[Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] e e e e e all [Music] [Music] oh [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Applause] [Music] he [Music] [Music] y a [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] okay [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] oh [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Applause] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] I'd like to welcome you to the August 19th Charlotte city council meeting think we have every everyone here um I'd like to begin by welcoming you this evening thank you for joining us and we begin our meetings with an invocation as an expression uh of inspiration followed by the Pledge of Allegiance and the invocation for us as a council is really meant to underscore our proceedings and set the tone for um how we move forward we celebrate the religious diversity of our entire Community including those who do not have a religious faith and tonight council member Molina will begin with our invocation followed by the Pledge of Allegiance thank you mayor protim uh first off I want to say happy Monday to everyone who's joining us here and those who are watching us from home um we are one week out from uh CMS starting school so I know that there are some anxious parents um who are excited and probably terrified about next Monday um but as we Center ourselves in this work I want to say as we come together on this day August 19th 2024 let us pause as a council uh Center our thoughts and the responsibilities before us may we continue to approach each decision we make with humility each decision with integrity and each challenge with a spirit of collaboration let our work today um and every day be guided by deep commitment to the well-being of all residents and fostering Community where every voice is heard and valued thank you let's stand for the pledge of the allegiance pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all so I will begin with an explanation of our zoning process but before we do that we're going to go around the DAT and do introductions and I'll start with the deputy city clerk Billy tons Deputy city clerk good evening everyone T brown pleasure to serve District three good evening I'm marjerie Molina represent East Charlotte District 5 Liz Babson assistant city manager for the city of Charlotte Dante Anderson mayor protim district one hello Ed Driggs district 7 District Six good evening Lana Mayfield council member at large ter hegler Grace senior assistant City attorney excellent so let me explain um our zoning process for you so you can follow along the the process begins with the application submitted to our planning staff for review and there are two types of cases on the agenda this evening we have decisions and we have hearings decisions on cases for which the public hearing was previous ly held so there's no other uh public comment and then we have the hearings for the hearings anyone who wishes to speak is asked to see the clerk the deputy clerk before the start of that particular hearing and staff's pres presentation will jump start that process and the petitioner um and those who are in favor of the P of the petition will get three minutes combined to present their case unless there are opponents or opposition sign up to speak or if staff is in opposition the petitioner will get 10 minutes and the opposition will get 10 minutes and then the petitioner will get a two-minute rebuttal if no one is opposed or signed up to speak against um that particular um petition then the public hearing will be closed and we'll move on to the next one the petition goes to our zoning committee uh of Planning Commission for a review of recommendations and I'd like to pause right now and pass it over to chair Blumenthal so that he can introduce himself as well as his committee thank you councilwoman is there a switch on here I believe it's on it all right thank you councilwoman and to the rest of council as well uh my name is Andrew Blumenthal and I'm the incoming chairman of the zoning committee of the meinberg Planning Commission uh I'll start by introducing my fellow committee members to your left uh we have Clayton cely Robin Stewart Rick Wier Teresa McDonald Aaron Shaw and Shauna Neely um the zoning committee will next to meet uh given Labor Day on Wednesday September 4th in lie of our usual Tuesday slot uh that'll be at 5:30 p.m. at that meeting the zoning committee will discuss and make recommendations on the petitions that have public hearings this evening the public is welcome to attend that meeting however please note that it is not a continuation of any public hearings from this evening prior to that meeting you are welcome to reach out to us excuse me to provide input you can find our contact information as well as information on each of these petitions on the city's website at charlot planning.org thank you councilwoman thank you and thank you and the committee for your service at this time I'd like to pass it over to staff so we can review the deferral and withdrawals good evening thank you um Teresa mvo um we have seven defal items this evening um I'll just read th through those quickly item number three petition 20231 124 by the paces Foundation item number 12 2022 224 uh by the uh petitioner is srl Central Avenue Properties LLC item number 13 20 24011 and the petitioner is Eastwood homes item number 17 20237 the petitioner is Ahad developers LLC item number 18 20 24035 and the petitioner is the city of Charlotte item number 19 20 24057 petitioner is savil homes LLC and the final deferral this evening is item number 20 20246 dream key Partners um and all of those items are requesting a deferral to the September 16th 2024 hearing thank you can I get a motion to defer those items as requested I have a motion and second all in favor raise hands any opposed that is unanimous thank you we will now move on to our consent agenda and we have petition items number four 4 through 11 that might be considered in one motion um except for those items pulled by a council member please note that these petitions meet the following criteria first there was no public opposition to the these particular petitions at the hearing secondly the zoning committee recommended approval and there are no changes after the zoning committee's approval and lastly uh staff recommends approval of these particular petitions are there any consent items that Council would like to pull for a separate Vote or comment if not um may I have a motion to approve the following petitions and to adopt the zoning committee's statement of consistency for each of these P petitions as appeared on our agenda as the council's own and I will go through and read each uh petition number um petition number 20231 152 by Sam's Commercial Properties LLC petition number 20231 164 by Eden acquisition LLC petition number 2024 0133 by above and beyond students Inc petition number 22430 by assana Partners petition number 2024 032 by Troy n petition number 202 2436 by Julio Bara Bara petition number 20 24038 by Cambridge Partners Inc in petition number 2024 041 by macway Road Ventures Inc can I get a motion to approve and adopt um the zonings committee to approve and adopt second thank you I have a a motion and a second all in favor raise hands any oppose that is unanimous B yes um okay let's move forward with the items um with changes after the zoning committee's recommendation and I will pass it over to staff so uh staff can review those items sure um that is academ number 14 petition number 202 24022 by qtr development partners and Sunset Road Partners LLC there were two uh minor changes made after the zoning committee's recommendation this include adding a note stating that cross access will be provided to the adjacent Western parcel and it added a note that uh relating to a future location of the Cross AIS um on the site plan staff believes these changes are minor and do not warrant additional review by the zoning committee okay and as we approach these particular items in the floor of the evening we'll vote for um whether or not we would like to send it back to committee or Advance okay so now we can move forward with our decisions so don't we need a motion on that I know we're going to do we were going to do it as we got to the items that was number 14 remember 12 we're in decisions 12 and 13 were both deferred so that was the decision of number 14 yes let me read number 14 and then we can make that motion because I I haven't read the mo the the entire petition yet and we are on 14 you have to say we s it it's not how I usually okay um now we're moving forward with our with our decisions and we're on agenda item number four 14 okay that is petition number 20 24022 by qtr development partners and Sunset Road Partners LLC the location is approximately 12.11 Acres located on the south side of Sunset Road East of Oakdale Road in the etj with the closest um Board of County Commission being number two District Two Mrs leak in the closest city council being District to Mr Graham the current zoning is in 1A and the proposed zoning is in to ACD the zoning committee voted 11 to1 to recommend the approval of this petition and staff recommends the approval of this petition as well and as we just heard there were some changes um after the zoning committee met and they were deemed as um relatively minor can I get a motion to not send back um item number 14 back to the zoning committee can I get a motion in a second so move second I have a motion in second all in favor of not sending back item number 14 to zoning committee raise hands anyone oppose okay that is unanimous can I get a motion to um approve motion sorry I just want to clarify this just a motion because when we say a motion to approve that's leading versus a motion or however the motion goes to either approve or deny objection okay thank you both is there a motion to approve petition number 20 24022 so moved I have a motion Crow I have a motion to I have a second second all in favor of of approving I just want to make sure we um it's approved approve and adopt the motion of yes approve and and adopt the statement of of consistency dude chill out from the chief seats I know I know I have a motion in a second all in favor raise hands any oppos all right that is unanimous we will move on to item number 15 petition number 20 2429 by Emy development company the location is approximately 19.81% located on the south side of alexandriana road east side of Statesville Road and West of Twin Lakes Parkway north of i485 in the etj closest to district one for the board of County Commissioners and closest to District 4 Miss Johnson 4 um city council the current zoning is ofc proposed zoning is IMD the the zoning committee recommended um 5 to one to recommend the approval of this petition and staff does not recommend the approval of this particular petition we also heard that there were additional items that changed after the zoning committee um casted their vote can I is there a motion to motion to approve and adopt motion not to send back first we need the motion to not send back to we didn't get they need needed to read it to say whether or not it was something that needed to be sent back approach the parliamentarians on the war path can I can I get a motion to not send back item 15 we need to hear from staff about what the changes are they need to read what the changes we're doing so well I think they told us about yes it's back to school time' been on vacation too long six weeks long time corre Mr Paton approach the [Music] bench Can can we hear the changes for item number 15 certainly for item number 15 there was one note added after the zoning committee meeting and that was the petitioner added the note to um related to a contribution of $200,000 to the city of Charlotte affordable housing trust fund uh prior to the issuance the First Co for the site okay move not to send back second I have a motion not to send back and a second all in favor of not sending back to the committee raise hands any opposed that is unanimous can is there a motion to approve and adopt um the zoning the zoning committee's um statement of consistency for agenda item number 15 second I have a motion and a second all in favor raise hands comment Please Mr drigs so I I just want to know quickly the staff does not recommend this I don't take the decision to vote for something against the recommendation of Staff lightly I feel their analysis of the applicability of our policy was appropriate but in my mind this is a situation where the application of the policy doesn't really fit the circumstances so this was offered uh for the intended use the staff's intended use uh no transaction was possible so uh again uh greatest respect for the staff but I feel it's in our interest to go ahead and move this one forward thank you thank you Miss Mayfield did you have a comment thank you so our colleague council member Brown did thankfully S Johnson right Council Brown my apologies council member Johnson did send us an email in response to this but I also want to share that I appreciate staff's idea