Mhm. >> Mhm. >> Mhm. >> You need a gown. Yes, that's right. Bang, bang, bang. Good evening. Uh I'd like to call to order this March 23rd zoning meeting of the Charlotte City Council. My name is Ed Driggs. I am the District 7 member of City Council and I chair the uh Planning Transportation Development Committee and in that capacity, I will be sitting here tonight. Uh we start our meetings with introductions and we'll begin with the clerk. Darlene Kelly, Deputy City Clerk. Teresa Aguilar Gray, Senior Assistant City Attorney. Good evening, Dimple Ajmera, at-large member. Good evening, Dr. Victoria Watlington. I have the pleasure of serving you as a member at large. Uh good evening, Joy Mel, representing District 3. Good evening, Dante Anderson, District 1. Alison Craig, Deputy City Manager. Oh. I'm sorry, you're turn. Good evening, everyone. James Mitchell, Mayor Pro Tem. I'm sorry. Good evening, Kimberly Owens. I represent District 6. Malcolm Graham, District 2. Good evening, LaWana Mayfield, Council member at large. Good evening, JD McCray, proudly representing the East Side, District 5. Thank you. We will begin our meeting with an invocation, expressions and inspiration, followed by the pledge of allegiance. The invocation by the council member is intended to solemnize our proceedings. We celebrate the religious diversity of our community, including those without a religious faith. Tonight, it is my turn to deliver the invocation. So, I hope you will join me for a moment of reflection. Heavenly Father, accept our thanks for this day and all its blessings. We ask that you guide and direct our efforts to serve our community and everyone who lives in it. Grant that each of us may be just and fair and act as good stewards of the trust that our citizens have placed in us. Bless those who work with us to serve our community, particularly those who do so at grave personal risk to themselves. May Charlotte always be a place that we all can be proud to call home. Amen. Amen. Stand for the pledge. Stand for the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> [clears throat] >> So, we have a couple of events tonight that are not within the normal sequence of our meeting. So, the next the first item is going to be a public hearing on community area plans and in particular, this is a hearing on changes to the adopted the seven adopted plans that are indicated by the work that was done on these seven plans that have not yet been adopted. And the intention is that we will modify the adopted plans to conform them to the plans that we will adopt. Because there's a hearing tonight, we're not actually going to vote on that tonight. Uh we will listen to what is said at the hearing and our intention will be to vote on the 13th of April. So, do we have speakers signed up? Yes. All right. So, uh Here we go. We've got both those and these right? And uh Yes, Ms. Holmes, is she going to speak to this? Just before the speakers, I was just going to give you a brief overview. Um as you are well aware, since the deferral on the 24th of November and our engagement that followed that, uh the there have been a recommendation of several new policies that touch on neighborhood change. So, how we deal with development in existing neighborhoods and how we preserve neighborhood character. Uh policies also that speak to environmental impacts. So, uh specifically around adjacent uses and how we uh are context sensitive to those adjacent uses. Uh and then a third category, infrastructure and how we take into account um our growth with our infrastructure. Uh we also have minor additions and revisions that just clarify language and then several map changes across uh several of the area plans. Uh so, with that, uh we can go into the hearing. I was just going to give you that brief overview before we delve into the speakers. All right. So, that was basically the staff presentation and therefore we can proceed to the speakers. We have uh six speakers signed up and a couple of those are against and therefore uh in this case, the speakers in favor have 10 minutes. to speakers in opposition have 10. All Or how do we work this out? They each speaker each I'm sorry, each speaker should get 3 minutes. Oh, okay. Uh Hm, okay. Even though we have uh speakers in opposition. But this is not because this is not technically a zoning um >> Uh right. All right. So, then I guess what we'll do is we will hear from the speakers for and then from the speakers against. Or do we just take them in order? In the order they signed up. >> Right. It doesn't matter. All right. So, I have uh Erin Oliverio Oliverio and uh Stephanie Lasney. Are they here? Yep. Yes. Is Oliverio Hi. That's me. Hi, I'm Erin Oliverio. Um I just have really quick comments. Um I live in the Mountain Island Lake area and I just wanted to come up here and let you all know how awesome the planning NCDOT staff was with our uh community alliance. They spent an incredible amount of time with [clears throat] us going over the plan, explaining all of the appendices and how everything would work together. So, I just sort of want to acknowledge them. Monica, um Kathy Cornett, Catherine Mahoney, and uh Travis Miller with C-DOT. And they were excellent and we are very happy with the amendments and things that came out of that and the things that are important for our area. So, I just wanted to call them out by name and say thank you for to them for doing that. That's great to hear. Thank you. Ms. Lasney, is that right? Close enough. Okay, thank you. All right. Good evening, everybody. My name is Stephanie Lassey. I represent the Stillwater Acres neighborhood. Um I come before you once again this evening to ask for your help in saving Stillwater Acres. Um I'm here to speak tonight to ask you I'm very pleased to hear that uh the decision was made to defer the decision to adopt the remaining community area plans until April 13th. Um I believe that there is more work to do and specifically on the West Outer. Um I do want to echo what uh Erin said a moment ago uh regarding the Charlotte Planning Committee. They have been a fantastic organization to work with. Um great partners and um but at the same time I do believe that there is some more work that needs to be done. Um with the amended policies that are set to be adopted within this, um I very much agree with those. I think that the the policies to amend um the uh impact of manufacturing and logistics next to existing neighborhoods, I think those policies are fantastic and are very much needed in a lot of areas in Charlotte. However, the issue that my community has with the West Outer plan is that it states that, you know, manufacturing and logistics is part of this community area plan and is right across the street from our neighborhood. We just went through this with the Foundry project with the Steel Creek Presbyterian Church properties. Um so, on one hand we're stating that we've learned our lesson and we recognize what's happened in Stillwater Acres and that manufacturing and logistics is not ideal next to residential. Yet we stand here before you tonight set to doom those same mistakes again. We are about to repeat history. And, you know, when we meet with the Charlotte Planning Committee, um again fantastic people, but, you know, it's what we are adopting into policy. That's what's in writing. So, it doesn't matter what anyone's intentions are or what we say our goal is or what we say we're going to do down the road. What's in black and white is what matters at the end of the day. And as you all know, this is going to be the footprint that's going to help you make future zoning decisions. So, it's very important that we get this right. The residents should have a voice in this process. We have been advocating for this. You guys have seen me up here countless times advocating for Stillwater Acres saying we do not want manufacturing and logistics. We are not against development by any means. Um we think the way that the rezoning petition 134 was handled was very fairly. We think that that was a very good compromise that we're moving forward with one area and not with the other area that doesn't have the specific plan. That completely makes sense. What I'm asking for and what I'm advocating for is to protect the future of our neighborhood. IMU is a much better use, a much better future use or commercial place type instead of manufacturing and logistics. Thank you. Was that my time, Mr. Chair? >> [laughter] >> You landed that one perfectly. Well done. So, our next speakers are Ernest Smith and Kelly Pleasure. Thank you. >> [clears throat] >> Good evening, mayor and council members and planning staff. My name is Ernest Smith. Um I come to you tonight before uh as a real estate professional. Uh I'm not here uh just only to oppose, but uh to really advocate for the communities and families and my family along with our the long-term integrity of the growing city of Charlotte, North Carolina. So, as the uh West Outer Community Area Plan uh is currently mapped, it sets as a dangerous precedence. Uh it's a process of extended vision of South Charlotte and Douglas Airport uh that uh transforms established residential communities into a manufacturing logistics corridor. Newer areas like Berewick and established areas like Stillwater Acres, places where families are starting and or have built their lives are now facing very possibilities of being surrounded or worse, replaced by massive warehouse developments. And here's the issue. This directly contradicts what have already been learned. During the Southwest Middle CAP process, the city acknowledged the lessons learned. Those lessons were clear. When manufacturing logistics developments in or near residential communities, the intensity must be reduced. That means moving away from the most aggressive designation, the ML2. And instead using more compatible place types like innovation mixed use or ML1. [snorts] But today those lessons are not being applied. Instead, the West Outer CAP leans on vague green space recommendations and undefined critical areas to justify placing high intensity ML2 zoning right next to neighborhoods. And rather uh establishing clear policies, responsibility, and being pushed down the line to further rezoning decisions where history shows us protections do not hold. Let's talk about the history. In 2020, despite over 1,000 petition signatures, despite being located in both a Lake Norman or Lake Wylie uh protected area and critical area, a major industrial rezoning tied to the Keith Corporation was approved. The very safeguards we're now being asked to trust were ignored then. And there is no reason for residents to believe that they won't be ignored again. That's not planning. That's gambling and with people's houses. We are not against the growth. I've been blessed to call Charlotte home for over 25 years. We are not against economic development, but growth without consistency, without accountability, and without respect for the people already living here is not progress. We are asking for one simple thing, consistency. If lessons were learned, then apply them. Codify them. Ensure the communities like Berewick and like Stillwater Acres are protected through policy, not left vulnerable or interpretations during rezoning battles. Because one uh once the rezonings changes, once warehouses come, the character of those neighborhoods are gone and there is no reversing it. Nicely done. Thank you, sir. >> [applause] >> Hello. My name is Kelly Pleasure and I, like Erin, am from the Mountain Island Lake community in Northwest Charlotte. Our community spans a couple different maps on the 2040 Community Area Plans and are part of why some of the votes were delayed so that more communication and input could occur. I'm here tonight to thank you for that extra time. Our community alliance, after being made aware of the plans in December, took time to review this information, which was a lot to take in, um and pulled together questions and concerns for the planning group. The planning group not only came to a Saturday morning Councilwoman Mayfield Town Hall in our area, but they also hosted a follow-up meeting to make sure that they understood our concerns and then we understood what could and could not be part of these