the Shod and they were amendable to that. So, I'm curious to hear from you, Jason, in a moment about whether that's still the case. Um, to me, the Shod provides a benefit. It's a tree buffer. We're right next to the highway. It makes both the property, I think it's a better property when you have that tree cover from the highway as well as for those on the highway to have the trees. So, I'm really not inclined to remove the shod when you're describing it as an incumbrance, but you're not describing exactly what is the issue here. Um my understanding is the redevelopment that's about to occur here. I mean that is very very positive. Everyone's excited about this. Um but that's like the one story that's not part of this resoning. So the current plan for redevelopment that's happening that's going to happen. But what this resoning is asking for is you know something in the future. We don't know what that is. 20 stories that's fine. Um, I think that goes along with what we see in our plans. Um, I do want to note though again there's no affordable housing even though with the to bonus there could be. Um, if there was a smaller request, but because the request is being maxed out in terms of entitlement, the affordable housing bonus doesn't play here. Um, so I just put that out there for council's consideration. But I am curious, Jason, has your client talked to you about bringing the Shaw back? They have and and we've discussed it and again their desire their strong desire is to try to avoid as many conditions on this property as they possibly can as I described. I think >> they're asking for the removal though of the shod. So in my opinion it's not a condition. It's just you know going back to what we had. >> Sure. No I I Yeah. And when I say conditions I mean the conditions associated with developing the site including any overlays uh which the shot would be. I I think we're they're willing to entertain the conversation. They're certainly not going to have the case not get approved on that basis, if that makes sense. Uh but as I said, they're trying to do whatever they can to try to keep this slate as clean as possible so that they can max maximize future redevelopment. >> Okay. Yeah, I definitely understand that. Just again from the conversation that we had the West Raleigh CAC, you know, folks don't want to have only pavement here. If we can have a little bit of green space, a little bit of good clean air, um that is the preference. >> Sure. >> Councelor Jones. >> Hi Jason, thank you so much. I just wanted to touch on the um two neighborhood meetings you had. How many people came to those? >> Uh we had I think 14 was the total number of nonapplicant attendees at the first meeting and four at the second meeting. >> So overwhelming support is for the 18 people that came. I mean, the people who chose to show up spoke in support of the case. I mean, we can't make people who don't support the case show up to speak on the case. I mean, as you know, the way that zoning cases go, typically speaking, the people who are going to show up are not terribly interested in what's going on. U in this instance, the feedback that we got from those who were attending was was excitement associated with something happening at the Kmart. >> Sure. I mean, I I would just reference peace and west. I think you guys did a great job of bringing a lot of people who were in favor of it. So, I don't want to act like people who are in favor just don't come to these things. So, I don't want to give that um perception, but when we say overwhelmingly and we're making a decision on that, I just want to put that into context for everyone what that meant because this is your this is the job of the applicant to bring people. This is what you did before. It's not impossible because you did it before. So, I'm just wanting to make sure that that's clear that that's 18 people. This is 3,500 um pe uh residents, which no one is no one here is against. you know, I I don't think anyone's against that, but um I would I would ask for some consideration of that shod since this is a big change and it's it's something that's already required. So, I would be inclined to agree. Uh thank you, councelor Harrison. Thank you. >> Sure. >> Other comments? Um councelor Patton? >> Yeah. Hi. Um so, how long So, you're obviously leaving it as a as the Kmart structure for some time, >> correct? And how long before a a new [clears throat] tower would go there? >> It's really to be determined at this point. Um their best case guess right now just based on the market associated with building multif family at this moment is the earliest it would be is 5 years. Um that could happen faster if things change dramatically. It doesn't look like it's going to. So within the next I would say five to 10 years is when we would start to see the first of what they would envision two towers on this site. >> Okay. So this is going to be sit as is for for some time. Um it's my understanding that when the tower comes in the type of site plan you'll have to bring in will trigger frontage improvements on um Blue Ridge in particular and that hopefully in the 5 to 10 years we'll have also done our part to put BRT here. Um, and I'm just thinking a lot about the people who will need to access BRT on Western Boulevard and how they will do so from the Kmart and you won't trigger that type of site plan for some time. And so I would be interested it I I'm not a technical expert. I believe once that tier three site plan is triggered, there's going to be like separated bike facility and wider sidewalks that are there now. And so I would be interested in um exploration of how that particular part of the site improvements can be pulled farther forward so that we're not waiting 5 to 10 to question mark indefinite years to to get that part because at some point we'll have BRT here and we'll want to get people out to the street to access it. >> Okay. >> Councelor Silver, >> uh just want to talk about buffers for a second. Um, this is now an entrance. Looks like an exit and entrance ramp to to 40. A buffer. Clearly, there could be a vegetation buffer, but I'm assuming because of it location, very likely it could be used as a structure, whether it's a parking deck to maximize the rest of the site. I know it's not designed yet, but in terms of what would be placed at that location instead of the shod, uh, are you, it's hard to say, but are you assuming what would go in that location? and you want maximum flexibility, but are you envisioning that a structure can serve as a buffer to insulate from that drive to the interior part of the site? >> Yeah, I mean the the anticipation is that with putting in two what they anticipate would be two towers here, those structures, those blocks um including parking decks would essentially maximize the developable area that exists in those parking fields today. And and by maximizing, I mean it's it's kind of pressing at the edges of where they can fit those buildings. And so, you know, I don't know if I would consider it necessarily a buffer, quote unquote, but it would certainly serve in that capacity given its proximity. >> Mayor PM, did you have a question? >> Not a question, but we close the hearing and I got a comment. So, >> okay. Um, I will go ahead and close the hearing and yeah, we can continue with questions. You want to go? I mean, my request would just be that we hold this until January 6 if the client is willing to bring the shod back. Um, there might be other concerns or thoughts too that could be addressed by council members, but that would be my request. >> Right. Um, Mayor Pam. >> Yeah, I was going to say, um, little known fact, I used to work at this Kmart, which is how I know there's sidewalks on your front. [laughter] Um, and when I was in District D as a rep, um, Mayor Bowwin and Council Member Stewart and I worked feverishly to try to get the owners at that time to do something with the site and they refused. And so I'm very excited about the potential that your clients are going to bring forth to do something with the site. And Council Member Jones, I know you raised questions about people who may be in opposition, but I know there were a lot of folks back when we were trying to get something done with the site throughout the community who were very interested in seeing development come into this particular corridor. There was talk about a grocery store at one point in time and some other amenities in that corridor. So, I I can say that even back then, most of the people who surround that area were pushing for us to get something done on that site and not leave it leave it empty. So, I just wanted to put those comments out there. >> I just wanted to I'm sorry. >> Well, and yeah, and then Mayor Perttom, I'm just curious, what do you think about the Shod issue? I'm I'm trying to figure out what I think, and I mean, I think Councelor Harrison and Jones have talked about it, but I'm just curious since you worked there. [laughter] >> Um, I mean, certainly some type of buffer would be appropriate, be it vegetation or something. I know. Um, to the point about not having it all be concrete. um you know, so I do support that particular portion of it, but um whatever it takes to get some development done on the site. So I I wouldn't necessarily say that would be um something that would prohibit my vote if they can't work that particular piece out. I definitely just want to see something vibrant come to the corridor and certainly have an opportunity for maximum utilization for housing um would be a great achievement. >> Thank you. Um Councelor Silver and then Jones. >> Well, first uh this has been a long time coming. I clear and work at Kmart, but I think I went in there once to shop and >> just once. [laughter] There weren't a lot of people in the parking lot, so I got a little bit nervous. Uh, [laughter] but you know, as we look at this one, this was identified as a growth center. At one point, it was location of a light rail stop. Now, it is bus rapid transit. Uh, but this is fulfilling a long-term vision for seeing this place urbanized. There was a Blue Ridge corridor study uh that started all the way from Rex