but this particular area as was alluded to by my colleague more than 20 years they were not able to develop what we thought would happen in their area so I appreciate the fact that the petitioner listened to The District representative to members of the community made a contribution has in here some housing afford affordability for a segment of our community that needs access to it made additional commitments for sidewalk improvements not just for their specific property but even extending Beyond as well as contributing to our Housing Trust Fund as we continue to see major growth in the city so although it is not in as as a slight to our staff which does an amazing job for this particular project it seemed like this development would be one that would hit our goals of our 10-minute neighborhoods as well as create housing diversity in the area where they are jobs thank you thank you any additional comment um Miss Molina uh thank you mayor protim I just really quickly I wanted you to elaborate because I I asked earli or just to get some clarification because again as as my colleagues have stated I don't want to be redundant here um but really understanding what your policy position was can you just give like a highle view of what that was um just for public records so that we can C certainly um so the the property today is in the um in the manufacturing and logistic Place type um and as is most of the property surrounding it um the petitioners seeking the IMU Zone to develop a um holy residential project multif family stacked project from a polic policy perspective that is not a a type of development that we would support with the adjacencies of the manufacturing and Logistics occurring around it moreover that's an that's still a viable manufacturing logistic area we've recently approved several projects for manufacturing there's Auto Repair auto dealership surrounding that we've had a couple other petitions come in recently for prese submittal meeting for manufacturing Logistics So based on those characteristics we did not feel this was the best location for this multif family project not nothing against it is the developer has done great strides to make it a good project and I don't doubt that it's just really came down to the policy and where that directs us to locate multif family residential projects such as this no I I like my colleagues appreciate the work of staff and and quite often it's it's something that we lean on because you really lean into this work before we actually have a touch point with it so we depend one on on your work and and the Acumen that you lend to this process as well as you know our our um our our you know commissions so um I just wanted to you know acknowledge that I also will be um supporting the council member due to the fact that this has been a long-standing opportunity you know for more than a decade now without any you know interest in development and I feel like that based on that assessment it would be worth supporting and I think that if there's an appetite to you know diversify this particular area with that type of um project then I'm I'm willing to support it to see that through so thank you again for your work um and that's all I have mayor proen thank you Miss Molina I I too will be supporting council member Johnson on this particular petition I spoke with staff um early C at length about this petition and understand where um this petition has been and this this part of the city has been for a while so I will be supporting Miss Johnson as well I believe we have a motion um and a second um Deputy clerk is that correct to approve okay all in favor raise hands any opposed that is unanimous and Memorial Gardens the location is approximately 10.65 Acres located on the east side of West Sugar Creek Road and North side of the Roman Road West of Mineral Springs Road in District 4 Miss Johnson's District the current zoning is n1b proposed zoning is ic1 the zoning committee voted 6 to0 to recommend approval of this petition and staff recommends the approval of this petition as well is there a motion to approve the this petition and adopt the zonings committee's consistency statement as it appears adop consistency statement I have a a a motion and a second any discussion on agenda item number 16 all in favor raise hands any opposed that is unanimous we now will move on to our hearings this evening and we will begin with agenda item number 2021 and okay as I mentioned earlier if there's no opposition um we will hear from staff and then the petitioner will have an opportunity to discuss the petition and we'll start with agenda item number 21 uh petition number 20249 4 by the city of Charlotte planning design and Development Department it's a text Amendment the purpose of this text amendment is to modify the unified development ordinance to address minor administrative items related to the tree preservation account and neighborhood character overlay and to correct sher's errors um the staff recommends the approval of this petition and I will hand it over to staff for their presentation thank you all right great thank you mayor prot uh yes so our first item is public hearing on Texas Amendment 2024 094 uh probably one of the most straightforward text amendments we'll have uh just to talk through the three changes that are essentially uh composed in this um article 14 is our special purpose in overlay districts uh that's where our things like our neighborhood character overlay our residential infill overlay uh historic district overlays all live in the Udo uh as we were going through the exercise of working with some communities on the neighborhood character overlays that are uh currently in process uh there was some language that we noticed that was a carryover in there it's not existing in any of the other overlay districts that we have uh and it essentially States um clarifies some things about deed restrictions uh and so we are we again we didn't see that language anywhere else the code in the Udo is silent on deed restrictions as it uh really technically should be uh those are private agreements the city doesn't get involved in reviewing or enforcing any of those uh so this change for article 14 would remove just statement that uh reads that it cannot modify any standards located within existing Declarations of covenants and restrictions uh again that's just to make it consistent with all of our other overlay districts and really clarifies that again staff is not involved in researching or enforcing or implementing any of those deed restrictions so that's the first change uh the second change as mentioned also has to do with our uh tree preservation uh section of the ordinance uh we all have understand we have a fund that uh we collect funds when people do pay payment in L for tree save and there's a certain U pot that that money goes into which we can then use for for other tree initiatives uh really just needed to clarify and change the word of fund uh to something different I think it changes to account now uh and that is so that those funds can be dispersed there's just some uh just challenges with the word funds when it comes to uh dispers ment of those funds through strategy and budget so working with them we identified that that was an issue uh so we've changed that word uh to essentially just read how it needs to uh so those Heritage tree mitigation payments uh and other payments in Li can be uh dispersed out through that fund and use as they were intended to uh and that's essentially the same for the enforcement section so anywhere that we had that word fund when it came to tree preservation uh that had to then be changed uh to account so that also can clarify where that collected fine Revenue gets deposited and then dispersed out of so just three really basic cleanup changes uh nothing overarching that has any real policy implications uh just some cleanups that we've identified through staff implementation and then again working with strategy and budget on um those mitigation funds so be happy to answer any questions that you have thank you Mr Pon are there any comments Miss Mayfield thank you Mr Pon and if team up top can go back to the slide so help me understand the clarification we're changing the language to remove it from fund currently those funds can only be used to be dispersed for tree related so by changing the language from fund to account what does that do doesn't change what they can be used for just changes the ability to then disperse them through strategy and budget so again just for clarification if it doesn't change where it's going what was the challenge in strategy and budget for them to allocate funds uh we've got some folks here that maybe can clarify the technicality of it uh but it doesn't change what it can be used for so it doesn't open it up to using those funds for anything other other City initiatives it has to be used for the same thing it's just essentially again changing that word uh but I'll let Tim explain a little bit more the to account why thanks Dave good evening Council Tim Porter Urban Forester it's really just a preference from strategy and budget to be more comfortable uh there was some understanding of fund being a very specific type of account that as we move into the new accounting system workday in the future there was some une uneasiness with that account or its equivalence if you if you dig into the red line it says accounts or its equivalence it's just a comfort level longterm that just better aligns with the preferences of strategy and budget and our future accounting system workday so it truly is just a even name change it's not any of the accountability of it yes that's correct yeah thank you any additional comments Miss Molina thank you mayor protim um article 14 David can you give me some um understanding of especially with East Charlotte I get a lot of interest in the overlay District tell me what exactly we're updating so that me and the community can understand that so we're updating the the language that's in there there's a a sentence that refers to again those Declarations of covenants and restrictions just commonly referred to as deed restrictions and it creates some confusion as to is Staff responsible for reviewing and enforcing those or not moving forward things that meet City standards because there may be a conflict with those deed restrictions again all of our other overlay districts and and the Udo and its entirety is silent on deed restrictions as it should be we don't have any ability to get involved in those those are private party agreements uh and so it's essentially removing that sentence um so it's just clear that like as all the other overlay districts that that's not a staff responsibility doesn't mean that private property owners can't still take action and enforce those deed restrictions through their own mechanisms uh and it doesn't mean that they can uh you know don't have any mechanism to enforce those it just means it clarifies that the city isn't the responsible party and again that's something that's outside of our ability to even touch the scope of what that might mean right yeah just for clarification exactly is there some kind published document that we're going to um give as a result of this or it the published document would just be the Udo with that sentence removed and that's the redline version that's online now it just shows that sentence being struck and then just a renumbering of that section to um just go back to now that B2 is gone B3 becomes B2 Etc um so that's the one thing that will change uh we can always put out some uh messaging through our own planning department channels to say this was an update again it doesn't provide any real Effectiveness on anyone's ability to again enforce those or uh say hey our community has these deed restrictions what do we do to to move those forward those are that's just all a private party matter okay that that's all I have thank you mayor pend thank you if I have no other com comments can I get a motion to close public hearing so moved second all in favor raise hands any oppose that's unanimous we will move on to agenda item number 22 two petition number 20231 156 by plant for partners Inc the location is approximately 16.08 Acres located on the east side of East WT Harris Boulevard North of Rocky River Road and West of John Russell Road in District 4 Miss Johnson's District the current zoning is n1a proposed zoning is ofc Staff recommends the approval of this petition and after staff's presentation Mr Steve Farney will have 10 minutes to present and is Mr Kevin Hull here yes okay Mr Hull you will have 10 minutes and then there will be an opportunity for a two-minute rebuttal thank you thank you um the site is approximately a 16 acre undeveloped parcel located on the west side on the east side of WT Harris Boulevard North of Rocky River Road for context there is an established residential area to the east of the site and Duke Energy is located across WT Harris to the West the WT Harris Corridor in this area includes a mix of residential support and office uses the request is to reone