plans. We did not get every concern addressed in the CAP, but our lengthy document of questions was responded to with an equally detailed response that reflected the amount of effort we put in and that is a good thing. As happens every time we sit down with staff, we better understand the complexities of Council's decisions that need to be made and the tools, both in place and in progress, to enhance those decisions and this was no different. We see the Community Area Plans as something that absolutely will impact rezonings, which our area has and is continuing to see many of, but we also see that the CAPs are not the only tool. I remember hearing a comment in January's meeting about the newly approved CAPs for an area that already were having rezonings that didn't quite fit the CAP. And I can understand how that can be frustrating, but in our meeting we learned about that root the rubric that zonings are put in when they don't quite fit the cap. And truly they do look at many factors to determine what is best for an area. We also learned about the activity center inventories that are in progress now to also let Council know whether an activity center that hopefully is only 10 minutes away um is established or in progress or a decline. Just more information to make important decisions. And through it all we also saw what we've also often seen recently that by working together constructively with residents of the community every plan, tool, and decision can be better for all. We feel that in the cap that this has occurred in the extra time given and the community area plans that touch our community are not the only tool that Council can use in making important decisions, but ours is a better tool given the resident input over the past months. So, thank you. Thank you. Our final two speakers are Sam Spencer and Barbara Falcone or Falconi Falcone. Well, uh Council staff um thank you so much for the opportunity to speak with you tonight. I want to tell a story of people looking at Charlotte from the outside in. Um 15 years ago um we had a major Hollywood crew come to the city of Charlotte um to film one of the biggest productions in our city's history for Homeland on HBO or on on Showtime. And you know, when they came and they did this filming um where did they look for places that they wanted to to capture character where they wanted to set the show. Um most of the protagonists and their friends and family well, they ended up living in Elizabeth. And if you look at one of the homes, I'm just going to take one example uh for one of the characters that was used on the show. Um that house in Elizabeth was $355,000 when it sold in 2002. Now it's worth $1.3 million. It's worth a million dollars more. Um because when we look at a neighborhood like Elizabeth, we see character. Uh but what you may not know is this house is right next to a quad. It's right next to a quadruplex. And the quad in no way affected the value of the home increasing a million dollars over 20 years. Um it didn't take away from the character. It didn't mean that you know, people didn't want to portray Elizabeth as a desirable neighborhood. And I think that's important to remember in the context of this discussion that we're having about community area plans, specifically the amendments to manage neighborhood change and ensure infrastructure can support growth. We want to make sure that everybody has a place to live in Charlotte. And personally as somebody who is very heavily involved in the creation of the 2040 Charlotte Future Comprehensive Plan I think it's myopic to go against what reams of data are telling us that we need more supply to be able to lower prices. All of us in this room at one point or another has talked about how important affordability is to us. That we've talked about how important it is that everybody has a place that they can afford to live. We [clears throat] know how bad the affordability challenge is. And if we tie our hands in these community area plans to make it so that we can't have more housing stock and more affordability for our residents I don't think that that is doing our residents and our friends and our neighbors a service. Remember this plan is couched in equity and it's couched in the idea that everybody in Charlotte deserves and can have a place to live. I hope you'll consider that when considering these amendments to the community area plans. Boy, these guys are good. Uh This Falcone. Did go. Sorry, I have never done this before. Um hi, I'm Barbara Falcone. I'm also with the Save the Steelberry Association. I would like to firstly thank you all for hearing us out. You've been very um accommodating with differing and making sure we're able to read and interpret these plans, especially our newest representative Joy Mayo. I'm very happy with her quick action with the airport and making sure that they are very clear with their plans and what they're planning on going forward. Um Stephanie did a great job of expressing basically the legality and the expectation of the caps program and what we want from it. So, I just kind of wanted to speak more so about how it affects our community with the mistakes that they've kind of made so far. Um we have a very elderly member of our community who used to actually walk the back way to the Presbyterian church and visit his past wife in the cemetery, which he is no longer able to do thanks to the foundry's [clears throat] creation. He has to walk along the side of the road and almost get hit by traffic if he wants to go visit her and he used to do this on a daily basis. So, unfortunately that thing has affected one [clears throat] member of our community and all the other things that have occurred as far as like cutting the entire tree line so that the only thing we see is the backside of a giant gray building. Things like that we want to make sure that people are more So communicative and more thoughtful about these sorts of things as they move forward with the rezoning. Again, with manufacturing logistics they don't have to really care so much about these sorts of things, the beautification of an area and what they take away from it when they mow down acres and acres of land with a vague idea of what they might do with it. So, I again want to thank um the postponement of the area B uh rezoning so that you know, there's time to actually figure out what they want to do and maybe it's not manufacturing logistics, maybe it can be IMU or something more commercially beneficial to our community rather than being something of an eyesore as we are being surrounded daily and not even mention what would happen to the 160 road if they don't plan on actually taking the time to expand it themselves, which they probably won't cuz if you don't require it, they're not going to. And it's already a nightmare at leaving our neighborhood at 5:00 with what they've already done construction wise and I can't imagine it would get any better. So, I want to thank you all for taking the time to slow this process and make sure that we are hearing everything that's being planned as we go forward. So, that's my time. Thank you. Thank you. And Madam Clerk, that's our last speaker. Yes? Okay. So, as I alluded to before subject to a vote uh little later in this meeting we will be deferring uh Yes, I'm sorry. Uh I was just going to make that comment. Uh we we will be deferring the vote on uh both the adoption of the new plans and the changes to the existing plans on the 13th. Now, I have Ms. Mayfield. I move to defer the decision to adopt the seven proposed Charlotte Future 2040 Community Area Plans and revised policy map for East, Middle, and Outer, North Inner, North Middle >> Council member Mayfield, before you read all that, let's make sure we close the public hearing. Move the public hearing be closed. >> Second. Ms. Mayfield, we have Yes, let's conclude the vote. All in favor? My policy, sir. All right. And in fact, agenda item number five is the one in respect of which we're deferring. So, that might be a good time to do it or we can >> So, do you want to want to wait until we get to the item? The item. We can go straight there? Yeah, you can Yeah, I think I think it's fine if you'd like to go ahead and make the motion now. Because we just had the hearing. Yeah, that makes sense to me. So, just so we're clear, we're talking about the agenda item number five which refers to uh the adoption of the plans and we're making this change because in November we committed no later than this meeting to uh act like to adopt or to take action. So, uh we are now basically modifying the commitment we made in November. Ms. Mayfield. Thank you, Council member James. I move to defer the decision to adopt the seven proposed Charlotte Future 2040 Community Area Plans and revised policy map for East, Middle, and Outer, North Inner, North Middle and Outer, Northeast Middle and Outer, West Inner, West Middle, West Outer, and amend the seven adopted Charlotte Future 2040 Community Area Plans and revised policy map for East Inner, Northeast Inner, South Inner, South Middle, South Outer, Southwest Middle, and Southwest Outer until the April 23rd, 2026 Council meeting. Do I have a second? Second. Okay, any discussion? 13th. Point of clarity. Is it the 13th or the 23rd? 13th. 13th. April 13th. Yes, 13th. Hope I didn't misspeak there. If there is no discussion, all in favor? Okay, any opposed? Doesn't look like it. All right. Thank you. So uh we now have an unusual event in a zoning meeting that the next item is actually for Council to go into closed session. And do we have a statement uh Not close session. You had another one? Yes, you did. Can we just Can we do zoning first? No, we moved that to the end so that we can actually get through the work of the committee since we made them wait. Ms. Mayfield, Ms. Mayfield, for for reasons that are difficult to go into detail, we kind of need to do it now as a result of another meeting that's also taking place. So uh uh I I realize it's irregular. But um uh maybe you could read the >> Yeah, this is Yeah, it's on the agenda um for you to go into close session now. The um motion would be to go into close session pursuant to North Carolina General Statute 143-318.11A4 to discuss matters relating to the location or expansion of industries or other businesses in the area served by the public body, including agreement on a tentative list of economic development incentives that may be offered by the public body in negotiations. Do I have a motion? So moved. Um okay, we have a motion. Uh I I'm sensing a revolt here. Yeah, yeah, you have one. And you don't want to do it right now. Yeah. I just Um But I need to understand Why Why would we do it now? Can I make a motion that we continue? Yeah, go ahead. But there's no second, so you can make a motion. >> There's no second, so it's over. So you can make a motion to Yeah, I make a motion to continue to the rezoning so that we can serve our constituents. >> Second. We will do the close session after we finish rezoning. Second. All those in favor? All right, I think I >> [laughter] [laughter] >> I have by acclamation a move to deny the motion. So moved. All in favor? I. Okay, we're not going into close session. All right. Um and therefore we will move on to our business item on the agenda tonight, which is agenda item four. That's right. And this is the BoPlex improvement project. So uh do I have a motion to approve up to $25 million in capital improvements for the BoPlex Entertainment Complex and B, adopt a budget ordinance appropriating $25 million in proceeds from installment financing in the tour tourism tax fund for BoPlex Entertainment Complex, and C, authorize the city manager to negotiate and execute contracts associated with this. >> All right, any discussion? Sir. Uh Thank you, Mr. Driggs, and I just want to say thank you to CRVA. I think we have Steven Bagwell here. Steve, thank you. And for the workforce development committee, Dr. Watlington, Council Member JD, Council Member Anderson, and Council Member Mayfield. Um and to our DCM, Ms. Craig, thank you so very nice for putting this on the agenda very quickly. This was an emergency request that we knew we had to get we had to complete. And so I'd like to thank it came out of committee 5-0, and we just recommended the full council will support this uh item that we need to get approved today. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Mr. Driggs. Uh great job to the committee for expediting this request. I just want to make sure that as an accountant, the funding source is is not property tax. The funding source is tourism, which cannot be used for safety, housing, or infrastructure. So this funding source, tourism fund, has to be used to attract more tourism. So I just want to make sure that we clarify that. Uh and I think this is a very critical investment because it's embarrassing to have roof leaking in one of our own facilities while the game is playing or while the game is being played. So this is definitely a basic, very basic, critical investment that we need to make to ensure that our facility is safe, not just for our visitors, but also our residents. That's all. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Anderson. Thank you, Mr. Driggs. Um I just want to say thank you to the committee and the entire council for uh supporting this action. We already know we have to go through again the history of the BoPlex and what it's meant meant to the city. Uh they they're really operating on uh electrical tape and some some soldering here with HVAC systems that um are 70-plus years old, sometimes 50-plus years old. And so this is an investment um as my colleague just said, utilizing tourism dollars to then double down and invest in tourism that will bring more more people here to the city to spend money in our in our restaurants and spend nights in our hotels and have and spend money having experiences. So I absolutely support it. And of course it's in District 1, but I absolutely support this. I think it's a wise investment. Thank you. Thank you. I have Ms. Mayfield. Thank you. Council Member Driggs, I would just want to >> [snorts] >> add on to the comments of my colleague to encourage and remind the community where these dollars are coming from. But also, I think what's very important for the community to understand is the impact of BoPlex. We all think about when we love to travel, the places that we want to go to when we travel for a weekend getaway or for family vacation, family reunion. Just for fiscal fiscal year 2025, BoPlex had a 73% increase. What does that look like? 60 60 .8 million dollars in events, concerts, entertainment, sports. So when we have the number of individuals that we have walking through this facility, these are investments that honestly we probably needed to do a number of years ago, but the team through CRVA, they really tried to keep things together. So we can only duct tape it so much. So now is an investment that's going to continue the life as we continue to grow. I am personally happy that we have the Charlotte Crown, so we have women's basketball coming back to Charlotte, and that is going to be their home. But we have hockey, we have concerts, we have plays, we have comedy shows. It was a comedy show, I believe, just last night. So to support this one when you community hear me say no to quite a few things, the whole purpose of the hospitality and tourism fund is to invest in show how we as a community want to be seen by those that come to our community. And the first way to do that is when they when you walk into our facilities, you need to know that you're walking in a Charlotte and remember that. So I'm happy that we were able as committee, thanks to my chair of the committee, that we were able to have this conversation move it forward to full council. Thank you, Mr. Graham. Thank you. I'm Council Member Driggs. Our sports and entertainment continues to be in the the DNA of the city. Travel and tourism certainly is a big driver for that, and this council has made a number of investments from the tourism fund over the last year and a half, whether it was uh Bank of America Stadium, our investment in the Spectrum Center, and the practice facility, our ongoing support at the convention center itself, and certainly Bojangles Complex is one of those things that really brings a lot of visitors to our cities, uh helps support all our frontline workers. And I'm very supportive of the action that we're taking uh tonight. Um but I think they probably need to come back for more. Uh I had the opportunity really to um go into the guts of the building uh when a corporate um client was in town looking at the facility. And while we do need to do the mechanicals of the building, the back of the house also needs help as well. Um where entertainers come and their dressing rooms, the the restrooms, storage facilities. There's only one access point for tractor trailers when shows are coming loading into the building. So I I would suspect a year or two from now that we will be having another conversation about um um BoPlex because it's really really needed. The building is under constant use from visitors coming to our our our city. Um and as we get ready to host events like the Military Games uh or other events where that building will be a primary building in addition to the Spectrum Center, it really needs the type of TLC that we're giving it tonight, but also taking a look at some of the um customer-facing entertainment, artist-facing areas of the building that probably need some help as well. So I'm happy to support it tonight, and if I'm here 2 years from now, well, I would probably support another investment in the facility because it's it's very much needed. Thank you. Thank you. Dr. Watlington. >> [clears throat] >> Thank you, sir. I won't belabor the point, but it is critical that we continue investing in tourism as uh Charlotte continues to build [clears throat] our regional and hopefully national reputation as a destination for tourists. It's not just about the ticket sales. We understand that it's about the jobs, it's about our arts and entertainment culture, it's about small business growth. Um and so I look forward to supporting tonight, and I look forward to cheering the Charlotte crown on in their inaugural season. Thank you, [snorts] Mr. Maswera Arias. Thank you, uh Mr. Driggs. >> [clears throat] >> Uh I'm very supportive of this and I want to give a shout out to CRVA and Steve Bagwell who's in the audience right there uh for the incredible work that you've done to keep this facility up and going despite the outdated uh HVAC units um as well as making sure that our checkers have uh good ice to play on even though when sometimes that's really hard to >> do that. Um and also just like the cultural moment and significance of this is one of the only biggest venues in a black and surrounding black and brown communities, right? And they have access to this. And I was also is very personal to me cuz I graduated from BoPlex. Go East Meck. Um so it just we need to do this investment to make sure that we attract um more visitors as well as providing more amenities to folks um in this area. So if there's no further comment, all in favor? >> [snorts] >> It's unanimous. Excellent. So um we already voted to defer the item that is uh item five on our agenda and therefore I will now explain the zoning process. Uh the process begins with applications submitted to planning staff for review. Cases of two types are on the agenda, decisions and hearings. Decisions on cases for which a public hearing was previously held with no further comment. Hearings, anyone wishing to speak is asked to see the clerk before the start of the hearing and there will be a staff presentation uh following [snorts] which petitioner and those in favor get 3 minutes combined to present their case unless their opponent signed to speak up or if staff is in opposition. And the petitioner gets 10 minutes, opponents get 10 minutes, and petitioner gets 2 minutes which you may notice what I thought was going to happen earlier. If no one is opposed to sign up >> to speak, staff provides a short presentation. Public hearing is closed and the next public hearing is opened. So at [snorts] this point uh the petition uh the petition goes to the zoning committee of the planning commission for review and recommendation and I would like to introduce uh or ask Mr. Welton uh chair of the committee to introduce his colleagues. Uh thank you very much, Council Member Driggs. Uh and thank you, Council. My name is Douglas A. Welton. I am the chairman of the zoning committee of the planning commission. Allow me to introduce um my fellow committee members. They are Melissa Gaston, Aaron Shaw, Teresa McDonald, Robin Stewart, Carolyn Miller, and Michael Caprioli. The zoning committee will meet on Tuesday, April 7th at 5:30 p.m. At that meeting, the zoning committee will meet and discuss and make recommendations on the petitions that have a public hearing here tonight. The public is welcome to that meeting, but please note it is not a continuation of the public hearing uh that is being held here tonight. Prior to that meeting, uh you are welcome to contact us and provide input. You can find contact information for each petition uh on the city's website at charlotteplanning.org. Thank you very much and back to you, Mr. Driggs. Thank you, Mr. Welton. At this point, we will consider certain agenda items that are proposed to be deferred or withdrawn from our agenda. And Ms. Kramer, could you tell us what those are? Yes, we'll start off with item number 10, petition 2025-129 by True Homes requesting deferral of their decision to April 20th. Item number 11, petition 2025-085 by HK Cedarfell. They are requesting withdrawal of that petition. Item number 12, [snorts] petition 2025-021 by Harold Jordan requesting a deferral of the decision to April 20th. Item number 13, 2025-094 by Topco Properties requesting a deferral of the decision to April 20th. Item number 15, 2025-030 by Tryon Advisors requesting a deferral of their decision to April 20th. Item number 19, petition 2025-063 by Northwood Raven requesting [snorts] a deferral of the public hearing to June 15th. Item number 20, petition 2024-143 by Panorama Development requesting deferral of the public hearing to April 20th. And lastly, item number 22 petition 2025-077 by Short Development Group requesting deferral of their public hearing to April 20th. Thank you. So uh I don't know if there's another item that we need to discuss that might be deferred or not. They pulled 15. What is 15? What did she call that? I believe it was added to the list, Mr. Driggs. All right, let's So why don't we then consider the ones that we've heard about? Um uh is there any discussion about that? This question. Thank you, Mr. Driggs. After item number 15, what were the additional After item number 15, it was item number 19, item number 20, and item number 22. All for deferral. Thank you. All right, so let's vote on those, right? All in favor of those uh deferrals and withdrawals? Yes. Where's there a motion in a second? No. We need a motion. >> We hadn't had a motion. No. I made a motion to approve. >> second that. Okay. Now, everybody, there we go. We're making it >> Um we don't make stuff up here. So do we still need to talk about number 20? Okay good. Um our next item then is to consider consent agenda items. Uh >> [snorts] >> rezoning petition items seven through 10 with the exception actually of 10 which has been deferred may be considered in one motion except for those items pulled by a council member. I notice the lights are dimming. Um Please note that these petitions meet the following criteria. They had no public opposition to the petition at hearing, the staff recommends approval, zoning committee recommends approval, and there were no changes after the zoning [clears throat] committee's recommendation. Are there any consent items that council would like to pull for question or comment or a separate vote? Yes. Nine for comment. Number nine. So uh the petitions in question item number seven, petition 2025-114 by the Charlotte Mecklenburg Hospital Authority, number eight, petition 2025-121 by the Huntington National Bank. And um we will consider item number nine, petition 2025-122 after the vote. So right now we're voting on items seven and eight. No, we're not. All for approval. No, we're not because I'm waiting to pull number seven. >> Ms. Mayfield. I'm waiting to pull number seven. Uh okay, number