e e e e [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Applause] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] he he [Music] [Music] [Music] [Applause] [Music] [Music] w [Music] [Music] now [Music] [Applause] [Applause] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] call this meeting to order thank you for those who are joining us in our um Building inside the chamber and thank you for those that are joining us virtually um we really appreciate all of the opportunities that we have to work in this community as elected officials and to be here for our zoning meeting today so I'm going to start off with our um introductions for those at the dis and we'll start with our um assistant City attorney ter hegler gray senior assistant City attorney good evening Lana Mayfield council member at large C is six Ed DRS district 7 malcol Graham District Two good evening Dante Anderson mayor PRM District one vow serving as mayor Liz Babson assistant city manager good evening marer Molina District 5 good evening dimple as at large Billy tons Deputy city clerk all right um we begin our meeting with an expression of um of inspiration I think we've just come out of a budget session so I don't know how you can be any more inspired and been sitting for three hours in a budget meeting a z meeting how about that and know well oh we and we come right in to help you do you know the government's here to help you that's exactly what we're trying to do today so um I want to um say that um we have we do have a moment of inspiration by one of our council members and tonight is council member asira I would say that if you choose to participate in our discussion up here for this beginning of our meeting so that we actually get things done well for you and as following um Miss Ash's completion we will all um at the dis will stand up for our Pledge of Allegiance please participate if you choose to so with that I'm going to ask M asir to guide us through this evening thank you Madame mayor please bow your heads if you choose to do so in one week we will not be found in this Chambers we'll be observing Memorial Day so I wanted to make sure we recognize that tonight Memorial Day is is a crucial observance in the US dedicated to honoring and remembering the men and women who have sacrificed their lives in service to the country I want to thank everyone here and online that has dedicated their lives to serving our country and remembering those who are no longer with us Heavenly Father we come to you today recognizing the bra bravery and service of those in all branches of the military as we begin this meeting help us engage in meaningful discussion allow us to grow closer as a group and nurture the bonds of community and remember we are here to serve our community and our country in our own way tonight amen amen please stand for our Pledge of Allegiance I pledge Al 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 I'm going to take a few minutes to go through the explanation of the zoning process the process begins with applications submitted to the planning staff for review there are two types of cases on on our agenda tonight decisions and hearings decisions are on cases for which a public hearing was previously held and we'll have no further public comment hearings we would like to have anyone that wishes to speak as a part of the hearing to come down and see our city clerk at the end over here um so that we can get you scheduled on the right petition um to speak where you would like to be or have spoken um so we have uh in the hearings any that we have a staff presentation the staff has no time limit the petitioner and those in favor get three minutes combined to present a case unless there are opponents who are signed up to speak or if staff is in opposition the petitioner gets 10 minutes the opponent gets 10 minutes combined and the petitioner gets a two-minute rebuttal if no one is opposed or signed up to speak the staff will provide a short presentation and then we will close the public hearing and we'll move to the next item to be opened um petitions then go to the zoning committee of the Planning Commission for review and recommendation I'd like to introduce the zoning committee chair and ask him to to introduce the members of his board Mr Welton thank you Madame mayor uh and thank you Council my name is Douglas a Welton and I serve as the chairman of the zoning committee of the Planning Commission allow me to introduce my fellow uh committee members will Russell sha anely Rick Wier Terry Lansdale Rebecca Wilden and Clayton cely the zoning committee will meet on Tuesday June 4th at 5:30 p.m. here at the government center at that meeting the zoning committee will discuss and make recommendations on the petitions that have a hearing here tonight the public is welcomed at that meeting but please note it is not a continuation of the public hearing that is being held here tonight prior to to that meeting you are welcome to contact us and provide input and you can find contact information for each petition on the city's uh website at Charlotte planning.org back to you madam mayor all right thank you very much I'm now I'm going to ask Mr Dave Patton to tell us if we have any adjust adjustments or changes um in terms of deferrals or withdrawals um from since the agenda was prepared thank you mad mayor we do have just one uh deferral this evening and is a public hearing that was um item number 10 on the agenda 2023-24 by the paces Foundation uh they are requesting a deferral for their public hearing to our June 17th meeting and that's all we have all right so we need to have a motion to accept the one item that's being deferred do we have moved and a second any discussion hearing none all in favor please say I I anyone opposed all right all right our next item on our agenda is the consent agenda items this is where we have um petitions that meet certain criteria and um I'll see if I can find the criteria so that I can read it to you all right so we have a consent agenda items and we have two of those tonight which are items three and four which may consider be considered in one motion unless a council member would that would like to have a separate vote those petitions that are chosen for consent items had no public opposition to the PO petition at their hearing the zoning committee recommended approval and there were no changes after the zoning committee's recommendation and staff recommends approval um are you is there any consent item that you would like to have a separate vote Miss Mayfield three all right item that was mine too number three so I think we'll just go and start with item number three thank you Madame mayor and for consistency sake the challenge I have is we never really clarified language around to to ensure diversity of pric and points so we've already seen the impact in South End we're seeing the impact along university area alone the light rail where we made Investments we have not actually started working identified funding approved the development is still in the idea SL design stage that we will have light well that will be connecting from Uptown through wil up Wilkerson which we fought for for it to go up Wilkerson to connect to the airport but there has been a lot of transition just in the last four years in this area where area that historically had homes for 30 40 50,000 dollar now have 700,000 plus dollar homes we have new development that started in 20178 further along Wilkerson in preparation of the line coming through this particular project with trying to open up the door for to when we still have not updated the to language to identify diversity and our pricing and our house diverse Price Point housing alone the rail line to ensure opportunities for all residents not just some is something that gives me great concern all right thank you um M Miss Mayfield is referring to resoning petition 2023-the is it's approximately 4 and a half acres located on the Southwest quadrant of the intersection of Wilkinson Boulevard and remount it's in District 3 and the current zoning is manufacturing and Logistics and the proposed zoning is Transit oriented develop velopment neighborhood center with a condition the zoning committee voted to approve and the staff recommends approval of this item so do I have a motion to approve the statement of consistency pres prepared by the zoning commission so do but Dr won has something she want to say Let Me I let me get hands that I can see first okay I just thank you all right Miss wat lingon yeah I just wanted to note on this one very similar to what council member Mayfield just said I know that for um a long time we've been talking about Tod and what it really means for this Corridor it being a corridor of opportunity um and what that means considering funding um how far out the um actual Transit Transit investment is um so this is should not be a surprised to anybody um consistent with how I've been approaching this particular Corridor as it relates to Tod um I got some concerns about this one all right Miss council member Brown did you want to speak okay all right do I have a motion someone and a second any further discussion all in favor of the petition please raise your hands the item passes all opposed all right thank you very much so we'll now go to item four which is resoning petition 2024-25 District 2 and um the current zoning is manufacturing and Logistics and the proposed zoning is innovation mixed use the zoning committee voted to recommend approval the staff recommends approval do you have do I have a motion to accept the zoning committee statement of consistency is our own so move second we have a motion and a second is there any further discussion hearing none all in favor please say raise your hands anyone oppose that's unanimous all right thank you very much so those are our two consent items for the agenda today let's go to item five which is um resoning petition 2024-25 by Charlotte planning design and development this is a text Amendment the purpose of this Udo text amendment is to make changes to the conservation require residential development standards in section 4.5 of the Udo to increase the quality and quantity of required open space to increase transitions to adjacent parcels and revise frontal requirements there are two proposed changes in five of the 39 articles these changes include increasing the amount of open space from two to 5 Acres adding a landscape yard at the perimeter of the site requiring lots to the front of public streets common open space or Green Space increasing the minimum dimensions of required common open space establishing design standards for requ required open space and other minor changes the zoning committee voted unanimously as well as the staff recommends approval of this petition um is there anyone that would like to speak to this item heing no one that would like to speak to this item then we have a I'm sorry mayor I think the chair of the Planning Commission is trying to get your to I could not see Mr Welton uh Madam mayor I'd just like to say that we voted unanimously to defer our recommendation a they deferred it oh I'm sorry you're correct it's deferred um the Z the zoning committee did defer this petition my apologies Mr Welton all right Mr barari yeah with without going into the details I think deferral enables us more time because my current position would be not to support this there are some merits in this approach and things that need to be cleaned up but there's also some broader issues where this is a solution for our community building the things we need them to build and if we could solve some of the other problems I think this would no longer be as important as it is so it has nothing to do with um single family zoning and duplex Triplex that's a different conversation alog together uh this is something very specific and Nuance so I would make a motion that we defer all right we have a motion and do we have a sec a second Miss Mayfield So we have a substitute motion for a deferral to and um do you have a deferral until the motion was to till somebody figures it out oh that might be okay all right so with that um who would like to speak to this motion Mr DS so uh this is being excuse me done the way it is because of a pipeline of zoning applications that are basically not in alignment with the purpose of the Udo exactly and what we've seen is that uh uh a lot of the bught plans that have been submitted Avail themselves of this conservation option but in ways that we really didn't intend to happen and uh as staff has pointed out to us there are thousands of these in the pipeline it particularly affects the Ed etj because a lot of things are going on in the etj under this conservation option so we've heard from County Commissioners and from residents need TJ you know please stop this from happening um I believe that as far as it goes uh it's very workable and what we are also working on is a compact uh development option that responds to the concerns of the industry namely and this is an interesting point for us to ponder the industry has pointed out that applying the regular Udo standards without using the conservation option or without the compact one points to a price point just because of all the requirements that's really higher than what we want right so we need to now recognize the implications of our ordinances in terms of the kind of development that they permit commercially uh I think the compact one does that it's going to come up next month for a vote uh that's in process now hearings and so on um so I believe the uh as I talked about before on this we want to close this back door through which all these plans are being submitted but also open a front door and I believe we're doing that and therefore I feel it's appropriate for us to act on this tonight all right I have Miss miror followed by Miss Johnson thank thank you Madame mayor Mr DRS his spot on uh when we implemented the Udo we did not intend this this level of density uh we did not intend neighborhoods to not have public public streets uh publicly maintained roads we did not have development where it would not be required to plant trees uh this is unintended consequences that we are seeing I think we need to fix before more damage is done uh where residents will be taking on maintaining uh alleys uh privately maintained roads uh and I think we have seen from we have learned from our etj um that it will be it will cost lot more than in than the savings that will generate uh when someone purchases the property so I I just personally feel that if we wait too long uh we will regret this so I will be supporting this text amendment to move forward thank you yes M Johnson thank thank you madam mayor I'll also be supporting the text Amendment and voting against the substitute motion um but for for lots of reasons and and I'll say I don't you know you know I've suggest that we retire the phrase unintended consequences um I think as a body of leaders um we should we should U recognize when things are foreseeable so unintended consequences I just see them as consequences for bad decision like in life so I think we as a council and leaders should really stop saying that because some of these things were foreseeable um when the Udo was passed but more importantly I think that we should if we listen to our planning director some of the th some of the terms that she use this she talks about not passing this could be detrimental to the residents that are bearing the cost and the consequences that are um on the owners and if you listen to that that zoning committee meeting she really was clear on how detrimental this could be to our residents so I think that we need to act on this and act on this promptly so I'll be supporting the text Amendment thank you all right Miss Molina uh thank you Madame mayor and I just want to um lift up um the conversation from our transportation and development planning and development meeting uh where we had uh Miss Craig and her team to discuss uh some of those items uh as we refer to unintended consequences um some of the petitions that have come into the pipeline and and without making this decision now um we will possibly um have to deal with an additional over 3,000 5,000 I think it was um of of the type of unintended um petitions so I although I I have heard I want to make sure that I'm clear because I and I appreciate uh the offering of the substitute and I think I understand why council member barari is making it uh because there was kind of a discussion among myself and our our colleagues as to when do we do this right because a lot of the people from the development Community um spoke up and they said that you know this particular text Amendment would make it more difficult to create affordable units and as uh the chairperson Mr DRS has said there is um a plan to resolve that uh coming in the very near future for the you know development Community as they continue to try to uh create some of those affordable units but in in the interim I think it is important to go with the recommendation of staff so I will be also you know supporting um the text Amendment tonight so that we can Stave off some of those unintended consequences as we already have plans uh that will deal with you know the affordability and creating more affordable units thank you Madame mayor thank you any further speakers Mr Graham thank you madam mayor I I too will be supporting the original um text Amendment as proposed by staff over the last several weeks I've had numerous meeting with staff um developers designers as well as those those who develop affordable housing units uh what we said right from the very start when we passed the Udo was that we would uh utilize the document as a living document and make changes along the way where we saw that there were indeed unintended consequences to the decision that we made so this is spoton in terms of what we said we would do and so I support the uh the staff recommendation Mr barari two points just procedurally to make everyone's night easier it's been a long day I think that my was the first motion on the table so rather than to make everyone do that think someone can make a counter proposal and that can be voted on if that's the will but secondly I just want to say one more piece on this that I'm not sure you have to go deep into this one to really understand the ramifications many things said are accurate about this and moving time time is of the essence because of what's happening but as I've dove into the depths of this what I've realized is that there are things and tweaks that could be made and that could be brought to us right now that is not what we have in front of us that would have would have done certain things to help the problem for example if somebody is using little uh uh spread out areas of green space and counting that as a contiguous green space that's the spirit of this well let's just remove that loophole because of course that's not what we mean to do if somebody is putting in because it's a ble to be done today in the current ordinance that they're using Alleyways that aren't going to withstand the test of time aren't going to be maintained and upkept and they need to be public streets let's make that tweak but what we're doing here instead is just saying well let's just make this another unusable tool and go from two to five acres that essentially cut it out so I the the the punch line was if you give us more green space contiguous City because of that and people are gravitating towards this because of the spirit and others are coming towards it because there's simply nowhere else in the entire ordinance for them to do what they need to do right now so if we F if if if we had been urgent about fixing the problem and not just making the tool basically unusable that might be a little bit of an OV exaggeration but it's not far from it all those things are going to shut down because there's no longer a place to do it and the other side of that is okay well we're having good conversations we have a lot of good conversations but while this is on the table and it's out there it creates urgency to solve it when that urgency is gone it's just going to grind to a halt and if something happens at all it'll be way down the road and then we will have gridlocked the people we've asked to build more units in this community so there's definitely two sides to this argument and it's not simple all I'd say is I would prefer to keep the time cooker pressure on everyone to solve the other problem and come back with a real solution Miss watlington thank you madam mayor I just wanted to uh ask uh Craig if she could just speak to so everybody around here is clear about what the plan is and the path forward um and I know that the chared happened that that U what we see here is responsive to some of the concerns so just want to make sure that for the record everybody was clear yes so you just uh just to make sure I understand you want to understand the schedule and the timeline and what we're working on yeah and how this plays into the overall sure so I think this um this text amendment is sort of the phase one and so this is about addressing um the consequences of of development standards that may not be as clear as we'd like them to be and are exposing loopholes closing that and we are fast and furiously working on the compact development option um we should have a draft in a matter of days um that we can start circulating but we've had a number of workshops with the development Community um and have had lots of conversations with staff and various stakeholder groups uh to talk about um what those compact standards um should look like and I'm pretty happy with the solution that we have in front of us I think it's um it provides housing Supply but housing Supply with high quality standards and putting that housing in places where it's most needed um and so I'm happy to answer any other questions you have um so as it as we talk about this particular thing I know that council member car just mentioned that he had a concern that this particular uh text Amendment May render something unusable and not in a way that would be effective can you just speak a little bit to how you see this um impacting the path of development sure so a conservation development is intended to be used in situations where you have special environmental features and so um it's a practice that's been around for decades it's a a planning principle that we learned very early on in um planning studies and so projects that have those kinds of features will be incentivized to protect them I don't think that every development project will be using that it's not intended to be something that everyone's using it's supposed to be an exception in a small number there are other cities that have the exact same standards including Raleigh that what we're proposing and it is being used there and so we've got some precedent and other cities where um it does work for those kinds of projects um but again it's not intended to be the primary path compact is probably going to be the the tool that's used more and it's more similar to what was in place before pre udio with cluster development so I think we're just make we're aligning the tool um looking backwards as to what was working and then also looking forward at what's new in the market and making sure we're right sizing that tool for future development and so like I think a couple council members have mentioned our plan is to have that compact development form before you all for a vote in June thank you um I believe the chair intends to speak and I'm happy to defer but um I'd like to make a motion then that we accept staff's recommendation and adopt this um adopt this text amendment I think M Mr Bard you want to withdraw your motion or I I think it's fair to call it the first motion and a counter can happen over top second second yeah the first motion um and so there's a substitute by Miss watlington to accept the staff's recommendation um all in favor please raise your hands substitute for the substitute motion yes because once it's passed it's no longer Mr barari no longer has a motion all right so this is um was opposed anyone opposed all right is there a second on that substitute yeah yes Miss Miss Mayfield made the second all right thank you so now let's go to the next item which is item six for petition 2022-2023 approximately 4 Acres located at the intersection of Ryan Road and Morris Chapel Road is in District 3 the current zoning is neighborhood one a Zone zoning District the proposed zoning is B1 CD neighborhood business conditional the zoning committee recommended 5 to2 to uh to deny this petition staff recommends approval of this petition and so with that we will um I would ask the STA or ask for a motion to accept the zoning committees well I guess we'll say accept the staff do we have a write up of the staff Dave uh we it would be in as part of our staff analysis would be in the rationale section for for that so we don't have it on the screen this reflects zoning committee's recommendation so if you choose to vote in support of the petition you would uh make a recommendation to adopt staff's statement of consist to that can we um make sure that we go back to the text Amendment and make sure that we adopt the proper consistency statement for that so the consistency statement I thought was the text Amendment no there needs to be sorry thank you guys we have to go back and do a take redo take a new a new approach to the motion um I believe that the main motion was made by miss watlington and miss watlington needs to include that the tax amendment um is acceptable to our that we I think that because there is a defer that we don't have a zoning committee statement you may adopt the staff's statement of cons consistency so the statement of consistency if you would just say that we do not have the zoning committee did not have a statement of consistency and we would vote to accept this motion on with the statement with with the statement of consistency thank you Billy second all right we have a motion and a second all in favor please raise your hand again is there any discuss one more time vote it's a revote a redo rote re redo now we're on six I'll oppose oh anyone and oppose thank you T I'm sorry