the site from n1a to office Flex campus the aforementioned residential development to the east is zoned n1a however several properties to the North and South fronting on WT Harris are zoned 01 which is a legacy District which translates to the ofc Zone the 2040 policy map calls for a variety of place types along the segment of WT Harris including manufacturing Logistics neighborhood center and neighborhood one the subject site has a place type of neighborhood 2 staff recommends approval of this petition as the requested ofc zone is consistent with the existing mix of zoning and development along WT Harris Boulevard access to goods and services has been identified as a high priority need in the area the petition could facilitate goal 8 related to diversity diverse and resilient economy approval of this petition will change the place type from neighborhood 2 to campus I'm here if you have any questions thank you I would also just underscore that this is a conventional um resoning petition with no Associated site plan Mr Farney please come down to this Podium here and you will have 10 minutes to speak and Mr hole if you'd like to come down as well to be ready for the 10 minutes after Mr farney's Complete right over there sir sir you can go to right behind you Podium right behind but be careful watch your step here you go thank you good evening uh my name is Steve forny and I'm the developer on this site and I'm not going to take that much time because U the uh owners right now is the 7th Day Adventist it's their District headquarters there and this is land they've owned for over 35 years and up until now the only pursuers they've had wanted to build either apartment complexes or a school and what I develop and I've done 12 of these in Charlotte area is one story professional Parks very very low density we had a neighborhood meeting uh and a group showed up and they were excited about it because they didn't want to see an apartment complex in front of them or a school and so um I that's really all I had to say uh I'll be happy to answer any questions to the person that's uh opposed to it thank you Mr Hull please come down to this Podium you'll have 10 minutes as well don't go far you'll have good evening Council um my my uh primary concern and maybe it sounds like the site concept was not a part of um the zoning and staff review so but my um I think overall of uh seen the concept and uh spoken with uh some of the members my primary concern was with the tree Conservation Area proposed in the site concept between uh the residential plots of land uh and then the office development that it was not of large buffer so that people were going to look out of their backyards and instead of seeing trees in woods now they would see a parking lot in offices so I think the overall concept um sits well with me but as a member of the neighborhood uh would like to request a larger buffer between that uh more commercial office space and the neighborhoods that are there now thank you Mr Farney you have two minutes for rebuttal I don't I'm not the engineer I wish my civil engineer was here but he's out of town uh we're using the standard buffer between residential and Commercial um and and I don't really know what that is but it's whatever is on the on the books for that zoning uh there's a lot of tree conservation uh and those houses will not be looking on a parking lot the the buildings are going to be on the perimeters and the parking will be in the center so the neighborhood will only see the back of the uh buildings but you'll have to look through I think 75 ft of of buffer area uh if you look at the map that area just above the uh uh area in question is that I've got two buildings that is exactly what we're going to build and we have that exact situation and uh we've been there for 22 years and there hasn't been any problem uh it's very quiet operations as all professional centers uh and that'll be what the new the new one is so we do have a large tree conservation out of the roughly 12 acres that will be developing about five of it is going to be maintained in trees is a large triangle area in the center of the park that will be maintained as trees with paths through there with uh picnic tables and things so we're very aware of of that as an Ambiance and a benefit to the the park in general thank you any Miss Mayfield thank you um don't go too far away stay close by but this question might be for staff we note in here that Charlotte water currently does not have the water system accessible for the resoning boundary under review so help me understand how we're here with a recommendation from staff and committee if we already know we're having challenges with access to water this is a conventional zone so there are items that will be addressed at the time of Permitting um depending on what's proposed okay that doesn't really help me because on so I'mma try to ask the question a different way so that I can play catchup we just had a major incident within Uptown Charlotte regarding Charlotte water uh three and a half four weeks ago if we know clearly that Charlotte water is stating that the closest water distribution main is approximately 350 ft North of the resoning battery and again Charlotte water currently does not have water system accessibility why will we even move something forward if it there's a greater chance that this is a project that can be delayed I think from a staff perspective we were looking at the appropriateness of the zone for this site not specifically uh the the develop If This Were a conditional Plan and there's specific de development proposed then we would probably take a deeper dive in the availability of utilities but at this time whether they're going to just Market it in the future for for an office development um that's I'm going to turn it over to Mr Penton but that's my Approach go on up Dave yeah so just real quick on that stuff uh for water and ser when we see that kind of comment it doesn't mean the site can't be served it doesn't mean they don't have capacity to serve the site it just means they don't have a line in the area of the site so if it's to be extended to provide service for water sewer uh it'll have to be at the developers dime and their own expense we won't City doesn't pay for that extension so it doesn't mean that there's not capacity uh it just means that they have to extend that out and when they do uh they come in for permitting they have to then put in uh the lines on their own cost rather than the city having it already there so it doesn't mean they can't develop the project just means there's an additional expense per the developer thank you Mr Farney two questions for you one well one's one question is there a possibility for the consideration of the tree buffer versus a good bit of it being in the middle of the development for their amenity that we maintain undur buffer between that residential because we know fall tends to happen even though we're losing Seasons when all those leaves fall you kind of want to make sure that what you're looking at yet because also there's potential environmental impacts with the vehicles the gas the talking radio whatever it is is there a possibility that you all can look at you can work with your engineer to identify more undisturbed buffer space between the residential and your property versus more of the tree save going in the middle of the property well we're going to do the middle of the property anyway it's it's not going to affect the number of square feet that we can get and I don't know if you would ask me about the buffer on the street uh between the residential so the question that Mr Hall had regarding the residential and your property is there a possibility that you and your engineers can have a discussion of maintaining a little more of the natural undisturbed tree area versus clear cutting and then planning so you're are you saying can we do more than what the zoning requires right now is that the question well you can always do that but what I'm asking is if y'all can have a conversation in order to try to meet with Mr Hall and some of the other residents sure meet a little further in the to the middle to create a buffer that will enhance the neighborhood as well as your property sure we can have that discussion I we've got plenty of room in the middle I mean we're only putting 885,000 Square ft in 12 acres so you can see the density is very very low and I I need to interrupt I'm councilman Mayfield we have to be very careful because we don't have a site plan and it's conventional so any uses allowed in office Flex are allowed so he can't um condition he Gray he's not that reminder I appreciate that but yet since Mr Ho has some design that was that he has seen whatever that design is that we don't have I'm just asking if you can have a consideration to continue communication with the neighbors absolutely we want we want to be we want to be good neighbors uh we have been for 22 years down the street and we're not going to violate that we're going to work with the neighborhood thank you so much thank you any additional comments do I have a motion close close second I have a motion and second all in favor of closing public hearing any opposed that is unanimous we will move on to agenda item number 23 petition number 20231 165 by Central AV multifam LLC the location is approximately 2.83 n Acres Bound by the south side of Central Avenue West side of petm street north side of Sunnyside Avenue and east side of Independence um I 277 ramp in District One my district the current zoning is in 1D nc6 CD and the proposed zoning is cac1 ex staff recommends the approval of this petition upon resolution of outstanding issues related to infrastructure and uh requested technical revisions and after staff's presentation Mr Keith mcain will have 10 minutes and Bethany G and and Craig Miller will have 10 minutes to speak in opposition thank you thank you this site is just under three acres along Central Avenue pedmont Street and sunyside Avenue located in the sunyside portion of the Elizabeth neighborhood there are a mix of uses along this section of the Central Avenue Corridor which service the surrounding residential areas the site is currently zoned Neighborhood Center neighborhood 1D and office conditional that neighborhood center is zoning is as a result of The Pedestrian overlay that used to be on the site automatically Translating that portion to NC the petitioner is proposing Community Activity Center 1 exception which is a conditional resoning request and this petition is consistent with the community Activity Center Place type that's recommended for a majority of the site and is inconsistent with the neighborhood one designation on the two southeastern Parcels on the site The Proposal itself is for up to 3 15 multif family units as well as up to 5,000 sare ft of commercial or retail space that' be unrelated to the multif family development so it couldn't Service as like a leasing office for example ex petitions allow for modifications to certain Udo standards in exchange for public benefits and the benefits provided by the petitioner in this resoning includes the development of a 16t publicly accessible shared use path the relocation of the existing sewer line and 9,000 ft of amenitized public Clos the space along the shared use path and at the intersection of pedmont and sunyside the plan requests modifying the height plane restrictions for portions of a building within 200 ft of the neighborhood one place type there are two areas identified in this site plan where these tight plane modifications will occur one area will be um along this western boundary and one area is along the northeastern boundary as shown on that site plan this exception request modifies the maximum Building height from 65 ft to 85 ft and that's only limited to the areas that are specified on that plan the height plane restrictions for portions of a building within 100t of neighborhood one will be maintained so that the building is no more than 50 ft tall in that 100t radius the petitioner is also requesting to reduce the M minimum ground floor height from 14 to 10 ft where non-residential space may occur and the final ex request is to reduce the ground floor transparency levels where non-residential space may occur except where non-residential space may occur excuse me the petitioner commits to fund a traffic signal at Central Avenue and pedmont Street and up to three speed humps or other equivalent traffic calming measures within a year of securing the final certificate of occupancy a comprehensive Transportation review was completed as part of this rezoning process and mitigation measures were identified and committed to in the conditional notes the petitioner will relocate the existing curb line along Central Avenue to allow for the construction of a buffered bike lane per the Charlotte streets map and they will Reserve right away Along the site's Western Edge for future acquisition by cats for the Silver Line several architectural standards are specified that are mindful of the site's transition to the surrounding