Good evening, Marjorie Molina District 5. Good evening, I'm Renee Johnson and I'm honored to represent District 4. Alison Craig, Assistant City Manager. Good evening, Don Tanderson, Mayor Pro Tem District 1. Now from Grim District 2. Good evening, Luana Mayfield, Council Member Betlow. That drink, you set the weight set. That drink's District 7, good evening. Luana Mayfield, Council Member Ratlard. Good evening I'm Victoria Watlington and I have a pleasure of serving you at large. Here we hate the grace in your assistance to the attorney. Excellent. Thank you. So we begin our meetings with an invocation that is an expression and inspiration followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. The invocation by a council member is intended to underscore our proceedings and we celebrate the religious diversity of our community, including those without a religious faith. And this evening council member, Agamira, will provide the invocation. Thank you. Please join. Following our heads. Good evening. I'm honored to offer this evening's invocation as we gather after the Easter holiday. As many are, as many in our communities have celebrated renewal and hope this past weekend. Let us carry that spirit into our work tonight. Tonight we also stand on the eve of Earth Day. So let us be reminded of our profound connection to the environment and our duty as stewards of the city's national resources. Tomorrow communities around the world will recommed to protecting our planet. Maybe on that spirit tonight by celebrating how our decisions impact not just our present needs, but the sustainable future we wish to create for generations to come. Amen. Amen. Thank you. If you're able to stand, please stand and join in the pledge of allegiance. A pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, to the Republic for which stands one nation under God in indivisible with liberty and justice for all. So we begin our zoning meetings with an explanation of our zoning process. And the process begins with applications submitted to the planning staff for review. Cases of two types are on the agenda, the decisions and hearings. Decisions on cases for which public hearing was previously held, and there is no further public comment on decisions this evening. And then for the hearings, anyone wishing to speak on a particular hearing is asked to see the city clerk before the start of that particular hearing. The staff will provide their presentations and there's no time limit for the staff presentation. And then the petitioner, those that are in favor of the petition will receive six, I'm sorry, three minutes combined to present their case unless one of two things occur. If there are opponents to speak against that particular petition, or if staff is in opposition, the petition will receive 10 minutes, the opponent will receive 10 minutes and the petitioner will receive a two minute rebuttal. If no one is opposed or sign up to speak, staff provides a short presentation. The public hearing is closed and the next public hearing will occur. The petition goes to the zoning committee of planning commission for review and recommendation. And at this time, I'm going to hand it over to Chair Blumenthal to go ahead and introduce his committee. Thank you very much, Mayor Perotes. and thank you My name is Andrew Blumenthal and I'm serving as a chairman of the zoning committee of the Planning Commission. Please allow me to introduce my fellow committee members here this evening. We have Theresa McDonald, Aaron Shaw, and Sean O'Nealy. We have three other members as well that are following online this evening as well. The zoning committee will next meet on Tuesday, May 6th at 5.30pm. At that meeting, we will discuss and make recommendations on the petitions that have public hearings this evening. The public is welcome to attend that meeting. However, please note that it is not a continuation of any of the public hearings that are being held here tonight. Prior to that meeting, you are welcome to contact us to provide input. You can find all of our contact information as well as the information on each petition on the city's website at charlotteplanning.org. Thank you, Mayor Perten. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So we will begin with the deferrals and withdrawals and we will do that all in one motion. At this time, I will handed it over to Mr. Pett. Thank you very much, we just have two items to defer to decisions. The first one is item number three, which is 2024-064 by J.F. Lawrence Properties LLC. And then the other item is item number 17 by Wilkes Asset Management. That's petitioned 2024-137. Both items requesting a deferral to our May 19th, 2025 meeting. Thank you, Mr. Patton. Is there a motion to defer to items second? Okay. I have a motion and a second. All in favor, raise hands. Any opposed? That is unanimous. Thank you. So we will now proceed with our consent agenda items. Resoning petition items 3 through 14, with the exception of 3, which has been deferred may be considered in one motion, except for those pulled by a council member. Please note that these petitions meet the following criteria. They have had no public opposition to the petition at the hearing. Staff recommends approval and the zoning committee recommends the approval and there are no changes after the zoning committee's recommendation. Are there any consent items council would like to pull for question, comment or a separate vote? I'll turn it on moana. Thank you mayor pro tem. I would like to pull item number eight and item number nine for comment. Okay, thank you. Miss may failed. Thank you. I would like to pull item number 12 Okay All right any oh, hey man Yes, Brown. Thank you, Mayor Pro Tem. I would like to pull item number three four and see him for comment Okay, three has been deferred. Oh, three has been deferred. Okay, okay, so you would like four And four and ten for, man, please Any additional ones Okay, I I need to go ahead and read All of these in one motion. I need to state the numbers as well. So is there a motion to approve? The petitions and adopt the zoning committee's statement of consistency as it appears in our agenda? Petition item number five, petition Number 2024106, petition item number 6. Number 20241110. Number 7, 2024131. Number 11, 2024139. Number 13, 2024146. Number 14, 2024147. So, second. Thank you. Any comment? All right, let's raise hands. All in favor, raise hands. Anyone opposed? That is unanimous. So we will now go for the ones that have been pulled. Is there a motion to approve petition number 2024, 07 3 and adopt the zoning committee statement of consistency as it appears in our agenda? This is the this is yours Miss Brown petition number 2024 0. Yeah, give me a day. Okay, let's see petition number number 4. Oh, yes, so move. Okay. There's a motion. Is there a second? Second. Okay. Any comment? Miss Brown. Thank you so much for that. Is this the one? Thank you, girl. I'm trying to get myself. Yeah, bear with me, please. Thank you. Absolutely. Okay. Thank you so much. So this position 2024, that 073 CLT operations holding LLC is Mr. Murray. Is that the one, Mr. Murray? Okay. Thank you so much. I greatly appreciate that. Been speaking with Mr. Murray in the community extensively about this. And so we were able to work that out. We got a last minute email at the 11th hour and I always like to recognize when the constituent sends something in at the last minute and let them know their voice do matter, even if it's at the very last moment. So we did address that and it was about the parking for the Zachary D Dresher Runt which is going to go inside of the food line parking lot With zoning approving and staff approving our support It as is not Without any opposition from the community except for the last minute email that we got in the 11 hour we do recognize your concerns We will be more than happy to speak with you and address those accordingly and appropriately But I just want to acknowledge that they work hard with the community trying to engage and development make sure that we push and move forward with this So thank you so much for reaching out to me and I'm excited and happy to support it It's gonna bring jobs in the area where the students walk to school where they can get lunch. Also, it's gonna be a community. I think community will benefit from this because the jobs will probably be in the community. Most restaurant jobs, max honoris, Vaxby's, Chick-fil-A, a lot of those students walk to work. A lot of those employees are employed early at the age like 16, 17, 18 trying to work their way to school and get extra money so I'm excited to support this. Thank you, Ms. Brown. Any additional comments? Excuse me. Hearing none, all in favor, please raise hands. Any opposed? That is unanimous. Do we have a motion? Is there a motion to approve a petition number? 2024-134 in Adopted Zoning Committee Statement of Consistency, as it appears in our agenda? So moved. Second. Okay. Any comment, Ms. Malino? Thank you Mayor Pro Tem. And so there was a reason that I pulled this and I sent an email to you all today to discuss what my concerns were and I want to make sure that I explain this for those that are interested because there are more than one petition on the agenda tonight for this type of zoning change. This is a neighborhood 1a, which means that's a single family house for anyone who's interested. And based on the current, you know, UDO, you could actually on that neighborhood 1 type, put a duplex or a triplex by itself. So if you wanted to create some type of income earning potential on a single family plot, right now as is under most conditions based on the UDO, you can put a multi-family unit. When someone says that they would like to go from N1A to N1C, if certain conditions are met and you split. That's basically saying I'd like the potential to take up an existing lot, split it in more than one, and then on those two units, if that is permissible, you could actually create double density. So instead of there being one multifamily unit, you could actually now have two multifamily units potentially based on the space that allotted. That is not the case in all situations. There are conditions that have to be met in order for that to be a reality. But I think as we make those types of decisions on an individual basis, the one thing that has to be intact is that we have to make sure that we've done our due diligence as leaders to reach out to the community. To at least at minimum, let them know that this is coming. Inform them of what the potential changes could be to their neighborhood and their stake in this. And find out what their feedback is. And so, actually, I'm going to sound like I'm repeating myself but for potential for petition number 8 2024134 there the reason why I'm in support of it besides the fact that it was unanimously approved by staff and the zoning committee is that there was already a very similar petition approved on the street and so I've been talking to the attorney representative that is representing both number eight and number nine to find out first what the feedback was, was, you know, directly from the community, which it appears to be favorable. There was about three people to attend the community meeting and in that community meeting, what they had were questions from what I can tell and really just more inquisitive, but it wasn't real opposition to what this opportunity presents. And so it's for that and for the precedent that was already set, which means that there was already a parcel that was approved and split but into two single family units. So this is close to the Sharon Armani corridor that's already experiencing a lot of changes. It's actually happening pretty fast where more petitions are coming into that area because of the type of corridor and the anticipated transit that's going to come adjacent to that corridor. And so I don't want to belabor a point, but I want to make sure that I'm clear in saying that for this particular petition there's already been a precedent set in that we as a council made an approval for a very similar petition where this one-lot, one single-family lot that was larger in size was split into two single-family lots and there are two single family houses. And big and there was no opposition from the community in those changes. So it appears based on the feedback from the community and the surrounding area to the homeowners that surround this area that they were in favor of this change. I wanted to make sure I pulled that. I spoke clearly to it so that the community could be aware of what is taking place. And really acts the neighbors that are engaged to really pay attention when you see that sign with the yellow Z. And if you don't know what that means, please call one of us. Call anyone that you trust, ask them, ask questions so that you can, you know, zoning is not an easy thing to understand. It can be very complex and for the average neighbor that's going to work every day, they got their own things to be, you know, bothered with when they see that yellow Z, they don't always understand that that means that someone has asked the council for permission to do something close to your neighborhood. And so the best advice I can give to anybody when you see that Z is to call the city and act, I seen a Z, it was on this street, even if you got to just describe it. It was on this street, we can look it up, we can figure it out, and we can try our best to tell you what it is, if it affects you how we know so far where it affects you so that we can get your engagement and get your feedback as quickly as possible. So thank you for that, Mayor Patin, and that's all I have on that. Thank you, Ms. Molina, any additional comment? Hearing Ms. Mayfield. Thank you and I definitely appreciate Ms. Molina's work. On this, I do have a challenge for the simple fact that we will be having another discussion later regarding splitting lots. I'm also concerned with the potential of us continuing, because once we say yes that first time, the next is impressive, regardless. But us continuing to counter our own language, meaning we say that we want to protect and support agent in place as well as neighborhood continuity. So you have one of honestly the few communities left in the city that have break homes that have nice size lots because people, if they have children or pets, they actually like playing outside versus what we're seeing being built throughout the city that has literally five feet between the housing that's being built. Even though I could support the idea of a lot being split based on neighborhood and community, I have a concern when the language is utilized that well well, we have a precedent set. Yes, it was done. Did we learn a lesson? From that being done regarding how that changed the look of community, because we, if you live in Charlotte more than a decade, or if you're one of the handful of natives, I've been here since 88, so I've seen a lot of changes myself with how communities are being built, how communities are being developed, and at the end of the day is our policy language that is open in the door for it to happen. We also, I wish that our manager was here, but I will be asking our representative later regarding a referral to committee, yet for this project as well as the next one, as well as the third one that is going to be asking us to split a lot in a historical community and in a neighborhood that is seeing transition. at the same time, where we are also approving voluntary annexation and bringing hundreds of acres into our perimeter, I think it is a challenge to continue down that road just because someone else was able to do it. But I do respect all of the work that the district has done on this. Thank you. Thank you. I have Ms. Johnson and then I have Mr. Driggs. Thank you Mayor Pro Tem and thank you Councilwoman Mayfield for requesting that referral. I would second that if needed. You're absolutely right. How do we address these policies? It's up to council members. So I agree with, I wouldn't be supporting this petition because it does set that precedent that we are, that we were so concerned about when those of us voted against the UDO. We, as a council, we know that 117 people are moving here per day. We still have to manage for our current residents and their quality of life. I was, I failed to acknowledge a developer earlier on the consent agenda who's adding to the community in petition number five on our agenda. I know we've already approved it, but I do want to acknowledge this is the kind of development we want. He's contributing $25,000 to the back creek HOA. He's providing a 12 foot wide multi path. So that's what we want to see developers adding to the quality of life for our current residents. And we got to be careful in approving petitions that displace our residents and reduce the quality of life. So I hope that we can also see this in the committee and really take a deep dive and take a look at how our policies are affecting individuals. I had a discussion with the petitioner earlier today and we were talking about a petition and we compared it to fear factor, which is worse. Do you want to have this type of petition or this type of petition because this is what's allowed by right? So that's on us. That's totally on us. So I'm happy to see this go to committee and I won't be supporting this one or the number nine or the other one because we do have, it's our responsibility to balance managing for the current situation while leading for the future. But we still have to know that location does matter and our petitions and we gotta be careful of the precedent that we're setting. So thank you. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. I have Mr. Driggs next. Thank you, Mayor Pro Tem. I think this whole conversation reflects the dilemma in which we find ourselves. So we attempted something, we are attempting something incredibly difficult, which is basically to accommodate the growth we're seeing in our city to pursue certain goals we have like the creation of housing in order to slow down the rise in the cost of housing. And that means that we have the content with disruption. And the fact is in my district, there have been developments that took place, and people didn't like the changes that were occurring around them. And the question is not, can we achieve what we want to do without any disturbance to anybody? The question is, how do we minimize the disturbance that is created by the growth that we're experiencing? Now maybe we haven't met everything we can yet. So I don't disagree with the idea that we're experiencing. Now maybe we haven't met everything we can yet. So I don't disagree with the idea that we go back and we take another look or we learn from this experience and then we ask ourselves questions about our policies. The difficulty is that on an ongoing basis, we have to be governed by the policy that's in place. So I appreciate that in my mind, Ms. Molina has done the right thing. She has looked at this in the context of our currently existing policies and has found that it is consistent with the adopted goals of the council. Now, it might be an occasion to then say, okay, but let's go back and think about whether those goals are right. But this is a zoning item. This is not a policy night. So we can identify needs that there are to revisit our policies. I'm a occasion like this, but we can't make the policies on the fly and implement them in a haphazard fashion. So I just want to say I am in support of the petition and of the recommendation that we make a referral. And my only concern is I don't know if we are going to be able to pass it tonight because three of our members are absent and two of those around the day have indicated well one has departed and two are not here. They're eight of us here, right? So you can't lose more than two people. And I think we do not want the outcome where it fails and then that sets in motion other things. So I'm just gonna say, I hope and wish that we could get this done because I believe properly we should do it tonight. And then we should also take up the issues that have been raised by my colleagues. Thank you, Mr. Drake. I have Ms. Brown. Hey, thank you so much, Mayor Pro Tem. I really appreciate it. So I definitely take a new consideration what my colleagues want to. Oh, I'm sorry. Councilwoman Mayfield and Councilwoman Johnson had said means a lot and also Councilman Drake. At what point, you know, we worked so hard. We have so much that we are responsible for it. So the day is an opportunity for the colleagues to express how they feel and to address it accordingly and appropriately. So if it's at the day is, if it's upstairs, if it's in 267 wherever it's at, it needs to be addressed. So I support them addressing it in this atmosphere and on racket publicly. With that being said, because I respect my colleagues and there is no I in team and Councilmember Melina has worked really hard with her work, her due diligence, and she spoke during the work in District five is who and what she represent. I will support her. I will support her because she, I feel in my heart that she goes out and she did do the do the diligence in this petition, in this petition, particular petition. I know I spent a lot of time with my constituents and I care about my constituents deeply when they call on me to show up and so so much that they made me as a superhero. So I understand how it is when you go out and you fight hard to work on something. So I would have to just support it in that aspect because she has done the work. Thank you, Ms. Brown. We're gonna circle back to Ms. Mayfield. Did you wanna make a comment, sir? Yeah. Okay, then let's do Mr. Graham, and then we'll circle back to Miss Mayfield. No, and I'll be sure. I think councilwoman Brown and councilmember Draggs really kind of summed it up. I mean, we got two issues on the table, really one, right? Rather than that, we approve that we don't by existing policy, right? done to work. The policy is in place. I think this is what we said we wanted to do, right? And so I think we should both forward and move on. Thank you. Ms. Mayfield. Thank you. So I want to make sure that we understand as this elected body, we have three choices. Vote to approval, vote to deny, or we can move to defer. There's not a situation, nor do I want to support a precedent of, last defer until we get more people so that we can ensure that this is approved. There's already a challenge in the idea of our language of consent item 13 to 75 can be approved in one motion. There was a time that we did not have such language. There was a time way back when in the olden days, six years ago, where you actually the district rep will motion. The, what would be stated is, I will accept a motion. For that rep to other make a motion to approve or deny versus, I will accept a motion to approve X. Yes, there has been a lot of policy language that has been created. But we also say this is a living document. And if it is a living document, that means as this baby continues to grow, we're gonna make corrections to it. Kinda keep you, if you as a little toddler, keep you from putting that fork inside the socket and getting electrocuted. If we do not have the conversations, and if we do not recognize that as an elected body, what our responsibility is, and that we have the value of a yes, no, a yes vote, a no vote, or a recommendation to defer. Then there's a challenge, if there's an expectation that everything that comes to force should automatically be a yes, because we are seeing the impact in our neighborhoods, based on policy language that may have been approved years ago. So we have the opportunity to look at that language to see if that language still serves us as a community and serves us with the direction that the city is going in. We have a lot of development that's going on right now. We have a lot of multifamily that's happening. Some of it we are going to seek them to a complete halt. To be perfectly honest, just looking at the financial constraints that are happening outside of us and what we're doing. Those of us that were around in 2008, 19, 2011, we saw entire neighborhoods that ended up filing bankruptcy and came to a complete halt and what that impact was. So this isn't for me a, hey, we'll get to it later. How many items are we going to approve before we finally have the conversation? And by that time, it's kind of like with the HOA, you say you only want 10% of renters in the community. But then the homeowners don't participate in the HOA discussion. And next thing you know, 45% of the community are renters. And unfortunately, they're not as engaged, so you can't get anything more forward. We can't keep saying we'll do it later if we never get the chance to have the conversation. So this isn't new. That's not the first time I bought it up. This is not the first time Councilmember Johnson's bought it up. This is not the first time any of us have said, hey, we need to look at this on the front end. But here it is. We're in April. We're looking at another decision. So if not, now, when do we exercise the ability of the vote that the people elected us to take? Based on all the information that we can, we all got to of the vote that the people elected us to take based on all the information that we can? We all got to make the decision that we think is the best decision based on the information is provided But I want to make sure that the community doesn't have a misunderstanding That just because you present it is your automatically be a yes We're doing I do diligence, but we also have to take into consideration that sometimes it's a no, because it might be something that would benefit later, but not necessarily right now in this particular instance. And that's not saying I'm asking any of you to change your decision. I'm gonna vote the way that I feel is the best representation. Yet, I wanna make sure that because of the comment being made, well, let's not move forward because we don't have enough people here. I don't want the community having this idea that just because it's presented to us, we are automatic, yes, our responsibility is to actually come up with a decision that we truly believe is the best decision for our entire community. And the district reps, you're the ones that's on the ground day to day. But that does not mean that as someone who's now serving in this seat, as at large after serving in this year for eight years, the I should be automatic. Yes, we still have to make sure that our vote is one that we are comfortable speaking about whether it's tomorrow two years from now or six years from now. Thank you Mr. Mayfield before I ms Brown do you have just a quick comment because I wanted to give it to the district right before we bring it to a vote. Yeah yeah I do have a quick comment so I second but again my predecessor one one been in the district for eight years. And my colleague, Councilmember Mayfield, has stated. But I also, I bear the responsibility of being the district where I would a lot of development going on in district three, a lot of hard work, a lot of due diligence. Shown up for community meeting, and showing up for my constituents, showing up to meet with developers my emails, doing all the stuff that I do. I would have to put some trust in my colleague to be able to move forward and do her due diligence. And so in this particular situation, the language that was developed, the UDO, the live and document, some things that was approved before I got in the seat. I'm in the seat now, but I do not. don't ever want it on public racket to say that it's not going to be a member of the community. I'm going to be a member of the community. I'm going to be a member of the community. I'm going to be a member of the community. I'm going to be a member of the community. I'm going to be a member of the community. I diligence and to be able to move forward and represent not just district five, but the entire community. I'll 900, 900,000 almost a million folks that live in the city of Charlotte. So I want to be able to support her in this particular manner for this particular petition. As she stated, as she moved forward with the information that she shared. Thank you so much Mayor Pro Tem for. Thank you for sharing that. I think we've had a robust discussion. I'm going to pass it back over to the district representative, Ms. Molina. But before I do, I did want to say just acknowledge as a council member that council member Molina has done a tremendous amount of work and due diligence on this particular item and the next one the follow so I just want it to I know that we're having a policy discussions and implications of policy as it relates to directly this particular item on the agenda but I just want it to acknowledge the work that the district rep has done with that I'm going to pass it over to Councilmember Molina and then we will proceed from there. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor Protin. And first, I want to tell you all, I appreciate your comments all of yours. And I appreciate your support. And Councilmember Mayfield, I think I understand what your position is. I know you will. I was at your first oath of office. So I was knee-hard to a grasshopper, but I remember. And I've watched your evolution as a leader. And it has been something that I respect as a colleague. And this was, that's why I took the time to send you guys the information to tell you what all I'd done to make sure that I gave you the information incrementally as we went along. So, you know, what I want to iterate here is that there are actually four, not one, but four petitions that are all there. And so think about this. And you to think about this like councilmember Drake said from a by-right perspective on in one a existing right now if you wanted to create density you could tear down the house and make a triplex right so let's say we didn't allow them to put it into and put two single families they get literally with an in one a right now make a triplex if they wanted to. So instead of having two single families on smaller lives, you would actually then have a complete change in the neighborhood where you got a single family here and a triplex here and a single family there. So it's, I mean, I thought through all that I promise. I thought about the actual character of the neighborhood. I thought about the feedback from the residents. I actually have the emails here that I'm happy to share with all of my colleagues that I got today from both petitioners that assured me that with this approval, they're only going to do single family. They are not going to do additional density on the additional density on the two lots. They said single family and it would be absolutely in line with what's already being done in the neighborhood. So there's not just one, there's four that are already in this area on the street. That's because there's another one that we're going to talk about where there was complete opposition by the community. And then that, yes, means something different if we set a precedent, right? In this case, the reason why I arrived through a deductive reasoning process is that there has already been multiple lots that have set a precedent across the street, right? Where they're already, you know you know I have no choice but to take that as a voluntary change by the community because I haven't heard opposition yet. Now again like I said when I communicated to