Mr Bari so we went back right yeah we went back we did go to that okay thank you all right so now we're on six and in this case um M Hagler gray do we have a we have the staff's recommendation and the zoning committee voted to recommend denial so do I have a motion a motion to approve a motion to approve yes if you yes Brown all right we have a motion to adopt the um approve this petition and adopt the statement of consistency from the staff yes for its approval yes all right do I have a second yes second all right we have a second any discussion Miss Molina uh thank you Madame mayor and I actually the I know that the um the uh District representative is actually in support but I I'd like to know more about the zoning committee's um perspective if we could ask if the chair is willing to State why he denied or they are willing to recommend denial of this all right Mr Welton the question is for the committee all right uh thank you very much um when we had this discussion it was a robust discussion and uh two points uh fell out of the discussion um we had the uh point about the environmental impact of gas stations and that was one of the points that was made we also had a point where there was a discussion about traffic improvements uh I will say that I uh fell short as as chairman in pointing out that some of the discussion about traffic improvements were things that were actually addressed in the um the uh staff's report so that discussion perhaps did not necessarily cover everything that had been addressed uh the motion and temperature of the room was that they felt those arguments were compelling uh there were two votes uh who supported the staff's recommendation and those uh were myself and commissioner Neely we felt that uh this was an allowed use in this particular District um and uh also you know we're in that situation where uh gas stations are still necessary cars did not disappear and we felt that those was compelling reasons for us to go forward with this and uh if you have any other questions best no I mean just specifically to kind of give some leeway because again and I I think I said this in a previous meeting I I actually love that there's Divergence right I love that there's these differing perspectives for us to kind of collect but I just wanted to know that you know what the specifics around why there was a recommendation for denial but thank you that's all I have Madam mayor all right we have a motion by councilwoman Brown and a second by Miss Anderson any other speakers hearing no other discussion all in favor of this petition with and the statement from the staff um staff's approval of the petition we have a motion we have a motion for an accept the statement of consistency is our own so all in favor anyone opposed all right that's great all right no oh never we're going to item seven now Madam May point of order sorry did you record the oppose no one nobody raised their hand when I said on okay all right you want to be on the record I think we can add you to the record to being on OPP post is it both Miss Mayfield and Miss watlington who's who's opposed I was opposed okay if you if the clerk would note that they're opposed thank you look at it so all right the next petition is item number seven for approximately 1.6 acres located on the northeast side of East 7th Street south of Lamar and north of Clement it's in District One the current zoning is General commercial the proposed zoning is mix use development District optional the zoning committee voted 6 to1 to recommend approval staff does not recommend approval of this petition in its current form and I believe there have been some changes to the language of the petition or the language of the decision and I'm going to ask Mr Paton to tell us what that change is thank you madam may we U some additional conversations with the petitioner uh prior to the meeting this evening and the petitioner has made two changes to uh this uh proposal and that would be a reduction in the unit count from 215 to 193 and also requesting to modify the parking ratio from 1.1 space per unit to 1.2 spaces per unit I believe those uh conversations or those changes or result from conversations with u members of the community and folks that express some concerns and hopefully those uh alleviate some of those uh but those were the two changes that were made uh staff doesn't feel that they would be uh major changes to go back uh for a consideration uh for this project and again we're made in conjunction with uh neighborhood conversation so uh we wouldn't recommend they go back to zoning committee but that will be a vote that yall have to take at this point do we have a motion to not send this item back to the zoning committee move second we have a motion and a second any discussion hearing none oh not on that I have a question okay so hearing there's no no one has a question so all in favor of the motion not to send it back to the zoning committee please raise your hands anyone opposed okay the motion passes so now we'll go back to the um item and I would say that we have to do we have a motion to the original yes we would have a motion is there a motion to approve the petition as restated with the Revis visions that we just voted to approve all right and that motion is made by Miss Anderson second and second by Mr dggs needs a consistency statement we I know with the and approve this with the consistency statement but the question is is there anyone that would like to discuss this motion Miss Johnson thank you just so I'm clear does the staff now support the petition no that doesn't change staff's recommendation consist stat no you you would still adopt if you wanted Z zoning committees they recommended approval so David I didn't hear you committees I think so the question was does this change staff's recommendation it does not uh and then there was a question on whether it's staff's consistency statement or zoning committee if you vote to support the petition you would adopt zoning commit zoning committee statement of consistency as your own not the staff's staff's zoning committees you said it's very Mr petton said that you half is not changing his position on the on the um recommendation and that the um zoning committee committee statement of consistency would be what we would be voting on but we have other people that would like to address this and so I had Mr Driggs and M I'm sorry do you have another question no that's all the staff does not recommend Mr DS and then will be followed by miss miss ashir I thought we were voting pass okay I'm no we I have people that want to all right yes thank thank you madam mayor so Mr Paton is there anything that petitioner would do anything make changes to get staff support uh we had consistently asked for reduction in Building height to about 65 ft which is consistent with the corridor I understand they need a different height for their project to to work can be feasible for them but that's where the difference is so unless that is changed staff's position is has just been that so so um thank you Mr Bretton because I have been reviewing emails from residents in Elizabeth neighborhood I know some of them are present here former mayor Dan CL falter is also here um The Challenge here is the height so the the unit reduction that has not resulted in decrease in height not not that I'm aware of no okay so that doesn't address the underlying issue here uh so I would not be able to support it all right um now I would have hear from The District representative thank you thank you Madame mayor and um first of all I want to thank the community for being engaged we've had conversations originally I went out uh to visit the homes of some residents that are here to look at the site and we've had continue engagement um over through the end of last week and so there were a a number of of questions from the community not only Building height um but also parking impact of parking in the neighborhood um and how a building like this would impact residents abilties to park in front of their homes deeper in the neighborhood and so um as we have continued to have these discussions um I'm also Mr Welton get ready because I would like for you to speak about um the committee's conversation around this so there a couple things going on with the reduction of 10% of the units that would that would automatically reduce the number the impact of parking of course and then increasing the parking ratio to 1.2 will help as well the other challenge um around the height is that there was some and Mr petton I I don't know if you need to speak to this but there was some movement on the original ask of the height um so there was this the height issue was partially addressed and I would like for Mr Wilton to talk about the design um and after Mr Welton talks about the design of the building I'll just have one more statement so Mr wion could you speak uh thank you madam mayor protim uh as a committee can considered this uh we look at trade-offs in terms of what do we get and we looked at the height and didn't really have a problem because we were getting a number of tradeoffs that we thought were exceptional we will get more supply of housing we will provide housing that is immediately close to $1 billion worth of Transportation infrastructure we will get housing that is walking distance in proximity to job centers such as Novant and Central peont Community College it is also walking distance to Neighborhood uh Center where there are at least a dozen restaurants small businesses and shops we will get uh housing located immediately adjacent to park and wreck facilities which will provide uh entertainment for everyone and uh Green Space we will also get what I consider an exceptional building form if we' done this by right you would get a cube which would have been much closer to the uh adjoing neighbors than what we've we've achieved which is a building where the massing is pushed toward the road and away from the neighbors houses and that provides the separation that we believe is necessary and appropriate for this particular petition and uh those were the comments that that we made oh and it's sloped it's downhill there's also if you look at uh if you go to storm waterer service you pull the little map out you can see that this is actually there's and if I believe if I'm correct there's about an 8T drop from one side of the one side of the site to the lowest site and I believe it's 14 feet from the next adjacent building on uh the next block out on on clet so there is topography that should be considered and when you're standing next to the building uh if you're if you you will not necessarily notice the height because of the the structure of the building it is articulated appropriately we believe so those are those are most of the comments thank you Mr uh Wilton I think the challeng is you know with if the partitioner would just remove this petition withdraw it the byright build would have the same density with with less parking allotment so it would be a greater impact on a community just by right so having um these changes and these concession really and truly does impact the neighborhood in a positive way and the last thing I would say is that you know this is a petition where you have the neighborhood association the ECA and the land use um person from ECA be in approval of this particular development but then you have an aspect of the neighborhood who I've listened to loud and clearly who have a challenge with this um but where we're at now the by right option would be far worse than what would be accepted here and so I'm going to continue to work with the residents on some additional parking um solutions for the neighborhood but as we move forward today I I will be supporting this petition with the concessions that Dave just went through thank you madam mayor mayor I have a followup question for Mr Patton all right Miss asir yes so um Mr Patton if this rezoning is approved would the place type be revised to to a community activity center with a higher density it would be revised just for this parcel or these sets of parcels that are being developed along this block so that could potentially give us a little bit of a a precedent for the rest of that quarter looking for Heights that are Beyond just that neighborhood center which is also one of the concerns we've got long-term uh that's why we're been holding the line at the height for the neighborhood center because we also want that Corridor to kind of maintain that same character uh so that could be something a future petitioner could point to down the road of course we'll evaluate each one on its own merits but that is something that we do have a bit of a concerned with so so I think to Mr Patton's Point um I think it's just not about this rezoning petition but the ones where someone can point to and say look you know now that we we are we'll be revising a place type and the presedent it could set so so would this place be appropriate for the there is there are there is it's adjacent to Neighborhood one they do have some height transitions in the actual uh project that don't quite match up with what the Udo would require there's a a 50 foot and 100 foot or 100 foot and 200 foot um separation or transition zone for uh projects like this where you can be 50 feet within the first 100 and then 65 ft in within those 200 feet so there is some difference in what's proposed as far as the transitions I think they're a little bit shorter maybe 80 feet uh where they start to make some of those increases in height versus 100 and 200 so there is there is a bit of a difference uh but you know again I I certainly we understand all the perspectives but we're looking at it from that policy standpoint and what that long-term outcome will be okay so considering the policy and the long-term outcome uh I mean this could change the neighborhood's character um is that correct potentially there's always potential yes uh I mean it it is something that again when staff if a future resoning comes in uh will'll evaluate it with the request against whatever the current policy is but it doesn't prevent a petitioner from looking at what was approved around it and and citing that uh it is something we do take into context but we evaluate them all in their own Merit uh but it's harder to have that conversation when there's already things that have been kind of chipped away out over time okay thank that's all I have right this m thank you uh Madame mayor so I I'm actually when when looking at this I I struggle because we get a lot of recommendations in the affirmative from staff and to have staff kind of holding the line on on this one it's concerning um and and so my thought on this is we've had a plan and that plan has created Place types throughout the entire city and so when you're saying to staff that it's taken years to plan out our city that you have a different idea then the point is to prove staff wrong right so you should have enough argument enough meat in the argument to say staff I feel like what you've designed here may need to be modified based on X Y and Z and it should be clear right because there's so many um touch points that they'll have with staff before it act and and the zoning committee um before it makes it to this point so the fact that the Divergence is with staff that will actually have the touch points on you know all of our city services and things that will connect to this it's it's hard for me to support this I actually would recommend and I actually have a question for David in that regard do you think that this petitioner can make I mean based on I've never spoken to the petitioner so I don't know what the questioning is or anything like that but do you think that this petitioner would be with more time willing to make the modifications and adjustments that would get them to your yes that's probably a good question for the petitioner I'll just say since about uh August of 2023 we've asked for a height reduction and we've seen the 78 ft consistently for I guess the last 8 months or so nine months or so so I wouldn't want to speak for them but we haven't historically seen any any effort to make that uh bridge that gap between where we are and what they're asking for hold on one second that's because that's concerning and so um and and with that the reason why I was asking because I was wondering would it be better Fit For A deferral like would they need more time to kind of get with you know some level of uh of of of you know getting closer to what staff has recommended but obviously it sounds like that may not be um an option so with that I don't feel like I'm going to support this tonight um I feel like that you know with that level of you know disregard for what the current plan says and not really a clear argument on why um this this should be different it it concerns me and I don't feel comfortable saying that that's something that we need to do tonight right council member Anderson thank you Madame mayor I I just want it to be clear um for my colleagues who have been speaking that this has been a very long conversation with the community and um and and the petitioner as well and we have gotten to a place where there is there there's a subset of of residents who don't feel fully comfortable with with the building um but our our welcoming of the concessions that have been made and a petitioner has been listening to the community there have been several uh Community meetings and and one-on-one discussions so it hasn't been a rushed process at all it's actually been quite a deliberate process and we also have the neighborhood association and the land use person who is the expert for the ECA writing a letter of approval and has been in conversation with all the residents and the petitioner to work to get to this point and so um I if I if I thought that deferring this would help move something I of course would recommend that um but this hasn't been a rush process so deferring it wouldn't actually help the conversation move forward cuz absolutely if I did if I did believe that I would actually be recommending that um it's it's a situation where um in this particular Corridor uh there's some neighbors who are are not excited about this um as we've seen on various other petitions right um and we've I've tried to work to get the best outcome for the neighborhood with the understanding that the the association has is is for this as well so we have some height reduction we have some staggering um we have a reduction in units we have increase in parking ratio if I thought anything else could come from a 30-day deferral I absolutely would recommend that but I don't believe that that would would help at all and from a bught perspective it would actually be worse off than this and that's that's the conundrum I'm at is that you would get a building with a design not as Mr welon laid out with increased parking density so net net by right the neighborhood would be worse off and I never want to see that I want to see the best outcome for the neighborhood is that is that is that what this would be by by right yeah by right there could be a similar project but those height transitions would be a little bit different the max height would be a little bit different um given how close they are in proximity to those neighborhood one place types and you know I I there as as U mayor proam Anderson alluded to there's been a lot of conversations in cour coordination with the community and we certainly recognize that uh you know there are good merits to the project as a whole but our our main concern from the start has always been just that building hey but there are really good design elements built into it as well so you know this is a tough one for staff because there are quality aspects of the project but there's also one lingering concern that we've had from the start that just hasn't been addressed uh in a way that we felt is appropriate so uh but again that's not knocking any of the effort and work that's been done with the community on this thus far because it has been a very long process and a very detailed process and Mr dggs is next thank you um I just wanted to say for one uh we can reach a different conclusion from the staff without diminishing our appreciation for their work their respect uh we have a somewhat different angle on this thing right and it's a uh it's a quasi judicial process so um I'm sorry it's a uh it isn't it is precisely not quasi judicial it is legislative and legislative means um that we can make a judgment about it now I I just want to recognize all the work mayor poem has put into this which we have not individually been able to do uh I respect her judgment um I I know what she's up against because if you remember the green t-shirts up there I've got one too right and I can tell you right now we we've reached an outcome uh where I'm going to recommend approval of that and I hope that when I tell you why when the time comes uh you'll understand and and support it so I see the situation that protm is in and frankly uh and also reviewing the the details of the case such as they're known to me uh I think we ought to back her up I I really think that uh she has put a lot of work into this and that um we have a certain obligation amongst ourselves here to respect that so I'll be supporting it thank you all right um and now I have Miss Brown yeah thank you thank you mam I want to say something to the residents for coming out thank you so much for coming out I received your emails read them um mayor potim um thank you for your expertise and the knowledge that you put into your work I trust your judgment and I'll be supporting you on this Miss asir yes so just to follow up uh on a couple of comments that council member council member Molina made uh she was spot on uh when she talked about um uh really some of the concerns that staff has raised so council member Anderson said that height has been reduced but Mr Paton said that there have been requests by staff to reduce the height how much has it been reduced by if any at all it it came in initially as just asking for uh the standard height as measured by the ordinance which in mud is up to 120 ft uh so it started there and that's where I think the next submitter that came in dropped it down to where we are today which is that 78 ft so from 120 to 78 yeah okay uh and what it should have been if it if they were to get staff's support what's that what is the height the max height that sta would support our our ask has been the 65 ft that we had a resoning at the corner of 7th U and Hawthorne there which is you know a pretty prominent building now at that location that came in at 65 the apartment's next door I think we're around 58 or 59 so we were trying to look at you know some recently approved projects and what that Corridor and of course the Neighborhood Activity Center standard height is 65 so that's where we derived our ask from uh you of course this came in as a mud petition which is a little bit different it's one of our you know remaining Legacy districts that we've got uh in the queue still for an approval and again that starts at 120 they started at then went down to 78 and that's like I said where we've been uh but the 65 was derived mainly from other projects in the area that recently been approved in that neighborhood Activity Center so you're looking at about almost 13 ft in reduction further reduction that would be needed okay yeah and there is some transition to The Backs side uh it does get lower as you get closer to those you know residences on the back so you know do want to point out that they have made some of those transitions but it doesn't quite line up with the types of transitions that we look for now uh under the comprehensive plan and the Udo and and our place type map so but I do want to at least recognize that they have made some of those transitions back uh into that residential component thank you um you know you know I hear council member Anderson's remarks um did this is something I struggle with just like council member Molina does um you know at the end of the day we we had to make a decision that we can sleep with I um and I understand when Mr Drake said that council member uh Anderson have put in so much time into this um and has been working with the community the neighborhood association development community and so on um but I think we all have we all have to make an independent decision and it may not align with the district Representatives uh position so I I would not be able to support it that's all I have thank you thank okay we have a motion from Miss Anderson and Mr Driggs um to approve the petition and adopt the zoning committee statement of consistency is their own all in favor of the petition please raise your hand one two three four am I missing anyone anyone in all in oppose I'm sorry all opposed all right so really have you gotten everybody for the opposition speak okay thank you yeah so that doesn't so actually that doesn't mean it's denied unless you affirmatively um have a motion to deny just failed to pass I no it just didn't pass I think it just didn't pass so does that mean the petitioner can come back there's no twoyear hold on until it's deny yes but so we don't have a petition to deny you don't have but right now you don't have any action on this particular petition thank you for sharing so yeah so we need to affirm we need to actually deny it if that's our intention that's a different we got Citi here I just want to make sure very clear it's a clear understanding if I ask I make a motion to deny I second we all want to do man yeah he made a motion I did second second I want to make sure we' miss gray if you would just tell if we do a denial what are the um repercussions of a denial um I don't have the coordinates in front of me but it um my understand my recollection is that there's a 2year um period that you can't come back um with this particular petition that's not entirely accurate if I may clarify I know I'm yes I hear you yes but you're going to have to take some action so at some point you can I want to recognize Miss Anderson thank you thank you so um Madame maam I just want to be clear because residents are here and I want us to be honest Brokers with them around what could happen um and the impact of the