Music Music I'm going to go to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to do it. I'm not going to be able to do it. I'm not going to guitar. I'm gonna play the guitar. I'm gonna play the guitar. I'm gonna play the guitar. I'm gonna play the guitar. I'm gonna play the guitar. I'm gonna play the guitar. I'm gonna play the guitar. I'm gonna play the guitar. I'm gonna play the guitar. I'm gonna play the guitar. I'm gonna play the guitar. I'm gonna play the guitar. I'm gonna play the guitar. I'm going to play the guitar. I'm going to play the guitar. I'm going to play the guitar. I'm going to play the guitar. I'm going to play the guitar. I'm going to play the guitar. I'm going to play the guitar. I'm going to play the guitar. I'm going to play the guitar. I'm going to play the guitar. I'm going to play the guitar. I'm going to play the guitar. I'm going to play the guitar. I'm going to play the guitar. I'm going to play the guitar. I'm going to play the guitar. I'm going to play the guitar. I'm going to play the guitar. I'm going to play a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm gonna go back to the studio. I'm gonna go back to the studio. I'm gonna go back to the studio. I'm gonna go back to the studio. I'm gonna go back to the studio. I'm gonna go back to the studio. I'm gonna go back to the studio. I'm gonna go back to the studio. I'm gonna go back to the studio. I'm gonna go back to the studio. I'm gonna go do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do it. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to do a. I'm going to do it. I'm going to do it. I'm going to do it. I'm going to do it. I'm going to do it. I'm going to do it. I'm going to do it. I'm going to do it. I'm going to do it. I'm going to do it. I'm going to do it. I'm going to do it. I'm going to do it. you The I'm going to do it. you you . I'm going to make a little bit of the top right corner of the top. I'm going to make a little bit of the top right corner of the top. I'm going to make a little bit of the top right corner of the top. I'm going to make a little bit of the top right corner of the top. I'm going to make a little bit of the top right corner of the top. you . I'm going to make a video about this. The I'm going to do it. I'm going to do it. I'm going to do it. I'm going to do it. I'm going to do it. I'm going to do it. I'm going to do it. I'm going to do it. I'm going to do it. I'm going to do it. I'm going to do it. I'm going to do it. I'm going to do it. I'm going to do it. you . the I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. you The We will bring the zoning meeting from May 19th, 2025 to order and we will begin with introductions and we will start with our city clerk. I didn't know I had it today. Early times deputy city clerk. Welcome. Dimple Herschmarrer at large. Teah. Teah what? Your name. You should. Councilmember Brown. Councilmember Brown. Councilmember City Council District 3. Good evening. Marjorie Molina District 5. Good evening. René Johnson. I'm honored to represent District 4. Good evening everyone. James Mitchell at large. Good evening. Vylaus mayor. Mr. Chair Ed Driggs, District Seven. Good evening, Luana Mavio, Council Member, and large. We do. Good evening, Anthony Fox, and I'm City Attorney. Good evening. Victoria Watlington, Ed Love. Okay, we will begin with our pledge of allegiance and then circle back for our invocation. Oh, why are we doing it that way? She just applied to allegiance. Congratulations to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands on a nation under God and individual liberty and justice as well. Thank you. We begin our meetings with an invocation as an expression and inspiration followed by the Pledge of Allegiance, which we've just done. The invocation by the council member is intended to underscore our proceedings and we celebrate the religious diversity of the community, including those without a religious faith. This evening we have Councilmember Driggs who will provide our invocation. Revan Driggs. Thank you, Mayor Pro Tem. For the invocation tonight, I have slightly adapted a blessing by Archbishop Charles Chaplin from October 2011. Please join me if you wish. Heavenly Father, thank you for the gift of life and the opportunity to serve the people of our city. Help us to act with character and conviction. Help us to listen with understanding and good will. Help us to speak with charity and restraint. Guide us to be the leaders your people need. Help us see the humanity and dignity of those who disagree with us and to treat all persons with the reverence your creation deserves. And finally, help us to build a community where all our citizens can live together in peace. A community is worthy of all those who choose to live here. We ask this as your sons and daughters. Amen. Thank you very much. We did it. We did it. We did it. We did it. We did it. Confused. That's where we're in, Mr. Drakes. That's how there's a testament of your service to council. With that, I'm going to pass it over to the mayor for some proceedings before we jump into the zoning meeting. Before we have the city council's zoning meeting I'm going to ask the city attorney to address the next steps that we're taking in this meeting. All right. Thank you, Mayor and Members of the Council. Mayor and Members of the Council, you sent out a special meeting notice last week, well in advance of the Statue of Dormitory Required Period. That special meeting notice provided that this meeting will be held at this time and the purpose of the meeting was to was to conduct the zoning meeting. There's a closed session as well. And it was also to deal with the district's six discussion and a vote. The matter was slated for today, the 19th. It is consistent with the timetable that this council discussed previously and indicated that the decision on the appointment of a vacancy would occur on the 19th. The agenda for tonight's meeting however did not include the discussion on the district six vacancy and therefore under your rules in order to add an item to the agenda the needs to be a motion is second and unanimous vote to add that item for discussion tonight as on your agenda. It's appearance tonight is consistent with the indications and discussions discussions that this council has had previously For the action to be taken on this state and at this time mayor. I like to make a motion That we put the district six vacancy all the on our city council agenda for tonight second Emotion and a second is there any further discussion? Now I did hear the city attorney for point of clarification. Yes, ma'am. They had to be unanimous. Yes. Yes Yes, your room for requires that for an item to be added to your agenda during the meeting that that item can be added But it must be by unanimous consent of the city council So we have a motion on the floor at a second all in favor of of the motion, please raise your hand. Okay. Anyone opposed? So now represents unanimous vote. All right. So now, in addition to this, I will call for the nomination to consider eligible candidates and to vote on one candidate, which I believe been submitted by Mr. We would have to have a motion for adoption of a candidate for district six. Do we have a motion? I have clarification. We need to hear from the deputy clerk as far as the what since all of us feel out of form. I haven't talked to everyone to know so we can't have have a without knowing how to vote. Oh, okay. So let me say this. I believe that we have to have a vote. Then so the clerk can nominate we were using the board meeting process and the clerk can tell us what the results are. But we also need to have the name of the council members as well. All right, Billy? I'm so confused, I apologize. We voted, we got a ballot, and we voted. Even person, cast their vote. So what, we're waiting for the tallies to come in, correct? That's it, it's going to talk to you. OK, right. So once the tallies come in, then what are we doing? That will be the end of that part of the meeting. Okay. But that is what it sound. Okay. There was some cute fusion there. Oh wow. And I just want to get a point of clarification. Okay. Thank you for asking the question. Yes ma'am. It's a surprise. because it didn't sound like it was safe. Yes. Yeah. Madam Mayor, just to give you a recap and for the record, the deadline was Tuesday, May the 13th, and we received 12 applications. Out of those 12 applications, 10 were verified and considered eligible. I want to point out that James Rice withdrew his application on Friday. So there were two candidates, Grayson, Sandlin and Ashredi Welby. Their address or Miss Welby was identified as un... She was not a Republican. Okay, unaffiliated, I'm sorry. So that left with non-potential applicants. So what we have, I mean 10. So we have Christopher Curry who received five. And we also have Edwin Peacock that received five. And this is how everyone voted. So for Christopher Curry, the votes were Ashmira, Graham, Driggs, Johnson, and Watlington. For Edwin Peacock, the five votes were Anderson, Graham, Mayfield, Mitchell, and Molina. So that means there's a tie which you would be the tie there. All right. On this mayor, I have the opportunity to make a tie, break the tie in this and I have listened to many of us talking what the opportunities are and in this case, I believe that the council supported Edwin Peacock as the next district six representative and so with that that is my vote. So with that conclusion do we need a move to acclamation? We do need a motion for acclamation. Second it would peacock. We have a motion and second motion. Yes my motion was the motion was made except the nomination At Wimpycock based on the final vote All right on the final vote so that has Miss Mayfield has made that clear all in favor Of the vote please raise your hand And I guess I could raise my hand I'm not sure about that any opposed anyone opposed It's not unanimously. I'm not I'm not supporting it. Any opposed? Any one opposed? It's not unanimously. I'm not supporting it. No, it doesn't have to be unanimous. OK, yes, but your vote will be recorded just as you said. Correct. Yes, ma'am, but you were voting again, so I just wanted to make sure that it was recorded that I didn't as well as Mr. Dress. You have Mr. D with Mrs. Brown. Not a woman. You just call the board again. Excuse me. Can we call the board again? Mr. Smithfield, I was still trying to get clarification of the process. This is what happens. We move so swiftly and then ends get twisted up. I don't want to be twisted up. I want to be clear about what's going on on this day. We had five and five of us a time. You voted. you wrote the time. Yes. Then we're moving forward with the nomination of the the I made the motions. Yes, man. Okay. You made the motion. Who seconded? At one peacock. Correct. At one peacock. Mr. Peacock. Okay. And so then everybody is voting correct. Right. All right. So can we see that? We're going to do a So redo of our vote and again, please raise your hand if you're in support of Mr. Peacock for the affirmation of it. I think Ms. Mayfield has said that she would like to see her vote done again. So let's just go ahead. We're all in favor of Mr. Edwin Peacock for District 6 to complete the time that we would have with Mr. Bacar's absence. All right, so we have one, two, three, four, five. It is not this one. Okay. And Mayor. Six. Right. And I vote yes. Okay. And who are against? And now opposed. And now we need to vote for the opposed. Who are against? And now opposed. And now opposed. And now we need to vote for the opposed. Who opposed? Who opposed? It's for her. It's for her. It's for her. It's for her. It's for her. It's for her. It's for her. It's for her. It's for her. It's for her. It's for her. He is opposed. Okay. So with that, this item on the agenda has been completed and we should congratulate Mr. Peacock. I will give him a call. I will give him a call to let him know that he has been selected by the council. Thank you for the call. He is coming tonight and he is planning to be here at 5, thinking that this would not happen. I know. That's okay. We'll get him through. Okay. Thank you for the point. I was planning to be here at 5 thinking that this would not happen. I know. Just early. That's okay. We'll get in. Okay. Thank you. Everyone. Okay. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Your attorney has something. Okay. Mr. Attorney. You have a closed session on your agenda. I don't know if you want to do it now or you're going to do it at the end of the meeting. That's up to the council. Would you like we have a close session that's required today tonight? Can we do a close session now? We can do it now. Do I have a motion? We have a motion for a close session. Let me give you an actual language. The motion should be to go into the close session, pursuing to 1.43-31811A4 to discuss matters relating to the location or expansion of industries or other businesses in the area served by the public body, including the agreement on a tentative list of economic development centers that may be offered by the public body in negotiations. That should be the motion. moved. It's I get. We have a second and motion. All in favor? Raise your hand. Okay. Now, Mr. Fox, we'll go back to the bedroom. Thank you for your patience with us, but we do have another item that has to be done in close session. Okay. You look like a person. Thank you. Find up to speak or if staff is in opposition, the petitioner gets 10 minutes, the opponent gets 10 minutes combined and the petitioner will receive a two minute rebuttal. If no one is opposed or to speak up, sign to speak up, then staff provides a short presentation. The public hearing is closed and the next public hearing is therefore open. The petition goes to the zoning committee of planning commission for review for recommendation. And this evening, I'm going to pass over to Ms. Shawna Niele to do the introductions of the zoning committee. Thank you, Mayor Cotin. And you, Council. My name is Shawna Neely, and I'm the Vice Chair for the Zoning Committee of the Planning Commission. Please allow me to introduce my fellow committee members. We have Rick Winneker, Aaron Shaw, Theresa McDonald, Robin Stewart, and their absences Clayton Sealy and our Chair Andrew Blumenthal. The zoning committee will next meet on Tuesday, June 3rd at 530. 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 this is not a continuation of any public hearings that are held here tonight. Prior to that meeting, you are welcome to contact us to provide input. You can find contact information and information on each petition on the city's website at charlotteplanning.org. Thank you, Mayor Porto. Thank you, Ms. Neely. Okay, so we will proceed with our consent agenda items for this evening. The rezoning petition items 4 through 7 may be considered in one motion except for those items that are pulled by a council member. Please note that these petitions have met the following criteria. They have had no public opposition for the petition at the hearing. Staff recommends approval, zoning committee represents approval, and there are no changes after the zoning committee's recommendations. Are there any consent agenda items? Council would like to pull for question or comment or separate vote? We'll start with Ms. Mayfield. Number five, a separate vote. Thank you. Number five, I saw Ms. Johnson. It's the same for you. That was the same one. Okay. Okay. So is there and we will do that. Thank you both for that. Is there a motion to approve the following petitions and adopt the zoning committee statement of consistency for each of these petitions as they appear in our agenda as Council's own and I will go through and read the numbers. Item number four, petition number 204-064 by JF Lawrence Properties. Item number six, petition number 2025, 0-0-2 by Kelsey Miles. Item number seven, petition number 20-25, 0-0-6 by Viken RCPLC. Is there a motion to adopt an approved? Second. Okay, I have a motion by Mr. Graham and a second by Mr. Driggs. Any discussion? Hearing none, all in favor raise hands. Any opposed? That is unanimous. Okay, is there a, is there a motion to approve petition item 2024, 145 by David Land LLC and adopt the zoning committee statement of consistency as it appears in our agenda? So move second. All right, there's a, there is a motion in a second. Any conversation? Any comments? Yes, Ms. Johnson. Thank you. I just wanted to lift this one up. This was pretty much a technicality. According to my understanding, it's to change the neighborhood place type to the manufacturing and logistics place type for this site. So I will be supporting you. Okay, thank you. Any additional comment? Hearing none, all in favor, raise hands. Any opposed? That is unanimous. Thank you. So I'm sorry. I didn't see your hand raised. Miss McLean, yes. Mr. Drixhead was in the way, my apologies. We have Miss McLean. Just for clarification, did Miss Wattlington vote against you again? No, you again. I believe it was only Ms. Mayfield who was against this petition. Okay, then we will move on to non-consent decision items. And for those, we will begin with agenda item number eight. Petition number 2024, 137, by Wilkes at Management. Before we do, though, there were some changes to item number eight, Mr. Petten. Yes. Can we review those? Certainly. So petition 2024, 137 had7 had a few changes after zoning committee. They made the following changes to their notes committed to no more than 20% of the units may be for rent at any time. Buildings adjacent to Johnson, Ailer Road, Shelby Limited to a maximum of height of 44 feet. They committed to installing an 8 foot planning strip and 8 foot sidewalk along all public roadway frontages on the internal roadways No entity or persons shall own more than two units within the site and units shall not be available for rent within the first 12 months of the initial initial purchase Unless otherwise approved by the Homeowners Association These are all notes that were made in coordination with from what we understand conversations with community We believe they are minor and do not warrant additional review by the zoning committee. We'll take any questions you may have Thank you. Was there a motion to not send this petition back to zoning committee after changes? Motion to not send back All right, I have a motion and second all in favor raise, raise hands. Any opposed? That is unanimous. Is there a motion to approve petition item number 2024, 137, and adopt the zoning committee's statement of consistency as it appears in our agendas? So moved. Second. There is a motion in the second, all in favor, raise hands. is unanimous we shall move Was there a comment? Yeah, Miss mollena miss miss Johnson. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you so I just really want to lift up this petition It's said that what's good for the district is good for the city and I just want to acknowledge the standard on this development. I want to thank the petitioner. I want to thank Bridget for working so hard. We had two or three community meetings. I want to thank district four coalition and also Robyns Glen, sub division, namely Mr. Michael Faust. He was here speaking in opposition. So they worked really hard working with the developer and you all heard some of the concessions, but I just want to lift them up. Initially there were I think 165 units, there's now 145 dwelling units, their foresell commits no more than 20% of the units to be for rent at any time. We talk about advocating for home ownership. This is one of these complexes. The eight-foot planting strip. No entity or person shall own more than two units within one site. That's so important. Councilmember Mayfield and I were in a meeting just last week And there's over 800,000 corporate owned units here in Charlotte. Drives the market. So these kind of standards are so important as we're considering these petitions. 80,000. I'm sorry. 80,000. 80,000, sorry. OK. Just a little bit. Just a little bit. Preferred design guidelines. And the neighbors were were opposed to this initially but we have to consider what's allowed by right. So that's something that we can take a look at as a council but right now this is one of those petition it raises the standard in district four I want to thank again the D4 coalition and all of the residents who speak out I am listening and I know that this developer has another petition on the agenda tonight in the different district and these are just kind of the standards that I think are important to set in the city. So I'm honored to support this and again I want to thank you Bridget publicly for all of your hard work. Thank you. Thank you Ms. Johnson. Any additional comments? Aye. Ms. Ashmeer. Yes, thank you. I agree with everything Councilwoman Johnson stated. I also like to recognize the outreach efforts that Bridget does reaching out to the community and really keeping us informed throughout the process. I certainly appreciate that. And really she's creating a model for other developers and other petitioners to follow. So great job. Okay, any additional comments? Yeah. She started to say. All right, hearing none, I believe we've already voted on that particular item clerk. Is that correct? Didn't we vote on item number eight? We did the motion not to prefer that. So we need the motion to. Okay, so we had a motion and we had a second for number eight. Now we need to approve. We did not. All right, so all in favor raise hands for the approval of agenda item number eight. Any opposed? Okay, that is unanimous. We will move on to agenda item number nine, petition number 2024144 by Digital Morse Chapel LLC. And we also Mr. Patten have changes for this particular one as well. Yes, that's correct. So, this petition also made some changes after zoning committee's recommendation. They were discussed in some of the zoning committee conversations a couple weeks ago. Two notes that were changed. The first is that any of the proposed buildings would be constructed to achieve lead silver minimum or equivalent standards. That's an energy efficiency model that folks can use in constructing buildings to be energy efficient. And also the petitioner commits to a closed loop cooling system for the data center use. That closed loop cooling system will be maintained in accordance with manufacturing specifications. That closed loop system is important and preferred. How I have conversations with Charlotte Water, it is much less demanding on local water sources and really is just enough water that they would need to run just normal operations for office use, flushing toilets, sinks, break rooms, that type of thing. So they did commit to installing that type of system which again is much less strenuous on our water system. Thank you. Is there a motion to not send back to the zoning committee? So moved. Second. There's a motion and a second. All in favor raise hands. Any opposed? That is unanimous. Is there a motion to approve agenda item number nine and adopt the zoning committee statement of consistency as it appears in our agenda. Some move. I do have comments. Okay, there's a motion in the second. Any comment? Miss Brown? Yes, thank you so much. I'll be speaking to Mr. Martin. This is words, my head. No. The attorney. Colin, is he here? Mr. Brown here today? I'll Brittany too. Okay. So I was speaking with him and he had a shared that they had addressed all of the potential in my environmental impacts and that they had spoke to the community. There was no opposition about 16 members in the community meeting and I wanted to know. Mr. Patton, did you hear anything about the details of the impact on the environmental community? We hadn't heard and I believe there was some information shared from the petitioner that we did see but we haven't heard any real significant comments from our folks internally on staff. We're really as a city staff not equipped to put together like environmental assessment, but we did get some information from the petitioner that hopefully addressed some of that, I believe that was sent to council. Yeah, I think, you know, he missed the brown sentence information over, I don't think that he was just the information over that wasn't true, I didn't want to get on record stating that we did have some concerns about the environmental impact and that he did address those concerns. So I wanted to make sure that we record that, a clerk for me please, that that was addressed and also the community environment, which is the questions that I raised with him and any other council members have concerned, but I'm in a position to move forward and vote in favor of. It's a patent that's all I have for you today. Thank you, Ms. Brown, Ms. Watlington. That's my brown and I'm spoke to my questions. Thank you. You're very welcome. Okay. Wonderful. Any other comment? Hearing none, all in favor for agenda item number nine, please raise your hands in the opposed Miss mayfield is opposed for number nine. Okay, we will move on to agenda item number 10 Is there a motion to approve petition number 2025 022 and adopt the zoning committee statement of consistency as it appears in our agenda. So moved. I have a motion, is there a second? So moved. All right, we had a second. Any discussion? Hearing none, all in favor, please raise hands. Any opposed? Miss Mayfield is opposed to agenda item number 10. All right, that will move us on to our hearings. And we will begin with agenda item number 11, petition number 205-047 by Charlotte Planning Design and Development Department. And is a text amendment. Shall I pass it over to you, Mr. Petten? Yes,, thank you. So this evening we have a text amendment on our agenda. This is petition 205-047. We've discussed this with TPD a few weeks back. But we'll go over the full highlights again here at the public hearing this evening. This is our first maintenance amendment. So we'll go through these slides here. So again, why is the text amendment needed to continue and facilitate the goals of the comp plan? Major document like this does require updates and adjustments and revisions, just to maintain some efficiency and best practices, work through challenges that we come across through staff input, external stakeholder input, and also continue to make this a more user friendly document with better functionality. So as we discussed a few weeks back with TPD, we're moving into a maintenance amendment approach with our UDO. In the past, you've seen various text amendments come through and they would address different topics as we kind of got them delivered to us. We are moving into a maintenance process, which would maintain two biannual text amendments that we will do. We will refer to those again as maintenance amendments. They will combine both technical things and policy-based amendments. So we used to do cleanup amendments. This will involve some of those cleanup items. And we would do larger policy-based amendments like conservation subdivisions and compact subdivisions. They will also be a part of this overall process. So really this is combining both of those efforts into one engagement for these amendments will also combine those approaches. So we'll continue to use virtual information sessions post things on our website, deal with mailing lists, have collaboration with our stakeholders both internal and external work, work with our UDO advisory committee, and also any other things we may need, like in person workshops or neighborhood meetings. So all of that again will be boiled down into one singular process that we will do twice a year. Of course if there's emergency things to pop up or things we need to address from legislative changes at the state level, we can certainly put those in process outside of that, you know, by annual approach. But just wanted to cover that with you all so we can understand how we're going to go through these moving forward over the next few months of this year and then moving into next year as well. So what's in this amendment this evening is just want to highlight a few items, some of the bigger policy items, sites with multiple frontages and research campus options. We've included some changes to that one. We had some challenges with sites that had multiple frontages that would have a front on three or four different streets. Really understanding where those uses can put their back of house operations, parking, those types of things, how they need to treat the different sides of the buildings. Those were really a challenge when you had a site that had three and four streets around it or comprised a large block. So we made that a little bit more flexible to understand, you know, how folks can program those sites a little bit more efficiently. We also put together a research campus with light industrial. That's a new use that we've introduced into the UDO. We talked about with TPD. We've been a little bit short on our tools to better attract and accommodate life science campuses. So that's something we feel that with this new use and a couple of other tweaks we've made in this text amendment that we'd be better positioned now as a city to again attract and facilitate some of those life science uses that are certainly of interest within this city and within the region. So we go into the next topic that we've got office conversions. We certainly are aware of the office market. We did want to propose adaptive reuse of an existing office to a residential use as a more of a by-right process. There are challenges with converting that from a building code standpoint, but we wanted to at least remove the zoning barrier for that and allow that to occur as an adaptive reuse process. We are also going to introduce the facilitation of sites that already have a vacant office building on site that can be either converted or you could also redevelop that site with multi-family. So that again would have to have an existing building on the site. It doesn't apply right now to vacant properties that is something that we are looking at continually and we may see in a future amendment. But for now we are allowing again that adaptive reuse or redevelopment of a site with an office building currently on it to allow more residential options. We've also modified some of our landscape yard requirements. This is getting into some of the nitty gritty a bit, but we did have some challenges with landscape yards both with existing uses and future uses. We've gone back to a zoning district approach rather than the approach had which was based on place types which was again causing some challenges for projects to be delivered successfully. So we've worked with some stakeholders on getting that change. Hopefully that will alleviate some of those headaches. We've made some changes to applicability for the UDO. We've got rid of some confusing language regarding North Carolina fire Code, again modified applicability of frontages, clarified some applicability of green areas, tree preservation and heritage trees. We did talk a little bit at TPD about some changes to the applicability of the storm water ordinance. We are going to put that on hold until some legislative language potentially gets shaken out at the state level, but we may see some continuing items on that in future amendments, but that was removed. There will be removed after the public hearing from this text amendment. One more couple quick items, zoning district standards. We have worked again with our external stakeholders in the development industry, understanding that corrugated metal has again come a long way. We do want to allow that as a building material under certain conditions. So we did allow that as something, again, that is a change that we think will facilitate some additional projects that want to use that material. And we did get into some different development standards and modified some things, simplified setbacks for accessory structures, so things like Sheds, accessory dwelling units, those of all of them updated. We did update parking standards to clarify some different things for a location of non-residential uses where there's not a principal building on site, adjusted the ratios for parking for banks and retail goods, and also allowed some changes to our maximum driveway withs. So again, all things that as we continue to work with this document, learn more about it, understand some of the challenges with it. We are continuing to make some of those tweaks and changes. We do think that these put us again in a better position for this document to be used and implement it more successfully. We do recommend approval of the petition. We do think it's consistent with the comprehensive plan goals. I will be happy to take any questions that you may have on this particular maintenance amendment. Thank you, Mr. Paton. Ms. Mayfield. Thank you, Mr. Vaden. Under parking, you have in here, clarifies horseshoe driveways, may serve individual or multiple buildings. Help me understand that, because we already have some units, excuse me, I could think of one particular area where they built four single family homes, and it is physically one driveway that pulls in. And there, you're basically, it's one way and one way out. So once you have residents that rent all four of those, you're locked in if there was an emergency or even just haven't access. So help me understand this horseshoe language for it to be multiple or single when we're already seeing the impact of some of our driving minimums and how it's really created challenges in neighborhoods. So the driveway itself would just serve the site. They still have to meet parking requirements if they have let's say a duplex or a triplex on that site. But I think we had tweaked in this one and I'll look over to staff just for some clarifications is that I don't believe we allow horses your driveways to serve duplex and triplex on that site but I think we had tweaked in this one and I'll look over to staff just for some clarification is that I don't believe we allowed horses to drive ways to serve duplex and triplexes in the past. Is that correct? Kevin or is that my misunderstanding that element of it? Thanks. Good evening, Councilor Kevin May, planning staff. What Dave said is correct. We were finding some challenges as projects were submitted to the city where it was unclear, I think, for external users and for our staff whether horseshoe driveways could be utilized in certain instances, especially with regard to developments of duplex, triplex and quad. And the language here is trying to facilitate and make it more clear as those projects come in that that is a form of drive that they can use separate from needing to meet the parking requirements but to ensure safety of the motoring traffic, especially along materials. So the challenge that I have is the fact that we did at the Clarefine language of May, serve individual or multiple versus clarifying either or because we already see the challenges. Now you have in the next bullet provides guidance for maximum driveway width between curb and sidewalk if no sidewalk is present, but you can just based off of what we have approved and challenges that we're having, I have concern that having language that clarifies a horseshoe driveway may serve individual or multiple buildings versus identifying individual only or multiple only. That flexibility and that interpretation or translation use in the word may I have concerns. Okay. We'll see if we can clean it up and make a little bit more clear and get out of some of that, you know, differentiate a little bit better. Thank you. Thank you. Any additional comment? Hearing none, is there a motion of close public hearing? Second. Okay. All in favor, raise hands. Any opposed? That is unanimous. We will move on to agenda item number 12th, petition number 2025-015 by Wilkes at Management. Before we, well, the location is approximately 8.7, four acres located on the south end of Mount Holly Road, west of Rahn Road, in east of Creston Circle, and district two, Mr. Graham's district. The current zoning is in 1A, NML 1. Propose zoning is into ACD. Staff recommends the approval of this petition upon resolution of outstanding issues related to site and building design. Before I pass it on to staff, I want to make sure is Miss Merritt, Mr. Price, or Miss Olive Arena present, all three of you are present. Okay, after staff's presentation, then Miss Grant will have 10 minutes. You three will have 10 minutes in aggregate and there will be a two minute rebuttal. Thank you, thank you. Thank you. This site is a little under nine acres located along the west side of Mount Holly Road. In an area where we have a diverse range of residential product types, single family as well as multi-family residential and entitlements to the south and west that includes a multi-family and commercial and single family uses. This site is currently zone neighborhood 1a with a small portion of of it along the northern edge zone, we manufacture logistics 1. They are proposing to go to neighborhood 2a conditional, and that that proposed zoning is inconsistent with the policy-mots recommendation for the neighborhood 1 police type at this site. The proposal itself is for up to 100 multi-family