Hospital and terminated on Western and this was one of the key development sites. So, I'm very pleased to see it move forward. More importantly, uh the case is fully consistent and both the plan commission found it to be consistent. Uh in terms of the Shody yard, I know it. I mean, it exists. Uh primarily the special highway overlay district was to provide a buffer between a highway and residential. Uh I clearly understand it along some of the corridors on 40 and 440 uh where you have residences above with fastmoving vehicles. Uh this one is slowing down. Uh so I hear the concern. Uh I do know any development would have to line it either with buildings or with some options and I'm assuming also some trees will be planted, not maybe a 25 or 30 foot buffer. I'm willing to support this case. Um just primarily it's consistent. It's fulfilling the vision the city put forth to develop our city and it's really addressing a key site at a key location on Western and at least the entrance of 440 that will help uh this site really fulfill its ultimate purpose. >> Jones. >> Uh yes, Mayor Prom, I wanted to clarify. I never said opposition. I never uh advocated to to promote the opposition. What I am encouraging the applicant who [clears throat] did a wonderful job in the last case of bringing so many people who are in favor is to continue that and bring more people who are for the case so we can hear it. So that's what I was saying and um like I said in my comments, no one's against the density. No one's against that. It's about keeping the shod which was in place so that there is some protections that other neighbors from the West Raleigh CAC had requested. So, I want to make sure it's clear. I'm not in opposition. I'm not trying to amplify people who are in opposition. I'm trying to encourage others who are in favor to come out and make sure their voices are heard just like they did in previous cases. So, I just wanted to make sure that was clear um and encourage our development partners to help bring more people who are supportive of cases to the table as well. And then I mean I'll just make the comment that um I did live 15 years near this site and went there frequently. Um so I know it and I >> Yeah, I maybe we ran into each other way back. Um I think uh Jason did a good job of just explaining the difficulties of this site and the fact that it has really lingered. He said it was a dynamite site and I thought dynamite in a different way. It's just like blasted. [laughter] >> Um, and I would say like I I have sort of mixed emotions about the shot. My my gut sense is just to to attract people here, they're going to have to make this a much more attractive and they're going to do some plannings and things. And I get trying to be flexible. So, I would just say I'm excited that we're redeveloping this. And again, I'm not, you know, I I would vote for it probably either way. Uh, I'm I'm okay if we want to wait and see if they come forth, but you know, I'll I'll be voting yes um at the appropriate time. Are folks okay waiting till January 6th? Is that >> Do we need to leave it open? We need to leave it open. >> Okay. So, I will have to reopen. Yep. Uh reopen the >> I just have a question about that >> case. Yep. >> I mean, is it is it are what I don't want to do is hold it. It's the same thing in January 6. Like, are are your clients going to consider adding it? I'll just say this. I add my own personal experience with camera. When I was a student at NC [laughter] State, like the only place you could buy anything like this is where we went and shop for my dorm when I was a freshman. Yep. >> And then, you know, little hack back then was when you wanted to tailgate for football games, you have a parking pass. You'd park at the Kmart and walk up to Carter Finley. So, I know there's sidewalks there, too, because I traversed them in various conditions when I was younger. Um, that said, this is a very blighted site. all concrete right now. And I've been sort of tooling around here on Google Maps or whatever just pulled up and it looks like there used to be more of a tree buffer and then I guess when DOT came through and did their their interchange project, they they >> they've taken away many many on 440 West. >> Um and so where I'm at with this is we've got unanimous planning commission. No one signed up in opposition. I mean, we got hard cases that are hard. I don't want to make easier cases hard. This is a no-brainer for this type of development. I do agree with the mayor that uh you know, if you want to attract residents to your future residential, I'm sure the project's going to have to require some sort of plantings and some sort of sound barrier from the highway. Also, to council member Silver's point, the site is really adjacent to the off-ramp, not necessarily the actual 440. I'm comfortable proceeding without the shot. If your client will add it and then everyone wants to support it in January, I'll hold it. I'll vote yes today if if we don't. I think the question is, do you think your client will move on the shot? >> Yeah. I mean, I I can't guarantee they will because we haven't added it to date, but you know, like you don't want to make easy cases hard. I don't want to make easy cases hard either. Um, and so I'm happy with taking the walk until January 6th and talking to my client and seeing if they're inclined to add the Shody yard and we can go back. It's it's sat in this state for a long long time. I don't think another 30 days, especially in light of the development plans that are going to span years at this point, is going to change the outcome. So, let me talk to them again based on this feedback and we'll come back in January. >> I would appreciate that. >> Can I just add one more thing? What what I don't want to have happen though is whatever you add is then going to deter future development and then 20 years from now if another council sitting here talking about it. And so if the issue is a tree buffer or vegetation or some sort of greenery, maybe there's flexibility on whether it's a shot or whether it's just a more prescriptive condition to to to get some trees back. >> Sure. >> Yeah. Mhm. >> I was going to say the same thing. Uh whether 25 ft, I mean it adds you need a larger distance to address sound. I think having something 25 ft is more visual. Uh if as you're talking to your client it can be reduced down to potentially 10 ft which gets you at least a stand of trees and understory vegetation may be something you want to explore. Uh but the shot is more visual less sound unless it's going to be a thick forest. A couple of standard trees 25 ft wide are not really going to absorb. >> You could add a thick forest. >> You could add a thick forest. Hard to do in 25 ft but yes. So uh just putting it out there. don't know how my colleagues feel about having a vegetative edge as a condition as opposed to the full shot yard. Uh just to put it out there as well. >> Any other comments? Councelor Harrison, >> I just want to make sure whatever we have is commiserate with what the shot offers. So I don't see any reason to reduce the amount unless there is a true plan that we know is encumbered. you know, again, what is going to be redeveloped in the near term is has nothing to do with this resoning. Um, so it's far far in the future. >> Okay. >> I think we have discussed that. Um, we have left the hearing open and we will be back. >> Afternoon. >> Yes. >> Afternoon or evening on the 6th. >> Afternoon. >> Thank you. >> All right. Thank you. >> All right. Our next case is 2230 South Hope South New Hope Road. Bum Walter. >> Good evening, Madame Mayor, members of council. Bam Walter, Brley Planning and Developments. Nice to see you again this this evening. This is the 11:25 on South New Hope Road. You can see the parcel here on the west side of South uh New Hope uh just north of Rock Quarry. And I do just want to call to your attention the um remarkable geometry of this parcel. It is um we'll call it a C. Uh it it it has a uh this little bit in here kind of hollowed out of it. So just [snorts] want to make sure you understand what what's in play. The middle is not in play. The middle is not in play. So this is a request for about 23 acres. Uh this is going from CX-5 with conditions to the same uh currently it's part of a conditional use district with the center and because it's uh the conditions are going to be different from the piece in the center. It's not a text change to zoning conditions but a a map change it will essentially make a new district. Um it is consistent with the comprehensive plan and the future land use map planning commission reviewed and recommended denial. folks who didn't support the denial thought the site uh was appropriate for residential development. And then Smack also reviewed this. They had some recommendations for uh additional zoning conditions that might address storm order matters on the site. As I understand it, those have been added to the you held this at the table so you could could uh receive some additional conditions before you set the public hearing. That has happened. Uh and then uh we have all heard from the applicant's representation today that they would like to keep this public hearing open. They are not expect uh not asking for action tonight. They want to hear from the public uh and hear from you before they come back to you. So, uh, pulling back, looking at this from an aerial view, you can see Oldtown, uh, in parts constructed and under construction on the east side of South New Hope Road and uh, across uh, South New Hope from the site. Uh, a couple of views of the site from the street. So, this is views one, two, and three, uh, largely from the south end of the site. And then I want to talk a little bit about those conditions that the applicant has offered. So they've prohibited some uses. They have said that there will be no more than three lots with uh a non-residential primary use uh fronting along South New Hope. So they're limiting the number of commercial lots with frontage on South New Hope. They've limited the total gross floor area of medical and office use on the property to 55,000 square ft. And then