seven is also deferred. So it looks like our consent consists of item number eight. >> [laughter] >> Do we Do we all consent item number eight? Yes. All in favor? Yeah, we had a second. I make a motion. >> I thought I heard a motion, but that was it was >> what I thought it was seven and eight. All right, so so the motion now is for item number eight. >> on the eight. And that motion is made by Ms. Owens and seconded by Ms. Easley. Okay. Uh all right, everybody good with that? Hands up. Yes. [laughter] All right. So then we will consider uh item number seven, petition 2025-114 by the Charlotte Mecklenburg Hospital Authority, and that was uh Ms. Mayfield. Thank you. >> Uh yes, I guess I'll ask for the motion first. Is there a motion to approve that item? So moved. Okay. Didn't second. Okay. Now, discussion. Now, discussion. Actually, I was just trying to get an understanding and maybe staff can answer this one. It's uh noted in here that this petition proposes a private outdoor recreation facility that's associated with the adjacent health care institution, but it was also noted in the community comments access. So I was trying to get an understanding of what the community benefits to the residents are for this petition. So this is a therapeutic park. They were not They were not specific community priorities or benefits worked out. It's not an exception petition, for example. Um but >> it accessible to the community since this was a private outdoor facility? There are not notes stating that the use is limited in any regard. So I'm not aware of it being limited access, though it is associated with the health care institution. Thank you. Thank you. So Mr. Driggs. Yes. I I just wanted to address my colleagues comment. [clears throat] So uh the neighborhood Dilworth has been in communication, of course, um with the hospital and um and with the and and the petitioners' representation. And so they're very comfortable with the park. They have um what the petitioner has said is they want to keep the this area as open and accessible as possible, um but if there become issues or of loitering or things of that nature, then they will have to potentially pivot. But their current stance is that they want to be open and acceptable to the community that lives right there adjacent along Lombardi. So that's their position, Ali. Right. Uh Yes, we will. Right. So right now we're on uh Item number seven. Number seven and we've had comments and therefore we can vote. It's time for a vote. >> We have a motion? Was there a Yeah, she made a motion and she seconded it. Okay, so there [clears throat] was a motion to adopt and approve approve the petition and adopt the consistency statement. Correct. By council member Anderson. And I I need to read the uh actual There is a motion to approve the petition and adopt the zoning committee statement of consistency as it appears in our agendas and on the screen is the council's own. So moved. Okay, second to that. Ms. Mayfield seconded. All in favor. Thank you, Ms. Mayfield. Okay, we're getting there. Good. So now we go to number nine, right? And I believe uh do I have a motion to approve number nine? So now again, let me read it. Is there a motion to approve the petition and adopt the zoning committee statement of consistency as it appears in our agendas and on the screen is the council's own. So moved. So moved. I'll go ahead and let Ms. Wallace speak. So moved. Second. We have a motion and a second. Comment? Yes. Thank you. I just wanted to acknowledge Pastors Brian and Karen Bullock and the whole Union Church Charlotte family that has come out to uh support this rezoning tonight. How is what doing Union Church Charlotte? Yeah, they've got two locations here in the area and this marks a significant milestone because this will be their first permanent location in the area. Um as we all know, faith communities are an anchor in our neighborhoods and so we appreciate your presence and your engagement in the process. Uh your commitment to serving the community reflects exactly what we want to invest in the Charlotte area. So thank you for being here tonight and on behalf of Council Member Renee Perkins-Johnson, your District 2 representative who's unable to be here tonight, she's tending to family. Welcome to the neighborhood. Thank you so much. Took the time. Okay, that's all nice, man. It's all right. It's all right. We're good. Can we vote? All right, everybody. All in favor? Deferred to 4:20. Yes. It's unanimous. Okay. Congratulations. Congratulations. >> [applause] [snorts] >> So right, I'm just going to comment on the fact that I have a number here. 15. 15. 14. 14. Right, so uh we're doing 14, right? We already determined that items 11 and 12 and 13 are deferred or withdrawn and therefore we are now on item 14. Rezoning petition 2025-118 by Charlotte Planning, Design, and Development Department text amendment. The purpose of this text amendment is to update the UDO to implement and support the goals and policies of the Charlotte Future 2040 Comprehensive Plan. This includes updates to reflect best practices, address new and emerging trends, address implementation challenges identified by external and internal stakeholders, and correct scrivener's errors. Updates are proposed to 25 of the 39 articles. The zoning The zoning committee recommended uh 6-0 to approve and staff recommends approval. All right, so we have a motion. Yes. Second. Yeah, I made a motion. Somebody second. Yeah, I'll second. Okay, we don't need the full text for this one, do we? Or do we? Yes, it would be best if you did that, uh Mr. Chairman. All right, so again, uh is there a motion to approve the petition and adopt the zoning committee statement of consistency as it appears in our agendas and on the screen as the council's own. Yes. Yes. Yes. Second. Yes, second. Discussion. Hearing none, all in favor. All right. Come on, get those hands up. Okay, good. That's [clears throat] unanimous. I think it was unanimous and therefore there isn't anybody opposed. Or do you want to oppose? Okay, we're good. Uh >> [clears throat] >> so we go to item 15. Or that one's deferred. There it is, deferred. Okay, moving to 16. This one I think is still on the agenda. Yes. Rezoning petition 2025-039 by Christopher Martin. Location approx- approximately 0.37 acres located southwest of Scaleybark Road, east of Lockridge Road, and north of Murrayhill Road in Ms. Anderson's district. Current zoning is N1B, neighborhood 1B. Proposed zoning is N1C CD, neighborhood 1C conditional. Zoning committee voted 6-0 to recommend approval of this petition and staff recommends approval of this petition. Is there a motion to approve the petition and adopt the zoning committee statement of consistency as it appears in our agendas and on the screen as the council's own. So moved. Second. Second. Any discussion? [snorts] Hearing none, all in favor. Okay excellent. So we go to All right, so item 17 um we need to refer back to the zoning committee. Apparently there have been changes that require that we Sorry. We we We don't I don't have 17 in my book. It's not in the agenda, but it's in the book. It's on here. It's on the eye legislative. Yes, it's on here. Okay. It's on my It's online. It's not in our printed material. You can look here if you want to. It's online if you want. Okay. Anyway, the situation here is that we have changes that would require uh a council vote not to go back to zoning committee. It requires a 3/4 majority vote not to send it back to committee. Uh so uh Ms. Kramer, would you tell us what the changes are? Yes, this is a petition proposing 72 townhome style units. After the zoning committee's recommendation, they added a couple of conditional notes. They added a note stating that no more than 50% of the units would have a one-car garage. The rest of the units would have to have a two-car garage that accommodates vehicles being parked side by side. All dwelling units would, except for the eight units along Limelight Lane, would be served by a driveway that accommodates two vehicles parked side by side. And the last note added was that the eight dwelling units located along Limelight Lane should have a two-car garage that accommodates two vehicles parked side by side. Staff believes that these changes are minor and do not warrant additional review by the zoning committee. So do I have a motion that the changes should not go back to the zoning committee? So moved. Second. Any discussion? Yes. Um I would like to note, just for the community and council members also, that Steel Creek Residents Association has been working closely with petitioner. They've had the petitioner's uh attorney have uh attended their zoning meetings for several months um in a row um to kind of accommodate and make these changes with them. So just want to thank the petitioner and Steel Creek Residents Association for doing that. Um this is what we're kind of always talking about, community working uh in collaboration with uh developers when applicable. So just wanted everyone on the council to know that Steel Creek Residents have um They don't say support, but they say they do not oppose the rezoning. So okay. Good, we have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion? Now the Yeah, this is the vote whether or not to send back. Uh yes, this this is the vote not to send back. Okay, so everybody who thinks that we should not send it back, please raise your hand. And I think that clears the bar. It's unanimous, right? So now um Motion to adopt and approve, right? Yes. Okay. Yeah, I'm just about to read that. Is there a motion to approve the petition and adopt the zoning committee statement of consistency as it appears in our agendas and on the screen as the council's own. So moved. Second. Okay, any discussion? Yes, Ms. Mayfield. Thank you for staff. Since I did not have a chance to speak with the petitioner, I appreciate the additional language that they've added, but I'm trying to look at this to see if there's any possibility with this particular design, if there will be any on-street parking. I believe by the petitioner adding the additional two-car garage and the rear loading for the parking, that should assist, but I want to make sure that we're not setting ourselves up where you're going to have individuals parking on a pretty busy street. I believe that there was on some amount of on-street parking identified. C dot, if you could help confirm, but I think there is on the plan some identified. Because and as you are coming up, one of the things I need for us to consider is some other areas where individuals The average household has more than one to two vehicles. So unfortunately, a lot of homes today are not built with usable attic space. So people are using their garages more often for storage. So that means those two-plus vehicles are if they're not going to make it in the driveway, they're blocking the sidewalk and or they're on the street and that's causing challenges for sight with vehicles maneuvering. So I just wanted to get a better understanding. >> [snorts] >> Travis Miller with C dot. Good evening, council. Uh so currently, if you you can see the plan on the screen here, on Red Spring Drive and Limelight Lane, you will see bump-outs on each public roadway. You got a pointer. So you'll see bump-outs on the public roadway here, here, as well as right here. In each of those locations will accommodate off-street parking on the internal public roadways, but there is not off-street parking on your main arterial out here. But we create but this development has created setback for that off-street parking. So they should not actually be in the street right away. Correct. That's what I wanted to clarify on the drawings. Thank you. No further comment. We have a motion and a second. All in favor? Okay, that's unanimous. [snorts] No one opposed right? Um so uh Next item, our last vote for tonight is another one that requires uh a possible vote a vote to not send back to the zoning committee because of changes. Ms. Kramer, could you tell us what they are? Thank you. This is a petition for 125 affordable housing units and 11 townhome units. Since the zoning committee's recommendation, they added one note just clarifying that street frontage improvements would be