all of y'all the day I have no way to take that but no opposition because I haven't yet heard from the community opposition once they give me that opposition and I bring it back to y'all, I tell you like, hey, you know what? Or some of them show up and they like, look, we hate this, right? That makes it great for us. But when it's us going out to the neighbors to say, hey, how do you feel about this, collecting that information, then to some degree, we're left at just a disposal of what we get as far as feedback as concerned. So that is the reason why it was, I promise you, it was a full deductive reason of process to say there's already four on the street. They've already been, you know, made into smaller lots and they're single family, not, you know, density as far as multi-level units. And so that's why I asked for you all support. I do realize, again, that we're going to talk about another petition that is much different than this one. And I mean, I'm willing to defer. Let me make sure that I'm clear because I even was telling councilmember Johnson we do need to have additional discussion after this. And I think we all can agree that at some point we have to put this in a policy discussion so that a committee can make some you know some some you know recommendations to us about how we move forward. And we're learning, right? This is a brand new document. We're undergoing a brand new process. And we're learning as we go. I think this one is a learning experience. And I think we got another one on here that's going to be a learning experience. But I think it does tell us as a body that it is time for a healthy discussion around some of these changes, so I don't disagree with that. And with that. I'm not even calling. So Ms. Millay, do you want to proceed with the motion on the floor? You have a motion and a second on the floor, do you want to proceed with that motion? I think. motion? I think we can approve, yes? Okay. Okay, then we had Miss Wattlinton, as you will have Miss Wattlinton make a statement and then we can, we've had a great discussion so we can go to Miss Wattlinton. Well, my question is for Allison. In regards to the, I heard Councilmember Melina say that right now a tropics could be built on this lot by riot. Was that correct? So technically yes, but it depends on a lot of different things if the lot is wide enough to actually fit a triplex if it can manage where you park the cars, things like that. So, I mean, in theory, yes, but you have to look at each lot individually and be able to assess whether or not you could put a triplex on there. Because that was going to be my question is if a lot is subdivided, does that mean, even though today, the plan is to put single family, does that mean in the future by right on these smaller lot triplexes could then be built? I mean a triplex needs a pretty wide lot in order to be able to fit one on there so so it's again you can't you know yes but I mean a smaller lot actually makes it probably less likely. So that's what I think that answers my question because I realize that to your point you have to meet a lot of dimension sizes but moving to this next level density does that make these smaller lots eligible within that category for triplexes? I may lean on a planning staff member to help me out but I mean you do have to have a much wider lot in order to fit essentially a triplex on that lot. So subdividing into smaller lots in this kind of situation probably actually makes that more challenging, but I don't remember the lot dimensions. I mean that's correct. It technically it's a permitted use, but it has to meet all the development standards. Sorry, I can't hear you Pete. What's that? Yeah, so technically it's a permitted use, but it has to meet all the development standards. Sorry, I can't hear you Pete. What's that? E-N-N-C-H, just a little bit more. Yeah, so technically it's a permitted use. But you have to meet all the lot dimension standards setbacks, parking requirements, so the smaller the lot, the more challenging that gets. But is it a permitted use and once you district guess? But there's no way for me to know from this information whether or not these sizes would actually allow that. Not unless they did a fit test and provided us plans and went into permitting with it, so. Okay, thank you. Okay. Thank you. So with no additional comments, we have a motion and a second to approve petition petition item 2024-134 and adopt the zoning committee statement of consistency. All in favor, please raise hands. 1434-6, okay. All opposed? We have three opposed. Clerk, were you able to capture that? Thank you. Okay. Is there- I'm sorry? It carries. It does. It was approved. It was approved. It's clear. Yes. Okay. We're going to move on to item number 9, petition number 20, 24, 1, 3, 6. Is there a motion to approve this petition and adopt the zoning committee statement of consistency as stated in our agenda? So moved. Second. Okay, any comment? Yes. Ms. Malina. To not belabor the point, item number 9 is literally on the same street as item number eight. And again, there are four parcels that are already on the street. Again, this is one of those that, you know, the precedent was set. And I think in this particular petition, you know, again, I spoke to the representatives, I spoke to everyone and I was even told that the president was set before I even came on council. So that's not the label to point, it's the same exact thing, it's on the same exact street and the same exact thing. So that's it, thank you, May I please. Okay, thank you. Any additional comments? Hearing none, all in favor to approve, raise hands. Any opposed? There are three opposed and the motion carries. We will move on to item number 10, petition number 20-138. Is there a motion to approve this petition and adopt the zoning committee's statement of consistency as it appears in our agendas? All right, any comment? Ms. Brown. Yes, thank you so much. Thank you so much, Mayor Protin for recognizing it. Allow me to to comment I wanted to particularly speak on 2024-138 my peak development because I've been working tremendously with this community that I live in bearwick. Difficult decision with the community. However, we had the petitioners go out in the community meet with the community, get letters of recommendation. I was on a Zoom call. It was a lot of people. A lot of people, a lot of community members on the Zoom meeting with petition 2024, dash 138. However, except in the recommendation by the Zoning Committee and the staff committee, and also for the due diligence that was done by the petitioner and the community came together. So I'm happy to share that they were able to come to common ground and agreement to move forward the petition, but it wasn't easy and there was a lot of let work and footwork done on this to make this happen. Thank you, Ms. Brown. Any additional comments? Hearing none, all in favor raise hands. Any opposed? That is unanimous. We will move on to item number 12. Petition number 2024142. Is there a motion to approve this petition and adopt the zoning committee's statement of consistency as it appears in our agenda? Some move. Second. Is there any comment? Are there any comment? This is number 12. Thank you. This request is to rezone manufacturing and logistics to transit in it, development, a TOD with, of course, as a conventional rezoning. There's no associated site plan. When we look at the actual map on this, adjacent right next door to this development is manufacturing on the backside, it's manufacturing. But TOD has been approved basically in the middle of an area that has manufacturing around it. We are having a challenge with loss of manufacturing land within the city. We have residential land, for manufacturing, we have taken manufacturing land and be zoning as the city continues to grow. I do have concern with land that was identified, manufacturing, logistic, environmental wise, what type of manufacturing and or building was there for many years, the impact to the soil of that area. Us developing housing in these areas without really knowing the impacts. And again, the language that we look at, when we look at transit oriented development, building potentially housing versus it clearly being conditional to your D, where it's going to be for entertainment, whether it's a restaurant, retail, other things on this land is directly connected to manufacturing and it's on the backside of manufacturing, not knowing what is that manufacturing. You drive through the city now, you live in a neighborhood and there's work going on. Construction trucks start early in some cases at 6 7 o'clock in the morning depending on the type of business it is the lights Maybe on the trucks may be coming and going into late in the night that the trucks are backing up and they're heavy duty trucks You're gonna hear the automatic beeping to warn people as it's backing up There's a concern for me regarding the loss of manufacturing land that is already zone and it already fit certain requirements to try to almost force housing to go in those areas. And the fact that we as a city and neither to my understanding staff is doing a real study on the environmental health impacts of residential areas that have been built on formerly manufacturing logistics related land and in proximity to. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Mayfield. I have Ms. Johnson. Thank you, Mayor Pro Tem. And thank you, Councilmember Mayfield, for those comments. We spoke earlier, and I think you bring up some excellent points. This is another one of those policy issues that I would love to discuss. I'll take a deeper dive in committee. Another thing I would like to see in our books if we could, the counties comments instead of just saying see advisory comments at rezoning.org. So I appreciate your comments. I am going to be supporting this. But in the future, I think we need to work closer with the county and get that information because you bring up an excellent point. I can think of one that we are losing manufacturing land. So we really need to be strategic. One concern I share with our city manager and also assistant city manager when I ask for my cumulative petitions or of cumulative impact reports to include by right. That's not something that can be easily pulled. Would you agree, Alison? You can see what has been approved or was in progress on the development near me, Ab. So staff can pull that information, but sometimes it's easier to see it on a live map than a static map just because things change daily. And so it's sometimes it's a matter of scale of how large an area. So some of it is actually putting it on map that it's challenging. Because when I asked for a report, there seem to be some challenge in that. I think our staff should be able to pull map of our current situation like that. I would hope that they could because then that tells me that the impact is being tracked and that the growth is being tracked. So we just have to really take a deeper dive in our policies. Again, I'll be supporting this, but this is something I would, I think we should take a look at as well and I refer. So thank you. Thank you. I have Ms. Brown. Yes, thank you so much. So again, once again, I will, especially Councilmember Johnson. She is one of Councilmember's that completely her mindset aligns. Like mine, so I definitely will be supporting her without a question, without a shadow of a doubt. But I want to understand, is it completely surrounded by TLD and that there's no industrial around this area councilmember Johnson did is that correct or maybe Allison or Dave can answer this and then There's one ML owner adjacent to it and that owners interested in doing TLD as well Is that my understanding so I'm just trying to get that address? I'm not sure the interest of other owners to make a zoning change. This particular piece is fully surrounded by TOD and C, so this would be a similar zoning district than all the adjacent properties around it. The manufacturing uses that are on a arrowhead and on north hills are smaller, like independent offices that might have a manufacturing component. Looks like they might have some truck bays, but they're not large-scale manufacturing. The largest end user on north hills circle looks like a Navy and Marine Reserve Center. So they're industrially-zone. They're not the heaviest of industrial uses in we do anticipate at some point they may transition similar to this one to a TOD district. But this particular piece is fully surrounded right now by TOD. So this would make that whole block now TOD around it. So thank you so much for answering that day and addressing it to the best of your building and your knowledge. With that being said, I would like to just go back to Councilmember Mayfield because again, her knowledge, her veteran service here does not go unnoticed. And I think we all have agreed at some point that there is some deeper dive that we need to do, but when are we gonna do that? So we keep putting it off and then we have these conversations around the day is it never gets resolved. So that is something for us to put at the for-front. We cannot be of people that serve the people elected by the people to continue to ignore the things that the people want us to get answers for so we really have to address those accordingly and appropriately. Again with that being said I'm going to support Councilmember Johnston because I know for fact that she does a due diligence in more than one way and so happy to stand with you. I'm a colleague and to support you, but I also want not to not be put on public record to say that there are some concerns that we have that we need that are open, that are red flags and they're not long low hanging fruit anymore. We need to address them accordingly and appropriately. you miss Brown Ms. Brown. Any additional comment? Hearing none, all in favor, please raise hands. Any opposed? Ms. Mayfield is opposed. And that concludes the consent portion of the evening. We will now move to the non-conset decisions for the evening. And we will begin with agenda item 15, petition number 2024116. And I would like to make a motion to deny petition number 2024116. Thank you. Thank you. And now we can have a conversation about it. This particular petition has been before us in a hearing and was deferred last month. And I have spent a great deal of time with this particular petitioner to encourage them to work with the community and to enter conversations and and and and debate with community members in a spirit of collaboration. And so there are a couple of things going on here. here. One is the we make decisions here as you've heard this evening we've had great debate and really great dialogue. I greatly appreciate the conversations we're having this evening. And we all as district reps and also as at large members, encouraged petitioners and developers, and in particular when there are contentious decisions and every party is not coming to the table in agreement. We all encourage a spirit of collaboration. And in this particular petition, there's just been an absence of a spirit of collaboration with the neighborhood association board members and community members. Some of them are here, I'm looking right at them, hello Ms. Parker. And so there's just been an absence of that, although I have encouraged that over and over and over again, there's just been an absence of that activity. And also as it relates to the primary zoning district in this particular area on the request is it is N1B. And changing the minimum lot standards from N1B to N1C would be disruptive in my belief to the existing character and the established lot pattern of our historical neighborhood of Hidden Valley. And it's with those two points that I have been working with the petitioner for a couple of months and really not really making great traction. Any traction really, I make the motion to deny this particular petition. I would also like to say in full transparency that the petitioner is fully aware of this and has not indicated any desire to withdraw or defer the petition. So I see we have some comments here. We'll just, we'll go around. We'll start. We'll start with Ms. Azmir and we'll go around to anyone who would like to make a comment. Thank you. In this rezoning petition, I saw how community of Hidden Valley came together and advocated for preservation of their neighborhood character. I think that's powerful. Where neighbors come together to speak up, to preserve the neighborhood's character. I appreciate Ms. Parker and Ms. Henderson's effort and advocacy and really bringing the neighbors together in this. I think you sent a very clear message to the petitioner that what you are looking for and what they proposed is not in alignment. And sometimes we do have to do that. I'll be supporting Miss Anderson in this rezoning petition in denying it. And really letting community know that there are times you don't actually see a lot of denials because when petitioner knows that there is not enough support, they'll withdraw it. Well, in this case, the petitioner did not want to withdraw it. But you know, so we only have one option which is to deny. We shall be supporting that. That's all I have. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Brown. Thank you, Mayor Pro Tem. Mr. On and the privilege to stand with Mayor Pro Tem to deny this petition. I was denied in any way. Let me go and record and say that because Hidden Valley is one of those historic communities that we do want to preserve. And so, Ms. Parker, Ms. Henderson and all of the Hidden Valley community, strong in their advocacy, they're fair as well. There have been times where they've come and they did not do any opposition for petitions that have been brought forward. But this one they stood on solid ground and solidarity together and they made the most sense. It was fair and impartial and the community and valley community is a community that I love to see and that I, it's just one of those communities that deserve to be preserved. It deserves to be nurtured and loved. It's longstanding in our city. And it gives me complete joy know our mayor pro tem which is also the district rep made a decision to deny with all the facts in front of her and so again once again if I was standing in solos it was going to be an in-oh for me with explanation points at the end up. Thank you miss Brown I saw Miss Molina thank you mayor pro tem and I want to definitely before us, you know, Ms. Brown. I saw Ms. Molina. Thank you, Mayor Pro Tem. And I want to definitely before I say anything else, I also will be agreeing with the Mayor Pro Tem to deny this petition. I think, and what I've been telling my colleagues for most of the night is, I'm really happy that we had the discussion concurrently about the petitions in District 5 as a prerequisite to this conversation. And I don't want to, you know, belabor a point, but I want you to understand that there is an existing neighborhood. And think about a neighborhood. I mean, from a traditional perspective, no matter who lives there, your neighbors are the humans that you live beside. And most cases, your kids go to school together. You might even go to church together and do a number of different things. You commune. I mean, it's community, right? It's your neighborhood. It's literally the components of what will make up your life. And so when we seek to buy a home and make that permanent decision, we want to make it in a place that we feel all of those things concurrently. And when you have a situation where there's like disruption in the middle of it and you've got the community saying collectively, like you know, that they are just against this and there's no middle ground. There's really not a way to see it from the community's perspective and let me be clear. The ID. just against this and there's no middle ground. There's really not a way to see it from the community's perspective. And let me be clear. The idea, the reason that items eight and nine were recommended by me is because there was already a precedent in the neighborhood. So once we say yes to one petition, it begins what would be, you know, be understood as a precedent in that neighborhood, which would not prohibit anybody else from coming into that neighborhood and then doing the same thing because the council has then allowed for it to happen on a parcel. And so with there being so much opposition from the community this particular case where if we were to say yes there is a precedent then set where someone else could do the same thing. And to be clear in 1B is still a neighborhood single family home but to take it to in 1C and certain standards have to be met. met, this isn't blanketed, it depends on the parcel. And like the Assistant City Manager said, parking standards, size of the lot, a number of different things are taken into account. But once we've approved it from a land use perspective, then if it meets those standards, it don't have to come back to council. They can go directly through the permitting process without any type of prohibition, even if you don't agree with it. So like I said, zoning is something that is hard for our name. It's hard for us, right? And we are tasked with making these decisions and working with city leaders that have been trained through education to do this on a day and a day out basis to understand it for decision making purposes. So it's tough. That's why I want to iterate to all community members, every community. They're not in a position where they advocate like the Hidden Valley community did, where they came to us with that information to say, look, we understand, we've done the due diligence, we know what this means. there are plenty of community members who don't and I beg you guys if you see a Z and you don't know what's going on call your representative and ask them what's going on so that we can explain it to you and bring you into the fold and into that process so that you can also make your voices heard so that we can have these type of policy discussions among ourselves and this is what pushes us into the policy discussion phase. It says we see things happening across the city. So from across the city perspective we now need to have a policy discussion, you know citywide to say we see this happening and we need to mitigate it from a policy perspective. So that's all I'll say. I absolutely will be supporting the mayor pro-10 and I will also be voting to deny this petition. Thank you, mayor pro-10. Thank you. Ms. Johnson, did you have a comment? Sure. You asked. So just a couple things. I will also be supporting mayor pro-10. This petition is an example of the reason I voted against. The UDO was to protect neighborhoods like Hittin Valley and the neighborhood character. This is a disruptive petition. I hope this is an example to developers. And we realize that we're a growing city. But again, the collaborative spirit and working with the community is important. And also, I still think that location definitely matters. And we're showing that tonight. So I'm very proud of the council tonight that we are standing firm on this and protecting the community and attempt for anti-splacement, you know, and anti-gentrification. So one of the things you said was when residents see a Z to call council, you know, technology is so advanced, there's ways that we can be more transparent. ask for QR codes on those rezoning signs. I think that we should be very simple language. This is being sold or proposed to be redeveloped. So we need to do better and be more transparent with the community. But I look forward to denying this or supporting the mayor pro-tom. I did ask during our noon call, has the developer been advised in writing of the consequences of a denied petition? Yes. Yes. Okay. All right. Thank you. That's all I have. Yes. Thank you. Are there any additional comments, Mr. Dricks? So this is a really unusual situation. I don't remember the last time we voted to deny something. 2022. The addition 2022, 177. We have votes fail. Let's think of it. What's that? Let's think of it. I think there's 2022 when we deny the addition and district four. Exactly. I'm getting a little hazy in my old age, so I don't go back that far. The point I would like to make though is the staff recommend that approval of this. The zoning committee was unanimous, right? So we need to appreciate the big problem here was frankly the obscenity of the petitioner. It's actually a little bit more of a process question than it is a verdict on the merits. And I point that out only because the precedence that is established by this has more to do with the way the petitioner went about it than any judgment that we made about the merits. The staff recommendation and the zoning committee recommendation were based on arguably on the merits. But we don't like a situation where there isn't a productive interaction between the petitioner and neighbors and that therefore the process through which we try to arrive at a conclusion that's acceptable to everybody was frustrated. So I will join the pro-tam in saying no to this. I just want to be clear that I'm not sure that anything else like this moves ahead more normally, couldn't succeed. Thank you. Thank you. I have Ms. Mayfield. Thank you, Hidden Valley Neighborhood Association. Right. Thank you. Applause. OK, hearing no additional comments, I think we're- I just wanted to make sure that you have your statement on the record. I've read my statement. Do I need to read it again? Or do you need to sit at the clerk? Do you capture my statement, my opening statement? And the consistency or inconsistency statement? You can read it again for the record-hand side. Sure. You have the modified statement. Yes, so the statement that I read was the primary zoning district in this area for this request is N1B. Changing the minimum lot standards from N1B to N1C would be disruptive to the existing character and established lot pattern for the Hidden Valley neighborhood. I also made a statement about the spirit of collaboration in working with the neighborhood associations. Okay. And therefore not reasonable in the public interest. Yeah, that formally to deny you have to actually come up with a modified statement about reasonable and public interest. I think that's fine as long as you, as long as I, if you could record that therefore it's not reasonable in the public interest. I do that in that captures it. Yes, and is not reasonable in public interest. Okay. Okay. Okay. Ms. Watland, did you have a- I did. I just want to be clear, because I want to make sure that for the record, my opposition to this petition is not about the process or the willingness of the petitioner to work with the community. I don't believe in the product itself as being the right thing for the neighborhood from a land use standpoint. So I just wanted to be clear about my opposition and what's consistent with the previous two. Thank you, Ms. Watlington. Seeing no additional comments, all in favor of denying this petition as stated in our agenda, please raise hands. Any in favor? Okay, it was unanimously denied. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Parker. So we will move on to agenda item number 16, but before we do, there were some changes after the zoning committee vote on item number 16. I'll hand it over to Mr. Petty. Thank you. Yes. Petition 2024-125 by Teholtings LSC did make a few changes after the zoning committee recommendation. Those changes were to limit the buildings to a maximum of six dwelling units per building. Maximum of two six unit buildings would be permitted within the project area. A minimum of three, four unit or fewer buildings would then be built to round out the rest of the permitted units in this project. Final siding is listed as a prohibited primary building material and all dwellings would include a portrait stoop that had a minimum four feet in depth. So those were the three changes made. Staff believes their minor did not warrant additional review by the zoning committee. Thank you. Thank you. Is there a motion that the changes should not go back to the zoning committee? Well, not to return to zoning committee. Okay, I have a motion in second. All in favor, please raise hands. Any opposed? That is unanimous. Is there a motion to approve, Patissue? All right. Excellent. I have an emotion and a second. Any comment? I know. Hearing none, all in favor raise hands. Any opposed? That is unanimous. So we will move on to the next item. Patition item number 17 has been deferred and that we've conclude the decision portion of the evening and we will proceed to the hearing portion of the evening. And we begin with agenda item number 18, petition number 2023-074 by C. Investments 2 LLC. The location is approximately 26 acres located on the east side of Providence Road, North side of country lane, and South side of Cuy Condale Road in district 7. Drinks district's district. The current zoning is N1, proposed zoning is N1A, N1A, N2ACD, and N1ACD. Staff recommends the approval of this particular petition in its current form. And before I hand it over to staff for presentation, is there, let's see, Matt Orlinski? Orlowski. Orlowski, okay. So we do have opposition here and because there's opposition after the pre-staff's presentation, Mr. Brown will have ten minutes. those individuals who are against Mr. Arlowski, Mr. Jager, Mr. Kid, and Rubacher will have 10 minutes in aggregate, and again the petitioner will have two minutes. Thank you. All right, petition 2023-0 or 7-4 is an undeveloped site. Approximately 26 acres look at it on the east side of Providence Road between country lane and Kagan-Doll Road, about a mile north of 545. Sight is currently zone N1A, neighborhood one. Pose zoning is N2ACD, neighborhood two conditional, and N1ACD, neighborhood one conditional. 