community by right I also hear um that there is um some some consternation around this particular petition so rather than put the neighborhood in a position where we're voting for something that ultimately would be worse off for the neighborhood um and and that is what we just voted for as a council I would like to make a substitute motion um that I just move forward to defer this and we the floor for sub there is a motion so I can make a substitute motion we already voted on that motion she's making a motion I can make a substitute motion a new motion New Motion motion we motion a new motion we had a motion in a second for denial we already did yeah was a second was there a motion for denial I made a motion forgive me I apologize I didn't see that all I don't think you heard I didn't hear it I I didn't hear this I heard everybody everybody's talking okay Madam clerk would you please tell us where we are on this Madam mayor uh Mr Mitchell was the Mover Mrs ashir was the seconder to deny it okay to deny so that's a motion on the floor so a substitute motion so I was making the substitute motion because I don't I don't want to put the neighborhood in Peril I I want to be um fair to the petitioner because this really has been a very long process and so if you are if the motion is to deny I would much rather defer and see what occurs because again by right it would have a worse impact on the neighborhood and I don't want to have a worse impact on the neighborhood we have a motion and a second and a substitute motion to defer this item this petition all right so um comments or questions yes M Johnson so we just voted to well not to deny it it didn't pass it didn't pass so we there can be a motion to defer it yes yes aute motion okay we have substitute we have a substitute motion for deferral y Madam want to speak to that yes to the deferral portion because that was my original thought that was the the rational for my questioning right the rationale for my original questioning was exactly that it was give this more time right that's what was the line of my questioning so I I am absolutely willing to support a deferral so that if they're willing to come to you know terms with what staff is asking even maybe go back to those you know very engaged residents over there and talk then you know I think that would be worth having especially if there's you know a problem with what the byright option would be which I'm not sure based on you know Mr Patton's uh rebuttal that it it would be but I I'm I am open to a deferral I will say that but that was the original reason it was the original thought and then but we now have a motion on the floor for a deferral a second a second all right is there any discussion on the deferral all right all in favor of the deferral please raise your hands one two three four okay five do you have everyone anyone opposed to the deferral you only because they said they people are to the deferral the deferral pass right all right thank you okay so now we are at our next zoning decision petition 2023 d43 by Wilmore preservation for approximately 3 acres located on the northeastern corner of the of the intersection of West Boulevard in mint it's in District 3 the current zoning is in 1 D the proposed zoning is mix use development District historic district overlay the zoning committee and the staff voted approval of this petition do I have a motion to adopt this petition and and have the statement of consistency of the zoning committee as our own move second we have a motion I couldn't see Miss Brown and the second was second Mayfield okay thank you all right any discussion yeah just all right Miss watlington um this one I'm excited to see finally come through it's been one that's been a long time in the making um and I know that there is conversation not just about this parcel but about this whole intersection because we got the Willmore Center here and the Willmore neighborhood association has been very proactive about coming forward and saying hey we've got assets here um we'd like for it to be something that serves the whole Community uh and our staff has responded and I know that we're in conversation to create an intersection here that's cohesive that works with this um resoning and this development and so I think it'll be a great asset for the neighborhoods so um I'll be supporting all right Miss Mayfield thank you madam mayor I'm glad that this is finally coming through fruition under Miss Brown's leadership because this a conversation that's been happening for a little while but I just want to say thank you to the petitioners for identifying a designation of 5% regarding our multif family and trying to just at least look at diverse Price Point housing as the area is transitioning cuz South Boulevard to is coming further and further into the community people who have been there for Generations are being pushed further and further away and I appreciate the fact that they are preserving the school and the history of Willmore because Willmore is its own area it is not loo is high so or whatever new name it is Wilmore and I appreciate the fact that that is being maintained for future Generations all right Miss Brown yeah thank you so to what uh council member Dr Waton and Mayfield said Willmore is definitely an area to be preserved it's one of the historic neighborhoods in Charlotte that's longstanding so Willmore is near and dear to my heart family members still live over there so just like to see what they're doing and how they went out in the community and engaged and brought everybody to the Forefront so yes I'm definitely supporting and spoke to the family that was in opposition I understand them and how they feel as as well um so I just want to say I'll be supporting and happy to do so moving forward make a motion to move forward so we have a motion to um recommend app to adopt this petition and accept the zoning committee statement of consistency as our own second all in F we already have a motion all in favor please raise your hands anyone opposed all right that covers um petition number nine the next petition is resoning 2024 by the DS group um I'm sorry number that was eight this is we just finished eight it's going to nine yes location of approximately 1.4 four acres located on the east side of south trian west of nation's Ford and north of Queen an Road it's in District 3 again you're winning the lottery today m brown issue three is um and our current zoning is neighborhood B1 the um neighborhood 2 to a conditional um is proposed zoning the zoning committee and the staff recommend approval of this petition is there a motion to approve this petition and accept this count the this the zoning committee statement of consistency as our own m brown was made the motion do I have a second Mr barari was a second all right any discussion Mr dgg sorry any discussion Miss Mayfield thank you Madame mayor for this one for me it's a little more difficult we have the yorkmont park community the neighborhood the yorkmont neighborhood has been very engaged for many years and we all received a email regarding some of the challenges and when we look on when we look at this we have Council historically has approved quite a diff a number of projects in this and media area the challenge I think here for the residents is the setback on this when you look at all the residential single family these are homes that have honestly really nices siiz lots and it seems a bit of a challenge that we have one conversation in one side of town about preserving a area but then on another side of town which honestly is historically A working class lower income part of town we're not having the same conversation regarding sustainability and continuity and preserving with the idea of allowing 50 Town Homes to go right here and the impact that they could have these streets are pretty narrow streets we already see the impact in a lot of communities with people that are parking into residential neighborhoods and the impact that that is having as I mentioned Miss Kut on behalf of other neighbors in the community shot us well Miss Allen shot a email to all of us regarding the concerns that they have with this project blocking entry to the to the neighborhood driveways increased storm water ponding issues infrastructure has not been upgraded to address the storm water issues the number of town homes creates overcrowding and the destruction of the woods and Wildlife because you do have a quite a few mature trees over there how close it is in proximity to the homes the traffic congestion of which we're going to have traffic congestion all across the city yet there's South Tron Nature's for Road the current congestion that we already have because of all the to the majority of those residents are not on the rail they are driving vehicles and that is having an impact so I just want to make sure that we did take into consideration the concerns that Miss kup sent to all of us again as someone who has lived in this community been what over 40 years and has been very active these are some very valid concerns that she and the neighbors have that I just want to make sure that we take into consideration before we decide on final vote on this brown all right Miss Brown thank you so much I hear what council member Mayfield is saying been at all the community meetings with Mr canup and some of the community meetings and their concerns and we did address them and had uh conversations around their concerns and what we can do there was some modifications made by staff as they requested they tried to fulfill them to the best of their ability to address the concern about the traffic the trips that are going to be put in there is not going to increase it that significantly and I'm just going to go with the recommendation of staff and the zoning both have approved I spoke with them in detail about it there's traffic everywhere in our city we can't stop building because of traffic we're not going to stop building because of traffic us as this Council who makes decision for the city and have mobility and how we get around the city that's something we need to really look at and dig deep down inside on how we're going to do this our city is going to continue to grow and move forward so we're going to have to make a decision collectively together how are we're going to move around the city and it's not going to stop people from moving here that wants to live in this great City and that's coming from someone that's lived in District 3 my entire life they're building in my neighborhood they're going to build in canup neighborhood your neighborhood and probably everybody neighborhood at this diet how we look at it how we move forward is going to be how we go around our Mobility plan and that's going to be something that we have to make the decision for all right we have a motion any further comments no we have a motion by m brown followed by second by Mr Driggs and the zoning committee um do we have a motion to accept the approve the petition and accept the statement of consistency of the zoning committee as our own so all in favor anyone opposed Miss Mayfield is opposed all right so thank you very much um now we are going to our zoning hearings and I think Mr Paton is going to tell us which ones are deferred and which ones are um ready for action Mr Pon just item item 10 which I believe we did we take a motion on that deferral earlier yeah uh so just item 10 is deferred to June 17th the rest are as as listed in the agenda so we'll start off with item number 11 we start on which item uh item number 11 11 item 11 thank you all right okay okay all right we have are in our public hearing and you've heard the rules about you know how many minutes and and all that so we have a resoning petition 202 24-33 by Charlotte planning design develop a text Amendment um the purpose of this text Amendment to the Udo is to make changes that result in better functionality changes clar greater Clarity new and updated definitions and basically it's a cleanup um requests um staff recommends approval of this petition um is there anyone speaking to this all right Mr duberry speak from here oh no please come down I'm sorry we're so accustomed to people I first thing I say is don't fall down the steps the second thing I say is please come to the podium and give us your name for the record and we will go from there you have three minutes wait a minute Mr P Mr petton we have to do our presentation sorry have to do the presentation first oh we have we have the staff presentation so sorry Mr thank you all right so 202 24-33 as mentioned is a text Amendment that's clean a cleanup text Amendment um so we do have some just general changes that are occurring throughout U the ordinance itself uh so the first that we'll just kind of go over U clarifies applicability of the Udo um for conditional zoning districts does modify and add some general definitions uh specify standards for when multiple structures are on a lot are either attached or detached uh clarifies what constitutes parking lot maintenance and repair uh clarifies resultant Parcels which are exempt from subdivision regulations and states that they have to comply with standards in the Udo updated some uh and added to some graphics and also just corrected some scribers errors and language references again a lot of these cleanups come from going on almost a year of use uh a year of learning and a year of listening uh so we are trying to be as responsive as we can and again this is our kind of third round of cleanups and we will continue to go through what's in this text Amendment uh so first we'll cover some of the design and dimensional standards that we've made some changes to or proposing changes to um this would create conditions for establishing a new block face for sidewall measurements uh adds for a 25t class B landscape yard option uh for multif family attached residential developments along their Frontage also creates some flexibility in the build to Zone requirement when site conflicts or constraints do exist and also clarifies maximum spacing standards for required prominent entrances uh We've talk about changes to the minimum number of required prominent entrance for non-residential and mixed use buildings uh offer some flexibility within uh our calculating the minimum building length uh really looking at that as a percentage of lot width along a frontage uh things like clarifying standards for selected forms of residential development things such as primary pedestrian entry orientation sidewall orientation prominent entrance requirements uh also modifying or eliminating selected standards for Triplex and quads to align with recent updates to state law uh that's basically going back to the changes that were made to how those buildings are treated uh in the review process as U pertaining to the actual building code um we talk about different things with open space making some clarifications to when open space is required for new construction uh also specifies open space is required for multi-dwelling development and also when open space is required for a multiphase development so that's a development that occurs over multiple phases and multiple years uh We've introduced some New Uses like Auction Sales outdoor produce sales outdoor recreation facilities uh and uh outdoor seasonal sales or Rail Yard telecommunications and data storage facility uh we rename the term gas station to vehicle fueling facility so we're not just recognizing just gas as as a fueling option but also potential electric vehicle fueling facilities um and we also are looking at a removal of the conditional zoning requirement for things like uh vehicle repair facilities for major vehicle repair for Minor vehicle repair facilities and also for those vehicle fueling facilities I'll get to a little caveat in that uh as we get to the end uh that wouldn't be just generally across the board there would be some standards and caveats to that that again I'll I'll allude to on the on the last slide uh We've also looked at adding permissions uh for a manufactured home or single family dwelling on an individual ual lot in our MHP zoning District our manufactured home park zoning District that's consistent with our past practice where we did allow single family dwellings uh within those zoning districts that wasn't carried over into the Udo something we learned and created some challenges with so we are cleaning that up uh we're also creating or adjusting prescribed conditions for things like Farms private Recreation clubs outdoor seasonal sales uh and then also specifying all uses and structures to be located on Parcels for which they've been approved so you can't put that on a separate parcel U adjust use definitions and permissions in the use Matrix as well as prescribed conditions U it talks about accessory structures and clarifying locational standards for those such as things like a detached carport that may be an established Corner side setback things that we just didn't clarify good well enough in this uh in the existing Udo today uh introducing standards for new categories of accessory structure like solar panels uh those wouldn't be solar Farms they would just be if uh a resident wanted to put solar panels uh there are standards now for that but it doesn't apply to a large-scale solar farm operation that has its own set of standards and use requirements uh we also excluded the area of an Adu or accessory dwelling unit from the cumulative square footage of accessory structures on a residential lot so we're treating them separately uh allowing for landscaping and as additional screening alternative for ground and wall mounted mechanical equipment uh in terms of parking we are looking at a modification to tier one zoning District vehicle parking requirements by adding CG and CR uh removing them from tier 2 and putting them into tier one U that was the original intent something that we uh realized as in going through projects under the Udo uh that there was some misalignment and what the intent was and the outcome so uh that's being cleaned up eliminates the tier two and three parking maximums for Senior Living developments uh create a parking structure design for uh structures located in N1 n2a or n2b uh we do allow things like schools in some of those districts they those schools or other uses may need a parking structure we realized we didn't have standards for when structures are designed in those districts so we did want to include that also specified the 400t reference and tier 3 vehicle parking requirement is a minimum 400t walk distance uh and then clarify the percentage of bonus EV parking spaces which may be designed for compact vehicles we do have driveway standards that are being proposed to change as well uh update driveway standards for duplex Triplex and quad buildings we have eliminated the maximum 24t cumulative width and establish a maximum of 40 foot% of lot width uh we are also looking to make an increase to that after the public hearing we've been working quite a bit with folks on the driveway standards that are uh working with us to give us some feedback and and we're listening and and understanding what some of the challenges are and we're going to make some additional adjustments after the public hearing also establish a maximum driveway width of 12et between the curb 5 ft behind the sidewalk that gives us some flexibility in how wide those driveways can be when you're again behind that sidewalk and then as you get further behind that you can uh make that driveway withd a little bit wider do add a horseshoe and a half circle driveway option for Lots on arterial streets that's to help from folks that may not want to back out onto some of our busier roadways in the city so allowing that half circle driveway can eliminate that uh potential possibility uh also established driveways shall be located to the side or rear buildings for units without front-facing garages uh there was a text Amendment filed on driveways uh by privately uh not by City staff and that was 202 24016 uh it was similar and they wanted to address driveway and parking standards for duplex Triplex and quad buildings in neighborhood one and two uh we've worked with the petitioner on this uh and included a lot of that into this General uh text amendment that we're talking about this evening and they agreed to postpone the public hearing on that and committed to either with committed to withdrawing that petition should this petition be approved because it would capture a lot of the same changes that they were suggesting as well uh just a few more slides on Landscaping I know this is really exciting stuff so we'll try to get through the rest of it here uh we do clarify the procedure for zoning administrator to modify landscape yard requirements clarifies the landscape yard applicability and provide additional screening options for parking lots through fences or walls also provide an option for vinyl fencing when that's installed within a landscape yard uh tree preservation and planning we do clarify the applicability of green area and tree planning requirements IR ments as part of a minor subdivision uh also provide some compliance flexibility by allowing proportional compliance options to achieve complete green area and tree planning requirements across uh a project site and also provide some flexibility in achieving tree Save Green area credits by allowing some non-contiguous areas to be credited uh under the approval of the chief Urban Forester and then we get into some Transportation uh changes that we are looking at Al clarifying the placement and location of driveways in relation to inter sections uh establishing a procedure for adjustments to cross seat to Street cross-section elements excuse me in instances where they conflict with ncdot and the Charlotte streets map and also clarify modification for the relocation of kurban gutter when there's conflicts with utilities uh we're also looking at uh introducing and reestablishing the alternative compliance Review Committee uh this is a quasa Judicial board and they can look at uh requests for alternative compliance with certain standards in the Udo um encourage the use of those alternatives and Innovative design practices that would minimize impact on surrounding development and implement the intent of the applicable zoning District just through a quasi judicial process um and that would be something again we've we've used in the past um and we would look to in instill that here uh for more um zoning districts that would be applicable uh for using that process so uh we do have some anticipated adjustments after the public hearing just want to clarify some of these so we are working diligently on some of our ex zoning District standards the ex district is our zoning District that is allowed to make certain modifications to development standards primarily those that are quantifiable uh so things like uh block lengths and and building facade uh lengths and and things that are are again quantifiable standards uh we're looking to make again some changes to that to capture some other elements that we feel were we're lacking or just don't have some of the tools to address some uh situations that have come up for projects that we'd like to just have again some better tools for um adjustments to the prescribed conditions for Farms to support meinberg County sustainability and food security initiatives um also adjustments to outdoor recreation facilities again to support a request for an adjustment received for meinberg County Park and Recreation and then we also uh had a removal to U change the measuring point for maximum Building height transitions this was something that did create quite a bit of concern when uh we had that included in this text Amendment uh again we were trying to go back and and get to uh some better past practices or at least to be consistent with some past practices But realize that wasn't a change uh that that we wanted to continue to move forward with uh so again that that height transition and and eliminating How It Was Written today from the lot line has been taken out of this U text Amendment or will be after the public hearing uh and then we'll make some other minor adjustments as we need to uh staff will recommend approval the petition we do feel it's consistent with the comprehensive plan we will turn it over uh to the gentleman to my left here to speak speak uh and we will take any questions you may have following their presentation thank you thank you um Mr duber Mayor I'd like to ask uh a question before I start if that is is okay a question to clarification oh a clarification for from our staff yes yes please feel free so um my understanding is that this would be an appropriate time to uh get clarification about resoning Y and um so our congregation is now uh resed uh into ml1 and we've been sent the uh youth MRI uh table 15-1 which we were asking or uh hoping that this would be included in the text Amendment uh to include um churches or places of worship a as a uh use uh allowed use in that zone is that correct uh I'm I'm aware that I think I did see the requests that that y'all made for that I don't know if it's been Incorporated I I will look over to my right here and see if anybody from the Udo team can give me a thumb up or down on whether we've included that in this or whether we are aware of that request and uh if so we'll follow up and we'll continue to talk with you about it but if you'll give him a minute I think um Miss Haron is checking I see her looking at her phone so can you tell us again so dilemma is my name is Ed DeBerry I'm uh one of the evangelists at University Church of Christ at 9920 new Hickory Grove Road uh in East Charlotte we've been there for over 30 years members and last year June of 2023 our property was rezoned and um we've been literally saving and anticipating expanding our facility in order to better serve our community which we've been doing uh diligently and very successfully I might add uh for as I said several decades this resoning will restrict us uh and and not have uh restrict us from having the ability uh uh or the opportunity to expand and and better serve the community so what we were hoping we could get done is to have that reclassified uh that you would look at that uh because