implemented around the church property that's abutting the site to the west, as well as along the rezoning boundary and this would be tied into the existing sidewalks. So just clarifying some improvements that would be triggered during permitting and wanted to get that on the conditional notes and shown on the site plan. Thank you. Do I have a motion that the changes should not go back to the zoning committee? So moved. Second. Any discussion? All in favor? The changes the changes do not go back to the committee. The changes do not go back. I think that carries, right? We're good. Any opposed? >> Any opposed? Are you wanting to be heard? Mr. Maswell Arias is opposed. Um So it won't go back and therefore I can now read Is there a motion to approve the petition and adopt the zoning committee statement of consistency as it appears in our agendas and on the screen as the council's own? Is there a motion? So moved. Second. To approve. >> Right. So this is uh item 18, Uh there is a motion. Mhm. There was a Yes, a second. Okay. Any discussion? Yes. Thank you, Mr. Driggs. >> [clears throat] >> Um thank you [snorts] to the residents of District 5 for coming out um and being here showing your advocacy. Um I I just want to talk to my colleagues. I will be voting no uh uh uh with this rezoning. And and it's not because um the residents or myself are against uh affordable housing or higher density. We deeply believe it is the wrong place for this zoning. Um I think it's not the proper location. It's right next to a single-family neighborhood. There's already really high traffic congestion and real traffic concerns. As you can see, the signs say yes say yes to safety. Um and and you know, as a council that's committed to Vision Zero as well as reducing traffic fatalities, I think it is imperative of us to keep that into account. There's also 90 townhomes being built just down the street from there. That's going to cause more uh congestion coming to this area. It's an area prone to car crashes despite that that intersection will be undesignated a high injury network and also infrastructure gaps. Um now having conversations with the developer, they've agreed to $250,000 of uh sidewalk improvements across the whole um area whether uh the rezoning area as well as the non-rezoning area. So that is improvement. However, despite of those changes and those good faith um approaches, I still will be voting no against it because I do respect the the voices of my residents who overwhelmingly do not want this. And I I just believe that this is I hope this council takes into account that we need to just keep pursuing smart development, right? We are growing fast as a city, but it shouldn't be at the expense of disrupting single-family neighborhoods. So [snorts] those are all my comments. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Ajmera. Thank you, Mr. Driggs. So question for staff. So this $250,000 commitment, is that part of the conditions? What's being referred to is the note that states that they would be implementing the street frontage improvements across the church property as well as their site. They did not put a dollar amount in their conditional notes, but they said that they would be implementing street frontage requirements and improvements um as they will be triggered but with with subdivision and C.D.O.T. during the permanent process. So they didn't have a dollar amount put into the conditional notes. But it's in the conditional notes that they would have those improvements done. Okay. So in other rezonings, I haven't seen a specific dollar amount included. So does the staff recommend leave it as is and not put a number to it? We're we're quite comfortable with it as is. Okay. Thank you. Well, I agree with my council member Maswell Arias. I will not be supporting this rezoning petition. However, I do appreciate the good faith efforts by the petitioner in terms of the infrastructure improvements. And I appreciate my neighbors for showing up here and making sure your voice is heard. Thank you all. That's all I have. Ms. Mayfield. Thank you, Mr. Driggs. I also want to share that I appreciate all of the community that [snorts] has reached out to us through calls, through emails. The concern that I have, a number of them. One, we have uh a lot of growth happening in our city. And when we think about what the idea of smart growth could be as we continue to support projects, we also need to consider are we contributing to reconcentrating poverty? And what does that look like? So if it's already been established that the average income in the area [snorts] is just under $50,000 and we're proposing a project that may or may not have affordability into it because that's depending on whether trust fund dollars are available. But if colleagues remember, 2 weeks ago we approved that last 3.5 million. So that particular budget of NOAH has been exhausted. So we have to have a different conversation. Yet when we think about areas of growth throughout the city, areas where we have homes that are valued at 4, 5, 6, 7, 800,000 that are near or even adjacent to homes that were valued at 200. They got a grocery store. They have retail. They have amenities. They're able to run to the store and that store is not just a dollar tree and or a dollar type store for basic needs. When we all are out advocating for that areas or as the former district district 3 for 8 years, the biggest challenge was when a potential retail retailer would say, "Well, you don't have the rooftops." Well, what does that mean? You're saying we don't have the income. Well, first of all, we know we have more expendable income than you like the numbers when you like the numbers. But when it comes to an investment, you use it as a reason not to. I could not in good faith support continuing to let that be a reason not to have the investments that we are looking for on the east side, especially after the multiple years and millions of dollars we have invested into former Eastland Mall area and what is happening over there. This is a beautiful project potential. I do not think that this area is the area for this particular project. And when we look at the impact to community and to be perfectly honest, when I look out and I see my elders out here, I want your next 25 years to be some good ones. While y'all have the ability and I don't know if this is the peak the project that's going to help make that happen. When aging in place and staying in place is something that's very important to me. Thank you. Oh, and so so that is very clear. No, I would not be voting to support it. >> [laughter] >> All right. That was clear. Uh Ms. Owens. I I just had a couple of questions. Just I want to make sure that I'm clear. I saw in in two places we are up to 99 years. Is that correct? >> That's right. The affordable housing commitment is for the 125 units would be maintained for their levels of affordability for up 80% at least 80% area median income for at least 99 years. The petitioner has stated during the public hearing and at the community meeting that they are aiming for a lower AMI, but the conditional notes state that no more than 80% AMI. And then if they are unable to get housing trust fund dollars after two cycles, can you explain to all of us what happens? >> So if they are unable to secure housing trust fund uh housing trust fund dollars after two cycles, the notes state that the they could develop in one A uses. And they are already zoned in one so it's essentially maintaining status quo. Thank you. No further questions. Dr. Watlington. >> [snorts] >> Now I have a new question since you said that, but I'm a I'm going to leave it. >> [laughter] >> Um I just wanted to to comment that I appreciate the perspective that Council Member Maswera-Arias and Council Member Mayfield uh uh brought to the table. I'm hopeful that the development community and the neighbors, if you're not already, are able to have a broader conversation about what it will take to deliver the overall community area plan, which includes amenities, um grocery stores, all of those kinds of things, because I do understand that there is this seems to be this dichotomy between we need more rooftops, we need higher AMI, um but we [snorts] we have this need for affordable housing right now, and I can understand as a neighbor why it would feel like we're making choices to continue to compromise the future of of the area. Um But I also understand the urgency of a particular need or opportunity when it comes to bear. Um so I'm hopeful, and I'm I guess I'll leave this with you, Council Member. Um I'm hopeful that the community and the development community can come together to have that broader conversation so that when we're having these one-off discussions about individual parcels, everybody is confident about how the plan comes together overall. That's all. Thank you. I have Ms. Mayo. Thank you. Um I think this was a Oh, sorry. Um this has been a a very interesting uh petition. We've received all of your emails, people against and for. So we first just want to thank y'all for taking the time to advocate for for your beliefs and for your neighborhood. Um as I'm kind of thinking of this and what uh the Council Member Watlington also talked about, I know often times when we speak with um advocates, particularly for affordable housing, uh we talk about housing first, particularly for our unhoused people. So I personally will be voting yes as a result of that, just thinking about the broader spectrum um and the needs of our community. Thank you. Yes, Ms. Anderson. >> Thank you, Mr. Driggs. Uh first I want to just thank the community for just continued engagement. Um East Charlotte is always engaged and always paying attention to what's going on, so thank you. We received all your emails, have had some phone calls, and conversations. Um What I also want to say is that we've watched this project in particular evolve so um going from a 20-year affordability window to a 99-year affordability uh window, reducing the number of dwellings um dwelling units, and the addition of senior multi-family units, in addition to for-sale townhomes. So it's a really unique mix of housing types in one particular uh location. Also very proximate to uh our Eastland Yards location, which of course the the entire council has supported, but when you think about the the evolution of the area plan for that space and how these residents will have increased walkability to for amenities, entertainment, food, etc. Um it really does uh bode well to combine this type of multi um this mix of um housing stock in a place that's trying to establish uh increased walkability and increased amenities. So I hope that the community will continue to have a high level of engagement, and I'm certainly hopeful that the um the housing trust fund dollars will will be there, because that really makes the That's what I I believe makes this project particularly unique for such a long time. We talk about affordability, we talk about our seniors who want to age in place, uh we we talk about homeownership being the opportunity to pivot out of intergenerational poverty, and there is um a mix of all of that in this particular effort. So um I'm very hopeful that the housing trust fund dollars will be there. Thank you. Mr. Driggs. Mr. Ms. Maswera-Arias. Thank you for the ability to speak again, Mr. Driggs. I just want to say that right now, East Charlotte is really at a crossroads, right? We have created a community that is only sustainable to live, not work or play. And we do have incredible projects coming on the horizon, but I want this council I want it to make it very clear. We cannot continue concentrating poverty and low income in one area, particularly areas that have always been uh disadvantaged. So, you know, vote how you will, but I really moving forward, please consider East Charlotte. We are lacking amenities. We have folks, investors, telling us that the reason grocery stores and other things are not coming to East Charlotte is because we have low AMI levels. And if we keep concentrating that, these folks, individuals right here, are not going to have grocery stores or retail or restaurants to go play and uh work with. So I I just really, you know, take into account East Charlotte