2040 policy map recommends the neighborhood one place type. The pose zoning N2ACD is inconsistent, and the pose zoning one ACD is consistent with the policy map. Proof of this petition would revise the policy map to neighbourhood 2 for the end to a portion of the site. The proposal calls for development of two non-contiguous development areas. area A is the Western parcel, development area B is the Eastern parcel. Development area A, 14 acres, proposes the neighborhood 2 into ACD district that proposes up to 220 multi-family attached dwelling units, up to 39 residential buildings, the maximum of 6 units per building They're more than 26 units buildings. The development area B is 12 acres Proposed earnings in 1 a cd and would allow for up to 55 single-family detached dwellings Development area a fall it proposed the following site and building design standards So construct 12 foot multi-use path and eight foot planning strip along Providence Road and Eight foot sidewalk and eight foot planning strip along country lane and Kikadol lane along the site's frontages Structures we have maximum 48 feet in height with a maximum height limited to 45 feet for those buildings along the eastern property brown during and development area adjacent to this existing neighborhood one is outing in place type. They'll include preferred building materials, minimum pitch roofs, usable porches and stoops, corner for sides will have additional treatment, architectural treatment. All units will include a two-car garage, a minimum of 25 visitor spaces provided on-site, in addition to on-street parking prepos on the new public streets throughout the site. Street trees will be provided along alleyways, a minimum of 20 foot side set back, a 10 foot class C buffer will be provided along this eastern property boundary, adjacent to the neighborhood one place type, development area B proposes up to 55 single family detached dwelling units, and the development of duplexes, triplexes, quadriplexes, or multi-family dwellings are prohibited in that area. Transportation improvements are proposed, including dedication of additional ride-of-way-long provenance, cacadol, and country lane. ADA compliant bus stop will be provided at the corner of provenance road and cacadol road. Two new public streets with on-street parking will be constructed internal to development area A. And intersection improvements will include at Caggindall and Providence and Country of Lane and Providence as well as the new intersection will include turn lanes, additional upgrades to crossings and a right in, right out at the New Public Street. Staff does not recommend approval. This petition in current form has the enhanced care should be taken to thoughtfully out design and a miniatized open spaces to match the care for the surrounding area. Additional open space should be provided throughout development area A, allowing direct access to amenities. A number of six unit buildings on the site should be reduced. Duplex, triplex, and quadruple buildings should make up a larger proportion of the buildings. And commitments should be made to prohibit certain building materials and sure harmony with the character of the area. Happy to take any questions following the petitioners' presentation. Thank you, Mr. Brown and Ms. Lens. Thank you. Mayor Pro Tem, Council Member, Senate Committee members, Colin Brown on behalf of the petitioner. We're going to have our presentation. Thanks, Max, for the overview as our slides are coming up. As you've heard this petition is on Providence Road. It's pretty interesting, especially in the context of some of the conversations tonight. I'll try to make some parallels of some distinctions based on the conversations you've had. But this is a fairly large tract of land on Providence Road in South Charlotte. Whereas you all know there's great demand for housing. There's kind of the 30,000 foot view south of the Arboretum, but north of 45. The site right across from Charlotte Latin School, so across the street, there's kind of a major campus, which is interesting land use type. North of the site is some multifamily, and then this site is made of a very large single-family home lots. I mean multi-acres, two and three acre kind of estate lots. When this was very much a country land that is the name of the street. Obviously we've seen tremendous growth in South Charlotte, up and down the corridor. It is a very desirable place to live. Great amenities. And so what has happened, this is pretty interesting, we started this petition with just the 14 acres. And I'll show you the petition we started with. Since we have added the rear 12 acres, we're basically down zoning that from it zoning today. And I'll explain the context of that. So again, when we started the process, we were just talking about the 14 acres on Providence Road. We were talking about multifamily. We talked about two phases of apartments on Providence Road. We started this process about two years ago and have had extensive meetings and conversations with the community, with council member Driggs, and with some representatives from the neighborhood that you'll hear from. Our real challenge, I know you hear this from us a lot. You know, the challenge is we have this neighborhood one place type, and it talks about creating middle-density housing, but unfortunately neighborhood one doesn't allow townhomes as we've learned. And so I think one of the most frustrating things to the neighbors is we, again, we started this as a real end-to- a significant amount of apartment density. After two years of discussions with council member Driggs and the neighborhood, we have decided to greatly dramatically reduce the intensity, do townhomes on providence and single family homes in the back. What's really frustrating, I think, to the neighbors is we've said, hey, but we still got to have into zoning because the UDO doesn't quite work for townhomes in M1. If we could do these townhomes in M1, we'd be happy to do it. But that is our challenge. Even though the M1 place type says, hey, we expect this type of housing. Our zoning ordinance, the way the rules are set up, you just can't build functional townhomes. So we have now doing a conditional zoning on the front portion as Max has mentioned. Townhome plan here, that's what I've got on the screen. This is a look at that. I'll talk in detail about a couple things. And then what we said was we also controlled, the original zoning did not include 12 acres deeper into the site. And I think this is interesting. So here are townhomes and the other portion I'm going to show you is back here. As we've been talking about, you know, tonight you guys have talked about the UDO and what it allows by right. Well by right on this rear 12 acres is Council member Mollina pointed out, you know, someone could come in and divide up this 12 acres and do duplexes and triplexes that would really be at a context deeper into this neighborhood further from Providence Road. So what we said in discussion with the neighbors is look, we do think we need more housing in this area, we need townhome density. If we concentrate the townhome density on Providence Road, we'll do a conditional plan. So even though it's an end to zoning, it's only townhomes. Then on the rear of this property, and I don't know if this has ever been done yet under our new UDO, we're essentially, we've got N1A. That's the lowest zoning there is in Charlotte. It allows duplexes and triplexes. We're essentially saying, we'll down-zone that so that it will be single-family-only. I think Council Member Watlington asked a question earlier, with a petition where the developer said, well, I'll only do single family homes, but one point out this is a conditional zoning, so it is a zoning condition that if you approve this on the rear 12 acres, these would be single-family-only. And so we thought, if I put this up together, that tells a pretty good story. So the front of the parcel, again, being townhomes, that's right on Providence Road corridor, this is an area where we need that housing. And effectively, we're going to down zone the rear of the site to build less units than we could build today. So that is kind of the nature of this discussion. You guys have talked a little bit tonight too about having petitioners who are willing to have a conversation. So it's incredibly interesting to me the development team on this one said, look, we have 12 acres that aren't even in this rezoning. But if we're asking you all, we're going to ask the City Council to support townhomes up front. We'll be invited. We'll bring in the rear parcel and down zone that. So, that's the context of what's happening. I will say, one of the things we always talk about on the Providence Road corridor is traffic. We talk traffic, traffic, traffic. So what we did when we started this rezoning, like I said, we were talking about over 500 units of multifamily apartments and we did our traffic study based on 500 units of multifamily apartments. Now that we are no longer doing multifamily apartments, we are still abiding by the traffic study that plan for that many units. So we're incorporating all the mitigations that were recommended for basically twice the number of units that we are now proposing. Extensive outreach has taken place. I know you'll wish we had a bow on this and we've had very productive conversations with the neighbors and some of their representatives. With just, as you know, we kind of have a limit on when we can submit a site plan. We're in discussions with them. We started our initial outreach meeting in January of 2023. We filed our application in April of 2023. And again, at that time, we were talking about 500 units of apartments. So here we are talking about about half that many units with town homes along the Providence Road corridor. And this will be probably the lowest UDO zoning in Charlotte, because I don't know of any other district that's actually down-zoned. So I think for the rear that will be low, that will be, it is smaller lots than what's out there now, but it'll be more consistent with the surroundings. We are still in conversations with some of the leadership from the neighborhood. They've indicated a few things to us. One, they'd like us to talk about building height. I'll point out the building height that we're requesting is the same as in N1A. So the same height as everyone around us. We are still looking at can we agree to some lower building heights on some units. So I'm optimistic that we may be able to kind of meet in the middle and provide a concession on that, which would be lower than is allowed today. Something else in Max mentioned, stats comments are increasing the open space and integrating it. What we've done, if you can see the site plan here, we've really concentrated our open space and tree save area on Providence Road. That's a highly traveled corridor. We've got some good trees out there. So our goal is to have our tree save there. We've got over an acre's a highly traveled corridor. We've got some good trees out there, so our goal is to have our tree-save there. We've got over an acre and a half of tree-save area along Providence Road. What we've kind of heard from the neighborhood is, hey, we want to make sure there's places for your residents to go and walk the dog and kind of not be coming back into our neighborhood. So we do think with an acre and a half of tree safe here, along Providence Road as Max mentioned, we'll be doing a multi-use path. And then we have some of our open space right here on the inside. So I think that our effort going forward after this will be some continued conversation with the neighbors and looking to integrate our active open spaces with this tree safe area. So that kind of comes like an acre and a half park along Providence Road. That's where people go. They'll be buffered from Providence Road By the tree save area. Other question that came up from the neighbors. Winston Brown. Yes, ma'am. Two minutes. Oh, two minutes. Thank you. Thank you Next item that's come up is visitor parking Each unit will have its have garages and parking as Max mentioned. There are 25 spaces of off-street parking. The neighbors kind of challenge us and ask if we could take that to 50 parking spaces. We've looked at it and we are building an internal network of streets that will have parallel parking. Our count, Matt Langston, tells me is that there will be 68 total spaces of off-street kind of parking that doesn't belong to the unit. So hopeful that that addresses some of those concerns. So almost 70 spaces not belonging to units that will, there will be ample place to park on site and they're not flowing into the neighborhood. So again, we'll continue conversations with the neighborhood on those items on our revised plan that we'll get and we'll come to the zoning committee in a week and a half or so. I'll pause there, let you hear from other speakers and then the next questions. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Olalski and gentlemen, if you could come down and upon arriving at the podium, you all will have 10 minutes in aggregate to make your statements. And before doing so, just please state your name before you speak so the clerk can catch in on record. Thank you. Yeah. Good evening. Honorable Mayor Pro Tem and City Council members my name is Matt Orlovsky I'm representing the Kikindal Coalition today. I'm joined by Michael Kidd, Steve Yeager, Matt Robacher, also with the Kikindal Coalition. So what's your name again, I'm sorry. Matt or Laufskie. Thank you. You're welcome. We represent approximately 220 households in South Charlotte, including country colony, Providence retreat, Providence plantation, Berkeley, Rayne tree, and others. Our organization promotes activities and awareness of issues in the Providence Quarter of South Charlotte. First, I'd like to sincerely thank Mayor Pro Tem Anderson and all the council members for your service to our city. I especially want to thank council member Driggs for his consistent attention to the concerns of South Charlotte residents and active participation with our coalition. I have to start by expressing our collective frustration with how the public hearing is unfolded today. This particular rezoning, this particular rezoning petition is dragged on for over two years, yet now culminates with what could be said as a last minute hearing scheduled on Easter Monday. Public hearing notices were received over spring break, providing minimal notice to affected residents. Many of our neighbors who would have liked to attend tonight are unable to do so because of these scheduling challenges. This timing doesn't exactly feel coincidental but rather somewhat of a tactical decision to minimize community opposition. The timing is particularly frustrating given the length of this process. Our community is participated in good faith throughout countless meetings, submitted comments, and engaged with both the developer and city staff repeatedly since December of 2022. To have the culmination of this process time during a period when many families are traveling, feels a bit dismissive of community input. We're also somewhat confused about the fundamental purpose of these negotiations. The property in question is currently listed for sale online in a listing on LukeNet. This listing is provided in your packets. It's listed as figure number one. The marketing on the site explicitly advertises this site as a fully entitled subdivision offering positioned for townhome development along Providence Road that would allow for the development of up to 220 townhome units. This raises serious questions. Are we negotiating with a developer who intends to build or simply helping to increase property value for a quick sale? This process increasingly feels like we're unwitting participants in what might amount to a property flip by petitioner who doesn't seem maybe forthcoming about their intentions. We had recently sent an email to the petitioner's attorney, specifically asking for clarification on this point. We are waiting a response on that. Aloop that listing indicates the current owner appears to have no attention in tension of developing this property themselves. Unfortunately, that leaves a bit of a sour taste in our mouths. See investments to purchase this land fully aware it was zoned R3 with deed restrictions, further limiting density to one home per two acres. After a long legal battle with country colony residents, the owner filed for a rezoning to build a four-foot story apartment building with nearly 600 units on just 14 acres. A proposal so outlandish, we feel it was never intended to be built. The apartment plan is listed as figure two in your packets you saw it already. This extreme initial proposal appears to have been simply a negotiating tactic to make the current high density end-to-plan seem reasonable by comparison. It's a classic door-in-the-face negotiation technique, start with an extreme request that will then be rejected, follow-up then with a less extreme request that seems reasonable by comparison, even though it's still beyond what would be normally be acceptable. In our numerous meetings with City staff over the past two years, staffers repeatedly indicated N2 zoning was neither recommended nor consistent with the areas planning vision. Even today, City Planning staff is not recommending approval of this plan in its current form. With the property now