they've limited the total gross floor area of all other commercial uses uh to no more than 37 37,500 ft. And then they have uh limited dwelling units to no more than 175 more conditions. They are promising with a tier three site plan that for the dedication of greenway easements. They are uh defining uh allowed encroachments in the um FEMA flood plane and limiting that to no more than 40% of impact area. Um they are saying that they will not cause changes in the flood elevations and also that they will not seek a letter of map revision. So that's from an authority outside the city and they're saying they're not going to pursue that. the the um that's a way to pursue sort of a change in the flood hazard area. So, they're not saying they're going to try to reduce that area. Um they are saying no buildings or vertical structures within the flood plane. uh no vehicular surface area in the flood plane. And then um offering double row silt fencing along the limits of disturbed areas adjacent to the flood plane prior to grading or construction. Um uh offering post construction uh practices uh stormwater outlets um and some some technical uh specifications around that. And then storm qu storm water control measures uh stabilized with sod rather than seeding. Um all uh subject to city approval and then limiting the storm water runoff to the 2, 10 and 25 year. You know the code requires two and 10. So they are offering 25 year as well. So what's uh happening here? The maximum uh residential entitlement is being added. There's not any here now. they are in uh addition to asking for more limiting themselves to less office and less retail than what's currently entitled here. This is consistent with the future land use map. There's a blend of designations on this property. They have not offered a frontage here that's not consistent with the transit emphasis corridor that's uh designated on Rock Quarry Road. I would just note that there is um flood hazard area largely along that piece of frontage and so the fact that they probably could not satisfy build two in the flood hazard area uh might suggest why they have not offered that. Again consistent with the future land use map and consistent with the urban form map as just uh noted a number of consistent policies here. There is a known service concern here and then the frontage uh fire service concern concern in this area and then the frontage as previously noted. So planning commission recommended denial. They thought that the current zoning was uh sufficient well six of the eight thought that it was sufficient uh for development of the site. Uh and then stormwater management advisory commission reviewed subsequently and were supportive as long as the conditions that you have seen tonight were added. Uh we had a couple of dissending commissioners who generally uh were in support of this request were would have recommend would have supported recommending approval to you. Uh, Commissioner Haver felt like the site had been vacant for a long time uh and that there was a need to add residential development to catalyze development here and Commissioner Atwell expressed confidence in our floodway and flood plane regulations uh and felt like it could move forward um appropriately given the state of regulation in the city. What questions could I answer for you before you open the public hearing? >> Thank you for that report. Uh questions. Yes. >> Yeah. First of all, thank you for the presentation. I know the applicant representative is here, but there's some concern. They missed the sign up period and asked for this to be moved until January. But one of my questions I have for staff. Um, and I mentioned this in a meeting early on with the applicant. Um, I don't think their attorney was with them at that time. But my question has to do with access. We're going to talk about flooding. We're going to talk about in the environmental piece. But my other concern is just access because there is a second property owner who's not part of this case that currently has the main access to this site at the intersection. So has staff had an opportunity to look at this from a access standpoint on how they can get that or what are some of the requirements they would have to have in order to get curb cuts because the current curb cut is not on this applicant's property. I'm gonna defer to my transportation friend. Yeah, >> my transportation friends. I know I've seen I know there are at least two of them here. >> They're coming down. >> Good job. >> Good evening, council. Carter Robertson with transportation. Um, early on with this resoning, we had some kind of preliminary discussions with NC DOT about the kind of unique shape of this site. So, as you mentioned, this other C property is kind of controlling um that access. We talked about um whether NC DOT would be comfortable with forming a fourth leg on that intersection. That's something they'd be willing to look into, but ultimately the applicant would have to work with this other property owner in order to um get some sort of easement or come to an agreement where that fourth leg could be uh accomplished. If not, um, access would likely be restricted along this area. Um, along the site, it's a median divided area, so it's probably going to be, um, restricted right in, right out if they don't get that fourth leg, but um, beyond that, we haven't spoken further with the applicant or NC DOT. >> Okay. Thank you. >> That's all I have for now. >> Other questions? Yep. Yep. Um, I have flood plane questions for >> defer to buy them. Me [laughter] too. >> Um, >> good evening. >> Good evening. >> Ben services. [gasps] >> So, there is flood plane on the site >> and we've gotten some community concern about building in the flood plane. Um, can you talk can you speak to our current flood plane regulations that apply to any building on any parcel that won't that aren't like beyond what's in this resoning case? >> Oh yeah, no problem. Um, so our our current flood plane rags and and the flood plane that's on this site is a FEMA regulated flood plane just for clarity sake. So our current regs for an undeveloped site, you are prohibited from developing kind of any portion of that FEMA flood plane area that's on your site. If you did have development or some sort of development on that site, a parking lot, a building, or something like that, then then you would be allowed to develop 50% of the outermost edge of that flood plane in the FEMA areas. So with the um with the first part where it's just prohibited from any development in any part of the the uh FEMA flood plane, there is a variance protocol kind of built in to that. So it's not a taking of uh land in and people like that. But the applicant is kind of saying that they would kind of cap their ability to kind of do a variance with those [snorts] um storm water conditions that you saw as well as the other ones saying parking and buildings would not be located in the FEMA flood plane that's on the site. So that's why some of those conditions read kind of oddly, but that's but that's what they were going for. >> Okay. So, by the code, you can't build housing in the flood plane, but you can creep into [clears throat] the edge of it for with your parking lot or like a shed or some something like that. And they're saying, >> correct, >> do any of that. >> Correct. You could go through a much more intense process showing you wouldn't have any greater impacts downstream or you could just stay completely out of it and not have to do the comprehensive flood study and that sort of thing. So that's kind of the tradeoff and that's and that's why the conditions there are kind of saying that they wouldn't ask for that sort of map revision or anything like that. >> Okay. Helpful. Um and then my next question might is procedural. So might be back to binum. >> Okay. >> I'm just want to um confirm the sort of order of operations binum that um planning commission recommended denial before the applicant had been to smack. So they they they voted essentially on a different set of conditions. >> That's exactly right. >> Okay. >> Yeah. And SMAK's endorsement was uh the conditions were not on the case when SMAC made their their vote was conditioned on seeing some additional things and those those have obtained >> have been added. Okay. And then >> sorry I can I can pass the mic for now. >> No. >> I was I was going to ask for the um Thank you for that. I was going to ask the applicant. It sounds like so now they've seen SMAC and it sounds like they've also engaged with partners for environmental justice. Um but just want to get some confirmation on that and if you've engaged with any other environmentally focused organizations. >> Y thank you. Um Michael Burch Longleaf Law Partners here on behalf of the applicant. So uh yes, Partners for Environmental Justice reached out to us uh after you all set the public hearing. We had uh a meeting yesterday where they asked us to consider some additional protections buffers from the flood uh extent of the flood plane uh making clear some of the conditions we already had looking at some storm water conditions as well. We got back to them and said yes, we're willing to move forward and add conditions to address those comments. Uh then we were made aware this morning of PowerUpnc's interest in this case and so we want to are asking for a continuence to January 6th to um also engage with them hear from them see what if there's anything we can do to address that. >> Can you speak do you have an idea of what the um further conditions from coming out of the PEJ conversation will be? >> Um yes. So th those were the ones I was referencing like an additional buffer off of the current, you know, extent of the flood plane kind of limiting development even further into the site. Um, we've already prohibited and said that we won't seek a map revision. We are also going to say we're not going to seek a norise determination that where development could occur in the flood plane if there was a determination of no rise. So, we're going to commit that we're not going to seek that. Again, just to be very clear that we're not going to locate buildings, structures, vehicular