because we have been neglected for so long. And yes, there is incredible growth happening in that area as Eastland Yards sports complex and what this council has done previously, but also consider that we got sold out from the transportation plan, right? We're not getting as much investments as already areas that already are getting transferred that already have existing transportation. This is a community that doesn't depend or rely much on cars. They walk or they take the bus, and we already were short uh short-sold on on that plan and the transportation referendum. So please really consider, you know, if we want to make East Charlotte a vibrant community, as well as one that is able to work, live, and play at. Because right now, my residents are driving a half an hour, more than an hour, to go to work, to go shop at SouthPark or Cotswold or Concord or Carolina Place. And so I just want to leave that clear that I want to make sure East Charlotte get those what they desperately need, which are amenities, in a area that they can work, live, and play. Thank you. So I I actually have a comment myself on this one. Um Mr. Maswera-Arias, I appreciate your engagement on behalf of your constituents and your admonition in terms of how we go about this. At the same time, location has been a challenge for us for as long as I've been on council. I think other veterans will agree, finding the right solution where the housing can be established at a reasonable price and therefore can be made available affordably, taking into account the proximity of stores and things, trying to check all the boxes um puts us often in a difficult position. And on this one in particular, this actually aligns with a number of things that we really wanted to try to accomplish, partnership with a religious institution. And so I I think the short story is the council is between a rock and a hard place here, and I I think you can hear the fact that there is a a diversity of opinion depending on how you weigh that. Uh personally I will support this because I do think in the grand scheme of things, this is what we are trying to accomplish. We're trying to create this kind of housing. Uh we'd like to partner with churches, 99 years. So I agree with my colleagues who said that we need to be thoughtful going forward, uh and hope that this can be accomplished, but my own vote will be in favor for those reasons. I do appreciate all you all coming tonight. So is there any further comment? If not, I think we have a motion and a second, and therefore I will call for a vote. All in favor? 1 2 3 4 5 6. So that carries. All opposed? Four opposed. And that's all of us, right? Okay, that carries. Thank you. So uh that was our last decision tonight. All right, and then we move on to our hearings. So uh item 19 is deferred. Item 20 is deferred. 21 is is the first hearing for tonight. So Yes okay. So we'll go through and read the description right? Um rezoning petition 2025-072 by Lincoln Property Company. Location, approximately 44.02 acres located west of Old Statesville Road, south of Vance Davis Drive, and north of Reames Road. This is in the uh the ETJ and um Commissioner Powell's district, the closest City Council district is Ms. Johnson. Current zoning is OFC, office flex campus, and MUDD-CD, mixed-use development conditional. Proposed zoning is ML-1 CD, manufacturing and logistics one conditional. Staff recommends approval of this petition upon resolution of an outstanding related issue related to land use. And so, we'll hear from staff, please. >> bad. Thank you. I don't remember that, Victoria. The site is just over 44 acres, as you said, located in our ETJ. They're located adjacent to District 4, just along the west side of Old Statesville Road. In an area where we have predominantly industrial uses, as you can see here on this map. It is currently zoned office flex campus on the northern portion of the site and has some mixed-use development district old legacy ordinance entitlements along the southern portion of the site, and they're requesting to go to manufacturing logistics one conditional. The policy map recommends the community activity center place type for the site. That's really as a result of the mud conditional entitlements that were put on the site years ago. The proposal itself is up for up to 350,000 square feet of warehousing, warehouse distribution, manufacturing, office, and other light industrial uses. It prohibits some of the non-preferred uses or other noxious uses that you wouldn't want to see in this area, such as landfills or even data centers. Have a complete list of those uses up here. It commits to providing the county with a 35-ft wide easement for a greenway. Uh notes several transportation and streetscape improvements categorized along different access points. At access A, you have a new shared egress lane, remarking the median, adding a southbound right turn lane, providing an internal protected street. And then at access B, along Statesville Road and Independence Hill Road adding an ingress lane and two egress lanes, remarking westbound right turn lane, adding northbound southbound left turn lanes and several other items. At access C, providing one ingress lane and one shared egress lane, and providing minimum 100-ft internal protected street. And in terms of staff recommendations, staff recommends approval of this petition upon resolution of an outstanding issue related to land use. The proposal is in line with the development that we have seen along this west side of Old Statesville, which is really industrial [clears throat] in nature in terms of its entitlements as well as its existing uses. The conditional plan limits the uses that could occur on the site and prohibits those that we really wouldn't want to see in that area. It does facilitate potentially two comprehensive plan goals. Goal six could be facilitated through their um commitment for that greenway easement. And then goal eight might be facilitated by virtue of the industrial uses potentially adding jobs to the area. And I'll be happy to take questions following petitioner comments. Thank you. I have three speakers signed up. Colin Brown, Brittany Lynn, and Scott Kurtz. Uh you have 3 minutes. Thank you. Um Council member Rodriguez, council members of the committee, Colin Brown on behalf of the petitioner. Lincoln Property Group, Scott Kurtz is here as well. Holly did a very nice job on the presentation. 44-acre site. We got two zonings. We got an office zoning at the top and an old mud zoning that is a multi-family um zoning district. As Holly mentioned, you know, the thing to know about this site is everything in this quadrant is kind of manufacturing employment-based except for a part of our site, which currently has a multi-family zoning plan on it. That has not come to fruition. We think a lot because of what's around it. And so, Lincoln uh would like to come in and bring some employment uses into the area. Uh happy to have staff support. I will mention that I did receive a call and an email from uh county commissioner Elaine Powell uh over the weekend. Uh this is her district. This is actually in unincorporated um Mecklenburg County. Her question for us is the county has a historic uh property here and has asked us to look at our buffering and see if we can enhance that and include some native species, I think, which will reflect the historic structure next door. We're happy to do that, and we will get that in our revised plan that we submit on Thursday. Happy to take any questions. Colleagues, any questions? Do I have a motion to close the hearing? >> So moved. Sorry, I have a question. Go ahead. Can you speak a little bit about that historical site? I didn't see that on Probably not with great uh expertise. It is a historic home that is a historic home place. Uh the county is not opposed. They're they're just asking for some buffering in that location. We're happy to do that. Is it on the historic commission? Like has it been designated? >> It's a real county-owned. Oh, it's county-owned. Okay, so it's official. Okay, just You can go visit it. Okay. Thank you. All right. So, do I have a motion to close the hearing? So moved. Second. All in favor? Okay, that's unanimous. Item 22 is deferred. So, we move to item 23. Rezoning petition 2025-132 by Hopper Communities Inc. Approximately 0.44 acres located west of Providence Road, north of Edgemont Road, and south of Cavendish Court in Ms. Owens' district. Current zoning is R-8 MFC-D, multi-family residential conditional. Proposed zoning is N-1A, neighborhood 1A. Staff recommends approval of this petition. Ms. Kramer. Thank you. This site is under half an acre, located along the west side of Providence Road in a very residential area. As you can see here, predominantly single-family residential in the immediate vicinity. It is currently zoned R-8 multi-family conditional. That's an old legacy district for multi-family residential. That's from a 1993 zoning, though, I will say, which limited the site to bed and breakfast uses. And what they are requesting is neighborhood 1A, which, as you can see on this map, would put it right in line with everything that is surrounded by. The policy map recommends the neighborhood one place type, so this request would be in alignment with that. It is in one of our adopted area plans, so it is within the South Middle Community Area Plan. As I just stated, it would be in alignment with that policy map designation for neighborhood one. In terms of priority goals, we believe it could facilitate goal two for neighborhood diversity and inclusion because it's removing those narrow entitlements on the site that were previously approved and would open up the permitted uses for anything allowed within the N-1A district, which could include diverse residential options. Staff does recommend approval of this petition in line with the area plan and also in line with the adopted policy map uh for the site, and I'll take questions following petitioner comments. Thank you, Ms. Kramer. We have two speakers signed up. Aaron Hawk and Jack Roberts. It's a cool site. I pray all professor. Good evening, Council member Rodriguez and Council members. Um I do have some slides. I don't know if they're Oh, here we go. Um so, with me tonight is uh Jack Roberts of the of the petitioner and John Carmichael, who works with me at Robinson Bradshaw. >> My name is Aaron Hawk, and I'm here on behalf of the petitioner, Hopper Communities. Uh the site, as Holly said, is about 0.441 acres uh on the west side of Providence Road. It's about midway between Sharon Amity and Fairview Road. The site Uh here's an aerial of the site. It contains uh a detached single-family house right now. Here's a Google Street View of the house that is on the site. As Holly said, the current zoning is R-8 MFC-D, an old uh conditional district under the legacy ordinance. Uh the the 1993 conditional zoning plan includes this site plan, which uh sites the existing house. So, the house was was there in 1993 uh when the conditional zoning plan was adopted. There are a few uh development notes also with the conditional zoning plan, uh including the one that limits uh the the any structures on the house to what's what's any structures on the site to the structure that's already there. Uh the petitioner is seeking rezoning to N-1A uh to accommodate any uses that are allowed in the N-1A zoning district. This is a a conventional zoning request. And as Holly said, uh the request is consistent with the policy map, which call which places this site in the neighborhood one place type. Happy to take any questions. Thank you. Are there any questions or comments? Hearing none, do I have a motion to close the hearing? So moved. Second. All in favor? It passes. Thank you. So, we move on to item agenda item 24, petition 2025-135 by the Charlotte Mecklenburg Hospital Authority. Approximately 41.26 acres located south of North Tryon Street, east of W.T. Harris Boulevard, and north of Johnson Alumni Way in Ms. Johnson's district. Current zoning is IC-1, institutional campus one. Proposed zoning is IC-2 EX, institutional campus two. That's a two. Uh exception. Staff recommends approval of this petition upon resolution of a requested technical revision. With