single family uses and staff recommends will prule this petition upon resolution of the requested technical rision the requested ex Provisions for transparency ground floor height and Architectural standards are in response to the specific elevation characteristics of the site as well as its location along future Transit infrastructure the other ex provision being requested for flexibility in the height plane standards required for sites near neighborhood one place type and although this petition would modify that maximum Building height from 65 to 85 ft in those two portions these portions of the structure would not be immediately adjacent to any single family uses and the site's maximum height would be concentrated along Central Avenue and the Western Edge which will abut the transit line the public benefits procured in this petition would support pedestrian Transit infrastructure the 16ft shared use path would serve as a vital vital pedestrian connection for the community utilizing transit to access the nearby amenities along Central Avenue and this path will be properly amenitized in a way that is consistent with our existing pedestrian paths along Transit lines as part of this Redevelopment of the site and anticipation of future Transit infrastructure the petitioner also commits to relocating the existing SE line and that shifts what is typically a pretty big financial burden away from the city into the petitioner separately from the ex benefits out lied in this plan the petitioner will still utilize bonus menu provision options from article 16 in the Udo to achieve any height above 80 ft recognizing that this site is adjacent to single family uses they created uh several architectural standards that will allow for more compatible buildings design along City side in pedmont and again they are maintaining that 50ft height cap where within 100 ft of neighborhood one which further transitions to the single family uses there's also 65t height step down that's interior to the site in between the 85 ft and the 50t height zones although this petition is located at the edge of a single family residential area the majority of the site and Central Avenue is recommended for Community activity center and and that place type envisions mixed use mid midsize developments along Transit corridors so densification should be encouraged in areas like these which front major arterials which Central Avenue is and will also be along future Transit routes this petition sufficiently balances the goals of that CAC Place type and provides adequate public benefits to justify the ex request and I'll take any questions following the community and petitioners comments thank you Mr mcbang uh good evening mayor protown members of council members of the zoning committee Keith mcvan with Mo Van Allen Jeff Brown of our firm and I are assisting Republic Metropolitan the petitioner on on this request with me tonight representing the petitioners Adam McMichael uh and Dennis walls they're available to answer questions I want to thank Holly and the staff for helping us with this request Hol has done a great job outlining what the request is about and where we are as she mentioned uh a site located on Central Avenue adjacent to the Sunnyside neighborhood which is a residential neighborhood right behind us also that neighborhood is also part of the Elizabeth neighborhood uh before we filed this petition early on we started meetings uh on the site with the residents of Sunnyside to get input on the petition we've made a lot of changes to the petition request that you see before you tonight as a result of input from those meetings uh unfortunately we haven't been able to address all their concerns I think there's a number of speakers here tonight to address to address you regarding their concerns uh next slide so as Holly mentioned a variety of zoning districts for this site NC old Legacy conditional as well as n1d it is as hly mentioned a majority of the site is supported by the 2040 Place type map a small portion or a third or quarter of the site is inconsistent uh the rezoning would make the site totally consistent with a plan by using CAC we have limited height Building height we have limited density as as Holly mentions and the and planning department mentions in their staff analysis this is a transitional location and one of the things that we've worked hard to do here is to try to propose a conditional plan that does make a transition from Central Avenue a four-lane heavily trafficked Corridor adjacent to Transit uh which adjacent to Future Transit location as well as in close proximity to the existing links Gold Line stop on Hawthorne also has existing bus service on the site so we wanted to make a transition from th those public infrastructure improvements the site also has access to the Future Char cross Charlotte Trail which is directly across Central Avenue from the site so in trying to transition between that more intense quarter and the single family neighborhood to the rear we spent a lot of time on design how the building lowers in Building height from 85 ft along Central to a maximum height of 50 ft at at Sunnyside in pedmont added additional amenities in terms of open space enlarged setbacks we heard a lot of concerns from the residents about traffic and parking in the neighborhood so we've worked to design the access to be on pedmont closer to Central Avenue where it would have access hopefully to a potential future signal which is the petitioner has agreed to fund subject to cats sorry not cats but coot SE SE approval of the future signal I also will mention that in regards to the Cross Charlotte Trail uh the city of seed out is actually funded and will be adding a pedestrian activated signal on Central that will provide the residents of this community as well as the residents of Sunnyside a neighborhood access to the Cross Charlotte Trail at a at a signalized or pedestrian Crossing that trail connection also lines up with as one of the amenities that Holly mention a 16t multi-use path that will be built by the petitioner along along Independence that links the future transit station to the Sunnyside neighborhood and to the Charlotte Charlotte cross cross Charlotte Trail can't say that fast we also added a provision that said we would provide 20% more parking that is the minimum that is required by the ordinance again to address concerns from The Neighbors about parking we also worked with the city to not relocate the curent curb on Sunnys side in pimont so that on street parking along those streets along our front edge would not be possible uh and residents would be encouraged to park in the parking structure within the facility uh this just shows you what the future impact of the silver line will be on the site that area has been reserved and set aside for the construction of the of the silver line there's improvements in terms of sewer line relocation that are being done as part of the development of the site with this access as I mentioned was originally when we first started this we had an access point on Sunnyside Avenue we heard a lot of comments about the impact of the potential impact of that it actually would work well for this development to have access of a Sunnyside but we eliminated that and moved access vehicular access to pedmont at hopefully what will be a future signal funded by the developer we are working with Seda to get that accomplished as part of the development of the site have agreed to do a traffic war and Analysis as part of that and as I mentioned earlier this is the future pedestrian signal at the intersection of the Cross Charlotte Trail and the proposed 16t multi-use path that's part of this development two height exceptions that Holly mentioned quickly uh to increase Building height above what's allowed this along Central 85 ft here and 85 ft here again along Independence Boulevard and adjacent to the Future Silver Line Station we are are in compliance with the Udo in regards of Building height as it adheres to the residential neighborhood this exception is really based on this small Remnant piece of Independence Park that's called N1 Place type so the code actually restricts height based on that even though it cannot be developed with residential uses and then there's a number of other exceptions regarding mixed use buildings and how that because of our adjacency to the to the Future Transit line which is elevated above the site we wanted some relief on the mixed use provisions design standards the site will meet the residential design standards and as Holly mentioned we will meet the commercial design standards where the 5,000 square ft of commercial area would be located along Central Avenue there's a minimum commitment to no less than 1500 square ft so again public uh in terms of amenities public open space at the corner here public open space here to help with the transition limited height uh agreement to fund the traffic signal to help with traffic within the neighborhood and from the future development that occurs here larger setbacks along pedmont and Sunnyside to move the building back and create a better transition commitments to specific architectural treatments regarding balconies and porches uh that would project out from the main building to create a more of a scale down there three-story balconies and porches direct access to Sunnyside from these units and then the units along pedmont would also Orient toward them but because of grade would not potentially have access to pedmont itself and then lastly just again these commitments to architectural treatment along Sunnyside streetscape improvements Stoops and porches with direct access trying to create a a residential to residential use transition where the residents of this community feel part of the Sunnyside neighborhood and vice versa so a lot of work to try to make that integration as seamless as possible we're happy to answer questions okay great thank you yes ma'am Miss Bethany G and Craig Miller you make your way down to the podium you will have 10 minutes in aggregate to address this petition good evening my name is Craig Miller and I'm an 18-year resident of the Sunnyside neighborhood which is adjacent to the proposed development in this hearing and I had some exhibits did those get passed out we're passing them around now got it all right um I'm joined here by neighbors who stand together in our opposition to this rezoning up there uh and I will be followed by Bethany as you know sunny side is a small and tight-knit community that while a part of the historic Elizabeth neighborhood was largely cut off after the widening of Independence if you look at exhibit one one you'll see that it's also bounded by The Busy streets of Central and Hawthorne uh this is isolation I believe has played a large part in why our neighborhood is so tight-knit but our location has become somewhat more of a curse lately as it is increasingly a target for large scale development if you would please turn to Exhibit 2 you'll see there I included all the fairly recent and upcoming or potential developments that surround our neighborhood Hood I won't go through all of them I have them listed but if you could take a moment maybe later to get a sense of how our neighborhood is undergoing lots of pressure from development now we recognize that properties along Central and hawthor are zoned for higher density uses and understand the importance of that in a quickly growing city and urban core area this particular resoning however is very different because it includes those two properties so neighborhood one and 1D that were recently purchased by Skyla Credit Union and are included in the development and would be included in the sales transaction if it happens these two properties front Sunnyside Avenue within the interior of our neighborhood and had single family detached homes on them exhibit three page three shows the one still standing which is an example of the beautiful historic homes in our neighborhood and I'd like to point out that Elizabeth is a historic district on the national register register of historic places and there is currently an effort underway to establish local historic district for um Elizabeth resoning these two N1 Parcels to me is a dangerous precedent setting threshold if you look at exhibit four um that helps to maybe understand why if the resoning of these two N1 Parcels is allowed it invites developers to do the same thing with similar properties within the interior of the neighborhood from there it would only be a matter of time before they would ship away at the rest of the neighborhood and this is the kind of thing that ruins neighborhoods additionally this is is an exception conditional resoning as such the developer is requesting modifications to zoning standards in exchange for including features deemed as public benefits one request is to increase the height to 85 ft which Keith mentioned which will allow more Apartments to be built thus more money for the developer the others include significant reductions in ground floor height and transparency also shared earlier both of