we're sure or we feel fairly sure that we have overlapping interest in serving uh this community as best we can and uh so we're just hoping that you'll be partners with us and enable us to to do to do that all right so um I don't know if we're still working on it I am finally got an answer for you just want to look real quick at what the prescribed conditions are we are looking at it U as a place of worship allowed in the ml1 district uh and that would be a looks like a a use by right in the in the ml1 district so that would be an allowed use in ml1 under this text Amendment right okay well I just wanted to make sure that first the mechanics were in place and secondly I request your support uh for this thank you very much well we're really glad that you asked the question and um the answer was um to your benefit and support our support for you and good luck with the with the growth of your community church thank you all right so um we that any other speakers for this text Amendment hearing none we're going to close the public hearing M Johnson thank you thank you mayor um thank you Mr minister DeBerry for coming out I did get a email that I got your message you called at 3:00 today we've been in meeting since 1:30 so okay so thank you for coming out thank you for your comments and I look forward to supporting I have a question from staff mayor may not be covered in this text Amendment but parking spaces I was driving through a a a recently renovated building and there was so many compact parking spaces that were so small that there were a lot of colars that couldn't fit in them so it seems like a waste of space that like the developers are just checking a box that they are um they're adding the parking spaces but are they actually practical and are they sufficient so maybe we can talk offline what are the requirements spaces or the the width for each parking space cuz we want to make sure that we're not just allowing them to check the box and it's really not serving yeah let's um let me follow up with you and we'll have a an offline conversation about it because I I think there are some things that are addressed to that regard in in the udio in general I don't know if it's affected by this cleanup but we can follow up and have a conversation on that for sure okay that's all I have move to close all right we have a motion to close and a second all in favor please raise your hands all right thank you very much anyone opposed to that closing of this so that takes us to petition 12 20 24-23 by the the city of Charlotte for approximately 11.7 Acres located on the north side of Billy Grand Parkway at the Eastern end of Woodridge Center Drive it's in District three the current zoning is light industrial conditional the and general industrial conditional manufactur proposed zoning is manufacturing and Logistics the staff recommends approval of this petition and I believe on this case for item 12 we don't have any speakers Miss Madam clerk um so we have a staff presentation thank you for doing this and let's go good evening petition 202 24-23 is approximately 11.79% the 2040 policy map recommends manufacturing and logistics for the Eastern end of the site and Innovation mixed use for the Western end staff recommends approval of this petition um there's a conventional petition the uh it is consistent for the portion recommended for manufacturing Logistics Place type but is inconsistent for the portion recommended for Innovation mix use petition site is located between a railroad and Parkway which provide physical bu offers from uses further to the north and south of the site the entirety of the site is is currently zoned two conditional Legacy districts that align with manufacturing Logistics Place type the proposed rezoning would eliminate those conditions and establish zoning under the Udo um the approval would revise the recommended place type for the Western portion of the site from Innovation mix use Place type to manufacturing Logistics Place type I'll be happy to answer any question questions the uh petitioner is the city of Charlotte and we do have staff uh from General services available if you have specific questions for them this is going to be for our do we have any questions for the petitioner yeah I do I'm trying to council member Brown yeah so is this going to be a h pad so it's a conventional resoning to ml2 that is one of the uh permitted uses in that District okay nothing that's me good Mo to any any further questions hearing none do we have a motion to close the public hearing so move have a second and all in favor raise your hands anyone oppose all right so we'll go to item 13 um resoning petition 20248 by Bank of ozok I think that's what ozk stands for um the approximately 7.7 Acres located at the northeast csection of South Boulevard and claremount Cove Road East of England is in District Six the current zoning is Transit oriented development transition proposed zoning is General commercial conditional staff does not recommend approval of this petition and so the um petitioner will have 10 minutes to address um the staff presentation so we'll start with our staff presentation hi good evening uh petition 202 24008 is located on the northeast intersection of South Boulevard in Starmount Cove Lane s's approximately 776 acres in size and currently developed with a retail building current zoning is totr Transit oriented development transition Pro zoning is cgcd General commercial conditional 2040 policy map recommends the community Activity Center Place type the C cgcd district is inconsistent with the CAC Place type approval of this petition would revise the 2040 policy map to the commercial Place type proposed zoning calls for the development of a financial institution with an accessory drive-through following Transportation improvements are proposed access to the site is proposed via right in right out driveway on South Boulevard and full movement intersection on Star Mount Cove Lane PTI will dedicate um any required improvements prior to the first certificate of occupancy site and streetscape improvements are proposed the petitioner will construct an 8ft sidewalk and 8ft planning strip along the site's frontages with South and star Mountain Cove and lighting will be full cut off type maximum height of 26 ft there's several outstanding issues including uh Transportation issues um related to um C uh C do notes that need to be included on the plan but have not yet been and cats is requiring a bus shelter that has not yet been committed to other outstanding issues are related to site and building design uh the building should be reoriented to front South South bouevard and Starmount Cove Lane and push the parking and drive-through facilities fully to the side and rear of the building the plan should meet all applicable prescribed conditions uh for accessory drive-throughs in a community Activity Center Place type rather than commercial Place types and better align with the 2040 policy map plans should remove parking and maneuvering areas from between the building and frontages and uh this would allow a setback to be decreased uh to meet a cac1 standard uh remove driveway access on South Boulevard to enhance The Pedestrian facilities and Architectural standards should be included in the plan that comply with the Tod TR zoning district and the community Activity Center Place types staff does not recommend approval of this petition the petition is incompatible with the policy map recommendation for community activities Center Place type uh single-use commercial building with a drive-through is not appropriate within a quarter mile of a light rail station in 2019 the city undertook a proactive rezoning more than 1,700 acres to Transit oriented development districts along the links Blue Line right rail Right light rail Corridor um to help facilitate new development that contributes to the city's major investment in rail Transit um and this project is autoc Centric in nature and would actively detract from the transit investment that the city made financial institutions are permitted in the to tr district and could be built by right if they eliminated the drive-thru I'm happy to take any question questions all right we have some speakers first so um I have Anthony Fox but I I did I did not want to call you Anthony fox really I promise you I did not I wasn't trying to do that and after tell us your name Remington Jackson and so you are our second speaker so thank you Mr Jackson thank you all good evening good evening um May Madame mayor Madame um mayor protm who actually is there um members of the city council zoning committee planning staff um thank you for this opportunity to present on this application my name is Remington Jackson I work for the law firm um Parker Poe um located at 620 South Trion Street um sweet 800 Charlotte North Carolina 28202 um we represent the petitioner Bank ozk on this resing petition um we sent in this uh presentation will I be able to show it yes it should be it should be coming in just a second okay great um can I change it with this um I believe yes yep um as mentioned already the property address is 7143 South Boulevard um it's a SE approximately 776 Acres um existing right now is a retail um location which has a mattress shop and a pawn shop um as it's already been mentioned the existing zoning is Tod um TR um we're suggesting C cgcd for a conditional the reason for this is we'd like a financial institution with a drive-through by right as has already been mention of um financial institution without a drive-thru could be built there um Bank OC being new to the area um to having the drive-through is a very big Focus for them um part of Udo requirement we've already had one community meeting um no one appeared at the community meeting besides representatives for the petitioner um we've had no opposition to this um this use along this site um we've also received no opposition um in terms of letters or emails um just to give a representation of what the site looks like currently um as I said those are um the current retail locations um on sou of our with um starm Mount Cove Lane um currently it already has two cutouts um we will be reducing that to one cutout um as I'll be mentioning later in my presentation um this is what the um financial institution with the drive-through would potentially look like um it's a markup um which obviously would be changed slightly um as we've been discussing things with um um planning staff this is what the um our current site plan looks like which has gone through many um discussions with planning staff in particular the um right in write out um on South Boulevard um after much discussion um NC do has agreed to allow for a right in WR out there as well as a right in WR out along um Starmount um Cove Lane um in particular as I've already mentioned the drive-thru in the back of the um behind the bank should I say um location um allows for us to have the eight parking spots in in the front um and also allow for the Green Space open space in the very be um front of the closest to um South Boulevard this has already been mentioned I think um the recent and pending resoning um the other the most recent one besides our own was in 2019 um this is just to give aerial of where the um location of the site would be which would um across the street from the sorry across South Bart from um the Compare Food supermarket and it's right next to the quick trip but is a bank right um as it's already been mentioned by staff this is not um totally consistent with the community Activity Center Place type um however the site does meet all the zoning requirements of the CG commercial District um we also when making um this petition this application um for uh the CG zoning um we based it on the resoning petition 2023-the Bank um that was approved in January 2024 um which was also found to be inconsistent with the 2040 policy map um after staff found it be to be inconsistent um the zoning committee did vote in favor of it um six to one if I remember correctly and um then this council did approve that um resoning petition they I we based it upon that because it also had um a CG zoning sorry it they also went to a CG CD zoning um they also had the issue of at wanning a um banking institution sorry financial institution with u um drive-thru um some of the other similar comments from staff were um that we've received were also similar to that res which is why we based it upon that um the commitments that we made um that the petitionary is um committing to um improved open space including the plaza um Green Space adjacent to the um public sidewalk per the um site plan as I mentioned earlier which should be right they in the front two green spaces um that's more um green space than is actually required by the um current Udo requirements furthermore we're adding additional lighting um with a maximum of 26 ft um as I also mentioned we'll be consolidating the two existing curb cuts to only one curb cut to allow for right in write out for the um positioners customers to potentially get in easier um without I'm sorry oh I thought okay um the with one curb cut um that will be right in right out other additional improvements that um for the project um severe reduction in the existing site trips um per the um per the city um staff going from currently 632 down to 2011 estimated um increased Landscaping currently it's at 15% we'll be increasing it to approximately 36% of the site would be um Landscaping Green Space also this bank would be providing a service in accordance with the community investment act um by locating in areas with moderate income and high minority populations that have typically have a higher Reliance on D drive through Services um one of the big things for bank ozk is that they find their customers like to have a drivethru especially if they're using cash they don't want to walk to the location um carrying a large amount of cash they prefer the drive um have that or at least have that as an option um that's the majority of my comments um but I also wanted to um open leave it open for um any questions that the um city council may have all right um any questions for the petitioner or the staff oh he work Miss Mayfield for the staff yes thank you madam mayor I was just trying to write that down for staff I don't know fact that the federal government has created a mandate for banking institutions under the reinvestment ACT are we also looking at how that is potential Al will play into our policy conversation since we just the last conversation was around updating our language are we looking at how that may be impacted in these Tod areas so the Tod already current zoning already allows for financial institutions by W A Bank could be built on this site today without going through this rezoning would not be allowed to have the drive-thru okay so that answer to my question which is specifically regarding the Mandate that has come down for financial institutions through the reinvestment Act and the fact that there is a perceived safety concern with individuals since we do have a number of residents that have large amounts of cash on them and would be safer inside a vehicle are you all looking at the language which to ensure that we're aligning correctly I'm not aware of any discussion that has to do with drive-throughs and safety when it comes to financial institutions um we're looking at it from a policy and Zoning standpoint and staff's position is that this does not align with the policy um and we cannot recommend approval of this petition based on the existing Community Activity Center policy um a financial institution is allowed um in the in this location current Curr L it's just the drive-thru um but again I can't make any comment on you perceived or real safety of drive-through versus walk up or inperson service Mr pit appreciate it Maxon spot on with how we treat it in the activity center but just to your question specifically on the community reinvestment act and how we're looking at drive-through Services I know we've talked a lot internally about uh drive-throughs for financial institutions versus drive-throughs for fast food restaurants and edes and are there differences or different impacts which in some ways there there certainly are from a trip gen standpoint so I think that's still a conversation we're trying to parse through do we look at those a little bit differently than uh than traditional drive-throughs for like a restaurant uh we haven't quite come to any resolution on it but I think well I'm this I'm glad that this was brought up I'm actually not aware of of this change with the community investment act so certainly we'll take a look at that and see if it has some impact on which direction we go in but uh we're certainly to take a look at it and see what that might affect that could be very helpful and either one of you might this one the next question might be a easy one regarding cat's comments that are in here what we're talking about doing is basically a bus stop will be required at site a jent bus stops will be Consolidated into new shelter Pad but I I wasn't able to see on the map that you had up the distance between the bus stops cuz depending on the individual that's utilizing that bus stop and from whether they're coming from Montclair south or on the backside that could be a challenge when we say 10minute neighborhoods and all of that exactly which bus stops are we talking about combining and what could that potentially do for the riders that are currently utilizing those stops so is referring to um wanting a bus shelter to be built on this site and consolidate from the existing bus shelter that's on the QT property adjacent to the just to the north um I don't know the specific distance but they're requesting the bus shelter be near the property line with QT and the um the existing bus stop is just to the north on the qt's property so it would be uh yeah it's just moving it a a small distance to the South so it will be helpful to know exactly what that distance is cuz looking at the map it might seem like a small distance that could be anywhere from a three block or more distance between we actually walking it so I just want to make sure that we're being respectful of the residents that are there and we're not creating a obstacle for them by saying well we think this would be a a better alignment by moving this bus stop but it may very well cause a challenge for the residents of that bus stop so having of which that's something you can work out and provide later but knowing exactly what that distance is could be very helpful thank you close any other questions well the petitioner has Miss air and the petitioner has a two-minute re one of the reasons why we hadn't um committed to that bus stop is because the next bus stop is right next door at the quick trip so that's why we hadn't committed to it yet also by adding that um bus stop we wouldn't be able to provide as much green space that we currently are adding so it was kind of a trade-off if we add the bus stop then we don't get the green space um but of course we're willing to work with staff on this particular um thing as regarding the bus stop and the bus shelter that do make sense you have a minute and a half left if but we have Miss azir I want her to ask her question she did not have a chance okay thank thank you madam mayor so can we go back to the side plan what are they doing now stopping so this project May I'm sorry point of clarification the petitioner is supposed to finish their rebuttal before we finish our conversations is he he had I'm sorry tell me what what did you just ask the petitioner in this unique case is supposed to finish their rebuttal and then we have Council comments well let me tell you what we have we do this usually is that we have the um rebuttal to the staff yeah and so M asir wanted to do this but I wanted Mr um I help me with your last name Jackson M Cass that you would have that you understood that this was a rebuttal at after we have the council um before we have the council member speaking so yes um you can go ahead and finish your rebut you have an additional minute and 43 seconds and then rebuttle is to the staff presentation and you don't have to take up all the time yeah that was the that was the only point we had was regarding the buses to the petitioner after okay he just said he didn't have any addition all right so miss air has a question for either the staff or the petition yes so this uh this resoning petition is not supported by the staff because of its autoc Centric use is that right it's a multitude of things but uh the city undertook a rezoning along the Blue Line Corridor a few years ago uh to proactively reone these sites to a to District to kind of uh you know help help further the investment we've made in transit by getting um Transit oriented development and the the place type is community Activity Center uh a single use Auto oriented use um Zone CG would not be consistent with that place type all I mean for all the reasons that you mentioned I I struggle with this one so there I'm trying to figure out so would someone have to well if if the if pedestrian would have to cross a parking lot to access the building I'm I'm just trying to figure out like from pedestrian perspective how how would this work so there are two um access pedestrian access to the site one on South Boulevard so this is uh North South orientation along South Boulevard you would cross um this green space here cross the parking lot and enter the building there from South Boulevard and star Mount Cove if you're walking on the sidewalk you'd cross um the drive-thru here or was essentially part of the drive-through circulation and access the building here yeah I mean I see a problem with that where pedestrian would have to cross the drivethru to get to the that's correct and one of our comments was to reorient the building so that it fronts along South Boulevard and Starmount Cove move the parking to the rear and um that would enhance The Pedestrian experience um you see other examples that similar to this um like a Park Road in Wood law the Chase Bank has a drive-through facility but it orients the building at the corner of Park Road in woodlon and places the uh parking and drive-through facilities the back and side I so have you explored that Mr Jackson yes um we also explored that as an option um the reason we didn't is that fitting the the location the actual structure of the building and flipping it that way and then also having the drive-thru would again cut down on the Green Space so again it's an either or situation for us um that's also why we based it around the prior zoning where this exact same thing happened you again had um the pedestrians walking across the parking lot as well as walking across where it is technically the drive-thru but it's the entrance to the drive-thru and in that instance that um resoning was approved so for our staff so I guess where we would have building entrance in the front uh that would ensure that pedestrian would not have to cross through a drive through traffic to get to the building uh would that cut down on open space Green Space um it would actually have the added benefit if you move the building to the frontage and um move the parking maneuvering areas to the rear and side you would actually be able to reduce the setback requirement from that of CG to the smaller setback required in the CAC zoning District okay well I don't have any additional questions but I would encourage you to explore that option I I was I struggle with this one a pedestrian having to cross through driveway I mean I can see of pedestrian fatalities I I mean this is just not safe but that's all I have thank you move close Miss Johnson did you have a comment I did have some questions but um council member azir asked them I just wanted to know about why it was not being supported and if the drive-thru was the only reason you said there were a multi multitude of reasons that it wasn't supported so the drive-thru is certainly an aspect but drive-throughs are permitted in the CAC districts um or lots that are in a CAC Place type assuming that there was a drive-through on site before there was not in this location that zoning would not apply but I think staff could reach a point where we were a bit more comfortable with the drive through being on site if they did comply with the applicable aspects of drive-throughs in a CAC Place type which would include like moving the building to the frontage moving the uh parking maneuvering and drive-throughs to the side and rear the site um basically putting a more emphasis on The Pedestrian experience um so yeah it's not strictly that it's just you know a drive through there there are other factors that we think um can be accommodated okay well hopefully the U petitioner can work with the staff to AC make those accommodations thank you that's all I have close CL second all right I have a motion to close public Hearing in second all in favor raise hands any oppose that is unanimous we'll move on to item number 14 petition number 2024 024 by orisa Holdings LLC location is approximately 9.13 Acres located along the north side of Interstate 485 South of University Boulevard uh in thej closest to uh commissioner Dunlap District number three and closest to Miss Johnson's District in number four the current zoning is MX2 proposed zoning is n21 CD staff does not recommend approval of this position petition in his current form after staff's presentation Mr Paul panel and Miss anet Mingo um will have the opportunity to speak thank you all right thank you mayor protm 2024 024 uh mentioned just over 9 Acres uh at the end of abber cromi Street uh and and it is uh sorry about that it's at the end of abber she just saw on 485 uh just adjacent to this if we go to the next slide here we had a recent rezoning uh just in this area for a large scale uh data center that was back uh several months ago may have even been late last year but uh just to put some context on that that's where that petition uh plays in and is part of the adjacency for this one uh existing zoning is MX2 proposed zoning is neighborhood 2 a conditional uh and the Ed Place type as you can see is neighborhood one we do have uh neighborhood one all around it as well as some manufacturing