listed for sale at online, it appears the petitioner has filed again in sort of a last minute attempt for this public hearing during spring break. The timing sort of suggests to us an attempt to limit community opposition rather than a genuine desire to work with neighbors. I will point out Mr. Brown is accurate and we have been in discussions and I do not want to misrepresent that. We have a little over five minutes. I was a short here and I'll add. Allow them to speak. I'm going to consume the time. Five minutes. Thank you. I appreciate that. One of our greatest concerns is the precedent this rezoning would set. If council approves end to zoning in an area explicitly designated neighborhood one by by the 2040 policy map, then what stops the next developer from requesting the same treatment? We feel that approval of this petition would effectively nullify the neighborhood one designation throughout our area, opening the door to widespread up zoning and dramatically changing the character of our community. The pre-hearing staff analysis specifically states, and I quote, the approval of this petition will revise the recommended place type as specified in the 2040 policy map from the neighborhood one place type to the neighborhood two place type for development area A, which you saw earlier. This is a major change in one of the neighbors have made clear they disagree with from the comments they've made on the draft 2040 revised policy map. You can see that that included figure four in your packet. This is not merely about the rezoning petition in front of you today, but about whether Charlotte's planning framework carries any meaningful weight in guiding development decisions. Beyond our procedural and policy concerns, there are specific issues with the proposed development that warrant rejection or significant modification. Number one, density. The proposed 220 townhomes on 14 acres represents a density far exceeding anything in the surrounding area. This would replace what is previously contained approximately seven single-family detached homes, a more than 30-fold increase in density. Secondly, open space as previously noted and as noted in the staff analysis, enhanced care should be taken to thoughtful layout, design, and a monetize open space areas to match the character of the surrounding neighborhood one area. The current plan divides open space in such a way that it's effectively useless as an amenity. According to the City of Charlotte's own description of an N2 place type, these developments and I quote, typically include shared community amenities such as open spaces or recreational facilities and common parking areas. The proposed plan falls short of this vision. Thirdly, tree-save staff comments about the petitioners, about the petition appears to have included some disturbed land and areas without trees in proposed tree save areas. This is still truly a country lane that this land sits on. Every possible tree should be preserved for the benefit of the community. Despite these frustrations, I wanna emphasize that our community would like to come to a point where we can endorse this rezoning petition. We come to the table with our minds open to suggestions, which is why we didn't print protest shirts or make signs tonight. We're here, we aren't here simply complaining about traffic or about schools. While we would prefer this project to be developed under N1F zoning, the petitioner has made it clear he cannot financially make housing development under N1F work financially. Understanding this constraint, we've been in communication with the petitioner's attorney and are actively suggesting ideas that would make N2A zoning more palatable to our community. We're not asking for the impossible, just reasonable modifications that would help this development better respect the character of the surrounding community. So to recap, first, our neighborhood fully agrees with city planning staff's assessment that the proposed N2A zoning is inconsistent with established planning for our area. Secondly, we remain committed to finding a workable solution, even though we believe this process has been somewhat manipulated from the beginning. We respectfully ask that you deny this petition in its current form and encourage a revised proposal that will fully satisfy city planning staff's concerns and satisfy neighborhood concerns to make end to zoning more compatible with our neighborhoods character. Thank you very much for your time in consideration. Thank you, Mr. Brown. You have two minutes. Thank you. As I mentioned, we'll continue working with the VBAT we've received from the neighbors and staff and try to refile. I was amused, I think Councillor JOHNSON said, fear factor earlier about the comparison of the buy right. I need to do it. But if our slides are up, I do want to show you the challenges that we're facing. And we shared this with the neighbors and I don't think about it in here, so I don't think it was in an intimidating way. But essentially, we've looked at this site and buy right, we think it could be developed with 257 these town-honed duplex homes across both portions of the site. What we're proposing, we think is a lot better, we think it's better for the development team and the community. That's what it would look like by right. Those could be duplexes and triplexes. Again, that's 257. Our proposal only has 280. It goes from 9.2 dwelling units per acre to 10. So a very slight increase. But the benefits are we're providing all of the transportation commitments that were based on 500 units. We're providing a site plan that I think is much more advantageous and we're going to continue working. I guess I will quickly mention I think the developer on the site is looking for a partner to build townhomes. We're now to the fine tuning of neighbors asking how tall will they be? Well, part of having answers to that is knowing who's going to build the townhomes. So a lot of that is to have conversations so we can have more information about the exact architectural design to see if we can make some commitments to lower those building heights. So happy to answer any questions you have. We'll continue to dialogue with the neighbors and staff. Okay. We will begin with Mr. Driggs and then we'll go to Ms. Azmer. Thank you, Mayor Portem. So this has been an interesting history, I think to say the least. I believe I started hearing eight or 10 years ago that properties were being brought up with the idea of consolidation and there was discussion in the neighborhood about what that might look like. And then finally, it came into view with Mr. McCorkel. There was an initial proposal for 600 apartments, which I had the misfortune of hearing about at a community meeting attended by 150 people. And I can tell you it was a noisy occasion. At the same meeting, I was told, well, actually, there's another possibility. And I'm going, well, what is it then? We're here. Everybody's out there. What are we talking about? So we did manage then to eliminate from the conversation the apartments. And I made it clear that the department's not get support from me so I will comment though the staff has indicated they're not yet in support and the conversation continues I think we are close enough to warrant having this hearing tonight I believe that we will hear whenever the decision comes that changes have been made, that work has continued, changes have been made, and I'm hoping that those changes won't actually call for sending back. I think we can fix this. I have to say I was a little surprised by the neighbor's comments because the first half of your remarks sounded like a flat outout rejection and that is not the impression I got from talking to you. So it's unhelpful. I appreciate that the second half of your remarks was more in line with my understanding, which is that we are working on this proposal to get to a place where the neighbors have been properly heard and have had a voice. I've said repeatedly that in my opinion, the N2 designation is not the critical question and does not create a presumption about approval of N2s. It's a conditional plan and basically what's at stake here is will you allow this plan to occur and what is the designation that supports this plan? So I've tried in my conversations with the residents to talk in terms of the plan and not the end or the number because I disagree with the suggestion. There was a quote from the staff that says this will change the land use. That's a standard language. That's an ordinary thing. Whenever we pass anything, the language says, we thereby amend our plans so that this location isn't into. It doesn't imply anything in terms of what can happen nearby. So we're going to work to try and get to a place, and it needs more work. We're not there yet. To get to a place where changes that need to be made have been made and we reach a better accommodation with the residents and I'm very hopeful that we can resolve this because it has been going on for a long time and we spent in my mind more time than we should have dealing with the apartments before we could get down to the business of talking about a proposal that was, you know, a little more reasonable, like 280 units across these 20-something acres is in the context of the kind of things that are going on in Charlotte, not that far outside of the zone. So I would recommend colleagues that we not kind of get into a lot of discussion about this tonight, because it's unfinished. And obviously ask your questions, but I'm just saying there is more to come on this one. Thank you. Thank you. I have a massage mirror. Thank you. Mr. Dreeks bless your heart, because when I heard about apartments four years ago, I was like, let me send some prayers your way. Certainly, if you come a long way, I've been hearing about this for at least three to four years. But this rezoning petition, I appreciate the work that's gone into come to where we are today. But certainly I think the neighbours made it very clear there is still more work that needs to be done. I looked at staff's recommendations and staff does not, it's, staff has really taken very thoughtful approach in not recommending this, especially they are concerned about the density, the number of six unit buildings on the site, they're recommending that to be reduced. And also, I didn't hear anything about commitments that are being made to ensure that there is harmony with the neighborhood's character. Could you comment on that, Mr. Brown? Well, again, I think they almost have the site. 12 acres is being down zone to be single family. I don't know that's ever been done under the UDO. So I think that's a, I would surprise that the development teams suggest that. So I think that there's a great deal being done that half the site, instead of being duplexes or triplexes, like we talked about tonight, will be single family homes. As far as the remainder of the site, again, we've got a Charlotte Lighten campus across the street. We've got multi-family to the north. So we've got some kind of big campus type things going on. I think the transition, especially having the trees to here. And. and campus across the street. We've got multifamily to the north. So we've got some kind of big campus type things going on. I think the transition, especially having the trees here, and then if you can look, the single family homes that are adjacent to us, I think Matt Langston's done a nice job with the site plan. There are only six buildings that are facing that frontage and they're kind of in a rhythm of a single family home on the north side just two buildings. So I think there has been thoughtful design. Again, we're going to look at the building heights on that. And again, building heights here are allowed to be 48 feet. There's some very tall, there's some very big single family homes. But we're going to see if we can lower our building heights there and adjust our open space so that it flows a little more and maybe even folks from the neighbourhood come up and stroll through. Well, Mr. Brown, I appreciate the commitment you made to the back side and the work that you have done to address the height and open space issues. I guess my question is, have there been any commitments made on building materials to To align with the neighbourhoods character. Some but we can admit that we're not afraid and part of the reason we want to talk to the ultimate builders is to know the building materials they're using in the building heights. One of the things on building heights they said well can you lower building heights? Well we could but if you in your urban districts you see town homes that have flat roofs. Well, they have a lower height, but that doesn't really look consistent with the peaked roofs in the neighborhood. So those are the kind of fine tuning that we're doing now that we want to make sure, and I've kind of said that the neighborhood, we can lower the height with flat roofs, but my thought is they probably wouldn't want flat roofs. So I think in, you know, over the next week or so as we're revising our plan, those will be some things that we can incorporate. I look forward to hearing more. So maybe this question is for staff on number four, under staff, rational for recommendations. When you talk about the building materials to ensure the neighbourhood's characters preserved, are you referring to the hide or are you referring to something else? For the building materials specifically, we've requested that they add a list of prohibited building materials rather than preferred building materials specifically. Yeah, we're referring to, we've requested that they add a list of prohibited building materials rather than preferred building materials as the initial plan currently states. And we'd probably like to see a certain commitment to other petitions have committed to things like masonry water tables and things like that. Some specific language to how the design will look and feel, which we feel is lacking at this point. Yeah. So I think that's what I'm alluding to, not necessarily the height, but the type of material if you don't want to all look like a box. We do see that throughout the city. And I think we need to be intentional about that. In terms of, I know that Mr. Olersky did a pretty good job compiling this package. I appreciate how neighbors came together and really been working on this and use your time ten minutes very factively. I'd like to see more of that from other neighbours. It's great to see and I look forward to continued negotiation as Mr. Drake said. I think you guys are not too far apart from where we were a couple of years ago. So I think we can get there with Mr. Drake's negotiation skills. That's all I have. Thank you. Thank you. You want to speak last? Yeah, go ahead. I have Ms. Brown and then I'll have Ms. Molina. Ms. Molina was first, but that's fine. She was. One question. You two sort it out. Okay. We're trying to. Thank you Mayor Prodame. I'll be brief. First of all, Mr. Orlowski, thank you all for coming out tonight to express your concerns from a neighborhood perspective. I also share the same comment. I think we were talking amongst ourselves as we were flipping through what you provided. It's hard to make zoning language simple and you really made it very, very simple and I can tell that you've taken your time to understand what's in hand. And obviously, there's some extended conversation that's been had and Mr.. Driggs, I also want to say to you, you get some of the most profound turnout when it comes to your residence. I mean, as far as like community meeting, we're like 40 folk there, and just it is fantastic. The amount of community members that- That's right, use that word, but yeah. That's a big meeting, right? Like, and so