surface area, access roads, anything uh within the flood plane. >> Y councelor Silver, >> I noticed at the last slide, one of the plane commissioners had noted it has Michael, this may be a question for you. Um that can you go to Bick can you go to the last slide one more there it is >> the site has sat undeveloped for commercial for an extended period of time when was this initially reszoned to CX >> and how long has this property been zoned for the commercial use that it's been in the current state that it's in? >> Yes. Uh this property and this area has a long history. So, this property on the west side of South New Hope was part of the original uh master plan for Oldtown uh MA, you know, MP 103. So, it was adopted in 2004. Uh and these properties were granted uh retail and office entitlement at that time. Uh it stayed that way until the property on the east side of South New Hope was pulled out of and removed from the Oldtown uh PD essentially to get out, you know, to remove the requirement for a golf course. I believe that happened in 17. Uh the retail parcels then on the west side of South New Hope had to come through a resoning to also remove the requirement for a golf course. So that is when they were reszoned, you know, allowing retail and office but then going from PD to CX5. Uh that occurred uh the approval of that was in 21. Um but these properties have had commercial entitlements since uh ' 04 have been marketed for uh restaurant office inline retail you know since that time. But there are a number of site factors uh that have made this unsuitable for commercial for the past 20 years. >> Thank you. >> So if I can, Madame Mayor. >> Yep. >> So just some background. I'm good. Michael, I have a question for you. Um this site um originally was supposed to been part of a major golf community and when 07 happened, that whole idea went away with it. Um, it sat there until PNC Bank could no longer hold on to the property because it went from bank to bank to bank and pretty much 60% of this property was held by the bank. That's all of it. That from the town homes to some of the other residential that has been built so far. So when this finally came up in 2015, that's when we had around the first reszoning 2017 was because the bank could no longer hold the property and they had to sell it. That's when um property owners came involved. The issue with this site on this side of the street in particular to to speed up what I'm saying, you have family members who own this property and they have their own family challenges that have impacted the development of this property and I just leave it there. >> So I have I have a question about something you just said, Michael. Um you said there were the the site sat um dormant for 20 years because there were site challenges with development developing for commercial. Is that correct? >> Uh yes ma'am. >> Okay. So if there were challenges for developing for commercial why do you think those challenges will be overcome trying to develop for residential? >> Yeah. So residential development is able to kind of work with topography uh much better than commercial development. commercial development wants a completely flat same elevation across the whole site uh for all of its parking. In that case, that would require a significant amount of retaining walls uh and fill dirt to come in to make that a completely flat site and to bring the site up. They will retail likes to be level with the street. Uh this site sits uh you know eight to 10 feet below the road at different points. Uh and so developing it for commercial would require a significant amount of sight work, retaining walls, new dirt into the site as compared to residential that doesn't one need the same visibility. Uh also can work with tiered uh sites where topography changes. uh they're often uh sometimes smaller buildings again can do split buildings. So um that is a big a big difference between the commercial and the residential ability to use the site and develop the site for those different uses. All right. Uh we can open the hearing and we have uh a number of people signed up in opposition. Uh first was Emit Leah and again we've got eight eight minutes total and we have seven people signed up. So if you just want to allocate appropriately. Good evening madame mayor and council members. I'm Emil Haye a member of the Maybrook Crossings neighborhood just north of this site. Uh speaking in opposition to this request. I've got two main issues with it. Um as I'm sure all of you heard earlier this this morning it's been a fiery week for Raleigh. Um, in addition to the Raleigh Convention Center, one of the houses in my neighborhood in my street caught on fire this past Sunday. Uh, but thanks to the quick response from the Raleigh Fire Department, damage was kept to a minimum. But with response times for this area currently above recommended levels, I worry that adding additional housing units to this area is just going to make that even worse and cause more damage in the next fire. Um, my other concern is that this reszoning reduces the amount of commercial space that could be built, which is desperately needed in this area. Um there's there's a lot of good banks, restaurants, coffee shops, and more that aren't in this area. Um if you want a good cup of coffee, you've got to drive to Garner, North Raleigh, or downtown Raleigh. Like we'd love to have any kind of commercial development here. Uh it just makes living in this area a little bit better. Thank you. Katie Lee. >> Good evening, council members. Thank you for allowing us to speak. Um especially to council member Corey Branch, who knows our district very well. We appreciate his work with us so far. Um, before I begin, I did want to note um, you know, the residents have spent a pretty significant amount of time preparing for this and also stayed um, until 9:00 p.m. on a week night um, to give their speech. So, I do find it a little bit offensive that the um, developer was given unlimited time to speak to the city council even though they missed the deadline, which, you know, goes to show their dedication to making sure things are done on time and in a timely manner. Now, I want you to picture your perfect vacation spot. any location, you can build it from scratch. While I'm speaking, I'd like you to keep it in the back of your mind. In the current strategic plan for the city of Raleigh, one of the main goals is to increase environmental resistance, including cooling the city's hottest areas, improving floodprone areas, and implementing green storm water infrastructure. The destruction of the wooded area along South New Hope Road goes directly against all of these. In 2022, an NCSU study notes that urban forests can provide a 7% reduction in energy for heating and cooling and significantly reduces flooding risk. Despite an already 3.6 reduction in Wake County's canopy since 2010, the remaining trees still remove 11,000 tons of pollutants and intercept 8.1 billion gallons of storm water per year. The problem with affordable housing is not that the space does not exist. It is that the space that is available is being hoarded to increase the wealth of private equity. As of a month ago, the city of Raleigh's overall vacancy rates were 5% higher than the national vacancy rate. These dwellings are sitting empty due to artificially inflated rates set by private equity companies. If we hold these companies accountable, our housing options will instantly increase with significantly less cost to taxpayers. Not to mention, the proposed 600 units just a little bit further down South New Hope are already in process for resoning, which only further oversaturate saturates an already empty market. District C of Southeast Raleigh is currently and historically undervalued and unsupported by the city of Raleigh as a whole. It is the poorest district in Raleigh with the average medium income two $20,000 lower than the next closest closest zip code with a crime grade that is recently dropped to an F. To continue to take valuable natural resources from an already undervalued area to avoid [clears throat] private investor responsibility is unacceptable. Now remember that vacation spot I asked you to imagine? I bet that it had at least a few trees. Now, imagine you live there and someone came along and tore them all down to build houses that had almost no chance of being occupied. That's what could happen right now in my backyard. And it is for this reason that I urge you to say no to this resoning. Thank you. >> Thank you, [snorts] Shamaria Massenberg. >> Hello everyone. Thank you for being here. My name is Shamaria Massenberg. I'm a proud Raleigh native. I am present here today as the safety, welfare, and overall quality of life of my community continues to be threatened. I have serious concerns about the proposed resoning of South New Hope Road and strongly urge the council to deny Z125. As we've already discussed, this site is in a floodprone area. I strongly urge community leaders to not underestimate the importance of our environment. Protecting the trees in southeast Raleigh is pertinent to the overall well-being of local residents as the tree canopy helps regulate temperature and absorb pollutants. This development would not only threaten that canopy, but also exacerbate existing frustrations by increasing traffic in surrounding areas. In August 2025, regional communities experienced severe flooding with two fatalities in Nash County, demonstrating how quickly storm waters can overwhelm local systems, a risk that our community will also face. I cannot support a development of up to 175 residential units when it would knowingly jeopardize the safety of the current residents neighborhoods that happen to be comprised of black, brown, and working-class families who have historically had to deal with the impacts of flooding and environmental harm. I just want to say that our environment matters. This is not just a southeast Raleigh issue. This is a Raleigh issue. Thank you for your time. >> Thank you. And then uh Mama Kai Sanders is not here and >> she is. Oh, she is okay. All right. She was next, but yeah, who whoever is