Logistics there are some neighborhood 2 recommendations on the other side of i485 those are retained from existing entitlements and existing developments uh that more align with neighborhood 2 the neighborhood one uh just some site history so as we mentioned this originally that data center site we talked about was part of a larger rezoning uh back in 2021 uh that was part of a large scale single family detached with some single family attached residential I think over 500 single family units this piece that we're looking at here which is part of the rezoning this evening uh was part of that original petition in 2021 it was retained as MX2 through the data center resoning so that data center really only affected the property to the north here uh this was retained and was originally approved and is still entitled for 26 single family detached homes you can see it's essentially an extension of abber cromi Street in the existing community Community that's there uh so just wanted to provide a little background and context for uh this particular location The Proposal under this petition uh for 2024 024 would be to uh propose 71 multif family attached dwelling units Town Homes uh on the south side of abomi still an extension of that road would be required uh with a possibility of a connection up through the data center project do have tree save and open areas uh listed out as well as Class B landscape yard yard along 485 uh 29 ft of the right away from ABI Street would be dedicated uh fut cross future cross parcel access to the north is still envisioned uh as a potential here uh would provide an 8 8ft planning strip an 8ot sidewalk along abber Street Extension uh also provides uh 17,750 ft of open space it would dedicate this green area uh that is part of the storm water management buffer uh to meinberg county for Greenway access easement uh and also provides architectural details including building materials and our standard type of town home and attached products uh architectural standards that we typically get uh so as mentioned staff currently does not recommend approval of this petition in its current form uh we would like to continue to have some conversations with the petitioner to have some uh outcomes that better align with maybe that neighborhood one place type and the original entitlements uh maybe looking at some modifications to that that maybe aren't as U all have that many units that are are proposed and some different unit types uh things that we look for when we're evaluating neighborhood one to Neighborhood 2 uh would be things like proximity to Transit proximity to activity centers um proximity to uh connect or excuse me connectivity to other uh neighborhood roads and while abomi street is an extension uh there's really not a lot of other connectivity and it takes quite a bit of time uh and and effort to kind of get back out so that connection North uh to the data centerpiece would be a good one but again that'll know the feasibility of that given the use has changed but again we're not within close proximity to any activity center we're not within any real uh connectivity for Transit um so it doesn't quite check some of the things we look for uh looking at a neighborhood one to Neighborhood two change so again that's why staff is in the position that we're currently in we'll continue to work with the petitioner and we will turn it over to them and the public for their presentations and we'll take any questions that you may have following uh the conclusion of those thank you thank you so Mr panel because there is opposition you'll have 10 minutes Miss Mingo will have 10 minutes and then you'll have an opportunity for a two-minute rebuttal thank you mayor protim thank you Council for allowing us to speak tonight thank you David for your presentation tonight I will not need the full 10 minutes and everything moving forward uh quickly um this is uh I'm Paul panell with Urban Design Partners representing uh the petitioner for petition 2024 024 uh currently today at Zone MX2 requesting an into a zoning District uh for 71 town homes on approximately uh 9.1 acres of land uh David did a great job providing some context uh let me back up just one real quick so this is the dead end of abomi Street uh which you can see on this slide which is actually uh stubbing directly to this this 9 Acre Site uh you may recall that this was uh a portion of land that was rezoned uh quite couple years ago which was uh removed from zoning petition 202 2023 030 it was the data center uh that was rezoned a few months back uh this was excluded to hopefully remain residential uh we are bringing this acreage back for a residential Community uh Miss Mayfield during that resoning had some concerns related to the proximity of residential to the data center uh tonight we actually included and it's hard to see I think I actually realized I may need glasses regardless of the fact that this is a a 10-ft wide slide um the town homes which are being proposed under this petition are 800 ft away from the closest possible building line within the previous data center rezoning so I just wanted to provide that for context that uh we're talking about 800 linear feet between those two uses uh included the current zoning petition site plan uh in case we needed it let me go ahead and jump to the rendered site plan uh this is for 71 single family attached town home residential uses for sale these are a for sale product here uh they are not intended to be rentals um quite a bit of open space and tree save on site and the storm water management Pond uh is represented just to the north of the ABI Street Extension shown here in this slide I would like to just go ahead and jump right into some of the larger public benefits associated with this petition one for sale residential housing stock within this area and a diversity of different types of housing types I think is a benefit uh also abuy Street extending those of you that are familiar with the birkshire neighborhood when you take uh the birkshire neighborhood Streets back to University City I it's got to be 10 minutes it it has to be it it is a long way just a very circuitous route the extension of abomi street across B Creek uh eventually connecting up to Caldwell Park Drive would greatly lessen that commute for the residents of the birkshire neighborhood we see that as a a a positive public benefit we've also been working with Katie Lloyd at meinberg County Parks and wreck regarding the Back Creek Greenway uh there is a significant amount of green area and land that would be dedicated over to meinberg County Parks and wreck uh for the construction of Greenway which would eventually connect over to the currently undeveloped Caldwell Park uh so that is a component of this as well in addition to the the amount of green space that's being provided within this project uh as the petition moves forward we're happy to work with uh Council uh and uh answer any questions about why we're proposing 71 units here uh The Crossing along B Creek is turning out to be quite a bit more expensive than was originally envisioned uh but happy to have those discussions offline uh and with that I will go ahead and hand it over to opposition thank you Miss Mingo welcome and you'll have 10 minutes as well anyway I will not need 10 minutes either so I know you'll be happy about that uh my name is anwi Mingo as I said and as was said and I am speaking as a resident of uh in the area of the proposed call well far as uh development I appreciate the resoning requests made by the developer from mix use um uh areas and to uh residential however I would prefer to see Place type uh one N1 as opposed to n two and that would be to maintain the character of the neighborhood um I am aware the city's desire to build more housing so people can live in Charlotte and they can come from other States and within this state um to move here but this particular area was once farmland and there is at least one Farm remaining the streets in this area were constructed to accommodate a few homes not a whole lot of multif family homes and a lot of town homes cwell road is the main thorough far for the proposed cwell Farms development and I don't know about the 10 minutes because it doesn't really take 10 minutes to get to University City Boulevard from anywhere that I've driven but cwell road is the main road and so this two-lane road is the same one that becomes Tom querry once you drive towards uh cabis County and um because the city is is uh it has a desire to build a house on what seems to me every free space in the university area uh the volume of traffic has already become unbearable yet infrastructure improvements lag behind as it relates to roads and sidewalks enough construction has already taken place in the cwell road area to Warrant these improvements I would like to know when the improve improvements will be made and ask the cwell farms uh project be placed on hold until until such time as the improvements are made and I would like to also say that traffic affects one's quality of life traffic and the pollution from traffic uh affects our quality of life and the pollution affects our health and that is all I have to say but I would certainly hope this would be an N1 project and not an N2 thank you thank you Miss mango Mr panel you have two minute Roboto uh we certainly appreciate uh Miss Ming's uh comments tonight uh we do believe that providing a variety of housing types in this area for a for sale product is beneficial for the community it will help offset some of the development costs associated with those Road improvements and the traffic improvements that are associated with this and the crossing of B Creek uh but we are happy to have further discussions regarding those details as we move the petition forward thank you any comment Miss Johnson thank you mayor Pro Tim and thank you Mr panel for the presentation I've had the the pleasure of speaking with you um I think we have a a a ways to go to to get to a place where I can support it the fact that the staff does not support it and Miss Mingo the the resident I did reach out to the calwell Farms HOA um I spoke to him about it as well so while I appreciate the for sale you know that I do I really want to ask more questions particularly to the staff um I've been W to talk about cumulative impact and infrastructure I've been talking about that for a long time and Miss mingle's right as far as the two-lane roads so I I'd like to talk to staff offline maybe C dot to find out if there are any proposed improvements for that uh calwell Road area or Back Creek or any of those state owned highways to see where that is in the pipeline um as as we can discuss that and then we can talk offline thank you Miss Mingo for coming out as well that's all I have thank you thank you Miss azir yes thank you I was going to ask uh what district council member Johnson asked uh we have someone here from C do okay are are there any improvements planned for calwell Farms that uh speaker had addressed J Carpenter with C dot uh I'm not aware of any improvements uh that are scheduled uh but would be happy to look into it and coordinate um with uh the resident on on that matter or yourself as well okay I think U district council member will give us an update on that um I I certainly appreciate ad Mr penol um how there is a lot of open space um almost 177,000 Square ft of open space that's that's really good I appreciate um there is a buffer as a Greenway assess Greenway easement to County so there will be a connection to Greenway certainly these are uh pluses but I certainly understand the concerns that's been raised by Miss mingle and district council member in terms of um neighborhood to uh propos resoning um I I I what would it be if it was um neighborhood one proposed zoning Mr uh Patton so it's it's currently entitled now under MX2 for 26 single family homes which is the plan that we've got up on the screen here uh so it would that would look and function like a neighborhood one uh product uh but it would be just restricted to single family detach because that's what the conditional MX2 approval uh carries forward with it so if they went to a a neighborhood one District they could uh build under that CL that zoning district and they could do single family detached duplexes triplexes uh and that's something that we would be happy to explore with petitioner uh but again that what they're proposing here better aligns with neighborhood 2 and the request is for neighborhood 2 so there are some differences mainly in the the road type construction uh the type of buildings uh that are allowed how many units can be allowed within a certain building so uh just some things again we'll continue to try to coordinate on uh but neighborhood one would essentially look similar to what was approved uh under the uh conditional zoning frame X2 okay thank you Mr pen that's all I have move to close if there are no additional questions second I have a motion to close public hearing and second all in favor I any oppos that's unanimous we'll move on to item number 15 petition number 2024 031 by Panthers stadium LLC the location is approximately 12.04 Acres located on the east side of South Cedar Street West of West of Fourth Street and North of mint Street in District three Mr Grahams District the current zoning is mud o cac2 and NC n2c proposed zoning is euex Staff recommends approval of this petition upon resolution of outstanding issues related to transportation land use site and building design as well as environment after staff's presentation we will have Mr Jeff Brown and Caroline Wright Nate dittle will be speaking for this petition and we do have someone Mr Wesley Clark who has signed up to speak against so we'll have 10 minutes for 10 minutes against and a two-minute rebuttal thank you all right thank you mayor protim 202 24031 12 acres uh lots of folks are familiar with the site off Cedar Street is the location uh of the current Panthers practice facility along with uh an additional lot here to uh the north uh that's part of this petition U it is currently zoned uh mud o which is a mixed use development district with some optional Provisions uh there is some U cac2 portions of the property zoned as well uh as well as neighborhood 2C uh they are proposing to bring all those districts under one uh Uptown Edge uh district with an except with the exceptions uh that would be the ex provisions that we discussed a little bit earlier this evening that provides some relief from zoning standards in the Udo U adopted Place type for this petition is for the regional Activity Center so the uee district uh certainly would be consistent uh with that adopted Place type the proposal is split uh with Development Area so Development Area a uh that's the area that could be developed with practice and training facilities Fieldhouse facilities indoor seatings um for sports events and performances up to 5,000 seats for outdoor uses Sports operations reception facility uses essentially all the different things that you would see associated with uh a facility that would house the the U The Practice Facility here for uh for the team so Development Area B could be developed with all use could actually uh have some closings uh During certain events uh it also notes that any building that's 100 ft or greater from a frontage would not be subject to regulations within the Udo that are applicable to Frontage type uh does request some ex provisions and specifies that required public benefits for ex may include publicly accessible open space public plazas and Open Spaces outdoor recreational features and streetscape improvements uh some of the other ex Provisions that are requested include reducing the setback along streer Street to 16 fet and increasing the bill two Zone uh from 0 to 200 feet and then decreasing the bill two percentage uh to 40% there's also ex Provisions requested to the building design standards which would reduce the minimum Building height for accessory structures reduce building length percentages and an allowance for blank walls uh decrease minimum ground floor height uh there's some ex Provisions for parking standards related to the location of bicycle parking and vehicle parking between buildings and frontages as well as uh the structured Des of the design of the parking structure that could be associated with the site ex Provisions also requested for open space to allow for the reduction in the required open space uh to 2% with the allowance for open space to be met on the stadium site which is part of this parcel but not part of the rezoning um so there could be some open space that we would see not in this particular location but it be in the location closer to uh the stadium itself which again is is a contiguous parcel uh and that green area could be potentially reduced uh to 10% uh ex Provisions have also been requested the signage standards to allow for some different signage types and sizes uh to better address the needs for this type of facility uh and put together a master sign package for the actual site and then some ex Provisions to allow the existing streetcape to remain with a 7 foot planning strip and 7 foot sidewalk again these are all requests that the petitioners made the ex Provisions allow for these types of requests to be made in return for uh things like increased open space and and public uh amenities uh things like lead certification for certain buildings um there's a whole host of options that can be deployed uh which we have seen some of those baked into this proposal we'd like to get some additional Clarity on on some of those requests as well just to make sure that we are aligned with the goals and intent of the ex District so I don't think we're very far off from that just again asking for some of that Clarity from staff uh in our analysis and some of our outstanding issues so uh staff does recommend approval of this petition there are some items again that we have to work through related to Transportation uh land use site building design and environment again a lot of those relate back to the ex request just making sure that we're clarified on what the actual asks are and what the act the return from the public benefit St point is uh again something we've been in close coordination with with the petitioner and feel like we will certainly get to some good resolutions and outcomes prior to the re sub mittle this Thursday uh it is consistent with the activ or the recommendation for regional Activity Center uh and again we will uh turn it over to the petitioner as well as the opposition uh and we will take any questions following their presentations thank you thank you Mr Brown you have 10 minutes thank you mayor protim and members of council uh it's a pleasure to be here tonight uh and also members of the zoning committee assisting Tupper sports and entertainment on the Panthers practice facilities uh resoning uh with me is Carolyn Wright who's the chief venues officer for Tupper sports and entertainment along with others from the organization and Land Design who are the land planning firm involved in the project uh we also appreciate really staff's work on this uh there's a lot of technical aspects to this type of a unique facility and we appreciate their efforts on that also greatly appreciate council member Graham's efforts as the District representative has been involved in a number of discussions and some recent meetings so we thank him for his time and energy on the resoning uh move through a little bit of slides again this is the site location that uh the Dave's already talked about uh as staff mentioned uh this is a unique project and uh unique project that creates some special design and operational features that are associated with the professional football practice uh and the specific needs of the practice as well as player safety considerations so it's involved a lot of work with the staff to deal with um the unique fieldhouse in particular where the fulllength practices will take place within the Fieldhouse as you'll see in a second and we'll continue to work on these things but it's constrained a good bit by the transit line that is also on the on the full length of the site so there's some constraints that we're dealing with and we'll continue to work with that and we'll continue to work to address these outstanding issues we'll also work uh with the nearby uh third war neighborhood uh and will continue to be responsive as possible within this within the projects constraints and with some of the uh operational needs we had two well attended Community meetings and we're continuing to have good dialogue uh I want that on that point I want to also thank former council member Al Austin who's a member of Third Ward he's been helpful in that regard and we appreciate his engagement on that we're going to continue to work on the project we've actually reduced the building height uh from the original height down even further than what's listed in the staff analysis we've clarified the very limited access uh to Ceder street from the site uh work working on privacy fencing and improving the fencing along the Cedar Street and some other similar types of features U really as Dave said we we're dealing with the ex Provisions here because we have some unique considerations but I do want to highlight that this site we're seeking Zoning for Uptown Edge Uptown Edge is a consistent district with the regional Activity Center called for for the entire practice field facility now we're under a conditional plan now and we're going to a conditional plan but RAC would allow potentially substantially more intensive use than what we're proposing if it were rezoned later to that level let me introduce Carolyn Wright uh who will talk further about the project thank you and I appreciate your time um this slide here represents where we are at today in Phase One um we are in the middle of renovating uh the two fields in section a uh what I want to note particularly is D which is the current maintenance and access Road um that will be in in this place until we move to the Fieldhouse um the reason for noting this is because when we go to the rezoning we will be moving the fields over and up towards Cedar Street in order to accommodate the cats RightWay requirements so we spent some time working with them prior to the resoning there was uh no right of way on the property so we've been working through what those details are and the importance of Transportation um the red line on this drawing illustrates what the new right of way would be for cats across the property which represents about 20% of the resoning site so I call your attention to um f which would have been the prior Road and now moved over to G um we in fact uh took down the Dome and have removed the parking so any vehicular traffic that previously was going to the site will now be reduced and any future parking will be coming in off of fourth and into the cats slot area and the corner the bottom right hand corner of the building will house the entrance um we have heard and appreciate the feedback from the residents in Third Ward um they have uh given us some good things to consider um so the importance here of the Fieldhouse which is B that its location is determined based on the feed feedback that we got from cats and the the compression that we are receiving from the bottom part of the lot in addition to that the dimensionality would not fit anywhere else on the property um to the left of this drawing you have Dukes uh who has a an easement um and then on the bottom is where we would have all of our Civil Works and the small little building you see on the bottom of B is the Bolton and so all of those Civil Works and tie-ins Mechanicals Etc tie into the back of the property um item D on here which is our maintenance and maintenance building and viewing area we are aware would be built inside the right of way site uh and would be prepared to move it at the time that cats proceeds with their development C to the far left is where the enhanced path connection would be to continue the ability for pedestrian flow we would work uh with Parks and Recreation on what that looks like as it approaches Cedar for continuance of bike and pedestrian Pathways we had a dome previously here as I mentioned it was 60 yards the goal for this site as it has been for the entire duration of of Carolina Panthers football is for football um and the activities that are related to that uh what's really important here is that we don't get a tendous amount of time um with our athletes and so we need to maximize that time um they have three full fields at at 100 yards and that's really important two outside and two inside I don't know where I am on time sorry you have you have three and a half minutes great thank you um so the the traffic activity for the majority of our uses will be related to players and our coaching staff that will be parking at the stadium and either walking over or taking golf carts um as it relates to the compression from cats and moving all of our site forward to Cedar Street that does impact the tree line and we've heard from the community on that um the next page we have is a diagram that demonstrates um currently on the top right how close the current fence is to the existing trees that are between the sidewalk and the fence line the currently our athletes um have a burm in the way and so from a safety perspective we would like to flatten that burm and we need to increase the width the field area can be changeable so the fields can change direction it is a completely flat surface and so at any given time we could either have the um retaining wall be part of field runoff from the end of the field or from the sidelines of the field depending on the direction that the field has been painted so it is important to us that we provide the safest environment for our athletes and we would like to move and we'll need to move the retaining wall over that is an impact to the trees that are between the sidewalk and the existing fence it does not impact this the trees between the sidewalk and the road and those trees would remain and so would the tree canopy on Long Cedar Street as it relates to the fence we heard some concerns from the community about the privacy fence we desire uh we agree with them that