attached so town home style dwelling units It would have a 12-foot multi-use path and eight-foot planning strip along Mount Holly Road with eight-foot planting strips and eight-foot sidewalks located internal to the site They would commit to construct an ADA compliant bus waiting area along the frontage They would also be building a northbound left turn lane along Mount Holly Road There would be a 10-foot landscape yard planted a class B standards so going above and beyond what is typically required along the south eastern boundary where it abuts a commercial use that is in the manufacturing logistics one. Open space would be provided across the site and would be miniatized and there are quantifications for how exactly that open space is being enhanced beyond ordinance standards. Direct pedestrian connections would be provided from residential units to any public network and required public private streets. And street trees would be provided along the alleys providing for a bit more canopy throughout the site. All dwelling units would have a garage, there would be ten off street visitor parking spaces on the site, and there are some architectural standards including a maximum of six dwelling units per building with no more of those six unit buildings being limited to three of those buildings total across the site. And the buildings along that Holy Road themselves would be limited to four and five units. They also provide some preferred architectural standards related to portraits and stupes, as well as some others. And would screen any solid waste facilities, meter banks, HVAC, and mechanical equipment. Staff recommends approval of this petition upon resolution of outstanding issues related to site and building design. Although inconsistent with the policy-mots recommendation, the site does meet criteria that we would look for when considering a change to the neighbourhood to place type. The site is within a third of a mile, a dozen unit activity center within three quarters of a mile of existing commercial development that contains relevant goods and services that future residents may access. Site is located directly along a bus route, and would further improve those transit options with the commitment to upgrade that bus waiting area. And it's adjacent to MXZoning that allows for similar uses as well as some existing multi-family uses along Mount Holly Road that are similar in product type. This proposal is in an area that has been identified as lacking access to housing opportunity in our comprehensive plan. And I'll take questions following comments. Okay, hello Miss Gritt. Good evening Mayor Proton, members of Council, members of the Zoning Committee, Bridget Grant, Land Use Consultant with Maureen Van Allen. I'm pleased to be here this evening representing Josh Wilkes and Wilkes Asset Management. This is the same development company you spoke so highly of earlier this evening and we appreciate your kind words. I'm going to do my best to not duplicate any of what Holly had to say but we'll try to elevate some of this. As she mentioned, the site is 8.74 acres located on Mount Holly Road. You can see that we're adjacent to a public storage facility and an undeveloped site to the west that's zoned for a mix of uses including multifamily and office. The current combination, the current combination of zoning in the areas, a mix of N1, ML, N1A, and as I mentioned, that MX3, that is part of the Whitewater Center site, but as I mentioned, zone for a much more intense use. This is the 2040 place type map, and I think it's a little deceiving by showing the entire area as N1 given it does have zoning entitlements for much higher uses. It's adjacent to manufacturing logistics and neighborhood one and as Holly mentioned, it isn't within close proximity to an activity center but also other commercial uses on the Mount Holly Huntersville Road corridor. When staff is making decisions about how to change the zoning on the site, we often take a look at our access to greenways and parks in the area as well as transit. This is just a list that gives you a high level of being located next to an activity center, proximity to schools, parks, our road frontage, bike lanes, proximity to similar place types, providing transition between place types the next year, and providing housing opportunities. So I'm pleased to say that we have staff support, probably largely in part, to our ability to check a lot of these boxes. This is a site plan in case you a little easier read on how the site is going to be laid out other than what's already in the packet that you received. You can see we've got a mix of building types. It's primarily at Town Home Use. We've got a 12-foot multi-use path along our frontage. Our access is limited to coming off of Mount Holly Road. We are proposing a stub street to the rear of the site. Before closing, I want to confirm that we did receive some correspondence from the neighborhood stakeholder group and we've worked diligently over the past couple days and over the weekend to try to do our best to get our answers from NCDOT and C.DOT and even planning staff on how best to address those concerns. The first one was the addition of a deceleration lane which is a right hand turn lane into the development that lets cars pull out of the way and turn into the community without slowing down traffic on Mount Halley Road. And NC DOT has given us preliminary assurance that that's something that they would support. The second thing that was requested is an RCI, which basically eliminates your ability to make a left hand turn out of the community. And in times's reduced conflict. Upon preliminary review, NCDOT did not think that was the right thing to do in this location. It doesn't meet all of their criteria in terms of the mediums available for U-turn movement and not utilizing neighborhood streets to make that U-turn. That said, this is our preliminary conversation and we're happy to explore that further. The last request was to convert the public alleys in the community all to public streets. And this one is a little unique because the new ordinance has some underpinnings that has to do with your primary entrance and orientation. And it's to orient the units to the existing public streets. So we're required to orient our units to Mount Holly Road and we're required to orient our new units to the internal new public street, which in some ways necessitates having alleys to access them so that we can keep really strong pedestrian corridors on the public streets. And we've also confirmed that fire does review all of the alleys and site plans that go through. The only need all of the required turning radiuses, fire would have the opportunity to provide any feedback on any adjustments needed. And the private alleys are designed to the same pavement standards as public streets. So HOA management, HOAs are responsible for the long term management, but they are built to city street standards. And with with that I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you. Can you three come down? Who I just spoke to, Mr. Price, Mr. Merritt and Miss Oliveiraio. If you could come down, once you arrive, you will have ten minutes in aggregate to address the issue. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Good evening. My name is Erin Olivello. We thank you all for your time tonight We are here as representatives of the mountain island lake community alliance To discuss our concerns and more importantly our proposals regarding the rezoning petition 2025 015 I did bring a presentation and I apologize about them this type on the front. It's an extra two So I'm sorry about that. It's just 015 We are not opposed. In fact, we embrace thoughtful collaborative development that reflects our values and ensures long-term sustainability. Mountain Island Lake is a growing community. We're home to nearly 38,000 residents. Many of us are long-term residents. Once people move into the community, they stay for a long time. I know myself. I've lived in my home for 21 years and I know others that are speaking tonight have lived there for a really long time as well. Our community is primarily accessed by state maintained roads. This makes coordination and traffic planning especially important. These roads are not only the crossroads of our community, they are connectors between 485 and other surrounding communities which are also growing significantly. The impact on these roads in our area due to growth in Mount Holly, Belmont and Denver cannot be understated. As development continues, we believe it's critical to work together with the state, city staff, developers, and decision-makers like yourselves to ensure we grow responsibly. On the second and third slides that are titled Mount Holly Road and Mount Holly Road development, you can see numbers from NCDOT. We have over 20,000 trips a day along the section of road from 485 up to Matt Holly Huntersville and then turning left to continue on to Matt Holly Road. The recent rezoning on these pages, it's probably not all of them, it was hard to gather all of them, but that's over 2,000 units. And they're estimating that that's an additional 16,000 trips a day. Many of those have not been built yet, so we're not even at all of that right now. And then we're expecting hundreds more. We have a lot of vacant land in our community, and we know that all of this development is coming. And it's all going through the same strained road system. project at stress to our roads, infrastructure, and natural resources. We are not saying no to growth. We are saying let's make it smarter and safer. Hi, my name is Moabah Mairi. I also live in the area. I've been there about 20 years now. So I've definitely seen a lot of the development come in and grow. Now as you've seen some background on the area, let's talk about the zoning, rezoning petition, and some things that are site specific to that deserves your attention. The current site plan does not show the curve in the road immediately adjacent to the development. If you're looking at the exit concerns slide, if you look at the images on either side of the site plan, you'll see what we mean. that curve will directly impact how safely and easily residents can exit and enter the neighborhood. This is a real traffic hazard that hasn't been adequately addressed in the current plans. Ignoring it increases the changes of collisions, particularly as traffic builds up at peak hours. On the slide, reduce conflict intersections to give you some information about that. Our solution and request are to use reduced conflict intersections, RCI's. These intersections reduce left turns from side streets, improving both traffic flow and safety. NC.studies show that RCI's cut total crash rates by 50%. They reduce frontal impact crashes by 80%, often resulting, these crashes often result in serious injuries or death. It also reduces travel time by 20%. We're not asking for something unusual or costly, we're suggesting a proven state supported solution that aligns with the infrastructure needs that are areas growing area. Without addressing the traffic that already exists and will be further impacted by the pending development in the area. Now we're setting up our community and your future. I'm sorry. without addressing the traffic that already exists in the area and will be further impacted by the pending development, we're hoping to set up our community and your further planning teams for long term problems. The area has been seeing numerous deadly accidents including two-tanker accidents that billed enough fuel to reach local creeks, as well as hundreds with smaller collisions, did a high traffic volume and residents trying to get in and out of their neighborhoods. It's not just about the traffic for us that are here and those that are coming. It's about the livability of the area. It currently takes me about 15 minutes on a normal day during peak hours just to get out of my neighborhood. If congestion and danger continue to increase, the quality of life for the thousands of residents that are there and who are coming will be directly impacted. Thank you, Mr. Price. You have a little under five minutes. Good evening, folks. My name's Tony Price. I live exactly one mile on Mount Holy Road from the proposed development. I have lived there for 38 years, so I've seen a lot of tremendous growth in the area. Our additional request we'd like to highlight two specific requests that are vital to ensure safety and equitable growth in our area. A desaleration lane, this would allow cars to safely slow down before entering the new neighbourhood, reducing rear end collisions and keeping through traffic moving. Public streets, we're asking that streets in this development be designated as public, not private. While private streets allow the unified development ordinance, they are increasingly being used as a loophole allowing developers to fit more units on a site and avoid planting as many trees and footpath bike lanes. This may benefit the first short-term bottom line of a project, but it comes at the long-term expense of the residents and the community. Safety guys, safety. Public streets mean the city not future home owners will be responsible for road maintenance, more opportunities to plant trees, provide shade, and improve storm water management. A better, more walkable and livable neighbourhood over time. These are common sense improvements that will serve both current and future residents and help preserve the character and health of our mountain island lake area. The bigger concern to me and to many in our area is just the lack of infrastructure, period. As I said, I've lived in my home there, my wife and raised two girls there for 38 years. In the last 10 years I've had multiple vehicles go through the fence on my property. We've had a young lady killed in front of my property. In the last year I have had three vehicles go three separate incidents, vehicles going through my fence on my property, taking out a bus stop in front of my property that had a concrete trash bin that I could not move myself, but it got taken out and replaced multiple times. Fortunately, no one was killed because of that. It had been something staying at that bus stop and it's on an angle. This wheelchair folks try and use that, it's criminal parrots, it's just wrong. The bus stop, the trash can, the safety signs right in front of my house, been taken out, I cannot get these replaced by DOT, the city or the transit people. We have contacted them all multiple times. I have asked the police at the racks. Do I need to take care of these signs? Someone calling about them? They said no, we will take care of it. So supposedly they also called about this. And still, nothing has been done. And we're going some of these signs, the reflective sign showing where it's gone down to one lane, been down for over a year. Can't get it put up. Beautiful, beautiful. You have a little less than a minute left. Thank you. But, you know, another problem is, you know, and are the developers, are they going to be honest and show the potential buyers and residents what the traffic is like there between four and six o'clock? And yes, the fire department might look at this, but if they looked at between four and six when the traffic is blocked up for miles, it takes about 30 minutes to go one and a quarter miles at that time of day there. I think there are big issues involved with this development on that particular road. As stated, we want the growth. We want our area to look like the other side of town, but we need some help from you folks. Please help us out and look at everything that's going on around our development. Our area before you start approving these developments would be greatly appreciated and supported by all of our residents. And thank you for your time and listening to us. Thank you. Thank you. Miss Grant, you have two minutes for a rebuttal. Thank you, I wanna say we really appreciate the thoughtful feedback that the community provided. They gave us very specific requests and that's generally very helpful when we try to work with the community. I think we still have a little bit more work to do. As we mentioned preliminarily, we can already do that deceleration lane. There are always opportunities when working with alley communities to look for other ways to incorporate trees into the overall design. And we know that when we work to address some of staff comments, there's probably going to be a loss of units that also creates additional opportunities for open space. So all of that is to say we know we've got a little more work to do with the community and we will continue to do that. Happy to answer any questions. Thank you. We have Mr. Graham followed by Miss Mayfield. Thank you, Madam Mayor for a tim. And let me thank the neighborhood leaders for coming out tonight and providing their feedback. I've been working with them for the last six to eight weeks on a wide variety of issues in the mountaineer, Lake area, specifically to the impact of traffic and congestion in the area. We had a town hall meeting two weeks ago, I think, in Mount Nell Lake that we specifically address some of the issues and concerns. And I've seen it for myself in terms of taking tours in the morning as well as in the afternoon. So I get their frustrations and their willingness to cooperate and be advocates for the community. So we can do the salination lane. We can. Preliminarily see that with NC DOT without full review said they would support it. And you're working on whether or not there can be only a right turn. There were some concerns. It is a tool that they use throughout the community in different locations. But like a traffic signal, you have to meet certain criteria or it can actually have an adverse effect. And so in this particular area, it doesn't meet the criteria based on their preliminary review. C.D. might be able to speak to that a little more clearly than I can. And Monholy, the death elect to staff is a state road. Yes, not only a road. Yes, where are the entrances which is Monholy Road? Yes, a state road. State road, right? Yes, this is a state road. The state maintain road. Do you know where there are on any? I've spent well please right here. Sorry. I thought you were talking about it. I can say we're not in. Is there any preliminary plan for future development of construction for Mon-Holly Road. Can you kind of help me level set? So for Mont-Holly Road improvements, I will turn that over to C.Dot to go over. I'm going to apply. J. Carpano, C.Dot, are you asking about development specifically or improvements