which will detract from the architectural appeal none of these supposed public benefits offered in exchange for the exceptions come anywhere close to making up for the negative consequences of the requested exceptions and are hardly much if any benefit for the Sunnyside Community one is the multi-use pathway that was described combined with a linear open space plaza plaza which were asked for by cats because of the potential Light Rail stop next to the development another public benefit was the relocation of the sewer line as you're aware Light Rail is no longer the plan for the Eastern section of the silver line so these benefits are no longer relevant since they'd be built for something that won't be happening it isn't funded the desire for high density residential next to a light rail station also becomes less relevant in exchange for these and other lackluster offers couched as benefits Metropolitan rep Republic Metropolitan stands to earn substantially more money by building higher and reducing ground floor architectural value the bar for granting exceptions should be set much higher there's very little public benefit and the development will have significant negative impacts on the surrounding neighborhood in terms of cut through traffic and resulting safe issues more on street parking in a neighborhood where many properties don't have driveways more people allowing their dogs to use our Lawns as their bathroom and so on one other major issue concerns traffic if you look at the last exhibit one entrance SL SL exit is being allowed on the side street for all 315 units Now Keith pointed out that originally they had a entrance on Sunnys side which we didn't want what he didn't show is the original plan ALS also had an entrance on Central which was canned by seed do I understand so that left the one which is not really what we wanted because it funnels all the traffic through our neighborhood because there's no light at Central Avenue that makes it harder to get out on Central Avenue make your turns we already see this with another apartment complex that was built in our neighborhood um in my opinion this developer is development is another prime example of corporate greed where development compan companies ask for Rule and policy changes and walk away with millions in their pockets while the existing residents and Community not only get don't get benefits in return but suffer with the long-term nuisance ridden consequences of mundane inconsistent development thank you gu you have four minutes left okay I'll cut I'll get to the meat of it um good evening Madame mayor protm and City Council Members many of us here do believe that increasing housing density in neighborhoods like ours can improve affordability optimize infrastructure and reduce our carbon footprint by minimizing sprawl and protecting our natural resources however we believe there is a path to responsible development that can achieve these goals while also preserving the unique character of the existing neighborhood Charlotte's 2040 comprehensive plan is a meticulously crafted document that balances specificity and flexibility providing a vision for responsible growth with goals meant to reflect the voice of our community significant time effort and resources were invested in the development of this document the requested zoning change by Republic Republic Metropolitan serves as a crucial test of our commitment to integrating new developments responsibly into existing neighborhoods when considering the proposed zoning change our request for city council is to uphold the intent of the 2040 vision and set a valuable precedent for future development proposals specifically please consider the following first does this proposal fit with the vision of a community Activity Center Place type as defined by the 2040 plan per the 2040 plan this place type is for midsized mixed use areas typically along Transit corridors or major roadways that provide access to Goods Services dining entertainment and residential for nearby and region Regional residents typical land use is Mo mostly non-residential these buildings have tall ground floors and a high degree of transparency using clear glass windows and doors designed for active ground floor uses to support a vibrant pedestrian environment public open spaces such as small parks and Greenways and tree preservation areas are also important feature it also calls out transitions for building Heights to be lower along edges AB budding neighborhoods Republic metropolitan's plans do not align with the community Activity Center designation because it includes less than 1% of total square footage dedicated to non-residential uses with no detailed plan for the space only 25% % ground floor transparency and only 10% 10 sorry only 10t ground floor height the plan lacks the vibrant pedestrian environment and active ground floor uses that we seek and there is insufficient commitment to public amenities and Open Spaces in addition the exceptions to maximum building Heights are contradictory to the transition of scale a community Activity Center should have as defined by the 2040 plan our ask for city council is to require the developer to create plans that properly qualify this building for a community Activity Center place type in line with the 2040 Vision please do not set the precedent that a community Activity Center Place type can be a multif family apartment building with taller height limits and almost no mixed use this is not the intent of the 240 vision and may actively work against establishing more 10-minute neighborhoods second how can we challenge the developers to creatively incorporate N1 incorporate N1 zoning into their plans rezoning the two N1 Lots is a significant decision that will impact the surrounding neighborhood and set a precedent for future development the 2040 plan aims to quote enhance the character of structures and communities and that constitute the distinct places within the city this area our neighborhood is a prime example of a distinct place where we can test this concept the 20140 plan envisioned these N1 lots for a reason they were serving as a transitional buffer and graduation of scale between the dense development on Central Avenue and the residential neighborhood of Sunnyside in addition goal number nine of the 20 240 plan is to retain our identity and charm we should maintain a diversity of housing on this block not every part of the block needs to be densely developed merely because the developer requested it in addition the 2040 plan aims to increase the rate of restoration and adaptive reuse of existing structures left 20 seconds in summary we're asking that you please do not set the precedent that Community Activity Center Place type can be multif family apartment building with taller height limits and almost no mixed use please challenge Republic metrop colon Architects to flexx their creative muscles to build their development while sustainably incorporating the two N1 Parcels into their design we hope you will not support this resoning request thank you all right Mr mcain you have two minutes for blle thank you mayor proam uh in regards to the comments from the from the residents we we've worked hard to create that transition we understood from the begin there were concerns about including the two Parcels of pedmont and Sunnyside and that's why we work diligently with the architect to look at context sensitive design the porches the design of the porches and the Stoops are based on an inv at the architect looking at surrounding Residential Properties some of these neighborhoods do contain duplexes triplexes and quadruplexes and it tries to mimic that the actual design of those build units at that corner we added an open space Also at that corner to create that transition something that's not required and there's also 11,000 ft of total open space as a benefit of public open space again something that is not required uh in in addition in terms of the benefits we felt a the open space was a benefit the reservation and relocation reservation of RightWay for the future Transit sewer line relocation and expense at the cost of the developer instead of the city not an insignificant expense but we also the exceptions regarding design are because it is a mixed use building there will be commercial space here something the developer if it if agreed to do not required to do and there's up to 5,000 ft of non-residential to create that mixed use the area is not a great location at this point in time for commercial spaces but the developer is willing to take that risk 30 seconds thank you and then uh so in terms of the design standards we ask for exceptions we are meeting the residential ca1 standards it's when you bring in mixed use standards that we want a slight deviation again because some of these residential units front on a future Transit line that is elevated and therefore the units and there are no there's no real market for commercial space along a 16t multi-use path so that's where the deviations are there in that regard be happy to answer additional question thank you I'm going to start with uh opening up the comments here here um this petition has been in motion for quite some time I've met with a petitioner I've met with several community members um and I know that there's been a lot of community engagement and think I want to thank the community for coming out tonight um to to participate in the process there were over 60 community members at the meeting which is fantastic um and so I know that there's been a lot of give and take here on this particular petition couple questions for you I've heard from many of the residents that they would actually embrace um the introduction of goods and services um in their community and can you talk about the goods and services that are planned for this particular petition uh thank you all thank you for your time uh Adam McMichael with Republic Metropolitan uh look forward to all your comments and questions um we've looked at this site uh this development in particular over the last year um with high expect aspirations for it being a um a high functioning retail location but regularly we continue to receive feedback and against our better expertise that it's not an exceptional location for retail um there are some also some grade issues with regards to the site that don't necessarily allow for um uh what would might be optimal Heights on some of these retail commercial areas um and so until we continue to do further planning on that it's hard for us to commit to a an amount of uh Commercial Services above what we've put forth in our application so we've said we've stated that we would do 1500 square ft of retail and Commercial and we're willing to go up to 5,000 square ft should the market um uh demand it we we don't want vacant retail I don't think that helps anybody um and then also should the um uh the further planning of the site architecturally allow for uh more retail space um uh we've heard loud and clear from the community that uh or at least the the neighbors that um uh they would like to see more goods and services it's my opinion coming from you know larger cities here um uh I would love to see something in the such as a a bodega of some sort right a stop in uh grab coffee grab a sandwich grab a soda uh type location uh here I think there's some collateral issues to that that you know all things need to be considered which is sometimes that leads to more traffic sometimes that leads to more parking issues those are two things in our petition that we've gone to Great Links to get away from um uh but I'll just finish by saying you know we've met with the plaza Midwood Merchants Association and at this time we have their support in our proposal um and I think they understand more than most that we've spoken with in the community that um uh the limitations of of it being a fantastic commercial site versus what our proposal is uh and so uh this is where we've landed at the moment and and we think that um we could bring a good Community use to the to the location which you know optimally in my mind would be a bodega of some sort right uh uh a a grab and go type situation and I think that would benefit the community or at least um coming from the conversations that we've had well the community is very much involved and uh I know that there have been conversations but I think that is a a perspective that the community can have a point of view and collaborate with you on what they would like to see in their area um I have a couple more questions on this one and one of the one of the residents that I spoke with earlier talked about this being a community activity center and how how does this particular Corner these particular or Parcels fit into the concept of community Activity Center can you share some insight on that sure so if we're talking about the community Activity Center Place type and Miss GUI did a good job with presenting what the intention is for Community Activity Center Place types we're talking about mid midsize mixed use developments the community Activity Center is recommended along