uh wants to use the time. I'm going to be quick. It's late. Everybody's tired, not just y'all. Now, at this point, I just want to say we have to be mindful of our environment and also that the things that we're doing here hurt the world. It's not just Raleigh that gets messed up. It affects everywhere. Everywhere. And I want us to keep that in mind. The squirrels, the deer, our ecological systems are being devastated. Please. Nobody's here to speak for them. So, I will. Athena's not here. She's the only other person that I know recognizes animals, but our actions hurt the world. We're not alone. Thank you. All right. So, Zab Aladina, >> members of the council, thank you for the opportunity to speak. I'm Dr. Zayab Baladina and I live in the Oldtown neighborhood. My professional background is in public health and health promotion. I am speaking tonight because this resorting raises concerns around um health and safety of residents in Southeast Raleigh. This site is already a flood zone and replacing forested land with imperous surfaces will push more storm water into nearby homes. Flooding does not just damage property. It also creates mold, respiratory problems, and um other health risks. Removing mature trees will also increase heat and lower air quality. Southeast Rally already carries a higher heat burden than most of the city and canopy loads in a vulnerable area, creates health risk for children, older adults, and anyone with chronic conditions. Finally, the Oldtown corridor is already strained. More traffic on New Hope means more danger for pedestrians, more accidents, and more emissions in residential streets. These impacts do not just stay in one neighborhood. They ripple outwards. For these reasons, I ask you to I urge you to deny Z1125 as proposed or require for stronger storm water canopy and traffic pro um protections. Thank you. >> Thank you. And then we had uh Ireina Shanton and Cameron Green as the final two. >> Good evening, city council. Thank you for the opportunity to speak. My name is Ireina Shanton and I'm a resident of Maybrook Forest. I oppose the 1125 reszoning because adding 175 apartments will worsen to major issue in our community. Flooding and traffic. This area is already prone to flooding and covering more land with concrete parking will only increase runoff and harm neighboring properties. On top of that, traffic at New Hope and Rocky is already heavily congested during rush hours. Even the city own analysis shown that additional apartments would add more trips um to this area and strain this intersection further. For the for this reason, I respectfully request that the resoning remain as originally designated under Z2219, which prohibits residential development and limits permitted uses to office medical and commercial purposes only. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Good evening, members of the council. My name is Cameron Green and I'm an attorney practicing in Raleigh with experience in real estate and land use. I also live in the oldtown neighborhood adjacent to this site. My issues with this proposal focuses on the compatibility of this proposal, the infrastructure capacity and the adequacy of the conditions off that have been offered to mitigate. I can tell you from personal experience that the that the New Hope and Rocky year >> Yeah, I know. If if you have written comments, you can put them in the basket and we can at least hear what you had to say if you if you have them. >> I'll just move on. >> Okay. >> All right. Thank you. Um I'll Any questions for >> Oh, yes. That's right. Right. We're going to keep it open. Okay. Any questions for anybody? >> No questions. Um I I will share that know I've spoke with Michael um attorney Michael Burch on this case um and expressed to him my concerns and oppositions to this case but I know they want time to meet with you all as well as meet um talk about the meeting with PEJ on conditions on another case we left that opportunity so I'm willing to hold this open and bring it back on January the 6 but in the evening um because we only have like four cases that day anyway. way. >> All right. Okay. Thanks everybody for being here. It is I know it is late so we appreciate you um staying to voice your concerns. Uh the next issue is Z2025 Brier Creek Town Center. Uh good evening. Matthew Clim, Planning and Development. This is a request to uh reszone about 38 acres. Uh the property is currently zoned with the plan development master plan district with the Shad 2 and airport overlay district. The requested zoning is a modification to the existing master plan and a removal of the airport overlay district uh maintaining the shod 2. The request is consistent with the 2030 comprehensive plan and the future land use map and your planning commission recommends approval 8 to zero. Uh so just a zoomed out site image uh of where we are in Brier Creek. You can see the intersection of uh 70 and 540 to the east. Uh much of the site uh in the resoning request is undeveloped um and it is adjacent to uh Brier Creek Shopping Center. The master plan creates three districts of the property. District C is the open space district. All that is allowed there is greenways uh and parks and open space uses. District A, the yellow color on the map uh is currently developed. Um, and so the changes we're discussing tonight are really about what can be built on uh, district B within the master plan. So that orange orange color you see on the map. So [clears throat] there's um, a lot of information on this slide. What I think I would like for you to take from it is the uh, farthest right column the remaining entitlement because district A on this map is currently developed. uh the overall entitlement is changing in the proposed zoning column, but the balances of what can be built minus what is built on column A, excuse me, in district A is in the right-h hand column. So, there's an increase of 360 units that can be newly built in the master plan. 250 hotel units uh and roughly 50,000 square feet split between either uh retail uses or um light industrial research R&D uses as well is outlined as a permitted use in the PD. Um the 186,000 square ft of non-residential use is um exclusive of the hotel unit use. uh and we made that calculation um assuming a 500 foot uh square foot hotel room. So when you create a planned a PD uh master plan district, you choose a base zoning district um to model off of and you can make adjustments to it. What they have chosen with this case is the community mixed use or CX district. You can see uh what uses would otherwise be permitted in CX that are uh prohibited. So uh the PD tracks A and B, these uses are prohibited. They would otherwise be permitted. The master plan removes them from um uh range of permitted uses on the site. So the site is currently mapped with a little purple sliver on this map of the airport overlay district. Um the master plan also requires uh three specific items related to what RDU um has communicated their their needs or desires are for development of the site. One is the recordation of a navigation easement for the property. Two is the requirement for sound level reduction or SLR for residential construction. And the third are subdivision requirements uh that tenants of a residential structure receive notice that you live in an airport that exper um you may experience loud noises as planes take off and land. Um, so I wanted to zoom out and show where this site was compared to the rest of the airport overlay district as well. You can see the round shape here is where the Brier Creek PD exists here. So it already exists as a quote unquote hole in the airport overlay district. There is that small vestigial sliver that they're requesting to remove as a part of this resoning request. In place of that they have those three stipulations um that have come from the RDU airport authority. The request is consistent with the regional mixeduse public parks and open space and uh office research and development um future land use map designations uh and frontage treatments outlined specifically in the plan development district are consistent with uh what the urban form map would recommend. Um again consistent overall with the planned urban form map, future land use map. Um a number of consistent policies as well cited here. Um housing variety, lodging, complimentary land uses and urban vitality. Um inconsistent policies. The removal of the airport overlay district. The policy itself doesn't state it's okay to remove the airport overlay district if you do A, B, and C. The applicants have done that. they have added those three conditions um in the case to um attempt to emulate what is otherwise allowed there. The airport overlay district does specifically prohibit residential use which is what they're looking to add to the re to the um permitted development range. Um and of course the uh zoning infrastructure impacts related to fire response times is inconsistent here as well. Uh planning commission recommends approval 8 to zero. um stating that the request would allow for a wider range of uses mix uh at the site. I'm happy to answer any questions for you. [clears throat and snorts] >> Questions for Mr. Clem? >> Yep. Council, >> um can we go back to the slide um that talks about the construction materials uh in uh coordination with the noise >> yet the sound level reduction? Can you tell me what that is? What are what are the requirements for residential construction? >> I will ask Jamie Schwedler to speak a little more specifically about that. She's the applicant, but my understanding is that it's um thicker insulation, thicker walls, thicker roofing, beefier construction materials that have like higher sound attenuating qualities so that the noise outside is less loud inside had they have built a thinner wall. >> Right. And that was that was um Yes. Um, I'm sorry. And that was added by the applicant because of the conversations with the I I guess I'll talk to the applicant about understanding, but yes. >> Okay. I'll I'll ask her more. Thank you. Actually, can she come up? Can we answer that? Can Can I ask? >> I mean, I can go ahead and open the uh >> hearing