to? Improvements. So. Schedule improvements for Mont-Holly Road Right now in the Stip Rankings, which is the project rankings for state roads and state projects, there are identified projects to widen Mt. Holly Road as well as Mt. Holly Huntersville Road to the north. Those projects are not funded but we'll be competing in the rankings to get funded as a part of the evaluation process that the state completes for their projects. You guys, I'm not that I don't trust most grand. I trust or work a lot with their burden terms of making sure that the requirements for a right turn only is met or that we cannot do that. They cannot do that. seven and verify verified by staff, I'll assess something you can kind of continue to work on and make sure we get that. So staff has just been brought into the review of this and we haven't completed a review and have not coordinated with NCDOT to this point. But there are some concerns with the implication of where you turning traffic would complete their movements if restricted movements were implemented. So we're still evaluating and coordinating with NCDOT. Are there any outstanding traffic issues that you guys are negotiating with the bell first with as relates to this. Resonning? As far as this petition goes, C.Dot does not have any outstanding issues that they're working on. Staff? Yes, there are a couple of outstanding issues as it relates to site and building design. What we're specifically asking for is an increase in open space across the site so that every unit could access usable common open space. And additionally, we're basically asking for an increase in open space across the site so that every unit could access usable common open space. And additionally, we are looking to see a reduction in the maximum unit count per building from 6 to 5, and to commit to a minimum proportion of those buildings across the site being less intense residential building forms like duplexes and triplexes. The petition petitioners are aware of these outstanding issues and they've noted that they'll take a look to see what can be done. Okay. Okay. And are you still engaging in conversation with the new leaders and reference to some of those concerns? And is the same way that I can play a role to making sure that we kind of find a happy medium? I think it's appropriate for us to have another follow-up after we get a little more information and we also look at where we land with our revised site plan based on the redesign that we're expecting from city comments. And that redesign won't call for, I know we talked about the private streets which is so that, she's saying that that's something that based on the UDEO that the Frontage has to be done that way. Could you further explain? So the UDEO has certain requirements in terms of where buildings may orient if it's along a public street frontage like Mount Holly Road You need to orient a crop along that or orient along common open space. That's a minimum of 50 feet in width So any redesign of their open space could potentially change your private street network internal to the site. I'm not sure what they've been considering, but we expect if our outstanding issues to be addressed of the increase in open space and the modifications to the actual residential building types, it could change sight layout, depending on what they're actually considering and what constraints they might be working with. Okay, so that's something that you guys are still working through. Correct. And what's the traffic count? The traffic generation on this, I believe is 712 trips. And C.Doc can provide more information about how that's triggered and what info went into that. So thank you. So the estimated traffic generation for the site is around 700 trips. The buy-right estimate is around close to 300. So it's a little over twice the buy-right estimate, but that's that the 700 is approximate for this proposed site at 100 units. And this does not require a traffic study. Does not require a traffic study and any other transportation requirements. The left turn lane that's proposed and the additional right turn lane which they are looking at committing to would be acceptable for C-DOT for access and traffic improvements for this level of development. Well, I'm hopeful that within the next 30 days before it comes back to us and and June that there can be a lot of meaning on the minds of there can be what the neighborhood leaders are referenced to some of the outstanding issues obviously the outstanding issues that staff has will be addressed. Certainly and I still ask some other questions I would like to act offline with you and the neighborhood leaders. So I'm willing to kind of bridge that gap gap. There will be a number of eyeballs, at least for me specifically, on what's happening over there. And now I'm in a lake with this petition as well as others. I had the opportunities this morning staff to meet with the Zoni Commission via our weekly briefing and talk specifically about the area in general and then specifically about this particular rezoning request. And so looking forward to doing more work, but certainly one of the reasons for coming out today and looking forward in the interim between now and June to have further conversations. Thank you, Madam Mayor Pratton. Thank you. Ms. Mayfield. Thank you. Question for staff. Earlier when you were doing your presentation, you made a comment that this area has been identified like in housing opportunity. I would like to know from what year was that identified. Mainly because one for transparency, I live in the area. So if you drive straight up Mount Holly, basically the dead end, cross over Mount Holly Huntersfield, that's a dead end area, that's an area that's technically ETJ and did not need a rezoning where we have multiple units that have been built, whether they're for rent, town homes, multiple units, traffic has seen a major impact. If you were to traverse up Mount Holly, bold and make a right onto Mount Holly, Huntersville, there is a development that is multiple units that also did not need to go through a rezoning that has, I don't even know how many years that one is, that's going to have a major impact. You drive up less than half a mile, there's multiple projects that we've approved. If you were to make a U-turn, if you can, which is in itself a challenge, because there is no other light. There is no light, there's no traffic calming between you holy hundreds of year road down to Bellhead. There is no traffic calming. There is no traffic calming or really additional light if you make a left on to my holy hundreds of year road heading into Gastonia. You're gonna have a long way. If you happen to mess up and be in the wrong lane, that's just going to be, depending on the time of day, that's going to be a challenge. So I would like to know when this area was the identified for lacking housing opportunity. And at what point do we plan on updating that? Because council has approved multiple projects, not including all the permits that have been pulled for projects that are currently in community and those that are being built now. Yeah, I certainly understand where that is coming from. I will say that information is provided by our Long range planning team and it has to do with the equitable growth framework provided in the comprehensive plan. So I'll have to confer with them and put it in a follow-up report about the exact year as to when that data was collected. So I don't want to misrepresent an answer now by telling you something. So I appreciate getting that information before this comes back to full council and also earlier and I think Mr. Penn has already left. Nope, Davis over there. So we looked at language for update on our policy. What was noted, and we have heard on more than one occasion, that a traffic study is not triggered. Somewhere in the language, and this is something that you might be able to provide later, I'm expecting you to have the answer now since we're in the hearing on What is the trigger for council to? It's juxtap to know that what we currently previously used for a traffic study update no longer works for The developments that we have we're number we're 15 anymore. We're now in a 14th largest city where the fifth pass is going. So as we're making these updates for this living document, there has to be a new trigger for these traffic studies as well as looking at what my colleague councilmember Renee has said on multiple occasions that map that overlay of looking at what the impact is because this seems great when you presented this way. But this is not a true or accurate snapshot of what is going down on in the community when we look at not only these onies but products that are by right that we have no conversation about but that are happening. So help me because staff you all have that access you see that information. So help me understand staff support outside of a few challenges with this. So for the traffic study question, I will say one thing we did add when the UDO was adopted was capturing by-right projects that would trigger traffic study. In the past, we weren't capturing that in a real effective way. Now, is there an opportunity for us to continue to look at the thresholds that trigger that? I think certainly we can work with you on that and I can confer with C.Dot to see what those numbers are and understand, you know, when things do get triggered and if we need to provide some different mechanisms to update that and capture that a little bit more effectively. But I do want to add that we did add that as a by-right scenario in the past where we were only really getting those three zoning. So that was a good element but again are there things we can improve on and I'd certainly be willing to work with you all to figure that out. From just a general support standard on this particular petition I think Holly did a good job outlining some of the things that we look for and some of the things that are part of the area planning process right now that you all are considering and had the hearing on last week. We do have criteria that we've start to put together when we look at a map change, particularly from N1 to N2, which is what we see a lot of when we're going from that yellow to orange on the map. And the things that we look for are access to transit, access to goods and services, where it is located next to other adjacent properties and place types. This does meet several of those criteria, particularly access to bus. There is a few bus stops within close proximity. They are close just up the road from out in Holley to goods and services. So there were some things that we do consider that did meet those, which gave us a little bit more policy support for this. We do certainly understand the traffic concerns both Holley and Outrat,2 meeting with council member Graham. We heard that loud and clear when we understood what some of those concerns were. We certainly will continue to work with the petitioner and council member Graham on trying to alleviate some of those for this petition. But is there a larger conversation behind about how we're looking at traffic and by-right projects and all of that. I think we hear you all loud and clear on that as well and we hope to continue to work with you guys on that. Thank you for that. Any other piece I really encourage us to take into consideration. If part of the criteria that staff is looking at is also access to public transportation. That bus is sitting in the same traffic that I'm sitting here. That bus is actually taking up three and a half car lengths. So that's three additional cars that might be a little bit closer to the light. That's not there. So, and we still have a two lane, one lane really, road. The majority of the road, there's a pulver. So, even if we were magically able to identify a couple of million dollars to start buying up land, to widen the road, that is going to be a challenge because those large lights, that's where the drainage is going is. So that's a whole different conversation. But in the meantime, what is being proposed to council with full support and recommendation from staff is contributing to the congestion, which in turn contributes to the environmental impact because the vehicles are sitting in traffic a lot longer. Yes, some people have hybrid vehicles that are turned off and then whenever you get a chance to move to them in this later, it will come back on, but a lot of vehicles are not. So the gas, the fumes, the impact of all of that, the quality of life. So I think we're missing an opportunity when we say, well, there's access to public transportation, but if that public transportation has taken me 45 minutes to an hour to get from Mount Holy Row into uptown, or even 30 minutes for what should be, honestly, a 12-minute ride straight up. Now, Holly, what even if I was trying to get a McDonald's? Let's say I'm going from food lying to McDonald's. There's no easy way to traverse that. If you live in the country club, it can be a challenge just to make that left turn if you are Mount Holly Rowe. And you're heading towards 45. If you're coming off at 45, it is a challenge because you have a turn lane that goes into the McDonald's and the gas station. But majority of individuals use that lane to speed up to jump over because it's one lane that's going straight. So even though you have a turn lane there that's only for the businesses that was built, mind you, we just opened a brand new multi-family apartment complex right there and right across the street, across the tracks. So we've approved several already in this area. Going back to the question, and we have some limitations because of state, our road, state road, different conversation, but what? Council is approving, based on staff's recommendations, our multiple, multi-family developments that is directly contributing to the congestion. So it will be helpful for the questions that I ask to bring back that overlay. Bring back that map that clearly identifies, again, my driver's every day, so I already know all the buildings are. Bring back that information for the ones that were by right right did not come through as well as the rezoning petitions we have so that we can have a real conversation not only for ourselves but for community which my colleague loves to say the accumulative impact of these developments but ultimately we are creating the challenges with infrastructure That we do not have the funding nor the capacity within potentially the next decade plus to address Thank you. Thank you miss make it out. We have miss azure mirror and then we have miss Johnson Thank you Well some of my questions were already addressed by Mr. Graham, especially around the infrastructure request that was made as part of the PowerPoint Act. I do understand the request, especially for entrance and exit and the safety. That's a valid concern. So I would like to see some resolution on that before the next month's decision. That's all I have, but I appreciate your willingness to continue to work with them on the other items. I'm sure councilmember Graham will continue to keep us posted. That's all I have. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. Thank you, Mayor Pro Tem. Bridget, this is like deja vu, isn't it? So thank you, Council Member Mayfield. We as a Council have to do something. This might be one of those petition and I'd be interested in seeing one of the maps that I always ask for, for district four. I'd like to see one of those maps for this area. Because I know Councilmember Mayfield talks about this mount. Holly, what is mount, mount Hollyboat? Thank you, Mount Hollyroad, all of the time. So I'd like to see a map of all of the approved and the by right development in the last, I don't know, a mile from this petition in the last year or so. When we talk about cumulative impacts, this is exactly what happened with the petition that I just approved earlier. The developer, you know, it's a great product, but it's the location and location still matters. And if we don't have the infrastructure, which is why I champion the infrastructure meeting. So we're asking the questions, but we continue to approve and say, well, it's not this developer's problem, it's a bigger problem, it's the council. And we just have to take responsibility for that at some point. We've talked about changing the policy for traffic studies. Maybe if it was a cumulative count every 2,500, because again, this is or 800 but how many have we approved we know we're beyond the 2500 trip. Yes we do. Tickler. So maybe we should do that on a cumulative basis but we cannot and I say this all the time yes we have 117 people moving here per day but we cannot continue to lead for the future without managing for the quality of life for our current residents. So again, it's up to us when we are bold enough to just say enough, you know, or something, but we have to do something differently, if we were to expect something differently, different. So I would like to see if we, and I think Ed McKinney or somebody talked about changing the trigger for the traffic study to look at a more cumulative impact. If you could bring that back, or Allison, if someone could bring that back for us, and a map for this area. I think that should be something that we should all be able to see what the development looks like from a larger scale because we would be surprised because even though this petition doesn't trigger that traffic study, our residents feel the impact. So I really think we should. And you also talked about Council Member Mayfield. That was a great idea. What study or what is staff looking at when you talk about there's not a diverse housing type? Because in District 4, so many multi-family, that it's not diverse because there's no more single family. Right? So I would like to take a look. And this all stems back to the UDO. But if these are some of the things that we could take a look at. But until Council says, you know, we want to see, and don't even get me started on the impact on schools, because you all know that we're really not taking a deep dive into that and looking at that from a cumulative impact. So what is the city going to look like in 10 years? those 11 117 people move here in 10 years, what's it going to look like? So even in district four, I asked Angela, the water pressure. There's an impact on water pressure. So we really, really have to take a look at these things. And so we stopped just talking about about it and we actually do something different. Thank you. Thank you. Is there emotional close public hearing? Second. All right. All in favor, please