really the majority of the Central Avenue Corridor so this is one piece of a larger Community Activity Center strand that is contiguous here what the proposal is including with their permitted uses as well as the design of the site is consistent with that Community Activity Center Place type there is a mix of uses proposed I recognize that maybe it's not as much commercial use as the community may may prefer but I'll also note that Community Activity Center one the zoning District would allow for an entirely multif family Residential Building it doesn't have to have that inclusion of the non residential space there but they have added that in recognizing what the place type really calls for so when we talk about Place types we want to recognize what's also in the surrounding area and how this site will fit into that puzzle piece really so yes there it's mostly multif family residential but there are really a wealth of goods and services along Central Avenue and a lot of The Pedestrian improvements proposed in this petition are going to help create access to those existing goods and services and it will add folks that live near those goods and services as well as a small amount of commercial space on the side itself okay I also have another question if someone from SE do can um approach the podium again listening to the residents um not wanting to have um the the parking outage directly on Sunnyside and I know the petitioner had listened to that and so there's entry and exit on pedmont but what is the issue with also having um entry exit on Central as well um given that all of the all of the traffic will be flowing into the neighborhood if it's only on pedmont can you speak to why there can't be an an additional entry exit on Central Avenue uh yes uh thank you Jay Carpenter with C dot um so the the the greater principles uh have to do with access management and so along a a major arterial uh such as Central Avenue that carries uh significant traffic volumes as well as significant uh multimodal uh volumes with pedestrians and bicycles uh the the goals of a access management uh policy is to consolidate access across uh those points so minimize Crossings across sidewalks across bike Lanes consolidate turning movements at at smaller numbers of locations and so what that does is enhanced safety by reducing those conflict points and having driver expectations multimodal expectations concentrated in in smaller areas uh and it's um policies like that have been shown to increase safety uh support our goals uh that are in Vision zero uh and and factors like that so uh we we have our access management policy documented within our streets manual which basically uh has an order of operations of where uh developments should get access based on the type of development where it's located and so along an arterial such as this uh access should be from the side street to promote uh all of those access management uh policies and benefits that I that I outlined thank you I I I know that we've had some progress on this petition but I feel like there's U significant work needs to continue along this along Central LA you also have the Gibson apartment building which is 250 apartments right there on the corner and adding an additional um 300 plus apartments will definitely add stress to what is already a a highly um congested um highly traveled Corridor along Central and I think there we need to continue to be at the table with the community to work towards what a better ideal solution would be for them in this particular area so I look forward to having those continued conversations are there any additional comments you can go first okay I have Mr Driggs Miss Molina and then Miss Mayfield So This is a 2.8 Acre Site that current L has single family residential multif family residential commercial institutional office and mixed use developments that seems like an awful lot on 3 acres and when I look at the traffic analysis the indication is that this petition would cause the total traffic count to go down by 70 that's just not intuitive to me so uh um what exactly is there now that generates 2,000 trips there was a Skyla Credit Union headquarters of on the site there's also a small lawyer office but it's mainly the existing Credit Union headqu or was their main branch of the credit union that generated that traffic so that's not Uh current they have moved their operations so they're not currently in the building any longer the C do memo um reflects the entitlements under the current zoning because it has that neighborhood center zoning as well on the site it's it's hard to determine the exact number of uses that could be that that the current entitlements allow sorry it's hard to determine the exact number of trips that the current entitlements allow and council member Driggs if I can I will say that we have um uh in an effort to engage the community further we've gone above and beyond in this particular instance as well whether it's intuitive to you um uh by going ahead and and completed a traffic management plan looked at dat a developed a scope for a signal warrant for um that to be pursued after this plan so you know uh those are things that uh might not necessarily be required but we are doing already in advance of where we are today understood I'll just need to look at this in Greater detail but uh uh it just looks like a lot at that location anyway thank you mayor ptim Miss Molina thank you U mayor ptim I just uh I want to elaborate on that point that um uh the mayor protim made and my colleague Mr DRS I I you know Among Us I think first of all this is a an area that I'm very familiar with uh my my kid has been a pedmont pirate for a few years now so and um I've traveled these roads twice a day every day for a little bit and and I absolutely agree with the mayor protim um in in that you know there's still work to do I feel like that you know um considering the area density is already a reality for the neighbors right I think that there's always an equilibrium that when we're listening carefully and there's a good willingness that we can reach in these types of negotiations so my hope is that with intent uh there is an opportunity to do so um and um you know to to and and I do understand the Merchants Association they are great Partners you know but I I I always and I think each one of us uh sitting here have those challenges in that we have the voices that are regularly at the table and then we have the voices that we don't always hear and maybe the community members that have you know driven in their vehicles today they may be the voices that we don't always hear but we have to invite those voices as well right um I want to also commend uh the community members that put this together I think it was when I see a Community member take the time to you know with comprehension deliver something from your perspective um where it is you know demonstrative that you've actually taken a look at the scope of what we do and how we make our decisions it it it really it's heartening to me because this process is not easy for an individual to understand unless they take that additional time so uh kudos to you for taking the time to do this I think that um I'm you know just looking at how you designed it and even was able to walk us through that I I really appreciate your work there so um you know just delving back going backwards you know I I just you know I'm glad we're in this stage I trust the mayor protm she's extremely knowledgeable and I do feel like that she can you know guide both the community that trusts her and you guys to to a um to an equilibrium something that works for both you and the community if that's a possibility and that's all I have m p thank you Miss Molina Miss Mayfield thank you I have a question for staff just trying to understand back in June of this year allive Council received a email from the plaza Midwood Business Association calling for Lane reductions it was soon after there was another road rage incident that happened and the area the request was to reduce Central Avenue to two lanes of automatic traffic as well as extending the existing protected bike lanes that terminated on East 10th Street and East 12th Street to extend along East 10th Street in Central Avenue was any of these conversations since this was sent to All of council and I believe shared with planning staff taken into consideration when we're looking at project projects around this area I don't know if C do has more information about conversations but I have not um received that information as was previously mentioned though a lot of the commitments made through this plan are considerate of pedestrian safety and we believe could actually increase pedestrian safety with potential new signalization traffic calming measures the buffered bike lanes and the new pedestrian shared use path Okay so I also want to get an understanding because we're still having a lot of conversations regarding the language in our 2040 policy map and Udo I have shared in different times the concerns that I have that our language is completely transitioning neighborhoods this gives me concern because it appears to be in contradiction to our standing Place agent in place neighborhood continuity neighborhood transition when we look at the development that's happened also as a council from years ago and current we've had a number of conversations regarding what has developed alone public transportation I.E Light Rail and what has not regarding who has has access to this Transportation when we have language and commitments around Workforce Development Economic Development tment and neighborhoods and all these other things so I'm trying to understand really the totality of staff's support and recommendation to approve this petition upon resolution of just basically technical revisions when there are so many other opportunities that were not addressed in this so help me get to where you are yeah so I mean I think you summar staff recommendations are complex and it's hard in this resoning process to assess which variables but where there is clear guidelines in terms of our policy considerations when we make a staff recommendation so the primary policy we're working off of is that uh 2040 comp plan and the place types that are in effect and the place Ty designation here of community Activity Center is supported by the proposal itself and we believe that the public benefits offered as part of this proposal were justification for the rezoning request itself if it were something like let's say entirely single family active single family uses on this site I think that'd be a little bit different but considering the existing entitlements and the Planned Transit around this site we want to make sure that we're activating spaces along these major Transit corridors to be appropriately dense but also be mindful of the adjacent neighborhood one areas and I think it's a tricky balance in areas like these but this petition gets close at balancing that thank you thank you Mr mcari just a quick note for staff it might be a good idea for us to revisit our planning around around things like the Silver Line things that we know aren't necessarily going to occur we've kind of been ignoring that and wishing and willing it into existence for decades now and we have a better line of sight as to what's going to happen yet we leave our planning and policy documents in a kind of unreal world that's just still following that so that's a complex statement but we can't keep ignoring it I never get Applause in here what going all right he needs that thank you all I'll remember that forever thank you Mr barar um I I will say um I I appreciate uh Plaza midwit Merchants giving you sort of a a letter of approval on this but I also would like to say I've been in conversations with the ECA and and they're not in that position um for the that approval and this particular petition sits in the Elizabeth neighborhood so we really want to be cognizant of the neighbors and what they would like to see as they Envision the future of the community so lots of work to continue to be done on this one um I will also say Miss Mayfield that there is a a a a longer conversation around Central Avenue and the design of traffic flow parking Etc so much longer conversations with multiple um neighborhoods along that core door so there is a lot of conversation going on and some strong desires to have a redesign there thank you do I have a motion to close public hearing motion and second all in favor raise hands that is unanimous thank you we will move on to agenda item number 24 petition number 202 24061 by Charlotte PE LLC the location is approximately 1.9 Acres Bound by the north side of East Trade Street the west side of North Deon and the south side of East Fifth Street in east side of North cwell Street in District One my district the current zoning is UC proposed zoning is uex Staff recommends the approval of this petition upon resolution of outstanding issues related to Transportation site and building design and environment in addition to requested technical revisions after staff's