that, we'll hear from Ms. Kramer. Thank you. This site is about 41 acres along North Tryon as well as East W.T. Harris Boulevard. As already stated, this is a healthcare institution that's currently on the site. It is currently zoned IC-1, institutional campus one. They they are proposing to go to IC-2 EX, institutional campus two exception. So, I'll explain what an exception petition is here in a moment, but the policy map recommends the campus place type. The proposal itself, which would be a continuation of healthcare institution uses, and the IC-2 district that they're requesting is in alignment with that campus place type already adopted for the site. The proposal itself, we have a list of standards with this request that we don't have a site plan, but this is an exception request, and exception conditional reasonings are a way for us to modify certain qualitative and quantitative zoning standards in exchange for public benefits. And public benefits would fall into at least two out of three categories: city improvements, public amenities, and sustainability measures. So, we like to reserve EX petitions for scenarios where extenuating circumstances make it difficult to meet ordinance standards. Healthcare institutions are difficult uses to fit into our ordinance in a neat and tidy box. So, that is why it's considered as an exception request here today. It could not be accommodated under their existing IC-1 zoning. Needed to pursue the IC-2 so that you could apply those exception provisions, and the exception provisions are a list of what they are modifying in the ordinance, and they then provide public benefits, essentially as a justification for their modifications. So, I will show you I'll go ahead and show you the list of their provisions. So, this is pretty technical in nature, so I'm not going to get into it, but I'll have it here if we want to get back to it, but some of the items that they're modifying, for example, are maximum building length along a frontage, or maximum parking for a medical office use, minimum ground floor height, and they note how they're modifying the standard, and also what is the typical UDO requirement for that. The public benefits that they're require that they are providing in exchange, so under the public amenity category, they will be installing a trailhead connection to the UNC Charlotte finish trail. That would contain bench seating, trail map signage, and trail lighting. Under the city improvement category, they would be providing micro transit area on the site to include dedicated curb space for ride share, waiting pad consistent with CATS detail standards. And under the city improvement category, they'd be constructing a bus stop waiting pad and shelter at the existing bus stop along North Tryon. So, that would be exceeding the ordinance requirements since they have a bus stop waiting pad, and CATS wouldn't typically require them to upgrade that to uh a full waiting pad and shelter as they are specifying. Staff recommends approval of this petition upon resolution of a minor technical revision. We believe that the exception provisions requested um make sense, and the public benefits offered are adequate justification given the request of this rezoning petition. Again, healthcare institutions don't always fit into neat and tidy boxes, so I think an exception application to this petition uh is logical, and I'll take questions following petitioner comments. Thank you, Ms. Kramer. We have four speakers signed up. Uh John Carmichael, Bennett Thompson, Joseph Labowitz, and Nathan Tadtid. Mr. Carmichael. Thank you, Councilman. Thank you, Councilman members. Greetings, members of the City Council and the Zoning Committee. I'm John Carmichael, here on behalf of the petitioner, the Charlotte Mecklenburg Hospital Authority, also known as Atrium Health. Uh Bennett Thompson and Joe Labowitz with Atrium are here, as is Nathan Tadtid with Kimley Horn. The site's a little over 41 acres, northeast corner of North Tryon and East WT Harris Boulevard. UNC Charlotte is to the east and north. University uh Place shops are to the west, and you've got commercial variety of commercial and retail to the south. This is an aerial photograph of the site. Got a little uh zoomed-in aerial of the site. Now, I will say that the site is the home of Atrium Health University City Hospital. And it's hard to see, but this is the existing bed tower. It's located in the central portion of the site. This site is currently zoned IC-1 as Holly indicated. You've got IC-1 zoning to the east and north, TOD zoning to the north and west, and a variety of commercial districts to the west and south of the site. Petitioners are requesting the site be rezoned to IC-2 EX uh to accommodate the expansion of the hospital facilities. The approval of the rezoning request would increase the allowed maximum height of buildings on the site. The maximum height in IC-1 is 50 ft without a bonus, 80 ft with a bonus. In IC-2, it's 120 ft without a bonus, 250 ft with a bonus. The current expansion plan is to build a new bed tower as an as an addition to the existing bed tower. The new bed tower would be approximately the same height as the existing bed tower, 90 to 100 ft, and it would contain six stories so that it could connect to the existing bed tower. The new bed tower is needed to meet the healthcare requirements of the community. This rezoning request would also accommodate future planned or future expansions of the hospital facilities. Uh this is a photograph of the existing bed tower, and then of course, the addition would connect to that structure. The 2040 policy map places the site in the campus place type. This request is consistent with the 2040 policy map. I want to give you a little context here. Um prior to the effective date of the UDO, this site was zoned institutional. And under the institutional zoning district, you could build without going through a rezoning by right the bed tower that that Atrium seeks to build. When the the UDO became effective, the zoning was converted converted from institutional to IC-1. IC-1 has a more restrictive height than um institutional cuz institutional, you can increase the height if you increase the side yards. That's not available in IC-1. So, the UDO's really put healthcare institutions in a tough spot. So, we had to rezone to IC-2 EX to exceed 80 ft, and we'd have to have a bonus with 80 ft, and then we need exceptions because the certain development standards more urban in nature, and they don't accommodate a hospital. We'll happy to answer your questions. Excellent. Ms. Mayo. I had a quick question, uh Holly. Is this by the old university library? Does Is that Okay, thank you. I I I think that's a interesting topic to think about how we're reusing existing place areas instead of always just um you know, cutting down trees. So, I'm I'm excited to hear that we're thinking about reusing existing um areas instead of just clear-cutting um and diminishing our tree canopy. So, I don't want to miss an opportunity to thank Atrium Health for their role in our community and their many contributions. It's not a land use issue, but uh just want to point it out. Uh is there a certificate of need issue here? Yes. Joe Labowitz, president of the hospital, said yes. Right. Again, that's that's not a land use consideration. I'm just interested to know whether that's pending or where you stand. Thank you, yes. Joe Labowitz, uh president of Atrium Health University City. And yes, we have a conditional certificate of need that was granted. It's currently um in the process of being converted from conditional to full. Great. Thank you for that information. As I say, that's actually not a land use criterion, but uh if I have no further comments, I'll entertain a motion to end the hearing. Close the hearing. So moved. Second. All in favor? Hey, JD. In favor? Oh, yes. Yes. Yeah, yeah. Okay, good. It's Monday. I know, already. We're struggling. So, we move to agenda item 25, rezoning petition 2025-138 by Coral Reef Investment Properties, a location approximately 8.62 acres located along the east side of West Tyvola Road, south of South Tryon Street, and west of Sleepy Hollow Road in Ms. Mayo's district. Current zoning is R-17 MFCD, multi-family conditional. Proposed zoning is R-17 MFCD SPA. Uh So, I assume this is uh grandfathered. Like, this is an old uh petition. There are some amendments. Uh Okay. Um staff recommends approval of this petition, and uh Mr. Oliver. Yes, this is a site plan amendment to a uh existing conditional plan under the legacy zoning ordinance. It's a 8.62 acre site on the east side of West Tyvola Road, just south of South Tryon Street. The plan proposes the change of previously approved multi-residential Here. uh multi-family residential plan. Um the site is currently undeveloped. Current zoning is R-17 MFCD, multi-family conditional. Proposed zoning is RMF R-17 MFCD SPA, um which is a site plan amendment to that existing plan. The plan is consistent with the goals and policies of the Southwest Middle Community Area Plan, and it is in alignment with the 2040 policy map recommendation for the Neighborhood 2 place type. Little background. 2022, the petition 2021-235 was rezoned to R-17 MFCD to allow for the development of 129 multi-family apartment dwelling units, um including six workforce housing units, and and that would be in three principal structures. Site plan amendment calls for the reduction in the number of multi-family stacked buildings from three principal structures to two, increase the maximum number apartment units from 129 to 134, including an increase in the workforce housing units from six to seven, the removal of a pedestrian connection between West Tyvola Road and Sleepy Hollow Road, and the modification of the site access by shifting the northern driveway on West Tyvola approximately 200 ft to the south. Staff recommends approval of this petition as the site plan it's a site plan amendment to a previously approved plan with only minor changes. Um and the proposal is consistent with the 2040 policy map recommendation for the neighborhood to place type. Site is also abutting a park and served by transit. I'm happy to take any questions following Mr. Grant's presentation. Thank you. I'd like to note briefly there are some empty chairs here. Some colleagues go to the room behind the chamber here and follow the hearing on a screen uh because there are refreshments there and it's a comfortable place to sit, so they're definitely engaged. They're weak. >> [laughter] >> I'm kidding. Love y'all. I would like to note >> all the movies and you, Vic. That means come back is what he's saying. >> [laughter] >> Well, I would like to note for anybody who may be there we have a closed session after this meeting, so please do not leave the building. >> [laughter] >> And with that we have I believe one speaker signed up. Bridget Grant, there she is. Hi. Hi [laughter] Bridget. Good evening Council member Driggs, members of the board. I appreciate your time this evening. Max did a phenomenal job of presenting, so I'm just going to jump ahead to our summary slide. It worked. He called you out. Council member Mayo was able to attend our community meeting and so we were able to make some changes not only in the response to our site changes, but also in response to community feedback and I'm happy to answer any questions. I'm sorry. I'm distracted by my neighbor here. I'm sorry. I gave a brief presentation, so you didn't miss anything. Yeah, I'm ready to answer any questions. I mean Council I did go, yeah. Yeah, I just had a quick question. I think I asked Holly earlier, have y'all thought of um helping with a crosswalk so that people can get to the Yorkmont Park that's not far away. I think for the people on the other side of Tyvola. Is that something y'all would think about, Bridget? We haven't had that good chance to have that conversation. I think it probably depend on what's feasible along that site. We've got connectivity with the sidewalks along our site that go directly up, but I understand you're asking for across the street. If possible, I think that would be a great opportunity just for us to think about connectivity when we're thinking about Vision Zero as well. How are we being proactive