we will work on look and feel of that fence as it relates to the beautification of the community um on Building height our original submission was 95 ft we have revised we will be revising that submission to 70 ft uh at the apex of the roof which is a triangle it is not flat um what's important to note is depending on where you are standing would be the feet impact to you so at field level it is 70 feet to the Apex when you're standing on Cedar Street depending on where you're standing because the elevation changes it can range between 65 75 ft from the 65 to 70 ft from the sidewalk you have one minute left thank you I think I have covered most aspects we wanted for consideration to show you renderings to get a flavor for what the Fieldhouse would look like this is the view standing from Cedar Street uh to the left is the Fieldhouse to the right is the maintenance building with viewing deck this is the viewing deck that we'll be along the back the maintenance building houses Mechanicals and storage for football and grounds and ties into those pieces we've shared that are at the back of the property and this would be the indoor of the Fieldhouse that accommodates for the football requirements that is it thank you very much all right excellent Mr Wesley Clark you have 10 minutes once you um get to this to the microphone um thanks everyone uh council members mayor uh for having us um I wasn't planning on speaking uh until I came in here I was just planning on listening and then I saw everyone was speaking for this and council member Graham like as you remember in our community meeting no one in the community was okay with this um we offered uh recommendations for adjustment one being where the bubble was just to keep the indoor practice field right there um if you go back to slide I think it was five and uh so the area um I think that was like Zone C where that blue is they're saying that they can't go any further F than that they're not going to be able to do 100 meters or 100 yards but they can on that side um so that that was just like there's a lot of moot points about sunlight on the field well if you look at where the Fieldhouse is going to be that's going to block the sunlight to the trees to the vegetation and to the uh the condo owners on the other side of the street um also it it really is just an eyesore where it is if you were to put it back where the bubble was You' have a great view of this facility from the street if you've walked down Cedar Street before and you've looked over the field and you've seen that City skyline view it is a beautiful view and this field is going to take away from that it's going to take away from the community it's going to take away from the city and all we're asking is just put it on the backside with the angle that it would be where the bubble was everyone would still be able to see the city skyline and you'd have a great view of this practice facility it doesn't take anything away from the Panthers uh but where it is now it is going to take away from the community the homeowners across the street and the city but moving it in the other spot where the bubble was I almost think it would add value to the city and the community just because it would look great um and the environment uh those trees are going to have to come down uh that are on that street where they're going to build it that wall is going to go what 70 feet up it's going to block the sunlight from those trees uh not on not only on that side of the street but off across the street too uh and something's going to have to be done with that um again I just want to make sure our community is being heard uh and that's why I'm speaking um I've got nothing else I really appreciate you all letting us speak or letting me speak absolutely thank you Mr Clark Mr Brown you have a two rutal uh thank you very much and we appreciate Mr Clark's comments and we appreciate the turnout recently uh for the community uh follow-up second meeting we had in Third Ward uh we appreciate the fact that there's change uh that currently there's no bubble there the bubble is further away the bubble I want to emphasize was temporary really in nature 60 ft I mean 60 yards this is really to provide for the longer term prospects for the Fieldhouse and we recognize that the building will therefore be on a portion of Cedar Street uh most of the Cedar Street will be Fields however and you'll still have the view as you walk Cedar Street and see Cedar Street uh we've tried to be a good a good partner in this we continue to work with them we have reduced the building height uh we frankly uh recognize that that row of trees will be gone because of the constraint we're talking about and they're real constraints from the transit line as well as the need for these three fields to be fulllength fields that have sufficient player safety runoff so that's really what we're dealing with we wish there was more room uh to be able to save that row of trees I will say we we we've been working with an arborist and we're confident that it will not impact adversely the other trees on Cedar Street and so we're really uh we feel like we're doing a good job last comment I'll say again we appreciate there's change but the but the plan calls for really an uptown type of condition here on these fields and we're going to be doing something I think that's going to actually provide a lot more open space with these fields than If This Were a buil developed later under Regional activity center for a much taller potential building that would run potentially the full length of Cedar Street that's not a threat or anything it's just a reality of the regional Activity Center plan for Uptown but let me just quickly say we're going to continue to try to do what we can and working further with the uh the Third Ward community and we do appreciate the change that's happening we think the Panthers a great asset also for Third Ward and we look forward to working with them as well thank you thank you thank you Mr Graham thank you madam mayor proam and first let me thank the the residents of thir Ward uh specifically a former council member of Austin for for meeting with me uh and temper Sports on on two occasions now one um virtually in the other last week where we had about 40 folks in attendance to hear the petitioner uh and the proposal uh there are a number of concerns that we uh heard and a number of concerns that uh temper sports and entertainment are addressing uh some they mentioned in their presentation others um I will just highlight just to for the record um and they're working with staff on a number of Minor Adjustments um staff has some has approved it um conditionally based on those adjustments so the internal working um U with the um Team uh is in progress but that we talked about again the wall faide and uh the potential for U Community uh engagement there alternative material for the retaining wall um we talked about the tree canopy and tree saves uh we talked about the um the glass frage and certainly the U the traffic impact um uh with on Cedar Street and most of the conversations have been um the impact on Cedar Street uh the views on Cedar Street uh and the impact that it may have on some property values that are directly adjacent to the the new facility so we continue to work with them um um one of the things that they would love to see uh is the external View and you saw a little bit of it so I'm almost certain that you will distribute that um to the residents um immediately U so they can get an understanding of what the external view of the building will look like uh as as well as a number of the uh adjustments or concessions you're willing to make on the external view to make sure that the view um that the residents will see from externally to the building uh is um uh it's U pleasing to their eyes in addition they're also willing to work with the residents a number of um Community benefits that's not been articulated yet but they' have been very uh flexible in terms of um their direction we will continue to to work uh to resolve un um uh outstanding issues uh we understand that there's more and we be convening yet one more meeting uh before this comes back before a final vote uh talk about a wide variety of issues ises that were mentioned here tonight others that we have noted for moving forward and certainly the issues that staff has pointed out that they're working with the petition or to dot eyes and cross tees uh to make sure that we have something that's ready for a council action uh within the next 30 days thank you madam mayor thank you um Miss Brown thank you so much for that mam yeah to him I wanted to to say um thank you so much for your presentation and thank you for Mr Clark is Mr Clark still here yeah oh he's s here Mr Clark here thank you for coming out Mr Clark now the wall um he said it was going to be 70 feet tall is that correct was that the original height of the wall did we make any modifications Mr ptin can you ask one more time the Wall height was there any modifications made to the Wall height so that I'm not sure I I may defer over to the petitioner team to clarify that one for us uh Council Brown I think you may referring to the building height yeah the W building uh the original Building height has uh started at 95 ft as the designs have progressed we've been able to be more comfortable and we've actually are are confident that we in our revisions to the plan we went to 80 ft and we've actually now been able to say that we're confident that we'll be able to do a 70 foot a height as we continue to work on the design so it originally started out at 100 something 95 ft 95 and then I heard Mr Clark said it's going to block the view from Cedar Street I'm very familiar with that area is that coming from Fourth Street down to Cedar to where the practice field is now can you explain that a little bit about the view because he said if it was on the opposite side you still could see the entire view yeah so is that an option or the building uh and I can uh Miss right talk further if need be but the building the building itself will be perpendicular the Fieldhouse building where the fields will be loc an indoor field will be located will be per perpendicular to Cedar running along the edge of the Johnson and uh Johnson and Wales property so a portion of the of the of the uh the property will be the Fieldhouse that will be closer to Cedar Street and will be a new building that does not exist there the rest of the property will remain Fields so if you look at the the area there in in blue that's where the Fieldhouse portion would be and it would have a front a front onto uh Cedar Street from the standpoint of the building Edge that's the portion that would be uh no more than 70 feet and in fact one can say closer to Cedar Street it's like probably more closer to 65 ft in height so we do have a new building going in that location but as I mentioned earlier the rest of the property by way of this resoning would stay fields and so we feel like that's actually in in many ways a a positive we recognize that it's changed for those residents right along Cedar and per council member Graham We want to work and uh do as good a job as we can on the building uh aspects of it okay yeah and then final thing was like the community impact was significant right so they're they're very that's a historic district too that area historic around Johnson and Wales that neighborhood it's been there for quite some time so the community impact has been heavily attended yeah we've had we've had two we had a virtual meeting uh in April and then we had a follow-up meeting and again we appreciate uh former council member Austin and council member Graham's efforts we Ren noticed the enti entire Community twice we went beyond the notice that the city council I mean that the city would give us so we actually included a much broader capture of residents within third W in part for the reason that you've described this is an important neighborhood and we want to be good stewards of the process we've had two two large meetings and we look forward to having a follow-up meeting with leadership and others okay and so thank you Mr Graham that's your District would you let me know when you do the followup meeting please sure all right thank you so much no further questions for me May protim thanks thank you Miss asir thank you so do you have uh is there rendering for from Sedar Street and how a tree canopy will be taken down do we have rendering for that we don't staff doesn't have a rendering of that it wasn't provided to us but the petitioner may be able to clarify that or they may have something I I didn't catch their whole presentation but staff doesn't have one in our possession though okay so I'm assuming none of these are heritage trees uh that's something I'd have to clarify with our Urban Forester I'm I'm not sure what uh what classification they are I know there's some uh urban forestry uh items that need to be con you know worked on and coordinated on and I know we're having some internal conversations on those this week as well as some conversations with the petitioner later this week before they resubmit Thursday so I do anticipate a lot of those being resolved uh but I don't have specifics on some of those where if there are Heritage trees on site right now or not so under the Udo um we have to preserve Heritage trees so was this fall under the Udo or was it before this yeah this would fall under Udo guidelines for development so that would also allow all the provisions for uh the different options for tree save uh which there are are good post of those again I'm not an expert on those so I wouldn't want to get into any of the details because I'm just not as familiar as as Tim Porter and and his team uh but I know they're working pretty diligently with the petitioner to get some of those resolved but it would fall under all the udio guidelines uh which also includes you know other options for meeting that in alternative ways so okay so so um I know we have Alison Craig here if you could just come forward if you could come to the podium so I know that uh when we adopted Udo we have strict requirements around preservation specifically Heritage trees and I know that was one of the um one of the key points of as to why I got comfortable with udio and among other things but that was that was main um so correct me if I'm wrong but where we have um where we have um to which is the most highest density there was there are no exceptions in terms of the tree save is that correct yeah we've removed all the tree save exemptions in the Udo yeah okay so if they are Heritage trees they will have to be preserved and protected so for Heritage trees um there and again Tim Porter is not here but there are you have to do a um your best effort into keeping them and demonstrate that that they cannot be kept and then you would have to pay a mitigation fee is my recollection but they can be removed under certain uh circumstances but there will be a fee associated with removal of the Heritage tree g so this will go in payment of payment in L where we will use that funds we would use those funds to buy um preservation sites like we have done so I believe again that we might want to have another conversation and we can provide a follow-up report to all of council but I believe the Heritage tree mitigation Feast goes into a canopy care fund that um one of the things that that um funding source is used for is like the large tree assistance program that we had I think back in 2017 so things like that so but I'd have to to double check but it is to be used for things that are important to the community and Council about um furthering our tree canopy okay so would there be a tree survey done as part of this overall exercise okay and and would that when would that come in front of the council or would that be part of it part of the implementation after it's approved I believe it's part of the permitting process but we can follow back up with you with yall um yeah I I'd be interested in seeing the renderings of of the trees that that are in that are being considered to be removed um so if you can provide that um that would be great so I think that's a followup for Mr Brown and and the petitioner okay that's all I have thank you Miss azir would you like some clarification on whether or not these are Heritage trees yes uh and I think Miss uh Miss Craig is going to provide that that would be part of the tree survey um and and just having that rendering would also be helpful and that's all I have thank you if no further questions move to close have motion to close and a second all in favor raise hands any oppose that's unanimous we'll move on to item number 16 petition number 20230 071 by Mount H Investments LLC the location is 3.85 Acres located at the Southwest intersection of Oakdale Road and Mount Holly Huntersville Road north of Interstate 485 and District Four Miss Johnson's District the current zoning is n1a proposed zoning is cgcd Staff recommends approval of this petition upon resolution of outstanding issues related to transportation and environment we do not have opposition so after staff's presentation um charil Ahmad will have three minutes thank you thank you good evening Teresa Montalvo I'm here tonight to present staff findings for 20 23071 the subject site is a 3.85 acre parcel located at the southwest corner of Oakdale Road and Mount Holly Huntersville Road north of I 8485 the property is developed veled with a single family home and surrounding development includes a Duke um energy station to the Southwest single family homes on Lots ranging in size from 1 to 10 acres and both Oakdale Road and mount honley Hunters Road currently lack pedestrian improvements the subject site is zoned n1a and the surrounding zoning pattern includes a mix of n1a mixed use residential and multif family residential zones next slide over the last three years there have been several rezonings in the immediate area that combined include entitlements for over 550 dwelling units it's worth noting that each of the recent rezonings include requirements for cond constructing pedestrian improvements along Oakdale Road and Mount Holly Huntersville Road which over time will improve pedestrian con connectivity to the site the adopted Place type for the site is neighborhood 2 likewise the Place type for the Recently reson properties to the east and west were changed to the neighborhood 2 Place type as part of those resoning the petition is consistent with an is inconsistent with the 20 240 policy map recommendation for the neighborhood to place type and approval of this petition will change will revise the place type to commercial The Proposal consists of a neighborhood shopping center with a maximum of 31,500 square ft of development and will be located within several smaller buildings with a shared parking area the building height will be capped at 50 ft The Proposal provides for an 8ft planting strip and a 12T uh wide multi-use path along both frontages which will contribute to pedestrian connectivity in the area there are also also several Transportation improvements which will be required which will include but not limited to an8 Wood 8 foot wide pedest wide Median on Oakdale Road a right turn lane on I4 on the I 480 offramp limiting access on Mount Holly Huntersville Road to right in only staff recommends approval of this petition upon resolution of outstanding issues related to transportation and environment as the petition will provide neighborhood serving retail development that will support the residential development in the area including that which has been approved in the surrounding site in recent years the subject propert is located in an access to essential amenities goods and services Gap meaning that access to residential support goods and service is a high priority in this area I would note that the nearest commercial land uses are located approximately 2 miles as a crow flies to the east and west of the site the subject site is also not located within half a mile of a walk shed of a high-capacity transit station or major transportation Corridor the petition could facilitate the 2040 comprehensive plan goals including goal goal one 10-minute neighborhoods and goal eight diverse and resilient Economic Opportunity um available if you have any questions thank you mrat you have three minutes good evening thank you uh mayor proam uh members of city council members of Staff uh we have a little presentation here today uh that I'll go through which has some renderings of the shops over here off of Mount Holly Huntersville and road we are proposing three Parcels consisting of 3.85 acres to be uh reson to commercial zoning this would include 31,000 plus Square ft of retail Grocery and restaurant finally it would all it would be uh divided into about 20 shops uh as you can see on the redering we have a uh two entrances uh one off of Mount Holly Huntersville one off of Oakdale uh both are right in only uh the one off of Mount Holly Huntersville will be a entrance only the one off of OA will be a right in right out uh with a leftover from Oakdale there are three uh roadside improvements one off of access a on Mount Holly one off of access B on Oakdale and one off of the 485 uh offramp the as uh I'm sorry I forgot your name Teresa as Teresa mentioned uh there's about 550 uh units in the front and back to us but within half mile there is over 700 plus new uh residential units coming in so there is a immediate need for this uh retail Center sorry here's a better sketch plan showing the 25 ft landscape buffer to the backside along with the 8ot planning strip that Teresa mentioned with the 12T multi-use path for better connectivity for pedestrians and that is all from my side if you guys have any questions I'm uh here to answer them okay any questions no questions move to close second I have a motion to close in second all in favor raise hands any oppose that is unanimous we move on to number 17 20231 120 by Ascent real estate capital LLC the location is approximately 3.5 Acres located along the south side of Central Avenue West of Progress Lane and east of Norland Road in District 5 Miss Molina District the current zoning is 01 CD and n2b proposed zoning is n2c CD staff recommends the approval of this petition and after staff's presentation Mr Brown will have 3 minutes to present thank you thank you the site is 3 and a half acres along the south side of Central Avenue East of Norland Road in the Sheffield Park neighborhood it's currently zoned office conditional and neighborhood 2 conditional um and they are proposing to go to Neighborhood 2C conditional which is partially consistent and partially inconsistent with the policy map recommendations which calls for neighborhood two on the western portion of the site and neighborhood one on that Eastern portion of the site The Proposal would allow for all uses um and by right and underprescribed conditions in the n2c district they do specify some development standards as part of this petition for Building height not to exceed 65 ft just for reference the ordinance would allow for a base maximum height of 65 ft for the NTC District but you could go up to 100 ft with the use of bonus mini Provisions the other development standard specifies that they will be constructing Ada client bus waiting pad and the along the s's Frontage along Central Avenue that final location would be coordinated during permitting but that is as a result from a cat's request during the first review of this petition although a portion of this resoning request is inconsistent with the policy map's recommendation for neighborhood one that place type designation is not reflective of the existing zoning on that portion of the site which is in 2B the parcels directly east west and north of the site are all designated as neighborhood to on the policy map so this resoning would be complimentary to those surrounding Place types the application of a slightly more intense residential zening district is appropriate for Corner Lots um particularly when located along major arterial roads which Central Avenue is and abiding single family uses would be adequately buffered with a 25t Class B landscape yard and the development is considerate of adjacent neighborhoods by capping themselves at that 65 ft f residents of the site would be serviced by existing bus routes and the ADA Compliant bus stop that they are committing to construct this picture has no outstanding issues and staff recommends approval and I'll take any questions following petition's presentation Mr BR thank you uh I'll be very brief uh that was a good overview by Holly as we always talk about where does density go thank having our presentation I'll just show a couple things uh great location on Central um Avenue and I'll slip through the real details just to share a couple things with you and zoning committee uh here's the site I did an overlay so you can see the dots on the map these are grocery stores that are essentially uh within walking distance of the site these are schools within a half mile of the site uh this is retail across the street including manolos and landmark and great to point out I think we've got two bus stops directly in front of the site uh and you can see the city is installing pedestrian infrastructure a crosswalk directly from the future development to the grocery store with pedestrian Refuge Island so just a I think a great example of a good location for this uh and I'm sorry Cassie Jagger uh with a sentes here they see this being kind of this middle density and we think just a fantastic location uh from what the city has been looking to do supported by some recent City infrastructure Havey take questions Miss Brown I me I'm Sorry Miss Molina uh thank you mayor protim uh just really quick I know you and I we discussed this one um what what type of feedback did you get from the community uh we did host a community meeting which was well attended uh and I will say that at the and although there's no one here tonight uh we did receive feedback from the folks that live in the town homes across the street generally concerned about density uh concerns about more density in the area more traffic in the area um you know the responses I gave were similar to tonight of