and then we can >> anybody you want to talk before we open the hearing? >> Yeah. Just quick question for staff. So, it's just this tiny purple part that's removing the airport at really district. Okay. And then to repeat my question from earlier from my own understanding the airport authority will still retain some authority related to like noise contouring or something. So they still have some ability to reject something that's proposed here. >> Correct. And these these notes here are related to what the applicant has um voluntarily offered they would do in addition to the airport's authority of uh review for certain height buildings based on how um what authority they're granted by the FAA basically. But yes, that that happens as well. [snorts] >> Right. I'll go ahead and open the hearing uh for the case if uh Jamie if you want to. Uh, good evening, Mayor Cow, members of council. I'm Jamie Schwedler, and I would love for Matt to answer all of my questions tonight. Uh, he did a great job in in answering the the noise attenuation. Um, I'm with Parker Poe at 301 Fateville Street, and I'm here on behalf of the applicant along with my colleague Ashley Terz's. Um, the applicant is also here to answer all of your questions. is David Jarrett with um the uh who owns the vacant land as well as our representatives from McAdams and Kimley Horn who are all available to answer your questions. The request before you is a very narrow modification to an existing PD that was approved over 20 years ago. And what we're seeking to do is to streamline that PD to modernize it and so that we can develop the remaining vacant parcels in ways that respond to today's markets and today's housing needs. Um, this is unique site between the Brier Creek Shopping Center there to the west shown in red and the Brier Creek Corporate Office Park to the east shown in blue. Um, the PD was originally zoned in 2008. It's been modified at least two times that of course was under your old type of PD with a lengthy list of conditions. It was amended in June of 2012 to remove the AOD on most of the assemblage to allow for the residential units that exist now today. So since that removal, both an apartment complex and a hotel have now been built. Um, as Matthew mentioned, um, and the that amendment also revised the mix of uses. Then it was amended in 2018 to set up lots A, B, and C, as Matt explained, um, and to further uh, edit the mix of uses. When that vote took place, it left that sliver for the AODD, which is only 2.5% of our land area. All of the other area has already been removed. And so we're just looking to clean up the request by removing that additional sliver which causes some additional design challenges as I'll go through in just a moment. Um the current PD is shown on the screen. This is the kind of previous uh PD that was approved in 2018. It broke the tracks up into A and B divided along that private street um going east to west. It set the development maximums. It set the height to 195 ft which is equivalent to today's 20s story zoning. It set up the pedestrian circulation, the build twos and things that uh the city encouraged and macaw street then and it encourages us to bring forward now. And so that's what we've done. We've brought forward um changes that really cluster around three areas but less of the balance of the PD the same. First, we're facilitating site plan review for the vacant track. So, as we mentioned, we've reconfigured tract A um in that kind of different shape because everything in track A has already been built out. the apartments to the north and Macau and the um the Western Hotel to the south. Track B remains undeveloped and we'd like to place both a new apartment um user there as well as a hotel user who would like to be have approval before the end of the year so that they can move forward with site plan in the beginning of next year. Um and to do that we need to make sure we clarify which uses and which uh obligations from the prior PD have already been satisfied and which ones still remain to be satisfied. And that's why we wanted to do this cleanup with the master plan. Um, we've revised the permitted uses. Matt did a great job explaining the changes. We're really only asking for a change in 24 new uh residential units that we haven't built out the remainder of the entitlement, but it's really just a net change of 24 units, as well as 186 new hotel rooms that we don't have the ability to do today. We're also aligning that with the um the removal of the office, which is not um is already kind of saturated out in that area. And to do that, we're aligning the transportation improvements to correlate with those new uses. This is a picture of the existing Katon at Brier Creek. It's 264 apartment units, four-story apartments. That is at 94% occupancy with no noise complaints. It was built with the same um type of noise attenuation materials we were talking about earlier. That was built in two uh 2023, and we're committing to those same materials being brought forward. In this case, this massing shows how the buildings would relate to Macau with our build to that we've carried forward. And you can see in that top right picture uh where we've got some of the the parking and buildings trying to pull them up to the road. That's where the sliver of the AOD comes into play. And so if we can't put a residential use in that area, it's difficult to also meet the build two requirements that the city likes to see with building the bringing the buildings closer to the road, making sure we're carrying through with the streetscape and pedestrian improvements. And so we talked a little bit about the layers of airport regulation. There's actually three different layers. The AOD is what the city of course has in terms of the zoning uh through the UDO and we're talking about removing that today. that just restricts the residential use that's in that overlay district. Um, but then we also have the Raleigh airport overlay district. It's its own code. I mean, excuse me, the that it prohibits the residential use. It talks about restrictive height regulations, but it also says that if it's removed, the airport authority um recommends zoning conditions with noise mitigation. That's not in your code, but that's what we've learned through our work with the airport and essentially they have to be opposed to this removal. It's part of their their principles. But if it's removed and if the council chooses to approve the case, then they wanted us to include those three conditions. Many of those conditions were already in the case, but they've been edited and updated. We share track changes with the airport authority. Uh they thanked us and responded and had then did not come to the planning commission committee of the whole the planning commission meeting um or uh signed up here tonight. So we appreciate their work on this case and their principled stance, but we've done all we can to accommodate um their requests. Those sound conditions, as I mentioned, are consistent with other cases and how that's been treated in this area. They're consistent with how the Katon was built out. And I think that rental history really shows that those conditions are working. And then addition, um, after this case is hopefully approved tonight, um, we move forward to site plan, we would have to submit a permit to the RDU, um, international height, zoning, and ordinance and FAA regulations permit process, which would then have that oversight as to whether we could build and how high we could build and where those buildings would be. Um so that that will remain in place. That's a highly regulated area and we would comply with that at site plan. Um those airport zoning conditions were kind of already discussed. The navigation easement, it just basically says anyone that takes title to this property understands there'll be planes flying over ahead and will not take action against the airport. Uh number two has those noise attenuation um building standards. Those are um supported by the airport or or put forth by the airport and didn't ask us to change those further. So we carry those forward um just like they were for the Katon. Um and then number three indicates any subsequent plat recorded after the approval of resoning should disclose the noise contour information. The noise contour information is maintained by the airport. They can choose to change that over time. And what this would do is require anyone that's recording a plat to confirm what that is, record it with the register of deeds, so any subsequent [clears throat] purchaser would be aware because this was approved prior prior to the 2013 comprehensive plan or UDO and then the comprehensive plan updates. Um, all of those zoning conditions of those two amendments I mentioned before were already in place. So, it's no surprise that this is consistent with the city growth center on the urban form map um and consistent with what the future land map um uh expects in this area because that zoning is was largely in place. It's consistent with the comprehensive plan, the future land use map, the urban form plan. We appreciate the planning commission support. We are happy to answer any questions in this case and appreciate your time. >> Right. Thank you. Uh questions. Yep. >> Thank you so much. Um, I just wanted to say that, uh, since we're talking about where we used to work, I used to work at the Jason's Deli right down the street over here. And, um, [laughter] this is definitely the place for development. So, I think this is a great case. I I know the Weston Hotel has been a welcomed addition as well as those apartments there. Um, I did want Thank you so much for the clarification on uh the sound. I forget what that's called, but making sure that with the in line with the airport. Um, I really think as we talk about noise and noise ordinances across the city, it's something we can learn from and we can say, "All right, how can we maybe these building materials are something we can incorporate?" So, I really appreciate you uh sharing that with us so that we can implement it in other areas of of our of the city. Um the LA another question that I do have uh