raise hands. Any opposed? That is unanimous. I believe we can move on to agenda item number 13. Petition number 205-005 by EB properties. LLC, the location is approximately 1.96 acres located east of Cleveland, south of Hamilton, Russell Lane and north of Hackbury Creek Trail and District 2, Mr. Gramps district. Current zoning is in 1BB proposed zoning in 1DCCO. Staff approved recommendation of this approval after staff's presentation. Mr. Steve Mallory will have three minutes. Thank you. Thank you. The site's little less than two acres. East of Cleve Brown Road. Go right ahead. Yes, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. We have two people who have signed up in the 11th hour here. So after staff's presentation, then Mr. Mallory. Mr. Mallory, are you present? Yes, I'm here. Okay. Can you come down to this podium just so you can be ready? And then if Miss Lea Barnes and Mr. Melvin Brown, the third, are you present? Can you guys come down as well just to be ready right behind the podium? You can sit there. So now we're gonna do 10, 10, and then two. So this site is a little less than two acres east of Cleap Brown Road. Though the street it actually abuts is the terminus of Hamilton, Russell Lane. And the area was seen in the family residential as well as the multifamily residential products to the south and east and a little bit west of the site as well. The current zoning is Neighborhood 1B and they are proposing to go to Neighborhood 1D as well as with the application of the cottage court overlay. So that would go on top of the N1D zoning that they are requesting. And that cottage court overlay, since I know we haven't seen it often, I'll just remind to council it is an option that allows for residential development with small lot residential uses in a way that organizes the development and the dwellings themselves around common open space. And that would be designed as a cohesive whole with the maintained and shared stewardship by the residents themselves. And this is consistent with the adopted policy map play site for the area, which is neighborhood one. This petition staff does recommend approval. This petition is consistent with that policy map recommendation. The CouchCore overlay allows for a reduction in the lot size standards that we would typically see to get some more innovative design out of it and create more small residential communities. Again, around that shared common open space. So creating a bit of a preferred outcome when it comes to open space. And this would keep it compatible with the surrounding neighborhood one in the area. And would permit the same uses allowed in the existing zoning district neighborhood one B as well as the neighborhood one district and all the districts surrounding it that are a neighborhood one. And I'll turn it over to comments from the petitioner. All right, thank you, Mr. Mallor. You have ten minutes. Okay. Good evening, everybody. Thank you for your time tonight. I appreciate the support of staff and helping us navigate this. I don't have an additional presentation other than what we presented to the community members at the community meeting a couple of months ago that I submitted online. I've also emailed that to Council Member Graham and reached out for any comments or questions you had on that. And I'm pretty much just here tonight for any questions that may be present by any of the Council members. I'm glad to see the gentleman here tonight too that we met at the community meeting so he had some good conversations there. So thank you for your time and your consideration in this petition Thank you you both at well, can you state your names, please? Lee Barnes Lee okay. I read it as Leah my my fault just My fault okay mr. Barnes and then Mr. Brown, you have 10 minutes and aggregate to respond. Good evening and thank you for hearing me this evening. Currently I reside at the 4910 which is at the end close to the proposed development And I I've been, what we purchased the home last May, and part of the reason we purchased was the appeal of the privacy of being on the end of the street or road. And there being less traffic or just a traffic of the standard neighborhood, which is pretty minimum right now. And so that was the appeal with the privacy. With the proposed development of forest and spending to a college court with, as Jillim just mentioned, smaller residential areas, that could, I mean, that will cause additional traffic that will come through our street and our neighborhood, which we are proud community that's, well, my conversation with everyone in the community, prior to two is that they are opposed to this, mainly because of the additional traffic that will be coming through. So what we enjoy about our property and our location is, you know, in threat or in jeopardy. So the proposal mentioned for smaller colleges, that we believe that, or I believe that may provide more renters or a set of four and we're not looking forward to that. So if the development was to continue or to go through, I would request that it would be single family homes and not so much of congestion or smaller property types so that could be more traffic or just the small residential land properties that are composed of rental units Thank you Good evening To echo Mr. Barnes my name is M oven Brown. I am a resident of Hamilton Russell Lane for what will be three years this year and Like him part of the appeal for my family moving into this neighborhood was the limited access. It has a dead end road, which most of you know is a deterrent for traffic and activity. So to protect what we feel is the integrity of the neighborhood, cottage court does not sound very attractive for what we have, which being close proximity to, I don't know if you're all familiar with the area, but on one side is the Harris-Steita shopping center where Davis Lake and other sodas where McDonald's and Zaxby's and all these other high traffic areas exist. So we're very close proximity to UNCC. So we already see a lot of short-term, you know, residents coming through a lot of the college students already in neighboring neighborhoods creating a lot of noise and additional things that take place. And for And for those of us who have, still have smaller children, one of the things that we really enjoy about the neighborhood is them being able to be out in the street without worrying traffic and a lot of the other things that would come with that. So like Mr. Barnes and some of the other neighborhood residents, if this was to move forward, our preference would be single family homes to kind of maintain the integrity of what is already existing and that's that space. So we are empathetic and we know the situation that the city is in to kind of keep up with the demand of the 117 people that are moving here per day. So we know that this may not stop you from making a decision that you're making the future but if we have any say so in it we would at least like to keep the feel. We kind of all know each other. Everyone doesn't know each other's names, but we know your face. So when you got walking your dog and different things like that, we would like to keep that aspect as well. So just taking into consideration those things, I would just say that I know that if it had not been for the neighborhood in front of us paying it forward and allowing us to move back there, most of us wouldn't have homes currently. So we would like to do the same, but we would just like to have some input in what takes place and at the committee meeting it seemed very unclear what would actually be built, how that would look, how that would impact traffic and things of that nature. So if there was more clarity around the potential impact and what that could look like, I think we might have different opinions, but at this time that does not exist. So I just wanted to put that on display. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mallory. You have two minutes if you would like to utilize it. Yes, thank you. Yeah, so I appreciate these gentlemen coming and we did have some conversations at the community meeting. I would point out that the couple of the proposed sketch plans that we presented were just that. They were just options of what would be allowed within the neighborhood. And one of those options, they're focused on the cottage court, but one of those options was still a single family setup. So depending on, you know, because this was a conventional petition, there is no definitive site plan that we've put forward. These were just things that we presented as, here's what the current zoning allows. These are the size of the lots. Here's what the proposed zoning would allow. And with the cottage court overlay, it would add a little bit of additional units to be built in there because there is no lot size limit on that. But we did address both options of the single family versus the cottage court. I will point out as well that the current N1B zoning does allow for duplexes and triplexes to be built in their by-right. So I think that the current zoning allows for some things that they're concerned about. So I would just point that out to the councilor. Yeah. Thank you. Questions? Yeah. Okay. We have Ms. Ashmer, Ms. Johnson, and then Ms. Mayfield. Thank you. So, a couple of questions. So, Mr. Mallory, I know this is a conditional, I'm sorry, conventional petition and not conditional. So, gentlemen, I don't know if you know the difference, but when it's conventional, they are not required to submit a site plan. And that's certainly something they have the discretion to submit. Did staff consult with them as they were submitting it this rezoning petition? Yes, we talked through conventional versus conditional at this site. And I think even as of last week we spoke with the petitioner team and let them know. And maybe add the emptyages for folks if it were to be conditional so they could see what is occurring on the site itself. But it was submitted as conventional. It is a small site within two acres. So for us given that it would still be neighbourhood one type development, that it was a smaller site. At that time we didn't see a distinct need to go conditional but I certainly understand the advantages especially when it comes to engaging with community members and you all to see what would actually occur on the ground? Yes. I think when neighbors like to see the side plan and I hear they're loud and clear, I know it's a small side but for neighbors it's a change that's coming in their neighborhood which is different than what they are used to. So I understand I would feel the same way. Ultimately it's your discretion, but certainly I think that is a factor in our decision making. Second, I know you said you could do some of this by right, then why did you file a rezoning petition? The site has some challenges with a stream being to the eastern side of it. So really the whole site is limited. So we were just trying to get a little bit more advantage for the land use of that. Okay, that's all I have. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. Thank you, Mayor Pro Tem. I think that we, is this the petition we talked about? Yes, it's the one that's just south of your district boundary line. Right. Because I meet with staff about upcoming petitions in district four and we discuss this. But it's just south of my district. And I also mentioned it being a conditional. Yes. He's only. So I think that that's something that being this close to an established neighborhood, I think that that's something that we would recommend from the petitioner as well. Certainly it is your right, but it does impact our decision making process. And also, sadly to the residents, if you have, I understand the privacy, I understand what you bought, but that's what the UDO does essentially. Those areas can change to duplexes and triplexes. So that's just kind of a lesson or a warning for any resident. If there's a privacy or woods in your backyard or a dead end or what you call it, it's subject to change. So, but we do want to develop responsibly and strategically. And so, thank you for coming out and thank you for that input. And hopefully we continue to work with the developer, but I think it's fair that the residents should be able to understand what's the change that's going to impact their neighborhood. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Mayfield. Thank you. Washington Staff. So, and this one probably I'll go back to Mr. Patty again, but you don't have to come to the podium. Why are we working through this living document? Some of these conversations which I'm going to steal from one of my colleagues that the the conventional zoning fields. More challenging. to steal from one of my colleagues that the conventional zoning feels more challenging and it should be. So when it almost creates a space of some of us having a tail community, well by right you could do, they could do all of this and all of this is horrible. So at least we're going to get this. That's not how this should be working. And our language got us here. And if we say this is a living document, we have a chance sooner rather than later to try to address some of this. So that is what I would share for consideration for counsel as well. Or Mr. Mallory, the question that I have is while we're at the hearing and you hear from residents, and you may not have the answer to this right now. Is there an opportunity to have a conversation for sale product versus for rent? because there is, as my colleague was just mentioned earlier, which was right on point, when we talk about diversity in community, where we're now fast forwarded, where we now have more rental than we have on our ownership in our community. She and I and Director Halfordern were able to attend the NACA event that was Friday, all day Saturday, all day Sunday. And the map shows the large percentage of the city of Charlotte that is now rental. And I'm not saying just a single family product because we have neighborhoods that have been concentrated where investors have purchased in 30% of a once stable on our occupied community is now rental and the impact of that. So that balance of what type of city we want to be. So for the Smith combination. I do want to make sure that we're careful with asking the petitioner whether or not he's going to provide he would have a conversation about it for sale. Part of owner versus rental is something that really should not be considered. It can be offered but we have to be careful with asking the petitioner about it. So for just for clarification, for me to ask the petitioner, if he would consider conversation with community, and whether or not there is an opportunity for a four-cell product versus rental, I am not able to ask. Whether he can have a conversation with the community. Which is what I ask. So sure, I thought you were asking for it with respect to council, my apologies. Mr. Mallor. So, fight lawyers clarify. The question is, is that should we submit a plan? No. The question was, is there opportunity for you to have continued conversations with the neighborhood as far as if there may be opportunity for a for sale product since what their neighbors are asking for based on the neighborhood. And what you might be proposing that would be connected. They mentioned single family. I'm asking if there's an opportunity for y'all to have continued conversation. I would say that there's always an opportunity and my client would welcome those conversations as well. He's not here tonight, but he was at the community meeting. They met him. So, yes, we would be open to conversations on that. Am I allowed to respond to something that you said a minute ago about? Well, the way that's actually the work, so we have to ask you a specific question for you to respond to the question. But to, since I was making a comment too staff, I will ask for you to clarify what you heard as you wanted to respond to. And I want to make sure I understood your statement that you, that staff reached out to us and encouraged a conditional. So we noted that it could be advantageous for you to consider a conditional based off community feedback and based off potential council member concern, not that you needed, not that we were telling you directly, but that there are advantages to considering going conditional when it comes to engaging with the community. And when you saying that communication was made to me? So I had a conversation with my staff members last week and I was told that there was conversation with you had with the planning staff. Okay. Right. And I'm just saying that I did not receive that message did not come from not confirm because- So, hang on one second. Sorry. Hang on, because now we're not necessarily debating the merits of this petition. Are now considering whether you want to switch the petition and that's perfectly fine. But this is not necessarily the venue for that to occur. Right? And if there was some opportunity for communication, that's perfectly fine. So as I still have my time on this council member Anderson, what I, since we do ask specific questions and have a response, what I want us to acknowledge and identify is for council as we are having this hearing staff is in information. We heard information from the petitioner. They are needed to be clarification between them. That is a challenge. So as we're having the hearings and we are getting information presented to us and we have members from the community that have questions. So thank you for signing up to ask your questions Because this is really the only time that we get to hear from you unless you email us or unless we happen to attend the meeting. But the fact that what was presented to us from staff and then even though the petitioner doesn't necessarily know all the background on how to do it, the fact that there was clarification that needed to be made between their communication? That is a challenge if the information is being presented to us. And I think I assist the city manager here's that. Thank you very much. Yes, and that's fine if there was a point of clarification. What I'm hearing is that we're going down this conversation of debate around whether it should be conditioned or otherwise. And there have been several comments to that point. This is not the place to do that as my point. You've had a community meeting, you're having conversations with community and you have your council member here that will continue to work with you. But I certainly don't want to. Also for you to feel like there's any undue pressure for you to pivot your petition based on comments made here. So I'm