we have to have density somewhere and this is a great location for it so I know there is uh some concern was expressed about as we talk about everywhere in the city about adding more units but um again I think this is a great location okay um and did they outfit any ongoing issues or any concerns at all no I don't know if um anyone's contacted staff notw but just to make sure I let staff know too we had received that feedback so okay that's all I have I get close the hearing second second all in favor of closing hearings raise hands any oppos that's unanimous we'll move on to item number 18 petition number 2023 164 by Eden Acquisitions LLC the location is approximately 23.4 2 Acres located along the east side of South trian and the west side of Still Creek North of Hamilton Road in District 3 Miss Brown's District current zoning is n1a and i1 proposed zoning is n2a Staff recommends the approval of this petition upon resolution of outstanding issu isues related to transportation and site and building design and after staff's presentation Mr carmichel you will have three minutes thank you thank you petition 2023-24 is approximately 23.4 2 Acres located on the east side of South Tron Street and West Side Of Steel Creek Road north of Hamilton Road current zoning it is split zone between N1 and a on the Eastern and Western uh edges and ic1 in the center of the site proposed zoning is into a CD the 2040 policy map recommends neighborhood one for the eastern and western portions and Community activity center for the center of the site The Proposal is for a community of up to 187 multi family attached dwelling units along with accessory uses proposes a mix of front load and rear loaded units Building height would be limited to 35 ft and building length to 165 ft position commits to a 20ft class B landscape yard with 6ft privacy fence along the southern property boundary we're adjacent to N1 Place type and a 10ft class SE landscape yard with 6ot wooden fence along the western property boundary commits to several Transportation improvements uh access to the site would be from South Tron Street and Steel Creek Road there are a network of public streets private streets with Public Access easements and alleys to access the units a minimum 8ft planning strip and 12ft multi-use path we go along both the South Tron Street and Steel Creek Road frontages and 8ft planning strip and and six foot sidewalk would go um along the s's internal public and private streets as well as a 5ft natural surface Trail on the Northern boundary of the site staff recommends approval upon resolution of outstanding issues related to transportation and site and building design it is inconsistent with the policy map recommendation for N1 and Community Activity Center Place types however the site is partially within a community Activity Center Place type it's within a half mile of the core of an activity center centered on the intersection of South Trion Street and Steel Creek Road the proposed multif family attached dwellings would provide an appropriate transition from the single family dwellings to the south of the site to the more intense non-residential uses in the community Activity Center to the north also the petition commits to enhance screening above ordinance requirements with the 20ft typ B landscape yard with fence along the southern property boundary or adjacent to single family dwellings I will take any questions after the petitioner's presentation Mr car thank you Madam May Pro 10 members of council and zoney committee I'm John carmichel here on behalf of the petitioner um think I have a presentation uh as Mr Mangum said the site contains about 23.4 acres is located on the south side of South TR Street in the west side of Still Creek Road the site is immediately to the south of Christ the King Lutheran Church and a public storage facility to the southwest of the atrium facility in Still Creek and to the north of the Ashford Woods uh neighborhood the future generation Street park is located immediately to the west of the site here the site is currently Zone ic1 and n1a and the request is to Zone the site to the n2ac CD zoning District to accommodate up to 187 um multif Family attached town home dwelling units on the site uh the site as Mr Mangum stated will be access from uh Tran Street and Steel Creek Road uh there would be a public Street north south and then a private Street here with a um Public Access easement and then the site would also be served by internal private alleys there' be two stub streets to the West the maximum Building height would be 35 ft there are architectural standards that are a part of the partitioners condition conditional resoning plan vinyl siding would be prohibited um an amenity area with a clubhouse and a pool would also be provided on the site uh the petitioner has met with the Ste Creek residents Association on numerous occasions occasions and the petitioner is working with the residents associations LS committee the county and Christ King Lutheran Church on the establishment of a Greenway easement that would run from Still Creek Road through the resoning site and a portion of the church's campus to generation Street Park located to the west of the site the details regarding this Greenway easement or the finalization of it would occur prior to any decision on the resoning request so this is the Greenway here the greenway easement that would be provided and the petitioner would construct a minimum 5T wide natural surface Trail that's outlined in here in outlined on the plan in red and he would maintain and they would maintain it until such time that the greenway Trail is constructed by the county and so the natural surface Trail and the sights internal sidewalks will provide pedestrian connectivity from Steel Creek Road through the rezoning site and the church proper property to the Future Park to the west of the site until such time as the Greenwell Greenway Trails constructed by the county uh we appreciate the planning staff's favorable recommendation we'll address the site plan comments and we're happy to answer any questions that you may have any questions can I get a motion to close motion to close and second all in favor raise hands any oppos that's unanimous we'll move on to item number 19 good job dubc 2023-24 by Josiah bowling the location is approximately 2.06 Acres located on the Southwest intersection of commercial AV in Eastway Drive North of East Sugar Creek in District One my district the current zoning is ofc and ml1 proposed zoning is IMU staff recommends approval of this petition and after staff's present Miss Stephanie Holland will have the opportunity to speak for and Miss Mary forner will speak against your time allocation will be 10 minutes 10 minutes 2 minutes for rebuttal thank you thank you the site is just over two acres at the intersection of Commercial Avenue and Eastway Drive at the northern edge of the plaza Shamrock neighborhood and this is along a corridor that has largely had commercial and Industrial uses that AB but the residential areas around it his site is currently ly zoned office flux campus in manufacturing Logistics 1 and they are requesting to go to Innovation mixed use which is consistent with the policy Maps recommendation for Innovation mixed use on a portion of the site um and inconsistent with the policy Maps recommendation for neighborhood to on that most eastern portion of the site I will note though that the draft revised policy map has identified this as a change if the new revised policy map were to be adopted and that change would change the neighborhood to designation to Innovation mixed use as well as all that commercial that's just to the South to Innovation mixed use as well and that's just based off additional analysis that the long range team did on the existing conditions but also where we see that area headed as a whole and and IMU is more reflective of the former industrial uses that we see um but we don't necessarily anticipate it being purely industrial moving forward so Innovation mixed use allows for more flexibility there The Innovation mixed use district is compatible with the adjacent land uses and Zoning almost all of which is manufacturing Logistics one the IMU district is applicable for areas like these that are situated against the former industrial areas but are transitioning to other uses and may AB but neighborhood and activity centers and a greater and a greater mix of uses would be allowed under the IMU district with the application of IMU here we would also get a more preferred transition between those industrial uses and the residential areas that are along the periphery I'll take any questions following the remarks by the petitioner and opposition okay Miss Holland are you present okay come on down and once you get to the microphone you'll have 10 minutes EXC hi there I am Stephanie Holland and I'm representing the petitioner um as Holly this is a conventional rezoning and I am happy to answer any questions um but the intent is to just use a byright um use and abide by the Udo for the innov Innovation mixed use District okay Miss forner are you present please come down and you'll have 10 minutes once you get to the microphone hi my name's Mary forner I'm a 14year small business owner um on Commercial Avenue we have a hobby and game store there and we um are in the property next door to where this is um going to be um the zoning is going to be changed and while they didn't talk about the what they expect the change to be uh or what to be what will be on there um they just talked about making the change from one um zoning to another but when we attended the virtual meeting they talked about having um tow houses put on there and 30 different tow houses some Greenway stuff but I don't see any of that listed on here um for you I we feel that that property which has a cell phone tower on it and a railroad easement is too small to have 30 tow houses on that property um and there two what they said was there would be two car garages so that would be 60 cars coming and going in that little area there and we felt that was a lot of traffic going through there um speaking of traffic Eastway that Eastway Drive is right near Ginger high school so again there I don't think that there was any traffic study done um that I was that I knew of but with a lot of traffic coming down east way with the kids there garinger and so forth um and adding the 60 cars if it's a two-car garage with 30 people or 30 areas or 30 houses that just seemed like a lot for us um and then also my business is right there and we use the on street parking for um our our customers our Gamers to come in they come in and and sit and play games space to face so they're there for a little while um and we do use the on street parking for all of that and then the last thing I wanted to say was that um Cityside is right on the other side of East way and I believe what I remember is Cityside was going to be for young industrial people coming up and it's been when I see the police reports there's been a lot of crime over there and I just don't want that coming into our Commercial Avenue um on that corner there so thank you for listening to me and thank you for the opportunity thank thank you Miss forner will you stay there because I want to ask you a question after the two-minute rebuttal so just stay stay there please thank you for the comments um I was not in attendance with the meeting but I have read the notes and um as a conventional resoning we do not have a site plan to share with you all today but we do have the commitment that the petitioner would abide by the rules of the Udo and um meet the intent and work with staff to make sure that all of the uh regulations are met thank you so so miss forner I see that there were four people in attendance to the the community meeting were you one of the four yes okay and so were you just saying you you mentioned that at the community meeting there was detail shared about part of the design of the site but you don't see in any of this evident here that's correct so there was some some commitment at least verbally to uh design style of the site yes okay and what is the name of your business your small business get some game get some game okay great okay great thank you for coming out and I will F Miss asir has a question I will follow up with you as well thank you Thane are you done M yes go ahead Miss thank you um so I see proposed zoning is IMU Innovation mixed use so this question is for staff what could potentially go there under IMU yes so Innovation mixed use allows for a range of uses it could be commercial there could be office uses residential uses are allowed and it also allows for artisanal industrial uses think of like a glass blowing facility as an example of that um but it does allow for really a range of uses because it's meant to be applied in areas where we have seen Industrial Development so we we maybe anticipate some transitioning away from those uses but we still want to build in an allowance for the commercial type of uses or light or artisinal industrial uses okay um so why was this file conventional and not conditional so when we looked at this petition and whether or not we would um really require them to go conditional just in terms of staff's comfortability we considered our policy map in this area so we'll just go back to that so it is already calling for Innovation mixed use on the western portion of the site and the neighborhood 2 portion was identified to be changed to Innovation mixed use in this draft revised policy map so just in terms of staff's policy considerations it would be consistent with what we're already looking for in that area if it were maybe a larg a much larger swath of land we we may have some hesitancy with it seeing it go to a conventional District but given surrounding uses the policy considerations in the surrounding zoning we believe that IMU especially on a corner lot here wasn't appropriate application conventionally got um and I know Miss forner shared that uh she does use on street parking mhm uh so would could someone address that concern of hers I so we don't have a site plan to look at but and so I don't know how the streetcape would change um I imagine and C do could speak to this better about the existing streetcape but when they do go to redevelop this the site they will have to do some amount of streetscape improvements I'm not sure what that means for their on street parking situation um I'm not sure to what extent it's currently utilized but I can try to follow up on that question and and work with C do yes and that that would be helpful um and I know this is is only 2 Acres it's a small site um so I don't anticipate having a huge impact when it comes to uh parking but I think uh as a Miss forner is a fellow um business uh fellow uh business owner so I understand her concern so if you can keep her in the loop that would be great yes absolutely um and does this uh trigger a traffic study uh I can't imagine uses under IMU for this small of the lot that might trigger a traffic study and because we don't but also because we don't have specified uses in a site plan there's no traffic impact study that's triggered here Transportation review where they would identify multimodal mitigation points uh to speak to any sort of Transportation concerns in this area but that would definitely be something triggered during the Land Development processes sorry and last question so when uh when petitioner comes they first meet with staff right as part of the process so is it staff that recommends that you could do conventional route or is that something that the petitioner recommends that they want to so we can always ask for what we want it's not a guarantee what they'll come in with and what they send in an application for but generally during our prese submittal meeting which is required before they submit the application online L we will say well well given policy considerations given the existing zoning or given the surrounding land uses yes I think we're comfortable with seeing it Go conventional or no we're not we really need to see what exactly you would be developing on this site for X number of reasons and we're also of course at libert at Liberty during our analysis processes to say well given new information provided by different departments that we work with we would really like to see this go conditional but the petitioner is at no point obligated to essentially speak to our concerns whether it's conventional or conditional even if we strongly urge them to submit a conditional petition they could still submit a conventional petition but of course you all as council members and the community members are certainly at Liberty to push for conditional res zonings when you see fit good that's all I have thank you so much you've been a great addition to the um zoning I mean to D David's team thank you appreciate it all right that's all I have thank you Miss Brown yes I did thank you so much man for U Miss fora the you were there at the community meeting it was virtual it was virtual okay but you were there you were present and from your understanding what you said that uh there the it was going to be used uh for something different in that area is that your understanding and that they proposed something um 30 what they said was 30 tow houses okay and as one of the community members did you have any other concerns that you wanted to bring forth to us to have addressed just the traffic um that Commercial Avenue isn't that big and um so having you know that much traffic in that area just kind of concerned six so I'm thinking you know 30 tow houses at two-car garage you have at least two cars each um and that's 60 cars and that seemed quite a bit to me and so your business you're small business owner and um so we definitely value small business owners uh get some game is it located in the shopping center where um it's across from Bojangles put me in the area no it's right where it said uh Innovation mixed use it's that little yeah that so give me a landmark in your area I'm just trying to visually see it cuz I know the area um uh it's Eastway Sugar Creek in the plaza um there's a um car wash on the Plaza and there's garinger high school around the corner okay so Auto Bell not Auto yeah Auto Bell yeah it's in that area where is I just want to get a visual of where yeah in 7-Eleven adjacent to garer high school okay I don't have any more questions may but I would like to be uh informed on what they share at the community meeting absolutely updates thank you oh just one last question so uh go back to that slide that you had Commercial Avenue so for seedar are there any plans for improvement no is it it could be part of the followup so Commercial Avenue is a local Street in our Network and there's no plans to improve it but um uh as development occurs they would be required to install curb and gutter in the appropriate Street section for the network and Eastway is that City maintain or state Eastway is Eastway Drive I'm not sure I'd have to I'd have to double yeah so if you can just uh it could be a part of follow-up Q&A to miss Fortner um any plans for improvements but like you said you know as more development comes um M that that's when uh we get an opportunity to bring more improvements but all right that's all I have move to close second all right all the favor of closing public hearing raise hands any oppose that's unanimous we move on to item number 20 petition number 20241 by Jessica M Moreno Hernandez the location is42 Acres located on north side of Victoria a west of old States full Road and south of autumn Lake Drive and District 2 Mr GRS District the current zoning is mp8 MHP the proposed zoning is n1c Staff recommends approval of this petition and after staff's presentation Miss Moreno will have three minutes thank you yes petition 2024 001 is located on the north side of Victoria Avenue uh west of old Statesville Road the site's approximately 42 Acres it's the site of a mobile home uh the property Zone MHP mobile home park Pro zoning is n1c neighborhood one it's a conventional zoning District 2040 policy map recommends the neighborhood one place type uh the n1c district is consistent with the one place type this is a conventional resoning petition there's not an Associated site plan and would permit any use allowed in the n1c zoning District staff recommends approval of this petition as the n1c district aligns with the policy map and the development pattern prescribed by the N1 Place type and is consistent with the character of the area having you take any questions following the petitioner presentation thank you Miss Mora you have three minutes um no presentation he basically covered everything it's conventional we don't have any site plans yet we just want to build um it's MHP right now so we could only either build single um but maybe in the future we might want to do like a duplex on the lot but that's covers everything any questions close second second all in favor of closing public hearing raise hands any opposed that is unanimous we are on item number 21 session number 2024 003 by attacko Properties Inc the location is approximately 16.91% in District 2 Mr Gramp's District the current zoning is CG and MHP proposed zoning is N2 a CD staff recommends approval of this petition upon resolution of outstanding issues related to Transportation after staff's presentation Miss Grant we'll have three minutes have to speak in the affirmative thank you all right petition 20243 is located on the west side of States full Road South of WT Harris Boulevard sits approximately 16.91% 40 policy map recommendation to the in2 place type uh the proposal calls for up to 198 Triplex quadriplex and multi family attached dwellings uh the following Transportation improvements are proposed vehicular access to the site will be via new public Street off Old Statesville Road and Via new public streets off of an improved Radcliffe Road um the plan proposes a new public Street throughout the site uh an 8ft sidewalk and 8ot planning strip will be installed along the front edge of Old Statesville Road um exceeding the minimum 6ot requirement to accommodate uh to accommodate a proposed meberg County Park and Recreation urban trail an 8ft sidewalk and 8ot plane strip will be installed along other public streets ride Cliff Lane will be improved plan identifies as a potential location for an upgraded CATS bus stop um and all required Transportation improvements will be made prior to the first co uh following architectural uh requirements proposed the buildings AB buding the northern property line here will be limited to three units per building uh the rest of the buildings will be limited to five units per building other than one sixun building located internal to the site uh which may have six dwelling units required facades AB buding Old Statesville Road bradcliff Lane and network required internal streets are limited to 20 foot blank wall expanses and we'll have a minimum transparency of 25% of the ground floor and 15% of the upper floors we um incorporate facade articulation staff recommends approval of this petition upon resolution of outstanding issues related to Transportation as the proposal increases the variety and housing types in the area site is located within a short commute of employment opportunities plan commits to providing on Street facilities for meinberg County Park and Recreation urban trail the site is located along the proposed links red line and is within uh 34 a mile of the proposed Harris station on the red line um however staff would like to note that housing neighborhood concern Neighborhood Services is concern concerned with the potential displacement of 55 low to moderate income households currently occupy the site we encourage the petitioner to work with housing and Neighborhood Services on this matter have you take any questions following Miss Grant's presentation Miss Grant good evening mayor protm members of council and members of the zoning committee Bridget Grant land use consultant with Mor and Van Allen pleased to be here tonight on the behalf of the atapco team I think staff great job with all the details as they mentioned it's inconsistent with the adopted land use policy but when you look at the corridor it is very consistent with the building form and changes that are happening along that Corridor this gives you a rendered view of the site plan we appreciate staff's support of the extensive connectivity through the site as well as those Contex sensitive design transitions between the existing single family neighborhoods where we've got a significant amount of open space closest to the N1 as well as a thread of pocket park throughout the entire community we work very closely with Urban Design and staff to evolve this plan over time we have a couple of outstanding issues that we plan to address and we're happy to answer any questions thank you Mr Graham did you have a neighbor meeting I know you required to but feedback positive feedback we didn't really get anything that any concerns raised at the time a motion to close so Mo second all in favor of closing public hearing raise hands the oppose that is unanimous thank you Miss Grant the next item is item number 22 petition number 20 24007 by Oak Hill management location approximately 7.34 Acres located on the Southeast corner of southwest corner of Executive Center Drive and Alamar Road and District 5 Miss Molina's District the current zoning is ofc proposed zoning is C ac1 staff recommends approval of this petition upon resolution of outstanding issues related to environment transportation and site building Design After staff's presentation there's actually no one signed up to yes we do we have Miss Grant who signed up so you're right there you'll have three minutes there's no opposition thank you thank you as you mentioned the property consists of approximately 7.34 acres and includes two Parcels one on the east side of Executive Center Drive and one on the west the parcels represent the entrance to a larger Office Park development that was predominantly developed in the late 70s and 80s the area surrounding site includes the aforementioned Office Park to the South single story retail uses to the Northeast and West a church further