selfishly is this is where the fireworks go off every July 4th and I was wondering are we going to are we going to not have fireworks now or I'm I'm hearing we're going to still try to have fireworks. We'll figure it out uh as as we go. >> It's my favorite place to go for fireworks. So um I'm just Please don't take that from us. [clears throat] Um but I I really do think this is a wonderful place to to add density. Uh this is a very one of the densest areas in the city and um and we welcome it in Brier Creek. So thank you for working with the airport to answer their concerns um and helping us educate uh council on how we can do better with sound mitigation throughout the city. Thank you. Thank you. >> Just one question. Um how many feet is the western? Do you know >> in terms of height? >> Yes. It's nine stories, but I'm not sure if we have a height. Uh, >> the reason why I asked the question is because I know you said you have to go before the airport in the FAA as far as whatever your height is, but I know the Western was limited >> um on its height and it capped out at 9. And where this partial is, it's actually more in line with the it's closer to the airport. So, that's why I saw the 20 stories. I know it's not going to be 20 stories, but I was wondering if if we had a more realistic number of what that height may be. >> We tried to so I I can confirm that it's not 20 stories. It's not exceeding to the one uh 95 and went through that process. We tried um our at our both of our neighborhood meetings, the airport was the only attendee. And so we followed up with them um and scheduled a call with their design staff to try to figure out could we could we narrow it down and get to that answer. Um, unfortunately for us to figure out what that height could end up being depends on finished floor elevations, architectural drawings, and we couldn't really get to any narrower point um, other than understanding what the FAA regs were and that we'd have to do to that site plan. Um, so I can I think we can confidently say it'll be less than obviously less than 20 stories, but between you know where that is and where that ends up is really up to the airport, >> right? So, but more more realistically, it'd be probably capped around 9 10 feet. More than likely to fall in line with the western >> nine or 10 stories. >> Stories. I'm sorry. Yeah, not feet. I mean, >> not um I think nine or 10 stories sounds realistic. I think what we're we're trying to do is just translate that 20 stories over from what was previously granted in in the existing PD, but knowing that we're going to probably end up closer to to that area given what the FAA has done before. >> Thank you. Other questions? Okay, I will close the hearing. Do we have a motion? >> Yes, I would love to make the motion for approval. I move to adopt the proposed consistency statement dated December 2nd, 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. >> Right, we have a motion and a second. All in favor of the motion I. >> All oppose, nay. And that is unanimous. Thank you'all. >> Thank you. >> All right. Next, we've got Z2825 Binham Walter. >> Yes, ma'am. This is a request on the west side of Sandifer just uh south of Rock Quarry. This is 3 acres going from R4 to R10 with conditions. Planning Commission recommends approval consistent with the comprehensive plan including the future lane use map. This is an aerial view of the site. You can see it's uh largely surrounded by other residential development. They have offered a condition that would prohibit some uses here. Uh some things around schools, telecommunication towers, outdoor sports, those sorts of things. Uh the change in entitlement here is an increase in uh residential units and also an addition of a building type. So adding apartments is an allowed use as a result of changing from the residential four to the residential 10 district. This is consistent with the future land use map. Uh furnages is not relevant to this request since there's a residential district. Again consistent with the comprehensive plan future land use map. Number of uh consistent policies here for your consideration. uh the response time standards here is triggering the zoning and infrastructure impacts policy as well. So we have an existing service concern uh for this property planning commission is recommending approval here. uh they think that increasing residential entit entitlement here makes sense. And then uh Commissioner Atwell uh voted against this uh feeling like the FTDO option, the FRA, excuse me, the frequent transit development option available to the um property owner would allow the density that they're seeking with the resoning. What questions could I answer for you before you open the hearing? questions? Seeing none, I will open the hearing for uh Z2825. We have Amy Kraut. >> Hey, good evening, mayor, council members. My name is Amy Kraut. I'm an attorney at Smith Anderson. I'm here on behalf of the applicant, Ivan Holloway, um on this resoning request. staff did a get pretty good job summarizing the request and it's getting late so I'm just going to highlight a couple of key points. Um overall we do believe that this resoning request is consistent with not only the surrounding area but you know the future land use map. It is a 3 acre property located near that intersection of Rock Corey and Sanderford. Um it's surrounded by a mix of zoning uses from R4 to RX3 conditional use to R10 to the north and there are some uh denser town homes across the street on Sanderford. In terms of the future land use map, it is low-scale residential which recommends a range of housing types which this um resoning would accomplish including small apartment buildings. And just want to note that it's located AC on the transit emphasis corridor and within a frequent transit area both which support kind of denser development here. Really what we want to know is this is a a local applicant. U Mr. Holloway has owned the property for years and and many of the neighbors know him. So he's really invested in making sure that any development of this property provides needed additional housing to the area. contemplating for sale um units here um while respecting the surrounding area and I know that's really important um to to those community members. But the purpose of R10 is really to allow that flexibility and development especially given the current market conditions. Overall, we think this is a great area for additional density. Um it's walkable with access to transit. You've got grocery stores, restaurants, libraries, all within a half mile walking distance, three city parks along with the Go Raleigh Builtmore Hills bus route. Um, you know, we note that it has a higher walk, bike, transit score, and job proximity area, too. So, we think it's a great area for just increasing the density a little bit. again consistent with urban form as it's in that frequent transit area that encourage is um additional density around kind of future frequent transit routes um and promoting pedestrian friendly and transit supportive development along these corridors. Um staff did find it consistent with a comprehensive plan as it allows more flexibility um for much needed housing. We're happy to answer any questions that you have. Otherwise, we ask that you grant this request. Thank you. >> Thank you. Questions for Miss Kraut? >> No questions. I think we're all talking about where we live and I grew up on Santa Road. So, um >> Did you work there? [laughter] >> No, I grew up on Santa Road and [clears throat] I worked in that yard and I cut some grass. So, I I had a child labor laws. [laughter] So, um and I know Mr. Holloway, we we've talked. Um I just have a question for Mr. Holloway. Do you have anything you would like to say or speak to as far as the project? >> See, >> I just appreciate the um time and I'm looking forward to putting a quality product there and um I'm hoping to live there myself one day. >> All right. So, the appropriate time I think there's a question from a council member. >> Yep. Um just one um I'm just curious why not use the FTDO option and of save all this time and money. Sure. Um so a couple of things I think one of the contemplated uses here is town homes and there's the kind of issue with the UDO in terms of lot width and side sizes with that note. Um so that's you know really one of the options. Also they're looking for some for sale units here. So, >> and you're saying the FTDO is not supportive of for sale >> and it's not supportive of town homes currently. >> Yeah, the lot size requirements are larger than for this >> fix. Yep. >> Which is why the commissioner voted against that planning commission, too. Thanks. >> Okay, I will close the hearing as there's no one in opposition. Do you have a motion? >> Um, yes, I do. And I want to thank Mr. Holloway and I look forward to watching this um progress along the way for the entire community. So I move to adopt post consistency statement dated December 2nd, 2025 contained in the agenda materials and to approve the zoning amendment with the adoption and effective dates described in the agenda items under recommended action. >> Second. >> So we have a motion and a second. All in favor? I. >> All opposed. That is unanimous. Thank you all. Next, uh, we have petition annexation AX25 on Hodgej Road. Yes. Good evening, Hannah Reau, Planning and Development. Yes. So, this item AX 2525 and the item after that Z3025 go together. They are for the same site that is outside of the ETJ. So, I'll provide a joint presentation um for both of those requests and you can proceed with the two hearings after that. So AX2525 uh is a request to annex 2816 Hodge Road currently in Wake County outside uh the city's ETJ but it is contiguous with uh city limits currently has Wake County zoning R30 um and an associated resoning request as I mentioned um neither water nor sewer are currently available on the site uh and it is outside the standard uh NFPA response times for a full fire response. Uh [clears throat] look at the site location. You can see it's along Hodgej Road. Um currently one detached house on the site. This puts it in context with existing city