going to give it to Mr. Graham and then we're going to go ahead and close this out because a few council members have had the opportunity to speak. And I'll follow up with you as well as the residents who are here today to see if there's a median of mines. No pressure other than with the stature states that you have to do. I live in that area, I know it really well. And so this is the four of us get together and come to a gentleman's agreement. Okay. Appreciate it. Thank you. Is there an opportunity to move? I'll move. All right. opportunity to move? I was just talking to the attorney. Can you clarify what is within scope and what's not within scope? Is it related to discussing the type of petition? I think that Mayor Proton was concerned about the fact that there seemed to be a misunderstanding between the petitioner and the staff with respect to communication about the type of petition. Is that my understanding? Is that correct, Mayor Protin? That was my concern. Okay. And yes, but there was also a question from the representation of the petitioner because you're not the petitioner, I suppose. But there was a question of back and forth around whether you were asked to change your petition or not. So that's what I was raising up. More so than whether there's a debate about conditional versus conventional. Right? So I think that the council could probably ask the petitioner why or why not. They decided to do conventional versus conditional, but this seemed to be more of a missive. Well, a clarification with respect to communication, which I understand you wanted to cut that short. It would grant Yeah, so just so my interpretation that because I just want to make sure that it's clear, certainly can understand outside of the scope whether or not you all got a communication back and forth. But I didn't want to give the impression that this was not the venue to talk about whether a petition could be conventional or conditional. So I just wanted to clear that up. Okay. Do you have a comment? Because we have a motion and a second to close public hearing. Yes, I have a comment and my hand is up. Okay, if you can make it quick because you've spoken before. Yes, but go ahead. You can make it quickly. Yeah. So I think thank you Ms. Higgler-Grey for clarifying this. This is the opportunity we can ask whether why you decided to go with conventional versus conditional. I think this is only the opportunity we get to ask that. So it's okay. So to councilmember Mayfield's point, I think she was raising a good point. She could ask that question and so on, it's the discretion that the petitioner has. Ultimately, it's their decision whether they want to go with it or not. But I think that's the right question to ask to Council Member Mayfield's point. Thank you, Ms. Ashmeer. I believe you asked that question as well as well. Yes I did. As a beginning of the question. I sure did. Thank you. Absolutely. Any additional comment before we have emotion, Ms. Johnson has another comment. This is the last I just wanted to say that thank you for the clarification because it did sound like that we were being told this was not the appropriate time to discuss conventional versus conditional. Versus conditional. So thank you for that clarification. Thank you. Any other comments or points of clarification? All right. That's all unconditional move to close. So we had a motion in a second to close public here. I got the movers, Mr. Graham. Mr. Graham was the mover. Ms. Azmer is the second. All in favor to close public hearing, please raise hands. Any opposed? Okay. That is unanimous. Okay. We are at, well, we were at the 6 o'clock hour, we're now at 6.20. Is there a motion to open and continue the public hearings for the following rezoning petitions to the City Council business meeting on May 27th, 2025? Item number 14, 2025, 010, item number 15, 2025, 012, item number 16, 2025, 014, item number 17, 2025, 016, item number 18, 2025, 017, item number 19, 2025, 015, 015, 015, 015, 015, 015, 015, 015, 015, 015, 015, 015, 015, 015, 015, 015, 015, 015,? 2025 017. Item number 19. 205 018. Point of clarification. So we're closing. We know that. Is there a motion to open and continue the public hearings for the following rezoning petitions. I summon. I summon you. I'm sorry, not continue now versus what date you said. 27. Oh no. Councillor. Here. Public speak. Council maidies. Do I need to re-read this motion? The move you didn't hear properly? There's no clarity on it. There's no clarity on it. I think the first sound slide is that you're asking us to suspend the rest of the hearings for tonight to another date. And if that's the case, I do not think that there is support for us to not do our job tonight when we have a chance. All right, Ms. Mayfield to be clear, the motion was not to suspend. I can read the motion again. The motion was to open and continue the public hearing for the following rezoning petitions on the council business meeting May 27th 2025 items number 14 through 19 which I specifically read those petition numbers do I need to reread them clerk just to make sure that it's the right motion. Good you don't say that. Did you capture that? Let me understand what the motion then I do have a copy of the motion so. Okay Okay. So was there a motion to, is there a motion to do so? Okay. I'll make the motion. Is there a second to open and continue? I guess I got a plan for clarification. Yes, ma'am. So you're saying to open and move forward. Can you please clarify that for me? To open the public hearing for effectively items number 14 through 19 and continue them to the next business meeting, which is May 27th. You're asking, you're saying yes, you want to do that? I made the motion. Okay, no, that's important. You're a public. Mocha Denon. Is there a second to do what? To suspended to the not? No, to Denon, she said. The most innocent that I've not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. to move to the 27? No, there is a second. No, I'm not exactly right. We can't turn it to the other. There's no motion. Okay. All right, if there's no motion, then it doesn't pass. She made a second. No, I'm not exactly the right. We can't do that. So there's no motion. Okay. All right, if there's no motion, then it doesn't pass. She made a motion. You actually don't have to do that because it didn't pass, so we can just proceed in my correctness. You don't need to move. You don't have to do that, but if you would like to. I was so confused on what. We. I'll be your public senator. All right, so we will continue with agenda item number 14, 2025, 010 by David Phillips. The location is approximately 1.0. Or acres are located on the east side of Rockford Court north of East Woodlawn, road and south of Stacey Boulevard at and District 1, my district. The current zoning is in 1B proposed zoning is in 1C. Staff recommends approval of this petition and after staff's presentation. I don't believe we have anyone signed up to speak in the affirmative. So it's just your presentation. Thank you. Thank you. On the sheet that I gave you. Okay. Mr. David Phillips, you can come down to the podium after staff's presentation. We don't have anyone in opposition. So you will be, you will have three minutes. Thank you. This site is just over an acre looking on the east side of Rockford Court north of Eastwood Lawn Road. In an area where we have put out at least single family residential with some commercial uses as well as multi-family uses along Eastwood Lawn Road. It is currently so neighborhood 1B and they are proposing to go to neighborhood 1C. Is a conventional petition with no associated site plan. This request is consistent with the policy maps recommendation for the neighborhood one police site but this area. Staff does recommend approval of this petition. It would keep the site under the neighborhood one zoning districts and I'll also note and I'll pull it back actually to this site so you can see just how unusual it is compared to the other lots within the block. There's really no consistent development pattern within this direct vicinity of this block that it would be disrupting if it were to go to N1B to N1C. So for us, considering that there was no consistent lot development pattern already present and that it's generally much larger than that adjacent lots, staff recommends approval of this petition and I'll take questions following Mr. Phillips' comments. Good evening, Council. No comments just wanted to make myself available for any questions that you guys have on this petition for any conventional rezoning. I'll see you there. Move to close, senator. Second. Why easy? All in favour, any comments before we close the hearing? All in favor, raise hands to close public hearing, any opposed? Okay, that is unanimous. We will move on to agenda item number 15, petition number 2025-012 by North Point LLC. The location is approximately 6.11 acres located on the east side of Statesville Road and North and South side of Twin Lakes Parkway and North of Metromont Parkway in District 4, Miss Johnson's District. The current zoning is OFC. The post zoning is NL2 staff recommends approval of this petition and after staff's presentation, Ms. Brittney-Lines will have three minutes. Thank you. Thank you. This site is just over six acres along State's Bull Road as well as Twin Lakes Parkway. In an area where it's really directly surrounded by almost entirely industrial uses and maybe some office uses mixed in there Existing zoning is office flexed campus and they are proposing to go to manufacturing logistics to This would bring it into alignment with our policy map recommendation for manufacturing logistics at this site It is a conventional petition with no safety as site plan stopped as recommend approval again bringing that site into alignment will be a preferred outcome for us. It is compatible with the existing land uses which are perpetrontally industrial with some offices mixed in. So bringing the shifting the site from office flux campus to manufacturing logistics makes sense given the surrounding context as well as our policy on the ground. And I'll take questions following petitionitioner's presentation. All right, Michelin, you have three minutes. Thank you so much. Thank you, Mayor Prattin, members of Council, zone and committee, Brittany Lins with the law firm of Alexander Ricks. Simple petition in front of you. Essentially, this was part of an industrial business park, the Twin Lakes Parkway industrial business park, as part of the alignment rezoning for the UDO, what used to be the BP zoning district, some got translated into the OFC district rather than an industrial designation. So, the everything around it, as Holly said, you have manufacturing uses warehousing, you have a scrap metal automotive yard. It really is an industrial business park. Some of these sites just got zoned to OFC as part of that translation. So we see this as a corrective rezoning. We've brought a couple others in front of you. Luckily, the policy map agrees with me. And the 2040 policy map recommends the manufacturing logistics, which is what we're requesting. So we're consistent with the map, consisting with the surrounding sites. We're happy to have staff support on this petition. The last thing I'll mention is just that we proactively reached out to the District 4 Coalition. They, using their word, saw this as a corrective resounding and did not have any concerns. I'll take any questions. Okay, moving questions. Second. There's a motion to close and second. All in favor raise hands. Any opposed? That is unanimous. We will move on to agenda item number 16, petition number 2025, 145 by Pult Homes. The location is approximately 6.5 acres located on the west side of West Sugar Creek Road and north side of Glory Street and south of Honduras Drive and District 1, my district. The current zoning is in 1B, proposed zoning is into ACD. Staff recommends approval of this petition upon resolution of outstanding issues related to transportation and site and building design. after staff's presentation. We will have Mr. John Floyd. Hello, Mr. Floyd. Hello, Mayor Pro Tem. Nice to see you. Great to see you again as well, my friend, as well as Gaines Hunter and Matt Langston. They will have three minutes. Thank you. Thank you. The site is six and a half acres along West Sugar Creek Road just north of North Triumph Street in an area where we have single-family residential as well. Some multi-family residential in the vicinity and really a lot of commercial uses of course along North Triumph. It is currently so neighborhood one being they are proposing to go to neighborhood two a conditional. The policy map recommends the neighborhood two place types so this petition would bring it into consistency with our policy there. The proposal itself is for up to 110 multi-family attached dwelling units, how some transportation provisions noting the eight foot sidewalks, the foot planning strips along West Sugar Creek Road as well as internal streets, what construct a right turn lane with 100 feet of storage along West Sugar Creek Road, what installed 10 foot classy landscape yard and would create a minimum 40 foot wide open space area and it also Provides details as to just how that open space area will be enhanced beyond ordnance standards Direct pedestrian access from all units to public streets and there would be street trees provided at 40 foot intervals Along the Alies creating some additional canopy that we might not get just with Standard ordinance requirements also provide some preferred architectural standards Notable of which maximum of 16 it's per building with no more of those five 16 at buildings across the site Staff does recommend a provilist petition upon resolution of. I'm going to give you a quick look at the presentation. I'm going to give you a quick look at the presentation. I'm going to give you a quick look at the presentation. I'm going to give you a quick look at the presentation. I'm going to give you a quick look at the presentation. here on Thank you, Mr. Floyd. Thank you, Mayor Pro Tem, members of Council, members of zoning committee, John Floyd with more in Van Allen here on behalf of Pultie Homes. Real quick, the presentation here, I won't belabor it, but we are, as staff mentioned, located right along West Sugar Creek Road. You have the area around it, consistent zoning with other multi-family and single-family attached products right across the street. A bus line runs right down West Sugar Creek Road and Greenway access is to the west. You also have the neighborhood center down south of the site that is within one eighth of a mile. The comp plan calls for neighborhood 2 so we're consistent with that. There's the site map. A couple things I'll point out. There is that open green space right in the middle of the project to provide that community area that I've heard council member. May feel talk about being that necessary in town home style communities. Also we've got the tree save areas to the left of the schematic there kind of providing a little bit of buffer between the single family attached area and the single family detached homes that are already there. That's an elevation of the potential product that's going to go there. I am joined by a member of PULTY Homes and a design team if you have any questions that I can't answer. Okay, thank you. Are there any questions or points of clarification? Ms. Johnson. Is this in Hidden Valley? I'm sorry, I couldn't hear you. You said there are currently single family homes there now? No the land there is currently vacant. If you look to the left of the site plan there is some current single family residential neighborhood that this would connect into. And so we've got the tree save there providing buffer between that single family and the new development. This is right outside of Hidden Valley then. Is it? Okay, thank you. I just wanted to know the location. I was very happy. But not within the Hidden Valley neighborhood community, which is a neighborhood of single detached homes. Okay, thank you. Thank you. Any additional comments? There, the first. Second. There's a motion to close public hearing and second all in favor, raise hands. Any opposed? That is unanimous. Great to see you. Thank you. We'll move on to agenda item number 17. Petition item number 2025, 016 by Kingdom Development Partners LLC. The location is approximately 11.16 acres located south of Paul Creek Road, West of Toddville Road and East of Brisland Street in District 2, Mr. Grams District. The current zoning is in 1A, proposed zoning is into ACD. Staff does not recommend approval of this petition and after staff's presentation. Mr. Gross, as well as is Mr. Lukakis and Miss Dabneka. Are you present? Okay. So Mr. Gross, you will have 10 minutes. And Mr. Lukakis and Mrs. of. Gross you will have 10 minutes and Mr. Lucakis and Mrs. DeBnica will have 10 minutes as well and you will have a two minute rebuttal. Thank you. Thank you. This side is level 11 acres looking along Paukryg road in an area of really characterized by single family detached uses. The current zoning is Neighborhood 1A and they are proposing to go to Neighborhood 2A Conditional, which would be inconsistent with the policy-mounted recommendation for the neighborhood 1 police type at this site. It would allow for up to 88 multifamily attached units, as well as one single family detached log to the southern most, south-south-south-eastern most portion of the site. some transportation improvements so street access via an extension from Park Creek Road, it would have pedestrian connections from residential units to any public streets. Twenty foot minimums up back along all property boundaries, abutting the neighborhood one place type, along with a 10-foot-classy landscape yard. Open space would be measured at least 50 feet in all directions, exceeding ordnance standards, and they would also include some enhancements beyond those typical ordnance standards to be a miniatized open space. Street trees would be provided along the private alleys at a quantification so that it's new more than 40 feet from a tree, any given location. Greenway easement would be provided along the southern site boundary to Mecklenburg County Park and Rec. It also provides some preferred architectural standards in terms of primary building materials, excluding vinyl, and also noting porches and steeps would have been a month dimensions. Staff does not recommend approval of this petition in its current form. The 2040 policy map desk call for a neighbourhood one at this site. When we looked at this site, we are considering