to the East and multi dwelling and attached homes to the Southwest the subject site is zoned ofc other zoning in the vicinity includes General commercial for lots to the north east and west as well as a mix of O ofc zoning mud o and multi-dwelling Zoning The Proposal is to reson the site to cac1 which would allow for the proposed site to be redeveloped with all the uses by right and under prescribed conditions per the Udo the 2040 policy map rep recommends a community Activity Center Place type for the subject site as well as for multiple properties to the Northeast and west of the site the remainder of the office Park to the South is in the campus Place type and the multi-dwelling residential development in the area is located in the neighborhood 2 Place type the proposed cac1 zone is consistent with the recommended place type of the subject site staff recommends approval of the petition upon resolution ofst standing issues related to environment transportation and site design based upon the following the cac1 Zone zoning district is intended to accommodate those areas of the city that are transitioning to a more from a more autoc Centric land venues towards a more walkable well-connected and moderate intensity mix of retail Restaurant entertainment office and personal service as well as some residential uses the proposed zone is consistent with this community Activity Center Place type which is intended to accommodate the mix of uses comp contemplated by The Zone cats has multiple local and express routes that run along the site's Frontage and the site is within a half mile walk to the proposed Eastland Mall gold Lin stop such multimodal Transportation options are supportive of the proposed Zone also the petition could facilitate 2040 comprehensive plan goals including goal one 10-minute neighborhoods and goal four Trail and Transit oriented development while staff is supportive of the petition there are two outstanding items that directly relate to the purpose of the cac1 Zone which as I mentioned includes accommodating multimodal Transportation these items would be best addressed via condition of the zoning and include a request by cats to replace the existing shelter with an ADA Compliant shelter that meets current standards and a request by meinberg County Parks and Rec Department to provide pedestrian and bicycle accommodations along the frontage of Executive Center Drive to connect the funded Campbell Creek Greenway Trail project I'm here to answer any questions if you have any Miss Grant good evening mayor protown members of council members of the zoning committee Bridget Grant it's a pleasure to be here on behalf of the oakill team Teresa did a phenomenal job my presentation's not coming up but she covered everything that I could possibly imagine in terms of the level of detail um Holly just did a a great job on an earlier presentation describing when you bring something in as a conventional versus a conditional we went into this presentation with the idea that it was conventional because it's consistent with the adopted land use policy this site would likely be rezoned with the alignment resoning that the city intends to do as we start to take some of these parcels and move them to be directly aligned with the adopted land use policy we also believe that the new Udo builds in the ability for cats to get the bus stop with a shelter and Ada standards through the Land Development permitting process we're going to confirm that it doesn't need to be a condition the new Udo May provide that as well as the ability for us to work with Park and rack on providing that sidewalk so we're not opposed still work in progress and we're happy to address the outstanding issues thank you any comments Miss Molina thank you mayor protim uh so I got a few questions uh first um you and I we've spoken on this one you had a community meeting with nine people present what was the feedback on that it was generally positive people were excited to see investment in the area so this is really a two-part resoning there are these two Parcels that are on our Frontage on albam Marl road that we were doing conventionally we may look to reone a couple Parcels within the office Park also to CAC but overall the feedback was positive very interested in making sure that connectivity remain through Executive Center Drive I I take that street every day like literally every day uh so I actually have a question for staff because I got a concern actually it was somebody who I brought up in the budget today um she occupies space in the Executive Center Drive so we have businesses we have small businesses that still occupy that space and I wonder what our rebuttal is going to be to that like how or what will we have in place to help to you know um find new homes for some of those businesses that remain because that Office Park used to hold the Social Security Administration NC works I mean so many the the uh the North Carolina Democratic party was once there I mean so many businesses that I can think think of but I know some that are actually still operational including healthcare for facilities I think closer towards the back closer towards Farm Pond so I don't know if that's going to be directly impacted but coming towards the front there's still a lot of small businesses that occupy those spaces spe specific to the subject two Corner properties is what you're asking oh yes certainly an important question I I don't know that I have a direct answer for you today we could explore what uh programs or options might be available through our Economic Development Department but um that's I can can explore that for further for you um and see if there's any options yeah Miss gron and outside of that I I think you know as far as the petition especially with no General opposition and that's not on you that's on us to make sure that we do right by the people who are there and existing right so making sure that we bring in Economic Development to some degree this is a corridor of opportunity right so my my assumption based on some of the corridor's plans is that we may absolutely have something respective to the corridors to help those business owners but I'd like to gain you know some type of clarification before I could get really comfortable with any business owners that may be you know displaced as a result of this decision council member Molina if I can answer we did talk a little bit through the process about occupancy Executive Center Drive has not been at full occupancy for the last 10 years so they do have the ability to relocate tenants to other spaces it's really an opportunity for them to take some of the buildings that have sort of aged out of their Effectiveness and efficiency replace some of them but there's office space available right well and and I hear you so today in the in the budget meeting I actually suggested that we support a young lady named Tisha Boyd and she runs an organization called promised Youth Development uh she's been operating for 8 years and she's in that building she didn't even know about it literally until like last week when I told her so that's what I'm saying there are disconnects and again I don't think that's on you I think that's making sure that we got the proper lines of communication open because some people may be there operating and you know know and have a rebuttal and others may not so that's it's just a measure to make sure that you know especially as we continue to talk through the corridors this won't be the first or the last actually right next door there's already Apartments so uh Los Panos is going to be hovered potentially between like um the the Thirsty Beaver on Central between two apartment buildings or you know something similar essentially right but I you know and and that's kind of how we're developing but again I I go back to the fact that this is an absolute Corridor of opportunity and I know that at least my assumption is that you know we have some rebuttal for the businesses that may possibly be still operational in those Executive Center Drive offices so I'd just like to make sure you and I we can talk offline and and follow up on that and I'd love to have Economic Development followup to make sure that we're doing our part to you know touch those businesses and and see um how we can help that's all I have m brown you're good okay question do I have a motion so Move Motion to move forward all in favor close public hearing raise hand any oppose that is unanimous we move on to item number 23 petition number 2024 009 by Ramon adames the location approximately 27 Acres located on the north side of Irwin Lane West of China Grove Church Road and south of East westing house Boulevard in District 3 Miss Brown's District current zoning is in 1B propos zoning is in 1e staff recommends approval of this petition and after staff's uh presentation Mr Adamas will have three minutes thank you thank you petition 202 24-9 is just over a quarter acre located on the north side of Irvin Lane just west of chin grve Church Road current zoning is n1b proposed zoning is n1e they both align with the policy map recommendation for neighborhood one place type staff recommends approval of this conventional petition it is consistent with the N1 Place type recommendation is within a half mile of the Blue Line I45 South Boulevard Light Rail station and would provide some additional housing density by allowing residential dwellings on lots of 3,000 square ft or greater and I'll be happy to take questions Mr Dam presentation you have three minutes thank you um the existing lot has um restrictions due to the setbacks on the existing Zing but with the new proposed soning we will be able as they mentioned to have um a residential dwelling of 3,000 square ft lot at least two of those so that will be benefit to the community around it excellent any comments Mo close second I have a motion to close and second all in favor of closing public hearing raise hands any oppose that is unanimous thank you Mr Adamas we're on to item number 24 resoning petition 2024 018 by iclub Investments LLC location is approximately 4.62 Acres located at the Northeast intersection of Harwood Lane and mount hly Huntersville Road West of Country Lane in District 2 Mr Grahams District the current zoning is I NST CD proposed zoning is nccd Staff recommends approval of this petition upon resolution of outstanding issues related to transportation and environment after staff's present ation Mr McBain will have three minutes thank you all right petition 202 24018 is located at the Northeast intersection of Harwood Lane in Mount Holly Huntersville Road site is approximately 4.62 acres and is the site of a single family dwelling site's currently Zone institutional CD institutional conditional uh along Mount Holly Huntersville Road and n1a at the rear of the site institution CD n1a um the pro zoning is NC CD Neighborhood Center conditional 2040 policy map recommends the neighborhood one place type for the site the NC district is inconsistent with in1 Place type uh approval of this petition would revise the 2040 policy map recommendation to the neighborhood center Place type proposal calls for a child care center up to 12,000 Square ft or a medical office up to 12,000 Square ft here in this building and up to 20,000 ft of non-residential uses including retail personal service uses restaurants General Medical Offices uh the site plan prohibits certain uses such as gas stations drive-throughs outdoor entertainment Etc uh propos Transportation improvements include access to the site from hardwood Lane uh left turn lane along the front edge with Mount Holly Huntersville Road 50 foot right away will be dedicated along Mount Holly Huntersville Road uh 12ft multi-use PL path and 8ot sidewalk 8ft planting strip will be um installed along Mount Holly Huntersville Road and an 8ft sidewalk walking 8ot plane strip along Harwood Lane all required Transportation improvements will be made prior to the issuance of the First Co staff recommends approval of this petition upon resolution of outstanding issues related to transportation and environment as the petition proposes daily needs such as child care medical office retail space an area that has been identified as an access to amenities Gap by the 2040 comprehensive plan and the site is on an arterial Street proposes a 12ft multi-use path along Mount h hunterville Road has convenient access to a cat bus route pav take any questions following Mr mcbain's presentation uh good evening mayor proam members of council members of the zoning committee Keith MCV with more Van Allen assisting iclub Investments uh with me tonight representing iclub Investments is Sunil K kapali and Siri Navas matcha and I apologize for not pronouncing those correctly but that's best I can do as Max mentioned the aite at the intersection of hardwood Lane in Mount Holly Huntersville Road just over 4 and A2 Acres uh located across hardwood lane from fire station number 33 a site is currently zoned for a daycare center along the frontage and then n1a at the back for a single family home uh the proposal as Max mentioned is to and this is a pre currently approved daycare site for the for over 50% of the site over 2 and A2 Acres uh it is an area called for N1 a however at it's at an intersection of a collector road to Major thare it has been approved for a future signal by ncdot in terms of a location currently not funded or warranted uh the site as Max also mentioned has been identified as an area along manall where there's an amenity Gap uh this proposal of daycare and or office on the toward the back of the site along hardwood lane and then retail and office uses along The Long Mount Holly and hardwood Lane does try to fill that Gap does provide Green Space and Landscape uh yard adjacent to the residential to the rear the area here to the back is additional Green Space and common open space for the neighborhood further further to the West along hardwood Lane uh as as as mentioned we are over 2third of a mile from the closes other commercial activity going to the East and over a mile and a half going to the West be glad to answer any questions Pap car thank you all in favor of closing public hearing raise hands any opposed that's unanimous we move on to item number 25 petition number 2024 019 by 517 East 17 LLC location is approximately 0.56 Acres located on a Northeast intersection of North Davidson Street in East 17th Street south of Parkwood Avenue in District One my district the current zoning is ur2 CD proposed zoning is n1d and n1e staff recommends approval of this petition and after staff's uh presentation Miss Stephanie Holland will have three minutes thank you thank you the site is just over half an acre at the corner of North Davidson at East 17th Street this is just south of the blue line here in the Optimus Park neighborhood current zoning is ur2 conditional as a result of two different um Urban residential conditional petitions one approved in 2019 and one approved in 2020 and that entitles the site for the development of up to 21 units on the site currently those ur2 conditional plans petitioner is proposing the n1d District oops sorry proposing the n1d district for the two Parcels that are kind of what you consider south of the site with Frontage along North Davidson street and they are proposing the n1e zoning district for the parcels that have Frontage along East 17th Street both of those proposals and of those proposed zoning districts are consistent with the neighborhood one place type that is called for for this site as well as the surrounding neighborhood the petition would this is a conventional petition so there's no Associated site plan so essentially we' just be removing the conditional plans that are currently tied to the site and those plans propos denser building forms than currently exist within the block and so this petition would bring the zoning into alignment with the surrounding zoning districts as well as the neighborhood one place type and the types of building forms it supports the n1d and n1e Zoning districts allow for the same single family uses they just differ slightly on some standards like lot width and other dimensional standards the N1 e zoning District East is being requested for those two Northern Parcels because as you can see they're just bit more constrained in terms of their Dimensions so the n1d district wouldn't allow them to develop the site so they are seeking the N1 district for those two and I'll take any questions following Stephanie Holland's remarks Miss Holland please come down you have three minutes hello again um I think Holly's sumed it up very well this is the intent really is to ideally build uh four single family or four uh Parcels to reone back to single family or N1 um two of the Lots don't really qualify for the n1d so that's why we were asking for the two different zoning types um the intent here is really just to go back to a neighborhood use we did have a public meeting I think everybody on there was happy to hear that that there would be getting fewer neighbors than the 20 two that's currently approved for the site so how many people were at the public hearing was it just four as it states in in the um in our slides or was there more than that I believe there were four okay um and then I believe I had a one or two that requested um the presentation via email okay and then have you had any interaction with um the neighborhood associations around that area we have not no okay I would just recommend if you could reach out to the neighborhood associations in in that area sounds like they'll probably be in support but i' just like to Loop them in into this process thank you do I have a motion to close close Some Mo second all right all in favor of closing public hearing raise hands any oppose that is unanimous we're at item number 26 petition number 2024 020 by 35n 0 West 8 W LLC the location is approximately 1.88 Acres located at the Eastern end of WETA Drive East of Nations Ford Road and West of I77 in District 3 Miss Browns District the current zoning is in NST CD and the proposed zoning is n2b Staff recommends approval of this petition and after their presentation Miss frach will have three minutes to present thank you thank you petition 2024-25 current zoning is institutional conditional and is associated with the church to the south of the site the proposed zoning is n2b 2040 policy M recommends neighborhood one place it for the site is inconsistent with that policy map recommendation um however staff is recommending approval as the petition site is a Remnant parcel that is heavily encumbered by utilities and a creek with an Associated 35- ft water quality buffer rendering much of the site undevelopable the site is accessed by WETA drive and all other properties along Willet a drive are zoned into B um staff is recommending approval and I'll take any questions rach's comments all right Miss Rach evening Mo mayor proem uh Council staff thank you for having me this evening um to his point the majority of the 1.88 acres are constrained there are power line easements and Sewer easements across the majority there's about 22 Acres that's actually developable and the consideration was to move to n2b to be consistent with the residential uses adjacent so I don't think there's a lot of um there's not much that can be done with 0 22 Acres hopefully there's not much too much for discussion but I'm here for questions all right any questions thank L mood CL I have a I have a motion to close in second all in favor raise hands any opposed that is unanimous thank you miss rbec the final Petition of the evening is petition number 2024 021 by Foundry commercial the location is approximately 10.2 Acres located along the east side of Steel Creek Road South of bym drive and north of duckasaurus no she ask speak for her she striked her okay so then M then uh Mr Brown you will just have three minutes because there's not official opposition right thank you thank you the site is just over 10 acres along the east side of Still Creek Road it is located within the airport noise disclosure overlay the they are currently Zone neighborhood 1A and they are proposing to go to manufacturing Logistics too and the airport noise discloser overlay stays with both of those any districts when you res this is a conventional petition so there's an Associated site plan the 24 policy map calls for a manufacturing Logistics so the ml2 proposal here is consistent with that the petitioner has worked closely with the community to resolve their questions I believe they've held two different Community meetings that were um fairly well attended considering some of our other community meetings the petition would bring the site into alignment with the adjacent uses as well as the zoning which is pretty much all manufacturing Logistics on along the east side of Still Creek Road the existing Cemetery uses just as a note will be able to continue under the requested zoning District that they have and there are no outstanding issues I'll take any questions following petitioner's remarks mayor protim Colin Brown on behalf of the petitioner Foundry um commercial uh bill simerville is here um as as Holly mentioned um and council member Brown has been very instrumental uh this is a petition they're two related petitions uh a month or so ago you heard from a um Community member who said um sorry staff if we could highlight that one that would be great um who said hey we didn't know about this council member Brown has engaged with myself and the community we've had virtual follow-up meetings we had a large in-person meeting last week uh this is just about the cemetery rezoning but I know folks are watching so I will give a little more context this is a conventional petition just for the cemetery but foundry's deal involves this larger area that is owned by the city of Charlotte and also in agreement with the historic landmarks commission so there are a lot of kind of moving Parts but some some positives and I think once the community understood that why why there's not opposition tonight is just to really confirm there are no changes with the Historic Park it will remain historic um Foundry is working with storic landlock commission to relocate a building from this property to the old Steel Creek Church site uh there's a commitment in the counterpart resoning to have no access from Christy Lane and there will be no changes to the cemetery but in fact there will be some improvements to that area as well as maintenance and perpetuity so you don't see that in this conventional petition but between the contract with the city on this property and historic landmarks commissions those those are conditions that will bind the property so I just wanted to that context because we may have some community members watching but thank you again for your help we have some work thank you m brown you want so thank you so much Mr Brown I appreciate you and everything that you did in this process and the community members did say they they were not notified they didn't get the the notification of the meeting so miss Colin called the meeting at Still Creek Church um alha 160 big turnout a lot of concerned members with the church the community uh Foundry was very very instrumental and very thorough and explaining to the community I was there present I want to read something from one of the community members that was an advocate for the entire community and advocating for them to be able to be at the meeting to express their concerns about the historic area in the neighborhood which she lived in and some of her family members own property but she was against it and then she sent this she says good afternoon Miss Brown I wanted to write you and Mr Colin both I will not be attending tonight's hearing because I no longer wish to speak in opposition once the lines of communication were open I thought you um were open I thought you and your client The Foundry were very transparent I also believe that this is the best solution for our community to preserve the history of the Douglas house as well as the sanct sanctuary and the cemetery council member Brown thank you for all your support I would love to partner with you to bring more transparency to the resoning process in general I realized that everyone followed protocol however navigating the process as an average citizen was challenging but I want to say to um Miss Stephanie she was amazing because she she was uh resilient she had courage very courageous for her community and I was happy to be an advocate for her to support her and Mr Brown did not push back on anything that we wanted him to do so this is a great example of how when you communicate with the community collaborate together that the scales can be balanced and that's what I would like to see more of moving forward so thank you to Foundry did a great job Mr Colin but I also want to share that Foundry is pouring into she built this city which is one of the nonprofits that we've heard before not only do they have office space or will have office space on site but they also are giving them capital is it three years or five years it's three years Capital to run that organization and it doesn't get any better than that these are the type of Community Partners that we want to look for and the work that the women are doing painting truck you know just all the things that they do just look up she built this city it's amazing and that nonprofit is very active in our city and moving our city forward with Workforce Development so I was happy that we came to that resolution and to hit back for a constituent that was actually heading uh the community engagement piece it means a lot to me so I'm very happy and pleased with this I move the close if you don't have anything else thank second thank you Miss Brown I I just want to congratulate you on your leadership on this one because that is amazing she built this city does great work in our city and so thank you um Foundry capital for working with them and lifting them up uh especially for a small business we very difficult to get C access to Capital as we all know I have a motion to close public hearing a second all in favor raise hands raise your hand all right uh move to a journ All In in favor go home thank you good evening all [Music] right e e