when we're having these rezonings to think about you know, our green spaces and people having access to our green spaces in a way that's safe. Thank you. Seeing no other comment, I'll entertain a motion to close the hearing. So moved. Second. All in favor. That carries. Good. Okay. Our penultimate hearing agenda number item number 26, rezoning petition 2025-139 by Averitt Express. Approximately 53.24 acres located on the north side of Shopton Road, west of Beam Road in Miss Mayo's district. Current zoning is I-1 CD ANDO, light industrial conditional airport noise disclosure overlay. Proposed zoning is ML-2 CD ANDO, manufacturing and logistics two conditional airport noise disclosure overlay. Staff recommends approval of this petition upon resolution of a requested technical revision. Yes, Mr. Magnum. This uh site is about 53 acres located on the north side of Shopton Road, west of Beam Road. Site is graded um was part of the 2021 rezoning that encompassed this site as well as about 50 acres to the north um and entitled it for industrial light industrial uses. Uh site's surrounded by a mix of uses, other industrial, commercial um as well as institutional uses. Uh closest residential uses are across uh Shopton Road to the south. The current zoning is I-1 CD. Uh it's within the airport noise disclosure overlay and with a proposed zoning of ML-2 CD ANDO. The 2040 policy map recommends the manufacturing and logistics place type. The proposal would expand industrial uses permitted on the site to allow a limited number of ML-2 uses and specifically a vehicle operations facility um it allow for a maximum building square footage of 180,000 sq ft while prohibiting the most noxious ML-2 uses. Access would be both from Shopton Road as well as from Beam Road through a connection to through the site to the north. A 100-ft class A landscape yard, which could be reduced to 75 ft with a berm, would be adjacent to an institutional use in the southeastern corner of the site. Also a 50-ft class C landscape yard along the site's Shopton Road frontage where across the street from single-family residential. The petition commits to dedication of the flood plain to Mecklenburg County for future Coffee Creek Greenway. The petition is consistent with the goals and policies of the Southwest Middle Community Area Plan and is in alignment with the policy map recommendation for the manufacturing and logistics place type. Uh does not directly facilitate priority goals for Southwest Middle Community Area Plan. However, does uh or could facilitate goal eight for diverse and resilient economic opportunity from a comprehensive plan perspective. Staff recommends approval of this petition upon resolution of a requested technical revision. Uh the site is entitled for light industrial uses. The petition would expand the permitted industrial uses while reducing the building footprint on the site. Most of the noxious uses uh permitted in ML-2 would be prohibited while allowing for a vehicle operations facility. The site is located within the airport noise disclosure overlay and provides appropriate buffering to adjacent institutional and residential uses. I'll turn it over to the development team. Great. Thanks, Joe. Yes, I have four speakers signed up. Looks like only one is here, Mr. Brown, uh Cam Sessions, Matt um Surkovets uh and Travis Webster. But Mr. Brown, it looks like you're the spokesperson. >> Thank thank you. I do have the Averitt team here. Travis Webster is here, our regional VP. Uh thank you. We've got another interesting one for you this month. Um as Joe has kind of hit all the details, the big takeaway is if you see the site, it's already graded. We worked on this zoning a few years ago. It is approved essentially for a massive logistics center warehouse, the things that we see around. Uh Averitt Express is a a national logistics company. Uh you may see their trucks on the road. They have been looking for years to bring a regional headquarters to Charlotte. They think this would be an ideal location. A couple components that I that's I think very positive. Council member Mayo and I have talked about this. This actually uh brings a diversity of employment opportunities. They would have a headquarters facility here bringing white-collar jobs. They would still have some warehousing facilities so that we would have those jobs. The reason we're really here tonight is they would like to have a vehicle maintenance facility. So when those trucks are coming from all over, this gives them a location to go where the trucks can be maintained and and serviced. So we're talking about uh jobs like diesel mechanics and that's something Council member Mayo said, "Hey, you know, we have opportunities. We have CMS that is is doing programs like this." These are different jobs, different pay levels. So this uh creates a real opportunity to have a variety of uh uses, uh jobs, employment opportunities on the same site and it dramatically reduces the square footage of buildings that would be developed on the site. We've met with the Steel Creek Residents Association. Uh the traffic from this site would be about halved going from that major logistics facility to this. So we are talking about some slightly more intensive uses. It's really that vehicle maintenance facility, which is key uh to Averitt wanting to be there um to serve the needs for for their company. Uh so happy to take any questions you have. All right, are there any questions? Move to close the hearing. Second. Uh so Matt, is it Surkovets? Yes, it is. I apologize. I couldn't quite read that. Uh All right. Um have a motion and a second. All in favor. Okay, so we trundle along now to the last one for tonight, rezoning petition 2025-140 by XL Financial Services Inc. Approximately 0.43 acres located east of Sandy Porter Road, north of Camden Creek Lane, and south of Sandy River Lane in Council District 3, Miss Mayo's district. Current zoning N2B, neighborhood 2B. Proposed zoning CAC-1 CD, community action center activity center one conditional. Staff recommends approval of this petition. Mr. Oliver. Yes, petition 2025-140 is 0.43 acres located on the east side of Sandy Porter Road, just west of South Tryon Street. Petition proposes an adaptive reuse of a single family home for activities permitted in the community activity center zone district. Site is currently developed with a single family home. Current zoning is N2B, neighborhood two. Proposed zoning is CAC-1CD, community activity center conditional. The plan is consistent with the goals and policies of the Southwest Outer Community Area Plan. However, it is not in alignment with 2040 policy map recommendation for this for the neighborhood one place type, and I'll elaborate on that more in a moment. Um, the proposal allows for the adaptive reuse of the existing structure to accommodate uses permitted by right and under prescribed conditions in the community activity center district, such as personal services, office, medical, dental office, etc. But, it prohibits um certain uses that may be incompatible with the neighborhood, such as automotive oriented uses, such as vehicle fueling facilities, drive-thrus, car rental facilities, parking lots as a principal use etc. Um, so it however while it is consistent with the plan, um but not in alignment with the policy map, it would um be a minor map amendment to that policy map. Um, it is consistent with the goals and the policies of the Southwest Outer Outer um Community Area Plan as it meets the minor map amendment criteria, such as a minimum acreage when you combine it with the other community activity center place type that's surrounding it um to the southeast and to the north. Um, it's adjacent to neighborhood two place type and zoning, both both across the street and um surrounding it. And it's less than a quarter mile from multiple bus routes. Um, the proposed plan could help facilitate the Southwest Outer Outer Community Area Plan priority goal of a 10-minute neighborhood by expanding access to go goods and services um for area residents. And the program guide provides additional information on how the policies recommended by the adopted community area plans um would update the policy map. Staff recommends approval of this petition as it meets the minor map amendment criteria. And um supports the shift to a community activity center enabling a wider mix of retail, office, medical, and service uses. Um, site surrounded by other community by other community activity center place type, neighborhood two place type and zoning. And um and has access to transit. I'm happy to take any questions following the petitioners' presentation. Thank you, Mr. Oliver. We have one speaker signed up, Delores Leath. Good evening. Good evening. Thank you. My name is Delores Leath. I am the president of Excel Financial Services and representing the petition for 2500 Sandy Porter Road to be rezoned to CAC-1. When I purchased this property, it was approximately I would say about 15 years ago, and at the time it was it was very residential there. The apartments behind the property currently were not there. The gas station at the corner of Sandy Porter and Tryon were not South Tryon was not there. Um, there was I believe the Dunkin Donut was built Dunkin Donuts was built not long after, but overall, [snorts] it really had a residential feel to it. With time, and I would say over the last five, seven years, eight years, it has changed dramatically. And what I've found is that it is increasingly difficult for me to to keep good tenants in it. You know, people don't want to be there if they have kids because this property is the first residential property in a line of residential properties. They have built the school down the road. There is a facility, community facility across the street. There is a restaurant bar next door, as well as those apartments behind my property property. So, I'm asking that we rezone it. I do believe that bringing the rezoning would help the community because we're we're looking to open a professional services establishment that would be open to the community for and it would be by appointment only. So, right now traffic is a huge issue in the area, but it would be by appointment only and we can we do have enough space. We're going to use building that we have. We have enough space to provide for parking on site and we would be able to offer things like nails, hair salon, um you know, facials, that sort of thing. So, it'll be personal services establishments. And I'm open to any questions. So, thank you, Ms. Leath. I mean, Ms. Mayo has a question. >> Any comments? Yes. Uh, hi, how are you? Um, I'm just hoping that you'll get a chance to talk to the Steel Creek Residents Association. They have mentioned that they have not heard about this petition. Um, I've consulted with the planning staff. If if you could get with Holly and her team, or I believe Joe Mangum is helping with I know that is not Joe is on when you look at the paperwork. But, if if you can get with Javier uh Lopez from the Steel Creek Residents Association and please present to them um your petition. I think that would be helpful for me as I'm talking about that with um my colleagues. Thank you. >> Yeah, I will say that they were on the mailing list. >> Sorry, sorry, there wasn't a question. >> Yeah, that was just asking her to Okay. Um, we appreciate you coming tonight. Thank you. Thank you. I'll make a motion to Oh, we're closing the Close the hearing. Order to close the hearing. Second. All right. All in favor? Okay. So, that's the last hearing for tonight. We do have a closed session, so I I do you need to read them the motion to go into closed session? Uh, is there a motion to go into closed session pursuant to North Carolina General Statute 143-318.11A4 to discuss matters related to the location or expansion of industries or other businesses in the area served by the public body, including I move. Okay. Second. Order, please. Order. >> some businesses coming to JD, not the Colin. Colin. Still in session. You're interrupting us. Um, All right. All right. So, I think we got all that. I have a motion and a second. I have a motion and a second. All in favor? Okay. All right. We're going into closed session. Okay. Thank you. JD and John.