generally it's, you know, access to activity centers, transit, it's the location among other single family. Does it about any other existing multi-family uses? So there are some outstanding issues we'd like to work through with the petitioner to see if we can get a little bit closer to something that we might be comfortable with. But at this time we don't recommend it in its current form. And I'll take questions following the petitioner comments. Okay, thank you, Mr. Gross. You have two minutes. Thank you. Good evening, Mayor Pratton. Members of City Council and the Senate Committee. No engrossed with Urban Design Partners representing Kingdom Development Partners LLC. Competition 2025-016. Join this evening by James Grog's with Kingdom Development Partners, and Tory Feemster with the Sention Communities. Contacts to the site located about half mile south west of Freedom Drive to the east of Robert L. Smith Park. The side is the 11.4 acre side is located south of Pau Creek Road to the west of Urbana Drive and Topville Road. As staff mentioned, the site is zoned in 1A as is the majority of the area. However, there is into president about a half a mile west of the site, which was rezoned in 2023. There's also MX2 innovative, as well as IC1 to the north towards Freedom Drive. The 2040 policy map does recommend the neighborhood one place type at staff mentioned this is inconsistent. Jumping ahead to our rendered resigning site plan, proposing up to 88 multi-family attached dwelling units as well as one single-family detached lot that is at the southeastern corner of the site plan at our Urbana Drive extension. There will be a mixture of front and rear loaded units all being four sale product with a minimum of a 20 foot driveway. The staff mentioned we do have numerous outstanding issues to work through one being the Paukreek Road connection which in this rendering we have already revised to be a modified U03 public street to address C.Dot and subdivision staff's comments. As part of this development, all units are proposed as for sale and 30% will be designated as affordable at 80% area median income. James. All right,, very excited to be here, excited to be here to talk to you guys about this project. And this project is near and dear to me and the sentient because it's located on the west side of Charlotte. There is a huge demand right now, currently, for attainable housing. We are so excited about this project, because this project will have 30% of these units that will be attainable. We have formulated and cultivated a partnership with Kit Foundation. So one of the things that's big and near to us at Ascension is to make sure that we create attainable for sale sale housing for our school teachers, right? Because part of this project, what we're looking to do with this project is to create economic mobility. So ten of these homes will be allocated for those 10 teachers. The other 20 to 20, the other 20 to 19 units are going to go to a portion and we'll go to our police officers, our firefighters, and anyone else in that 80% AMI. But I just wanted to take time to educate the council about what we're doing and the work that we're doing with this engine. It's bigger than just creating these mixed income developments, right? So we, Tori, he's our CEO of Ascension, and we are big about educating our Ascension attainable homeowners. So we do more than just providing keys and giving someone a discount at home that quite frankly, you would not be able to differentiate between the attainable homes and the market rate homes. But we have four pillars of what we do in Ascient that we super proud about. We have a home buying program, which is to get our attainable homeowners ready for home ownership in the first place. But the biggest and nearest to me is the financial literacy. Because for us, we don't teach these school teachers and these police officers in fight-or-fires to what to do with that equity once they get access to it and what's the point in giving them to them. So we are big on financial literacy. We also have home maintenance, right? Because it's also important to make sure that you preserve this beautiful asset that they're going to get blessed with. And then the other piece that we do with this engine that I just want to educate council on is that we have a tax, a gift tax option, grant program where we would come and meet the attainable home owners where they are. Because the biggest thing that you hear when you're right now in any place and not just Charlotte, but across the country, when you hear the negative connotation about gentrification is just a displacement, right? So for us, what's important for us is we truly want the values of this community to go up and value, but we don't want our attainable homeowners to get this place because they can't afford to taxes. So we would meet them where they are and we would come alongside them and subsidize their taxes so they'll never get this place out of our community. So, you know, we are truly proud about this project that's coming. This is one of three essential products that's coming to Charlotte and the community that we're super proud about. And again, we also are proud about this partnership that we're setting with KIPP for our school teachers, our police officers, and our firefighters. And I think this is going to be in a great asset to the West Side community. Fantastic. You have about five minutes left. We're happy to answer any questions following opposition. Okay. So if I can have Mr. Lucas and Miss DeVnika come down and when you're at the podium you all will have ten minutes an aggregate to state your claim. Hello, my name is Linda Bnekka. I have been a resident of the Paul Creek Road area for over 30 years. I am here today to give my reasons on why I oppose the rezoning of 5701 Paul Creek to allow over 80 multifamily homes to be built. On these two parcels, there are many hundred foot old growth tulip poplar's oaks and other species of trees that have been tagged during a previous survey of the property. All these trees are supposed to be depicted on any land development plans with trunk diameter, species, and center point location. of this size on this property will greatly impact the habitat of the wildlife population, which has already been displaced by construction of homes on Paul Creek Road, Toddville Road, Tucka CG Road, Little Rock Road, and Old Little Rock Road, which all surround the creek. This will cause a decline in population of the deer, coyote, possum hawks, owls, and all other creatures who call it home way before we were here. Also the woods there create a noise buffer since we are directly in line and under one of the airport's flight path, which we can have every 30 seconds a jet going over for around 14 hours a day. Charlet should begin to treasure the natural resource of our wooded areas instead of destroying what makes Charlotte beautiful and what helps clean. Charlotte should begin to treasure the natural resource of our wooded areas instead of destroying what makes Charlotte beautiful and what helps clean the air. Paul Creek is a cut-through road with many speeding issues, blind curves and hills, which makes it already dangerous to walk, since the road has a ditch type runoff for stormwater and no sidewalks. With the current construction of homes on Paul Creek and another development being considered to be built near Little Rock and Paul Creek, those loans will add over a thousand daily trips on this road. We don't need hundreds of more cars on this already busy street that many, many drivers consider it their own drag strip that we have had the police put out the traffic radar to catch the speed. It's just a never ending thing and that's the big thing is the density of this proposed project is how many homes compared to it's all single family in the area and in the last two years there has been so much construction on the roads I've mentioned that I just worry about the stormwater runoff from these developments going into Paul Creek, which feeds into the Kataba River. And that's all I have to comment on. Thank you. Okay. You have a little over six minutes, sir, if you would like to state any words? Yeah, let's see if I can get all six. Council, as was brought to our attention by Council Mayfield, that our current growth rate is about 117 people per day here. about 117 people per day here. And that's going to be greater than 42,000 per year at that rate, currently, according to Google. You add two or three cars to a multifamily house and you put it on a road like Lynn has explained here. Excuse me. What we're going to have is not only the problems of more traffic which we really have some serious problems. We've had radar out there. We've called many times to police department. We've got several reports in on speeders. They think it's a drag strip. You throw all that in there combination. At the end of this road, at the end of Paul Creek where it hits Little Rock Road, there is a fire department, station 21. And they got to run up and down that road to get the freedom. You throw in a new development that has all these new homes in there along with, as Lynn said here, before there's 36 in progress now being built on Paul Creek, not even a quarter of a mile from this location that we're talking about here. At the end of it, up for also rezoning, there's going to be 200 more units behind the fire department. You threw all that together. All those units you're going to have about, just as he said, between 900 and 1,000 more vehicles on and already congested road with school buses and fire departments going back and forth consistently. It's going to cause quite a bit of problem. So that's our main concern, along with the sewer water. To run off on my side of the road, I live on the opposite side of the road, is being blocked up, it is still blocked up, it has been blocked up, it has been serviced. I can't imagine what's going to happen to the runoff when we put a bunch more homes in there. So, you know, I've got three minutes, 41 seconds less, and I don't have anything else for you all. You could feel free to use all three minutes. There's no rush. Well, what are you guys eating back here? Because I'm getting caught. I didn't get anything eating theater. He like always about. I got some gyps. No real food. Women talk more than men. One thing that when I looked up the USGS topographical map of this property, at the road, the elevation is 700 feet. When you get down to where they want to put the town homes, not in the setback area because of the creek. It drops by 50 feet. So they're going to have to push the sewage up 50 feet to reach the road. And what I worry about is during these flooding times we have, what's going to prevent all that sewage not running over and going into Paul Creek? And that's another big issue I have. Is the elevation difference on that property drops by so much, which I don't know if the designer has even come out to take a look at the property and the frontage. I don't believe you have enough frontage on Paul Creek to put a sidewalk, a planning strip, two lanes. I don't know if you're planning on curbing gutter and I don't feel comfortable having a Sidewalk within 10 feet of my garage which has windows which is gonna cause a security concern Which will cause me to spend a have to spend another $1,500 on another Security system just for the garage since it is detached. And I guess I could keep going for hours. I can keep going for hours but I'll stop. And thank you. You're okay? Thank you. Okay. Mr. Groce, you have two minutes for your rebuttal. Thank you, Mayor Proton, and thank you for being here this evening. I spoke with both of these individuals this afternoon, and I think we had a fairly pleasant conversation. Yeah, it was really coffee. Now it's on the record. Regarding trees, we have provided a tree survey to staff in order to be here this evening for public hearing. The full survey would be overlaid during the land development process where we would be looking at critical root zones, strip zones and so forth. If it is something that we need to do now, we can overlay that on our resounding plan. And of course, we would like to keep as much of the exact existing foliage as possible. We're keeping trees at the southern end of the site, which is our proposed green area, which land will be dedicated to Mecklenburg County Parks and Recreation for a future greenway. But looking at open spaces and buffers where we can retain the existing heritage trees, we're at all possible? There is a creek at the southern end of the site and there is significant topography. We would have to review this during land development, making sure grading is appropriate that we're not disturbing floodplain that our sewer is at the proper percentages to gravity feed, of course. Stormwater is very similar. We must meet all PCO requirements at land development. There are very stringent standards for stormwater. We cannot exacerbate any problems. Beyond what they are today, realistically, we should be able to improve the stormwater runoff with curb and gutter and storm drainage systems that them with channel water to our proposed storm water control measure. Regarding the frontage, we are providing a modified U03 typical section because we do not have enough physical land to provide a full public street to Pockery Road. We have about a 53 or 54 foot pitch point on that northern strip. So we are proposing a UO3 road network but not the full section. Originally we did have a private street with landscape buffers which was modified. No problem. Okay. Any questions? Miss Ashmira and then we have Ms. Johnson. Thank you. So petitioner address some of the concerns that this both speakers had raised and you were talking about buffer and I was paying close attention to that. So if you can just finish that sentence. Correct. So we are providing a 10 foot landscape yard where required which has a fence included as part of it originally our north south Connector to park reacroad was a proposed private street which had a 10 foot landscape yard on either side of the proposed private street However after review and in coordination with subdivision staff and C dot staff they requested a public road be installed So in working with them we came up with a modified local residential wide typical section. So we would be meeting the asphalt with the curb and gutter requirements, but only providing sidewalk on one side of the proposed street. So that was my second question about sidewalk. And I believe Lane had brought that up. So can you show me on here what sidewalk speaker if you could come to the podium? Ma'am, could you please come to the podium if you're going to respond? If you could use that light that we have the laser you click on. Oh I'm trying to figure out the map where I am. Maybe the other side the where we have have that a not this one the other one.. No, that's, yeah, I think, go back. All right. I live, which one do I press? The green. I live right here. So I am right next to their proposed entrance way. And my backyard is literally right there. And I will say the property right here, their property is lined with 100-year-old oaks, which I do worry about grading and the drip line of their oaks being disturbed, which they can't be. So, a petitioner, if you could tell us about sidewalk, you said only on one side of the street. Yes, let me jump to our book. Can we pull it in my presentation? Is that possible? Thank you. Thank you. Correct. So Councilwoman, it's this area here at the Northern end. We're proposing sidewalk along the eastern corridor of that North South Pockery Road connection. Okay, so that will adjust the concerns that the speaker had. I believe her concerns were generally about sidewalk being here as well as the proposed tapers along the frontage because we don't have a very wide road section so it is difficult to taper in the roadway connection and then provide any potential sidewalk connectivity from east to west. Got it. I guess in terms of our ordinance, what they're doing, maybe this is the question for staff, for our ordinance, the sidewalk improvements that they're providing. So would our ordinance apply to, well, without our ordinance ask for more in terms of what lean heads ask for? So the ordinance, what this development triggers are general sidewalk improvements and the sidewalks required along Well, what will then be a public street? So what specific extras are you asking for? So it was at the top where you see Paul Creek rolls Is that am I correct am I following you? Yes, it was to become a public sidewalk then I will have a public sidewalk 10 feet from my garage 10 feet from my driveway and yeah, and the sidewalk is required as stipulates when this development builds out the sidewalk would be triggered as a requirement I I mean it's possible to move the sidewalk to the other side and the planting strip because the other neighbors home is way further back than mine on the other side. So having a public road wouldn't affect them like it would me having people. You don't want sidewalk? I don't want anyone to come this far away when I'm working in the yard. Isn't it right away 1010? Okay, I think. Okay. Okay. Let me here to follow the rules here. My question is answered and that's all I have. Thank you. Ms. Johnson. Thank you Mayor Pro Tem. And thank you to the speakers who came out. I do want to ask some specific questions to the developers petitioner. Thank you to James Gras. Thank you for coming out and thank you for the petition to build attainable homes. That's for self product. That's important. That's one of the things we're asking for. And we can talk offline because we did hear about some great programs through NACA and home down payment. So let's find out what opportunities we have for those potential buyers. The Ms. Lynn, she brought up a very specific example about the level and the sewage. Can you speak to that? At a very high level, thank you for your question, Councilmember. Yes, there is significant grade change from parkery, road to the southern end of this site. Of course, as this project transitions to land development, should it be approved, we will further refine grading plans, erosion control, storm water, and utilities. Gravity feeding this site, you know, if we can are unable to gravity feed to the south, we could potentially be looking at putting in a lift station. But there are specific guidelines for gravity flow, certain percentages that are allowed, and our plans would have to reflect what Charlotte Water modern would approve. I'd also like to ask about the trees. The trees