presentation um Mr mcvan will have three minutes to present your case as there's no Opposition signed up thank you thank you this site is just under 2 Acres along North Codwell East Fifth and North Davidson street this is just a short walk from where we are tonight so if you want to do a site visit it certainly be easy to do so property is currently Z zoned up town core and they are proposing Uptown core exception so this is another ex request like the last petition and this is in the regional Activity Center Place type and that this this Pro proposal is consistent with that Regional Activity Center Place type the proposal itself would allow for the development of practice facilities and Associated uses as permitted in the Uptown core District the requests ex provisions and specifies that the required public benefits will include Green Building standards and a public art feature which they will collaborate with on uh collaborate with Urban Design Center on that public art feature request ex Provisions to the site and building design standards such as reducing the setb line to accommodate Canever space reducing the minimum ground floor height for the parking structure portion of the building and reducing minimum ground floor transparency and again that's that's because of the nature of these practice facilities and just kind of the unique use that we see here they are requesting an ex provision to utilize the parking structure design option C in the Udo with a reduction from the active ground floor uses from 90% to 10% they are requesting an ex provision to the tree planting standards and they are still working on resolving some outstanding comments with urban forestry but we expect that in a revised plan this week um assuming we're still on track for zoning committee in a couple of weeks we expect those urban forestry comments to be resolved um under collaboration with urban forestry they are also requesting an ex provision to allow the existing curb to remain along North Caldwell and a portion of North Davidson and an ex provision to allow signage on on the site to display on premises advertising or advert advertising associated with the adjacent Arena parcel hosting the Hornets uh They Also may seek administrative approval of a master signage package the site's primary access is along East Fifth as indicated with those arrows and there is a limited access drive that would be um available through Caldwell or North Davidson that limited access driveway labeled right there on the site plan would be for things such as service Vehicles the building facade along the southern site boundary will be treated with murals Andor other elements to create a visually interesting building facade uh until it is covered with adjacent development on the rest of the parking area staff recommends approval of this petition upon resolution of the outstanding issues sporting facility uses great unique zoning scenarios that challenge typical ordinance requirements prompting the need for Innovative standards or innovative solutions such as an ex conditional requests and these ex conditionals uh requests allow us to receive public benefits in exchange for those flexibilities and ordinance standards sporting facilities and the accessory uses that would be allowed in this petition have a typical site and building design so we believe that the ex request here is um is Justified and the site is currently underutilized as surface parking in the densest core of our city so transitioning it to active uses is a much preferred preferred utilization of this site that is in alignment with the regional Activity Center Place type it would be easily accessed by various Transportation options I mean it is a tenth of a mile from the Charlotte Transit Center so you could have access blue and gold lines as well as various bus routes and Redevelopment at this site would help to actively support our Transit infrastructure and I'll take any questions following the petitioner's presentation thank you Mr mcain good evening a protown members of council members zoning Comm zoning committee Keith mcain with more Van Allen assisting Charlotte Hornets with their resoning for the performance enhancment center with me tonight representing the petitioner are Travis Ferguson James Jordan and Shannon Gillian as well as Nate dittle and Bob Bob I'm not going to be able to pronounce her last name Bob with with also assisting the Hornets on their resoning for the side as Holly mentioned really a resoning regarding technical issues of the urban center zoning District uh that don't transition or don't relate well to a facility like this where the Hornets are trying to build a performing highman facility or practice Courts for for their athletes and and their organization so a number of Provisions to slightly modify some Quant fail standards of the urban center dist Urban core District uh as Holly mentioned consistent with the area plan we are working with sedot and we have come to an agreement on to how to address their concerns regarding the curb line relocation along uh Davidson street uh there will be a commitment there is a current commitment that there are there will be public parking on the site uh with some hours of use restriction as some of the spaces are here for the the tenants of the building and the use of the building but after hours there will be parking available to the public there's also a commitment actually for parking for the visitors and tenants of this building to park at at this facility is part of the agreement with the Hornets organization uh in terms of urban forestry we've come up with a solution and we can remove that ex provision from the from the petition uh as a solution as to how to meet the tree ordinance on the side has been arrived at and then there is a ex provision regarding signage to allow one additional wall sign on LA along North Codwell that could be an electronic or static sign and again trying to pick up on some of the signage theme from the current Arena and bringing it across the street there will be active spaces along Codwell Street uh ground floor active spaces as well as the main entries to the facility itself um this is an image of that corner uh this is Codwell and this is uh his street going out of town uh and uh that's where we are again we plan to address all the comments and we're happy to answer any questions thank you Mr mcvan um you know you of course you know I've had conversations with the developers and I'm uh very grateful that you're being thoughtful about the site and how it can integrate overall with uh the Spectrum Center and so that it's a it's a welcome addition to the community so I appreciate um the thought behind that and the intentionality behind that Mr drgs I just want to say briefly appreciate the team uh your investment in Charlotte uh this is a big project uh and I think a plus for the city so I expect we'll be able to navigate the resoning but thank you very much absolutely any additional comments CL I have a motion in a second from Miss Brown and Miss Molina all in favor raise hands that is unanimous thank you we will move on to agenda item number 25 petition number 2024 015 by BV Belk properties the location is approximately 38 acres located on the east side of mil Haven Lane South of Sunset Road and West of Statesville Road in District 2 Mr Grahams District the current zoning is i1 CD proposed zoning is CG staff recommends the approval of this petition and after staff's presentation Miss Grant will have three minutes thank you good evening mayor for attemp and Council uh petition 202 24015 is located on the east side of M Haven Lane South of Sunset Road West of old west of Statesville Road s's approximately 38 acres is currently undeveloped uh the site is a portion of a property Zone i1 CD light industrial conditional which was approved under petition 2020 uh 025 the proposed zoning is CG General commercial a conventional District the 2040 policy map Rec recommends the manufacturing Logistics Place type CG district is inconsistent with the ml Place type approval of this petition would revise the 2040 policy map recommendation to the commercial Place type um this is a conventional resoning petition there is not an Associated site plan and would permit any uses in the CG District staff recommends approval of this petition as the site is bound by properties designated as commercial Place type on three sides the 240 compren plan calls for service and Retail development to support workers and areas designated as Manufacturing logist Logistics and the uses um allowed in the CG zoning District uh would be more supportive of this goal and the 240 comprehensive plan identifies this area as an access to amenities Gap and the proposed CG District was better suited to fill that Gap than the current i1 CD zoning District I'm happy to take any questions following Mrs Grant's presentation thank you Miss Grant good evening mayor protm members of council members of the zoning committee my name is Bridget Grant I'm a land use consultant with Moren Van Allen pleased to be here tonight with Randy Smith on behalf of BVB properties this is a pretty simple resoning it's actually even smaller than the3 Acres we've revised it at 0.243 Acres we're just attempting to add a little bit more onto the back of an existing CG site to have a better fit for future Redevelopment of the site we're happy to answer any questions thank you any comments questions close second all in favor close public hearing raise hands that is unanimous thank thank you Miss Grant we move on to agenda item number 26 2024-25 eight Acres located on the north side of West woodlon Road and West Side of Wallingford Street East of I77 in District 3 Miss Brown's District the current zoning is CG proposed zoning is cac1 Staff recommends the approval of this petition and after staff's presentation Mr mcain will join us again thank you last time thank you petition 2024-25 Acres located on the west side of Wallingford Street north of woodlon Road and south of yman road it's currently developed with a parking lot and a small Warehouse under the uh current zoning of C G proposed zoning is cac1 conventional the 2040 policy map recommends commercial Place type so while it is inconsistent with the commercial Place type recommendation staff recommends approval it is adjacent to community Activity Center Place type to the north and east is approximately a half mile walking distance from the wood law Blue Line Station the cac1 zoning district is intended to accomodate areas that are transitioning from an automobile Centric orientation toward a more walkable moderate mix of intensity mix of uses petition could facilitate the comprehensive plan goal of 10min and neighborhoods and I will take any questions following petitioner presentation thank you good evening mayor forend members of council members zon committee Keith MCV Mor Van Allen again thank you for your time this evening with me tonight representing the petitioner is JQ Freeman with with Providence group Capital uh as Joe mentioned a fairly simple request or or simple request I guess to reone just under two acres to cac1 to allow a different variety or a different mix of uses on the site this is an area that's transitioning quickly just south of of the loso area just which is just North of us and actually we have connectivity to that area through Wallingford and then just to the east is the silver the Blue Line Station uh just over half mile away and Community activity centers actually recommended around it so this zoning provides the petitioner and the and the owners of the property a add ability to add some additional uses to this area to to help with the transition of the of this portion of the city we're happy to answer questions thank you any comments good close I don't have anything can I get a second second I have a motion in second to close public hearing see if she was good that's favor hands it is unanimous thank you Mr mcain we'll move on to agenda item number 27 petition number 22453 by JCB Urban company the location is approximately 1.69 8 Acres located on the north side of softly Road West of West Sugar Creek Road and East of Hill Crest Street in District One my district the current zoning is I NST CD and n1b proposed zoning is n1c Staff recommends the approval of this petition and after staff's presentation Mr David Murray will have three minutes thank you thank you this site is a little over an acre and a half along the north side of sofle road west of West Sugar Creek and east of Hill Crest Street this area is largely single family residential with there some multi family residential to the south and east and Commercial uses along Sugar Creek Road the existing zoning is institutional CD for one parcel and neighborhood 1B for that Western parcel this is two non-contiguous Parcels in this rezoning the proposal is for neighborhood 1 C which is only one step above that classification of neighborhood 1B that is around the surrounding Parcels this is a conventional petition the uh proposed zoning District here for n1c is consistent with the neighborhood