limits. That darker gray is uh city of Raleigh limits. Um you see here uh east of Noose River is a plan development that was approved uh two years ago. the banks 20 development. Zooming out even farther, you can see this where the star is. That's uh the location of this site within the annexation eligibility boundary. Uh utility location, you can see uh closest is to the north along Pool Road. And then current zoning, as I mentioned, that plan development that was approved in 2023, uh encircles it on three sides. future land use map in this area, a rural residential. Um, no flood plane on the property. Um, and then some views of that site from Hodge Road. The reasoning request is Z3025. It is a request to reszone from the county R30 uh district to Raleigh zoning which would be uh residential 10 conditional use. This area is currently agricultural some residential as I mentioned there is that plan development with a considerable amount of residential planned for the area. There's one proposed zoning condition which would prohibit or sorry um permit only the open lot building type on the site. So that does to the entitlement is really primarily like it sounds open space parking roads. >> Okay. >> Um request is consistent with the comprehensive plan including the future land use map designation. Remember that's rural residential. with that condition for just open lot it makes R10 which would normally not be consistent with rural residential consistent in this case. Uh some consistent policies um for this request and then inconsistent policies. These are touching on the fire service concern and then just the acknowledgement that this is uh the condition would condition out housing on the site. Planning commission recommended approval unanimously. And with that I'm happy to answer questions you have. Great questions. >> Just one, I know you mentioned the fire piece. Um I just want to make sure I'm I'm correct in this. During the um plan, development resoning, they dedicated land for a potential fire station possibly. Is that correct? >> Yes, that's right. The the Hodge uh road PD did identify a site for a fire service for fire station. >> All right. Thank you. That's all I have. >> Any other questions? All right. If not, I will um open the hearing for the uh annexation and we have uh Molly Stewart here. >> Thank you. Good evening. I do just have a single presentation tonight. Did you want to hear that? >> Sure. >> During this sanation discussion, okay, terrific. Molly Stewart, Morning Star Law Group, here on behalf of the applicant, Homes. I do have with me this evening Kippy Pvoseneck from Homes. Um, this will be very quick. I saw some confused faces and I can explain. Uh, so, so here's the site. Um, as as Hannah noted, surrounded on three sides by the bank's 20 plan development. Uh, that planned development uh is is entitled for uh more than 4,500 homes across all the different housing types that are permitted here, including multif family, town homes, and single family homes, as well as uh up to 20,000 ft of commercial use as well. Um this is the purpose of the resoning today. Um why it's not actually proposed to be brought into the plan development but um to make the road planning uh make more sense and not to have to jog around this parcel but more importantly to uh complete the streetscape along Hodgej Road. Otherwise there would be a gap here where it would comply with county standards. Um so it would be helpful for the overall site plan to simply bring this in um without greatly affecting um the overall plan. Um, so this this is two acres. Uh, the surrounding PD is um approximately 530 acres and we're available for questions. Thank you. >> Great. Thank you. Questions from the Steuart. Yep. No. All right. Well, let me go ahead and then um close the hearing on AX2525 and then I can open reszoning Z3025. Again, we've already seen the presentation from uh Miss Stewart and I will close that. Uh do we have a motion? >> So first motion is to approve the annexation of um annexation AX >> 25 >> 2525 second. >> All right. Any other discussion? All in favor of the motion? I >> I. >> All oppose? Nay. And that is unanimous. Um secondly, um I move to adopt the proposed consistency statement dated December 2nd, 2025 contained in the agenda materials and to approve the zoning amendment with the adoption and effective dates described in the agenda items under recommended action. >> Second. >> All in favor [snorts] of the motion? I >> I. >> All oppose? Nay. And that is unanimous. Thank you. >> Okay. We now have resoning TCZ 3225 and we have Mr. Clem from planning and development. [snorts] >> All right. [clears throat] Thank you, Madame Mayor. So, this is a request to amend zoning conditions uh for a site containing uh several properties uh along several streets here um on the west side of Creedmore Road and Jeffrey's Grove School Road. Uh the request is consistent with the future land use map and consistent with the plan overall. Planning commission recommends approval 10 to zero. Uh bit of context um largely residential development in the area, some institutional and office uses uh the school of course um Creedmore Road Baptist Church. The really the point of this case is to remove condition number two which limits building height to two stories and 35 ft. Removing that condition allows development to gain an additional 10 feet of height and one story. So the base zoning requirements for residential 10 um is three stories 45 ft. So the request is essentially adding 10 stories of building height to what can be built there currently. Um that being said there is no increase in entitlement or setbacks uh to change uh consistent with your plan. um a number of uh consistent policies. No inconsistent policies as the uses are permitted. It's simply a 10-ft increase in building height and your planning commission recommends approval 10 to zero. >> Great. Thank you. Uh questions for Mr. Clim. Hearing none, I will open the hearing uh for TZ TCZ 3225. There is no one signed up and I will close it. Uh [clears throat] well, first I move to adopt the proposed consistency statement dated December 2nd, 2025 contain the agenda materials and to approve the zoning amendment, sorry, to approve the adoption of zoning amendment adoption of the effective dates described in the agenda under recommended action. >> Second. >> All right. All in favor of the motion? I >> I. >> All oppose? Nay. And that motion passes. All right. We have uh text change TC324, Historic Preservation and Raleigh Historic Development Commission. Justin Rametta. Good evening, Mayor and Council. Justin Romea with Planning and Development. Uh this is TC 324. Uh just as a bit of background, uh this was authorized back in March of 2024. uh has received a unanimous uh recommendation for approval by the planning commission's text change committee and the full commission uh in October. This is a a slate of changes primarily um intended to align the UDO with with state law. Um current practices is aligned with state law, but the UDO is uh um somewhat out of alignment. So this text change would um bring the UDO into conformance with state law. Uh there are also some procedural changes that uh are intended to streamline those processes. Just a few examples uh of the changes uh for COAs clarifying who can apply just changing the definition of um who can be an applicant uh to align with um 160D. [snorts] uh adding the list of um eligible minor work COAs, so those are approved by uh staff. U putting that list into the UDO. Uh updating noticing requirements for landmark designations. Uh revising some language related to um building height and setback. Um just cleaning up some conflicts between uh which one is more restrictive. um and documenting the authority of the COA committee within the RHDC. Few other notable changes are removing the joint public hearing. So, there'll no longer be joint public hearings for historic landmark designations. City council and RTC will each hold um individual public hearings. Uh changed to make the uh uh the graphic diagram for the HODS, the street side HOD. um hopefully clear and uh easier to understand. Um adding again the list of minor work uh into the UDO while also um adding more work types to that list. Uh and then just general reorganization to match um current practice um for the landmark designations. Happy happy to answer any questions you might have. All right, questions. Is there a motion? Sorry, one question. >> Yep. >> Um, >> hi Justin. Thanks for this. Um, we did get some late breaking community questions and there we were somewhat technical, so I'm not going to try to replicate them here, but I think the the broad sentiment was like, do will these changes make it easier or more difficult to to preserve and take care of old buildings? So, in broadstrokes, easier, harder, the same as it is today. I think the the main thing it does is um makes the process for approving those changes entirely legal, right? So um >> you like that? >> Yeah. [laughter] >> So hard harder or easier is is um difficult to parse out like on a broad citywide scale. You got a phone. I think she >> Oh, Miss Tully will >> hopefully explain it better than I can. [laughter] >> It's okay. Um, largely the processes aren't changing. I think what does become easier is the addition of more work items to the minor work list. So, uh, more items that are approvable administratively by staff as opposed to having go to the COA committee for review at a quasi judicial evidentiary hearing. >> Okay. So, a lower barrier to entry for a person who may want to do the pres the preserving. >> Yes. >> Okay, great. We'd love to see it. Um, I'm having a motion for approval at the appropriate time. Are you >> uh Yep. I guess I need Did I hear I don't even know whether >> Okay, >> we'll open it. I will close it now. >> Oh, I don't have a question. Okay. I move to adopt the proposed consistency statement dated December 2nd, 2025 contained in the agenda materials and approve the zoning text amendment. Second. >> All right. All in favor of the motion? I >> all oppose. Nay. Eyes have it. And we are adjourned. >> The motion second. [music] >> [music]