say, is there any, we need to have an arborist go out or is there any guarantee those, what type of commitment would we have to those trees? So we have had a tree survey. The requirements are slightly different from rezoning to land development. We have provided that to staff as well. Denoting all city trees, all heritage trees and trees that were previously approved for green area credit. Keeping those on side, of course, we would keep all within our proposed green area, within any proposed buffer areas, and as we could within open space. But should any need to be removed, there are mitigation practices, part of the UDO, and fees that would have to be paid for that. Okay. So, Ms. Craig, I know you're the assistant city manager, but you're the planning director. If we could take a look at this petition and be very intentional about these trees. We don't want any unintended consequences. You know, that term, I think we should ban on county. I would say this to the neighbors. This is what someone said to me and it really brought things home. There's an intent to sell that property. So it's probably going to change. This is your opportunity to get involved with the and work with the developers. You've got a good developer who's fair. He builds a quality product. So I think this is an opportunity. Thank you for these concerns. We're going to address some specific concerns and there are more you know council members had questions. We'll work with the district representative but that's something to think about as a resident, the city's changing. So these are for sale units and again there's quality quality development in front of you., thank you for coming out. Thank you for your voice. Thanks. Thank you. Any additional comments? No more to cause. Second. I would like to just make a couple of comments. First, thank you for your approach to this development opportunity. It is really and truly leaning into civil servants that do great work in our community and need this type of help, both from a financial guidance perspective and the opportunity to have safe, secure housing within their AMI price range. So thank you so much for leaning into that community. Big, big, big win. For the residents that came out, thank you for coming out. And also thank you for sharing your perspective about the trees and the tree save. Especially those popular tulips, they're very, very tall trees and they're around for decades and decades. And so I'm sure with the beautification process, Mr. Gross, as you've recently stated that there will be an overlay that I'm sure that this particular project, the beautification of that area, especially given the civil servants in the intentionality behind it. I'm sure you will lean in with the same intentionality around the beautification and the protective of green spaces while bringing on additional housing stock. So I want to thank you, residents, for coming out and thank the developer for proposing this effort. Madam Mayor. Ms. Brown? Yes. You didn't see my hand, but it's okay. You didn't see my hand before you? Oh, I did not. No, it was just barely raised. But to the developer, thank you so much. I think this is the type of, the decisions that we like to see more of. And also for the residents being brave and coming out and protecting your community and working together and trying to find common ground, but the proposed development is not bad at all. It is something that I would like to see more of, especially affordable and for people that serve this community. So I look forward to supporting it with you communicating with the community and the residents and satisfying their needs because their needs do not follow on their ears either so it has to be a balance there but I do want to go and recognize that I do think it's a great approach so what we need so thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you Miss Brown Were there any additional comments or have you didn't see? Motion to close in a second. Madam clerk. Okay. All in favor to close public hearing raise hands and the opposed Okay, that's unanimous. Thank you so much for coming out. Thank you. Thank you. We will move on to agenda item number 18, petition number 2025, 017 by the DROC's group LLC. The location is approximately three acres located along the west side of nation's fort road north of Wanda Lane and south of Eccle del Drive and district three Miss Brown's district. Current zoning is OFC. Proposed zoning is into one CD. Staff recommends approval of this petition upon resolution of outstanding issues related to transportation and site as well as building design. After staff's presentation, Mr. Gross, you're with us again. You will have three minutes. Thank you. Thank you. This site is three acres located along the Westside Nations Ford Road, West of I-77. In an area where it's adjacent to school, as well as some office uses just across the way. some other residential uses located generally in an area where it's adjacent to school as well as some office uses just across the way There's some other residential uses located generally in the area the current zoning is office flex campus And they are proposing to go to neighborhood to a conditional The 2040 policy map does recommend the neighborhood one place type on this site So it would be inconsistent with that recommendation The proposal itself is for up to 37 attached units including one quadriplex and 11 triplex buildings so it would not exceed the intensity of a quadriplex which is located at the rear of the site. There would be a private alley network to access units, eight foot sidewalk and planting strips along nation's Road, as well as internal pedestrian connections. Commits to your open space with a minimum dimension of 50 feet in radius exceeding ordinance standard. They would provide seven guest parking spaces, prohibits building some not preferred building materials and limits the tax sliding to 21 feet and would be towerally directed. Staff does recommend approval of this petition upon resolution about seeing issues related to transportation and site and building design. This site is located adjacent to a school. It's also located importantly within a half mile of an employment campus, commercial area, and proposed Mecklenburg County Community Resource Center, providing some goods and services potential future residents at this site. It is also located directly along a bus route and it is a consider remnant parcel. It is owned by Shariot Mecklenburg schools. We do have some out-signing issues, this particularly related to site and building design that we think we could work through with the petitioner and I will take questions following the commissioner comments. Thank you, Mr. Gross. Good evening again, Mayor Pratton, members of City Council and the zoning committee. Nolan Gross with Urban Design Partners representing the Drx Group LLC, on petition 2025-017. Holly, thank you for the thorough staff report. You have covered most of my presentation, so I'll try to be fairly brief. This 2.44 acre site is located to the west of nation's Ford Road north of Wanda Lane and south of E.E. Wadell Drive. Site is currently zoneed OFC, proposed to be resumed to neighborhood 2A conditional, for up to 37 multi-family attached dwelling units. The site is currently identified on the policy map as neighborhood one. The revised policy map, which has not been adopted yet, identifies it as the campus place time. And here is our rendered rezoning site plan proposing those 37 multi-family attached units. Each unit will be re-irroaded with a two-quarter roged, accessed via five-foot driveway pad. Guest parking is located east on the side, seven spaces, as Holly mentioned. And to the west, we have our proposed green area and proposed SCM at the northern end of the site, which is the natural low point. We do have a few outstanding issues that we look forward to working with staff and believe we will do in the next few days prior to our submittal. Those items specifically are calling out trees along the proposed private alleys, proposed subway connections at the Northern and Southern ends of the site. Additional on-site sidewalk, allowing walkability to the proposed green area, as well as revising our solid waste location. But we look forward to working through those issues. Happy to answer any questions you might have. Thank you. Miss Brown. I know. Hi. If I was a pleasure to work with you. In nation for road, there is a strong community president in this area that you're speaking of. So when I see that the meeting has been held, the report available in attendance. It don't I mean that just is alarming to me because the nation for road corridor and The community leaders out there very active and engaged so we definitely would have to talk about that and What other outstanding issues are you working on? Currently committing to a certain number of trees along the alley. Proposed subroad connections to budding properties. Additional internal sidewalk, as well as confirming our solid waste location. My biggest concern at this moment, just with this petition is making sure that I take it upon myself to reach out to the community leaders and see if they were notified. I've worked with you before. How did, were you in charge of doing that or does somebody else do it? Our office does. Yes, I've been doing this. Okay. I've been mailers to all budding property owners in the community. We can talk offline, but I know that Nation Fort Road, especially in this particular area, we're doing some work now and now with the communities, engagement team, redevelopment of the neighborhood and making it look better. So I know that very, very active and engaged, so I just want to make sure that they are aware of this. And so we can talk and we will talk. Of course. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman. Anybody else? Thank you. Any additional comments? I would like to make one. I do completely agree with Ms. Brown. They have not only strong neighborhood president, but the whole coalition on that corridor is really leaning into it. We would love to hear their perspective on this as well as the implementation of the of the sidewalks and the planting strips, any other community beautification aspects that they would want in this particular project. So I look forward to hearing what their engagement is. Thank you. Any additional comments or questions? No. A little close in here. Second. Okay. There's a motion of close public caring and second all in favor raise hands. Any opposed? Just one. Ms. Walton, are you opposed? Okay. That's unanimous clerk. We will move on to agenda item number 19. Pet number 2025, 018 by Oyster Development Inc. The location is approximately 2.89 acres located on the north eastern quadrant of the intersection of Sam Wilson Road and West Point Drive and District 3, Miss Brown's District. The current zoning is N2B. Proposed zoning is ML1. Staff recommends a proof of this petition. And after staff's presentation, Mr. Jeff Watson. Hello, sir, you can come up to the podium. You will have three minutes. Thank you. Thank you. The site is just under three acres. acres located at the intersection of Sam Wilson Road and West Point Drive. In an area where we have quite a bit of industrial uses, well some office uses and residential uses located further away from the site. The current zoning is neighborhood 2B and they are proposing to go to manufacturing logistics 1. This is a conventional petition with no associated site plan. This proposal would be consistent with the policy maps recommendation for the manufacturing logistics place type at this area, as well as for the entirety of this eastern section of Sam Wilson Road, up until you hit some vacant and large, lot residential to the north. Staff does recommend approval of this petition. The proposal would bring the sites zoning into alignment with our adopted policy. It is surrounded by other industrial uses, including some heavy commercial uses as well to the south, making it suitable for some more industrial uses compatible with what is already on the ground and what is foreseen in our policy. And I will take any questions following petition or comments. Okay, thank you, Mr. Watson, you have three minutes. Thank you for your sound tonight. As staff recommended, we are just more or less aligning the zoning with what's already in the policy. I'm not sure how we got overlooked with the rezoning at the time that it was kind of matched a plan in the policy. So we're more or less just aligning with the current pose zoning for the land use plan. We don't have any intentions at this time, but just wanted to go ahead and align ourselves with the zoning in the area area which is heavily industrial around the soil. Okay, any questions? I did just have one question for you. You did mention that of this very small area. It was an industrial area so I know this pretty wide parcel is out there in that part of town, but I was also just surprised that you didn't get any reaction or any bites for the community meeting or anything. Well, I had one email from the gentleman across the street and I answered his question which was he disaster if we had any proposed development plans and at the time we did not and another gentleman called and said do I want to buy his property across the street was another gentleman but other than that no we didn't have any outreach. The majority of the would say the property owners right around us are national like big institutional owners and so we're adjacent like prologics, which is a huge real estate trust investment trust. So that's our joining neighbor. You got you. Yeah, I thought so. Okay, great. Thank you for that, Ms. Brown. Yeah, so Madam, Madam President, thank you so much. I really appreciate that, Mayor Pro Tem. I just want to make sure that, you know we don't want to, the community engagement piece, when we see zero, it's alarming. And we may not say nothing every time, but it's our duty to say something every time. We don't want to sound like a broken record. But the meetings, people watching the meetings, they want to know that we are actually representing our constituents in the best way possible. So when we see zero, it's like, what is the communication? And should put out there. And this is not for you. This is for staff and don't staff put the communication out? So the noticing that we do, there's noticing that the petitioner does and then there's noticing that we do for the community meeting that is upon the petitioner to notice that but we provide the full mailing list including property owners within 300 feet as well as the neighborhood organization leaders and they're required to send their notification to every single individual or entity on that mailing list. Right. So thank you so much for just explaining that information on racket at you know when we see zero It just really is it's It's troubling to see with so many community explaining that information on racket, you know, when we see zero, it's really, it's troubling to see with so many community members asking about the FAS pace development, how it's grown, how the city is growing, the traffic, the congestion and all of the things that they have to say to us, but then we see zero on community involvement, community engagement. So I wanted to definitely be on record with us. It asks in the question of what are we doing to make sure that our community members are involved and that they're engaged with the communication as we put out. But if it's zero and we've done our due diligence, then that's not a whole lot more that we can do. But we definitely want to make sure that we are doing our due diligence. If I may add, I did send out certified letters and then we didn't have anybody show up. And so this is all via O-LON. And so we set out another and had another evening available for community comments and nobody else showed up against it. We'll try to watch. Thank you so much. I definitely believe you not saying that you did not, but then we do still have a duty to reach out to the community leaders that are engaged in that area as we go to the community meetings and just wanna make sure to dance. I just wrote it down to just to follow back up with them and say, hey, this meeting was held. Were you aware of it? Were the constituents aware of it and how we move forward with making sure that we can get them involved? I believe that you did what you were supposed to do. But then I have a job to do my part. I understand. Yeah, thank you so much. I really appreciate it. Thank you, Ms. Brown. I have Ms. Johnson. Just one question. You said the requirement is neighbors within 300 feet. Is that what you said? So that's our city policy, which goes beyond what the statutes require, which is just abutting property owners. Our policy is to notify any property owners within 300 feet, well as the entirety of the neighborhood organization list of neighborhood organizations within a mile of the site. And that list is curated by housing and neighborhood services. Thank you. So we've expressed concerns about the outreach for a long time. I thought we were looking at expanding that notification. I know at one time we talked about it being on next door. So we do next door notices, I'm sorry to interrupt, but we do next door notices twice for every single petition when it first becomes an active petition at the beginning of the process, and then right before public hearing. So it did have a next door notice that was sent out for any community that has a boundary within a mile of the site, and that notice for the public hearing sent out last week for this petition. So perhaps when we've talked about this we should look at expanding the mailing, the radius for the mailing. I know we've talked about a long time so it's just a matter of council just changing it. I mean, if that's what we wanted to do, I mean, the ladies night on the day guess we can get some things that. But I would like to take a look at that I don't know if that's a committee referral or but we need to stop talking about it because we've all expressed concerns about it. So that's not understable. Yeah, I understand. It's a council issue at this point. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. Any additional questions or comments? We'll close here. Second. OK. There's a motion of close public hearing and second all in favor raise hands. Any opposed? OK. That concludes. Second. The agenda. There's a motion to adjourn and second all in favor. Raise hands. Are there any opposed? All right. Have a wonderful evening. Dr. Wiley. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.