one designation on this site and because it's the conventional petition we have no Associated site plan but staff recommends approval of this petition um it is just a real modest increase in that neighborhood 1B designation that's in the surrounding neighborhood the institutional conditional plan that is on the Eastern parcel was for a daycare expansion that never happened so bringing it under n1c would allow it to be utilized for something and and redeveloped accordingly and I'll take any questions following the petitioner comments thank you welcome Mr bur thank you mayor protim Council zoning committee uh David Murray I'm an attorney here in Charlotte and I have the pleasure of representing my friends at JCB Urban on this rezoning the purpose is to allow the potential for these two lots to be subdivided um and this is a home builder so they're going to add houses to these properties happy to answer any questions thank you any questions Mr Mayfield sorry clarification the purpose of this is to do what because I didn't quite hit in these lots are really deep but they're 100 feet at their Frontage and so we could have four 50ft wide Lots uh under n1c and so we're not certain that both of the lots are going to be subdivided but this is going to be give some flexibility to the development of those sites since they're so deep thank you mot CL second I have a motion in a second to close public hearing all in favor raise hands that is unanimous thank you Mr Murray we move on to petition item uh number 28 petition number 20 24056 by Vivo Investment LLC the location is approximately 5.2 Acres located on the north side of yorkmont road south of Billy Graham Parkway and west of South Tron Street in District 3 Miss Brown's District current zoning is 015 CD proposed zoning is n1b CD staff recommends the approval of this petition and after staff's presentation Miss Britney Lind will have three minutes thank you thank you this site is approximately 5.2 Acres located on the north side of yorkmont road west of South cion Street and south of Billy gr Parkway it is currently developed with um a Hotel Current zoning is 05 CD proposed zoning is n2b CD the 2040 policy map recommends commercial Place type there's not a site plan associated with this petition but conditional notes that include commitments to utilize the existing buildings and Associated parking to convert the 138 existing hotel rooms to 138 multif family residential units requires that all units must function entirely as a hotel or as multif family units there's no overlap of hotel and multif family use allowed commit to reserving a minimum of 10% of the multif family units for households earning less than or equal to 80% area median income for a 20-year period State's intention to maintain the existing yorkmont Road streetscape and requires at least 30 days notice of intent to Hotel occupants of initiation of conversion to multi family units States the petitioner intent to work with City housing and Neighborhood Services regarding the transition of residents it is inconsistent with the place type recommendation however staff does recommend approval upon resolution of outstanding issues related to transportation and land use the petition would provide an additional housing option in an area identified by the comprehensive plan as having insufficient housing uh proposed neighborhood 2 zoning and place type would provide an appropriate transition from the commercial Place type to the east along South Trion Street and the neighborhood one place type to the South and West along yorkmont Road and I will take any questions following the petitioner's presentation thank you good evening mayor proen members of council members of zoning committee I see some new and some familiar faces so welcome to the new guard and look forward to working with you my name is Britney Lind I am a lawyer with the law firm of Alexander Ricks and I'm here tonight representing Vivo Investments Vivo living um Joe did a good job orienting to the site I'm going to be very brief with your time I know we're second to last on the agenda um the one interesting thing that I'd point out uh when I was looking at Google Maps I don't think I realized how saturated Hotel uses were in this area just at this intersection you see six hotels uses um this was also um as Joe mentioned a hotel use an Extended Stay America it's outdated it's um kind of been a security issue what Vivo is looking to do is a onetoone conversion from a hotel to residential units there are existing kitchens and bathrooms that would be upfitted modernized um as you heard there is the affordable housing commitment there is the anti-displacement provision working with housing and Neighborhood Services um so we are excited about this project as staff said they're supportive because of the need for housing in this area um Vivo is a reputable company that's done this multiple times both in Charlotte and across the US um enhancing the security the safety and the housing stock in the area so at that I'm happy to take any questions you may have thank you Miss Brown yes thank you so much Britany for presenting today um I've been in contact with uh York Mount neighborhood they're very uh particular about that area and I I appreciate the um the affordable housing unit piece I do I the what bothers me um is the community uh zero commitment from the community yeah so uh Vivo has actually been engaged with a community they they're willing to do open houses all of those items there hasn't been much Community engagement but they've been reaching out and happy to continue to do so yeah with me include me definitely we got to get that done um so it it sounds good I look and I go to the commitment for the affordable housing pieace and I know exactly where you're talking about some of that behavior over there and the traffic that's right to pedestrian traffic and some things have happened that with safety concerns so I do agree with you on that but there was a minimum of 10% for um is that could it be increased or so this would be since it is kind of a a sustainable practice of using the existing buildings there are three buildings there using the existing buildings as a onetoone conversion that's naturally going to create that attainable housing market um there is that commitment to a minimum of 10% being at 80 Ami right now I'm happy to discuss that with you further but overall these are going to be attainable housing units compared to a lot of this new build where you see the Demolition and and new construction buildings around Charlotte okay all right and so one last thing is um for me I know Mayfield council member Mayfield might have some questions for you I um I I like to see what you're doing in the area but uh I just recently um even though we're supposed to be on recess we were not the community reached out to me and I'm just curious some of the community leaders had just a few questions and if we could get them involved and engage the community I'll be happy to Advocate and be in in the vicinity but thank you so much of course thank you Council more questions at this time Miss Mayfield thank thank you and you are so correct councilman Brown that York M Miss kup and others are extremely active and have been for a very long time so it is interesting so if I'm reading this correctly this would be if this petition were to move forward this commitment is from the petitioner without asking for any trust fund or city dollars in this particular development that's correct it's a product of being able to reuse the building um and have the existing parking and infrastructure that gives them the ability to um produce that attainable housing uh price point I look forward to following up with council member Brown and hearing from the community thank you thank you Mr Brown you had another comment I did and when I went into um the transportation considerations I I went over to um the outstanding issues prior to public hearing and transportation it did say um that the trips are going to go down is that correct from that is right so it's currently entitled for a hotel what being used as a hotel you can see the transportation slide that I have up now the total daily trips is decreased when you're talking a multif family unit compared to a hotel unit okay all right so I don't want to make note of that and we'll be in contact but thank you so much for presenting I don't have any other question move to close second all in favor to close public hearing raise hands that's unanimous thank you Miss lens we move on to our final agenda item for the evening agenda item number 29 petition number 2024 058 by wils Asset Management the location is approximately 2.85 Acres located south of Ridge Road East of Benfield Road and North of Craven Thomas Road in District 4 Miss Johnson's District current zoning is CC propos zoning is CAC 1ex staff recommends the approval of this petition upon resolution of outstanding issues related to the environment after staff's presentation Miss Grant will join us again and she'll have three minutes thank you thank you um the subject site as you mentioned is a 2.8 acre parcel located south of Ridge Road and East of Benfield Road Bryce n null Lane and Highland shop stri currently terminate at the site the area surrounding the site includes a rich mix of commercial and multif family development to the north and west and single family neighborhoods are found Westerly of Benfield Road the petitioner is seeking to reone the site to a community Activity Center one exception the site and much of the surrounding area is currently zoned commercial center with some neighborhood service zoning to the north and west the 2040 policy map identifies the the subject site as well as the surrounding properties as a community Activity Center the proposed development is a 120,000 square foot climate controlled storage facility with a maximum Building height of 50 ft the development include extending Bryn Lane and Highland shops drive through the site the petitioner is seeking flexibility from two Udo standards one to allow two new Street extensions to be constructed in accordance with the office Nar office commercial narrow cross-section standards in lie of the office commercial W wide cross-section and to limit ground floor activation requirements to the Highland shops Drive Frontage in lie of both frontages public benefits they are offering in relation to these exceptions include the provisions of public open space and the construction of offsite sidewalk improvements to fill a gap in The Pedestrian Network along Highland shops Drive staff recommends approv approval of this petition as the requested zone is consistent with the community Activity Center Place type the place type calls for a mix of retail personal services multif family and office uses the proposed self storage facility is supportive of the existing and future mix of residential uses in the area thank you Miss Grant good evening again mayor protm members of council members of the zoning committee Bridget Grant with land use consultant with Mor and Van Allen it's a pleasure to be here tonight on behalf of Josh wils unfortunately he couldn't be here um Teresa did a great job providing the overview so I'm just going to highlight that this resoning while seeking exceptions is still providing the required Road Network and extensions along Highland shops Parkway as well as Bryce null the reason we're seeking that reduction in the streetcape standard is because it's the Terminus of two streets and we're directly across the street from a cemetery and church which also changes our needs for ground floor activation with that I'm happy to answer any questions thank you any questions or comment oh to close the hearing second all in favor of closing public hearing raise hands that is unanimous have a good evening before we before we convene I would like to recognize Miss Mayfield thank you I just want to take a moment to thank our city and or County staff during the time that we have been off you may have noticed so for our residents and community members that may have had a challenge if you are not able to get to the highest speaking stand there are now spaces for you to be down here on this level with us that is not carpeted as well as a much lower Podium for you to easily have access to to try to make our your building the People's Building more ADA Compliant so that was done over the 6 weeks that we were out so just wanted to give a shout out and thank the staff who went in got this done and did it so seamless that you probably didn't even notice that there was something a little different except when the first gentleman came up was like where so now we now have podiums as well as parking space that's not carpeted for our members that may be in a wheelchair motorized or by hand so thank you for allowing me to acknowledge thank you Miss Mayfield staff always being thoughtful and thinking about how we can connect better with the community with that I will say a motion second I had a motion I have a second all in favor go home yep yep y have a great night [Music] [Music] for