it says something, right? To say that the residents throughout in multiple situations have been so engaged in expressing their concerns, but I really feel like based on what I see, I, you know, and to our staff for having the foresight and looking at this objectively and saying, hey, we're not there yet, right? I think that's good. I'm really happy to see that. But I really think we got the right ingredients for the cake baking here, right? I think you have, you know, someone who is highly adept at this information, leading, you know, what would be the mediation portion of what this would be with a profound understanding if I know that you all recall in your district. We did really have a bus load of people from your district. It really come out with T-shirts in complete unison to show how they felt about a particular petition. So we do know that you guys are capable of doing things like that. But I also want to say that, like I said, you have the right ingredients. You have someone who represents you who has highly adept at this information. And Mr. Brown, we see him very often. And he's pretty fair when it comes to being in a position of mediating what this could look like, right? Since this policy document has been approved, it's one of the things you saw with our debate tonight, right? We grapple with it because we have these things that fall outside of the context of what the rules would say. And then there's this word that you keep hearing, the by-right word that even for community members that aren't, you know, as deeply embedded into this conversation, by-right simply means based on the policy, this is what the petitioner can do, right? And this policy documents support stensity, so it means that, you know, by-right without having to act the council, this petitioner, if they own the land, they can have a density purpose for buying a petition or buying a parcel of land that supports said, you know, density in that space. And so sometimes, in some cases, what would be by right is actually better than what, or what would be petitioned in some cases is actually better than what could happen by right. I like to take these opportunities, because again, these aren't things that our community members are adept at. And in this case, we have community members that are highly adept at the information. So there's this skewed possibility for who we talk to. So I thought that would be a good opportunity to say, I do look forward to this coming back, because I do, like I said, you guys got the right ingredients in this cake that you're baking. And I feel like once it comes back for a decision trusting, the leadership of council member Driggs, who also chairs the TPD committee. So leading this conversation on a monthly basis and some of the incremental changes, you have one of the most adept person at this policy that you guys can help that has the ability to kind of usher in this conversation. So that's all I have and I look forward to what's going to come back. Thank you, Ms. Brown. Yes, thank you so much, Mayor Patim. I just want to say to his name right, Mr. Matt Orlowski. Yeah. I said it correct. Okay, awesome. I just want to say to you and your constituents for coming out tonight, thank you so much. I'm big on community support and community engagement. So I like the way that you come out and represent your community. A lot of times I think from the community perspective, where people watching in, when they see the petitions getting approved, again, the UDO, the staff, zoning, a lot of, we may be thinking opposition, but community is a big part of how we move forward with intentionality and standing with you in solidarity. Mr. Brown, I will say is a very fair person. I like working with him. We'll go back and forth with you and negotiate, but I'm big on community. And so you showed up tonight. So whether you had other community members here or not, they had you. And we're listening and it's recorded. And so everybody can see it all over the world, actually, but particularly in the city of Charlotte. It's on UT. It's on YouTube. It's on the city of Charlotte channel. And it's going live right now. But it's always saved. And all of our meetings, you can go back and look at them and dissect them and put things together you can hold us accountable to what we say and what we support. So community to me is well represented because you were here. This packet that you put together is like a college project. It's like a plus and you broke it down, the way that you should have broken down. So thank you so much. It's very understandable and I hope with Mr. Dries leadership who I admire a lot, that you all can come to coming ground and work something out, but I wanted to tell you it doesn't matter who is in present the fact that you were here. You have worked echo loud for your other community and they should be proud to have you representing them. So thank you. Thank you, Ms. Brown. But before I hand it back over to Mr. Driggs, I just want it to also think the community for coming out on a Eastern Monday. But you. Ms. Brown, before I hand it back over to Mr. Driggs, I just wanted to also think the community for coming out on a Eastern Monday, but you know, we're here as well on a Eastern Monday. And I certainly want you to have great confidence that there was nothing nefarious about holding the public hearing this evening, but I'm sure as the district rep has stated, it's about moving a conversation forward. And I spoke earlier about the spirit of cooperation in these petitions with the community. And I certainly have heard that there's a spirit of cooperation here. And as was stated earlier, hopefully you can get to a place where you're on the same page. So look forward to the continued work and of course Mr. Driggs will do a great job of leading that conversation. And with that I'm going to hand it over to Mr. Driggs. All right well let's wrap up. I wanted to say first of all Mr. Brown used the term down zoning a couple of times. Just want to be a little careful in the context of SB 382 to make it clear, okay? We are not doing anything because I know a lot of legislators are probably watching tonight. So this is being done by the petitioner in response to input from residents in terms of the not making the maximum use of the potential of the N1A. So I'll just point that out. The other thing I wanted to say to the residents of country Lane, you have all been heard tonight. I was there when there were 150 of you I think. I heard then. But you have to benefit a really excellent representation. And that is a huge advantage for me and for you because it means that we can have a constructive engagement. Often in these situations, you get a lot of noise from people and it's hard to bring some structure into the conversation. So I just want to assure people that I'm listening and that the message on behalf of country lane was delivered very effectively tonight. We all heard it and I look forward to continuing to work with residents and their leaders and the staff, frankly, to tackle some of the questions that haven't been answered yet. Appreciate your being here tonight. Thank you. Move close. Second. Okay. Have a motion to close. And second, all in favor raise hands. Any opposed? That is unanimous. We will move on to agenda item number 19. Thank you. District of 2024, 1, 2, 4, by aviation metals of North Carolina, Inc. Approximately 7.32, located along Business Center Drive, West of Little Rock Road, East of Moore's Park Drive, and North of I-85 in District 3. Ms. Brown's district, the current zoning is N1A, ANDO proposed zoning is N1A, ANDO, proposed zoning is ML1CD, ANDO, conditional noise airport news disclosure overlay. Staff recommends approval of this petition upon outstanding issues related to transportation. And may I ask before staff's presentation, do we have Miss Hendrickson? Okay, so after staff's presentation, Mr. Carmichael will have 10 minutes and then the opposition will have 10 minutes in aggregate to state your case. Mr. Carmichael will have a two-minute Rebuttal. Thank you. Thank you. Petition 2024-124. It is approximately 7.32 acres located on the north side of Business Center Drive, east of Melody Lane and west of Little Rock Road. It is undeveloped and wooded and surrounded by a mix of uses, including established single family to the north, recently developed industrial to the east and interstate 85 to the south. Current zoning is N1A, ANDO, that is airport noise disclosure overlay. Proposed zoning is ML1CD, A, N, D, O. There's 2040 policy map, recommends the neighborhood one place tight. The proposal would allow for up to 70,000 square feet of gross floor area. Of uses permitted in the ML1 zoning district. There are a number of uses that are prohibited, highlighted by adult use, animal shelter, various automobile oriented uses, Cremates, or M, would limit the number of principal buildings to 1, or allow for up to 40% of the gross floor area to be devoted to office uses. Commits to a minimum 100 foot class A landscape yard, limits building height to 45 feet, locates the sole driveway near the eastern property boundary, furthest away from adjacent single-family dwellings, and commits to an eight foot planning strip and eight foot sidewalk along the site's frontage of business center drive Staff recommends approval of this petition upon resolution of outstanding issues related to transportation The petition is inconsistent with the policy map recommendation for the neighborhood one place type However, the site is located along an interstate frontage road adjacent to an industrial use to the east and within the airport noise disclosure overlay. The petition commits to providing a minimum 100-foot buffer to mitigate impacts to the established single-family detached residential uses to the north of the site. Petition prohibits many of the most noxious uses permitted in the ML1 zoning district. The site is within two-thirds of a mile of the Little Rock Road interchange with Interstate 85. And within two miles of the Charlotte Douglas International Airport. And I'll be happy to take any questions following comments from the petitioner and community. Thank you. Welcome Mr. Carmichael. Thank you, Madam Mayor Pro Tem members of City Council and the zoning committee. I'm John Carmichael and I'm here representing the petitioner tonight. With me are Jason Dolan and Todd Brown. I think I should have a power point. Thank you. So as Joe said, the site contains a little over 7.3 acres is located on the north side of business center drive between Little Rock Road and Moore's Park Drive. I-85 is immediately to the south of Business Center Drive. This is an aerial photograph of the site. And this is assumed in aerial photograph of the site, obviously. But here's the site outlined in green. The parcels to the north contain single family residential uses. The parcel to the west here is currently vacant, and the parcel to the east is owned I-1CD, and it contains an office warehouse and distribution building that contains 156,217 square feet of gross floor area according to the tax records. This is a photo looking into the site from Business Center Drive. This is a panoramic photo of the site's frontage along Business Center Drive. I use that feature the other day for the first time. And as you can see from these photos, it's a wooded site. And there are no residential uses on Business Center Drive. So the site is currently zone N1A as are the parcels of land located to the north and the west of the site. As previously mentioned, the parcel to the east of the site is zone I1CD and is an improved with an office warehouse and distribution building. The petitioners requesting that the site be re-zoned from the N1A airport noise disclosure overlay district to the ML1 CDE airport noise disclosure overlay district to accommodate the development of a building on the site that would contain up to 70,000 square feet of gross floor area and would be devoted to office warehouse and distribution uses and potentially other uses permitted in the I1 excuse me ML1 CD-Zoney district, but there are numerous prohibited uses as Mr. Mangham stated. The maximum building height on the rezoning plan is 45 feet. So this is the rezoning plan. This is business center drive here and then this is I-D-5. Access into the site would be via this driveway from Business Center Drive. The access drive is located at the eastern edge of the site, further away from the single-family homes to the north of the site. Passionate vehicle parking would be located in front of the building. The truck court would be located to the rear of the building. An eight-foot planing strip and an eight-foot wide sidewalk would be installed along the site's frontage on business center drive, a minimum 100 foot wide class A landscape yard would be established along the northern and western boundary of the site. This type A landscape yard would be undisturbed, and there's also a stream buffer along the northern portion of the site that's a little wider than 100 feet at various points on the site. This is CIDOT's trip generation table. According to CIDOT, if the site were developed with its content item, it would generate 241 daily trips. The proposed zoning would generate a 149 trips according to CIDOTOT We appreciate the plain staff's recommendation of approval and we will satisfy the two outstanding Issues this week. They're really adding a typical note or standard note and adding labels to the rezoning plan and We're happy answering questions and we'll Look forward to responding to the community's comments as well. We appreciate it. Thank you. Miss Hendrickson and Mr. Galagos and Mr. Togunar-Lillian and Mr. Phillips. If you all come down upon arriving at the podium, you will have 10 minutes in aggregate. There's gentlemen here. Here. Here. Here. Here. Here. Here. Here. Here. Here. Here. Here. Here. Here. Here. Here. Here. Here. Here. Here. I'm sorry. It's a round. And before you speak, can you just state your name so the clerk can capture it. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Can you do more? Can you do more? Sorry. Thank you. Thank you. Thank zoning committee. My name is John Gallagos. I'm a wildlife biologist with 40 years of service with the US Fish and Wildlife Service. That included habitat assessments and restorations. My opposition to rezoning Petition 2024-124 stems from the following two key points. First, the proposed rezoning parcels include the Tyson Branch Creek drainage basin. This narrow creek transfers stormwater's westward, past the new warehouses, under Business Center Drive and under Highway 85. Negative impacts to the surface and groundwater hydrology of Tysra Branch Creek is a major concern. Second, overlaying this drainage basin is a thick mixed hardwood softwood forest that benefits the residents of the adjacent Moors Park 2 community and the surrounding landscape. Most of the forest will be removed should the rezoning be approved. This loss will create serious negative impacts and hardships to the Moores Park 2 neighborhood and resident wildlife populations. Changes to the surface and groundwater hydrology of types of branch creek generated by the proposed rezoning include the following four concerns. One increased volumes and velocities of stormwater runoff from extensive new impervious surfaces discharging into Tysra Branch Creek. Two, groundwater levels rising with sustained creek levels, saturating backyard soils and flooding low-lying properties. Three, increased soil erosion along Tysra Branch Creek and around the culverts passing under Highway 85 and Business Center Drive, raising a potential threat to Highway 85 and Business Center Drive. Four, erosion of the creek bed itself could eventually expose the petroleum pipeline that runs underneath Tysra Branch Creek and create the potential for a fuel spill. Loss of most of the existing forest will remove the insulating natural blanket that surrounds the Southern Morse Park to community. This forest buffer provides a residence with protection from the following. Views of traffic on Highway 85, the airport and business center drive, traffic noise from Highway 85 and business center drive, air quality degradation since trees purify the air, loss of the resident wildlife population, lost green aesthetics around their homes, and property value declines. So I stand opposed to this rezoning petition and respectfully ask you to deny it. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Sharon Hendrickson representing the Morris Park community. I want to share with you my personal experience with finding this neighborhood and how I fell in love with Morris Park and why it means so much to us. After 41 years as a public school teacher, I retired and spent the next year deciding where to relocate. My husband is a Vietnam veteran who has head Parkinson's for the last 33 years. I needed a place to accommodate his mobility issues, space where he could go outside without feeling like he was too close to people and within 20 minutes of wherever we needed to travel. It was perfect. One neighbor who pays a landscaper has come to my rescue and helped me in cutting grass and raking leaves. A single mother who worked full time with four children brought me something to eat every day that I was going through cancer treatments. A little eight-year-old girl came running down the street to give me a white rose and say happy Mother's Day. It was the first time I'd heard the words that day. Until a few months ago, I called my neighborhood diversif and now that is no longer an acceptable word, I now am calling it eclectic. But what it is to us is where we feel most at home. My name is Norman Phillips. I'm a 25 year resident of Morse Park Drive and our Morse Park community. We're not obviously a prominent road or a Myers Park or a Valentine. We're just a little neighborhood that you probably not heard of before. More park drive and more park and melody lane. We are a neighborhood in which we think in terms of love because that's how we feel about each other. We love each other. You can see our neighborhood here. It's a representation of our heart. What's really neat about our little neighborhood, what helps us so is our geographic way that we're located. We have a center island in which we have about five or six or seven homes and then we're surrounded on the perimeter by other homes and we have one way in and one way out. And it allows daily contact with one another and that has made a tremendous difference in the quality of our life in our neighborhood. We'll stand up to any of the other neighborhoods in Charlotte in terms of quality of life. That's why we're here. And because we truly love one another. In the last ten years, we have invested a significant amount of money in improvements in our neighborhood because we believe in our neighborhood, a little West Charlotte neighborhood. My mom and my dad, I spoke to them about helping me to improve our neighborhood. We've put in, my family's put in about $2 million in this little West Charlotte neighborhood, and we were the catalyst for the rest of our neighborhood who put in another two million dollars in improvements and renovations. We've built new brand new brick homes in empty lots. We've renovated all of our homes. The sad part is since this petition has come out, everything has stopped. We've got we've got neighbors in a state of fear over what we're going through right now and they put their homes up for sale. That's tragic. We've got one home in the neighborhood that our family has, my mother bought as a living inheritance for my son. And that project has been put on hold. We've gutted it out. That stopped five months ago because of the concern about plumbing and property values. The neighborhoods already been hurt by the first warehouse that was put in, in which we received no notice on that. And we've got no positive contribution from that warehouse. There's been more traffic, 18 wheelers coming in our neighborhood. We've got pictures on my phone, full of pictures of 18 wheelers already. Can't get out of our little circle. We've got more encampments of homeless people up behind that existing warehouse. We're going to see more of that with this aviation metals warehouse. We've got more parked cars at night. We know there's drugs, we know there's prostitution. We even have half-naked people that we have called walking in our neighborhood from the first warehouse, leaving some of their underwear in our road because I've personally had to pick that up. We're going to get more of that from this second warehouse. We know this. You're looking at PhD level individuals in land use and rezoning because these are the people that live here. We have an absolutely awesome neighborhood. This aviation metals warehouse will be the demise, unfortunately, to one of the best and highest quality of life neighborhoods in the city of Charlotte. If you folks allow this to happen. Okay, I'm to have to wrap it up. You have about a minute and a half left. Thank you. Dr. Schatzuner-Eli, well, why everybody has expressed I think I'm not going to go over that, because it's similar, but we've been, we actually, the newer addition to that neighborhood and we absolutely love it. We used to live by Providence and Valentine and we are feeling that peace and that sentiment of commitment and neighborhood love that they're all sharing even by us being there fairly new. I'm here to express on behalf of me and my husband to express concern and to ask for empathy because the community is facing a great of resorting for industrial use. The developer had other commercial land options, but chose this area for its lower price. It's targeted for industrial resounding, despite other available commercial land, meaning the developer decision is driven solely by the pricing of the land that they purchased. And again, I want to focus on, this is a community that is at edge, everybody's feeling uneasy. We are feeling pushed out. And obviously, the investment that we've had in our properties also feel at risk. So by granting this resounding, honestly, this is going to be a big damage for the entire community. So we want you to help us in choosing to continue to be a sustainable community center in growth, protect our last remaining green space, prevent further environmental and public safety issues and respect the voices of those who call this neighborhood home. But please vote no. Thank you. One last thing. Martin Luther King says it's always the right time to do the right thing and that's today. Do the right thing. Vote no against this. Thank you very much. Thank you, sir. Okay. Mr. Carmichael? Have two minutes. No, that's it. Mr. Phillips. Last but not the lady. I'm not sure. Okay. You ready for us? Yes sir. I'm going to ask Jason Dullin real quick to talk about some of the concerns with the creek. Sure Jason D Dolen, 610 Eastmorehead Street Charlotte. I know some of the folks spoke about erosion to the creek, increase of flood waters or storm water from the site. We will abide by all of the requirements that post construction and the UDO require us to be to follow so storm water will not be any higher than what it currently is. We will have a storm water pond that will control that and as Mr. Carmichael mentioned we're going to have a hundred foot under stirred buffer along the rear of the property so there won't be any erosion that will occur down near the creek there should not be any issues with exposing an existing gas line that is in that area. Thank you we're happy to answer any questions that you may have. Thank you. All right. We'll start with Ms. Azamira. Thank you. Let me first start by saying that regardless of where you live, whether it's West, East, North, or South, we all treat you equally. I just want to make sure that I understand that your neighborhood is very special in how you care for each other. I think that's truly special to live in that neighborhood. I was reviewing this rezoning petition and I struggle with it because there is close proximity to residential neighborhoods. So I understand the fear and anxiety that neighbors have for manufacturing side coming so close to them, especially concerns around clean air, water runoff, just many environmental impact. So, you know, we can only be truly a great city if we address quality of life issues. And I don't know how this rezoning would improve our quality of life. You know, I see this as something that will negatively impact the residents nearby and their quality of life. So I struggle with this one. I will continue to work with the district rep before the final decision next month. I was going through staff's recommendation, and I know that this is inconsistent with the 2040 policy map, but there is a rationale behind it. I don't know if I necessarily agree with the rationale that you have. If you can speak more to that rationale, and if you can also address some of the quality of life issues of having a manufacturing side being so close to residential neighborhood. Sure. So this petition follows a petition next door that was approved about four years ago. So we view this as being somewhat similar. We realized it's getting, I'm not sure it was actually closer to some of the units, but the frontage on business center drive and on Interstate 85, I'm not sure that that's the best location for by right development if it went in under N1A and apparently it hasn't been developed under that existing zoning. But the UDO does provide for the buffering against N1 place type. against so you have the 100 feet class a landscape yard. And basically on top of that, you have 100 foot protected stormwater or protected water buffer for the creek. So we felt that in the balance we were allowing for expansion of this commercial or industrial use while still protecting the neighborhood to the rear. So in terms of this additional buffer, I think that's great. But it doesn't really address the underlying quality of life issues. You know, industrial traffic is different than residential traffic, especially when you have to sit through 18-wheel trucks driving near your neighborhoods when you have small kids. I just, I struggle with this, especially when we had three to three to four years ago, we did not have UDO adopted. You know, now that we have UDO adopted, we have the 2040 policy map. Now, and to recommend this, when we, it's inconsistent with 2040 policy map, it just, I feel like we just adopted something, but then now we are recommending it, even though it's not consistent. After the neighbor's feedback and input that went into it, it just doesn't align overall. But that's all I have. I'm sure district I have more to say. Thank you. Thank you. I have Ms. Watlington. Okay. Thank you. My concerns are pretty similar to what Councilmember Esmeral and others have mentioned. When I hear, yes, we understand that this is a promulcation for industrial and I can see the purpose overall for the use near the airport that said exactly what has been said before. This should feel like progress to the residents, especially those most impacted. And from what I'm hearing, what they've seen from the last petition, there are quite a bit of outstanding issues. So I will be very much interested to understand how those specific things that were mentioned could be addressed with this. I see it appears to me that this petition is much closer, especially behind at least four or five neighborhoods directly. So I would imagine that when it comes to buffering, when it comes to sound, all of those kinds of things, those would be things that I would love to see addressed in creative ways. Certainly as you turn into this neighborhood, I see that there's another parcel there that's not a part of this petition. But I do think that there needs to be some kind of separation, some kinds of transition so that as people are coming into their neighborhood that they're proud of, that they have invested in, it should feel like a neighborhood area not a service road with a bunch of manufacturing coming from this side of things. So I think we got a long way to go on this one. Certainly I understand the use, but I hope that there is a way from a livability standpoint, even aesthetically, that this can feel like more of an integration into the existing neighborhood and something that would add to it rather than subtract. So I'll be interested to see what comes in conversations. And can I just clarify one thing? This is light and dust real. I'm not that I'm not that to minimize anybody's concerns, but it's not like a manufacturing facility with smoke stacks and that sort of thing. I just want to clear that up. Absolutely. Understood and forgive me. I said manufacturing. That's okay, you just want to clear it up. Thank you. I had list of drinks. Thank you Mayor I have Mr. Driggs. Thank you, Mayor Pro Tem. Thank you all for being here. I can tell you you have delivered your message very forcefully. We hear you. And Mr. Phillips in particular, great speaker, okay. So when Ms. Brown doesn't want to be on council anymore, you're about running. I know this is painful, partly because in effect. Yeah, I'm not seeing that. Yeah. Where you going to support? Yeah, I know. I know. This is hard because you're losing what is effectively a park there right now. I mean a wooded area And that's something tragic that unfortunately is happening all around Charlotte and From the staff recommendation you can tell this is a bit of a dilemma for us. There are reasons why this Alliance with our policy and then there are other reasons like if you heard the conversation earlier, why we might feel that this is not something that sits right, but we just don't feel good about it. I would recommend that you underscore some of your concerns about add behavior and so on, with maybe evidence of service calls to CMPD or some kind of data like that that indicates that you have had that experience. It provides like a data, some data around that. And also the audible noise. So if they're going to have trucks there, it can be quantified what the noise level would be in your neighborhood from the presence of those trucks. Because of course internally your neighborhood will continue to exist. The problem is what's going on nearby. And so what I will be looking at is the kind of spillover effects from having this development as it affects you noise, crime, and the fact that it's on 485, for example, is a reason why that might be considered. 85. 85? Yes, I'm sorry, I'm on 485. Anyway, that might be considered a reason to have a facility like this, but there are also reasons why we wouldn't. So I'm just saying I look forward to being guided by my capable colleague and appreciate you're being here tonight. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. I have Ms. Molina. Thank you Mayor Proteman. I'll be brief because I don't want to stall the district rep. I could see you guys from the back, by the way, we got a screen back there so I could see you. Thank you guys for coming out tonight. It really does help us a lot to know when you take the time and you drive from where you live and you come to the government center and you let us know exactly what you feel. It gives us a real-time view. It's really special, like I said earlier, and I'm a mother, and it's my first job. I do that before I do anything else. And the neighborhood I live in, I know my neighbors, our children,, you know, seen each other for a lifetime. And we go to the same stores and we do some of the same things and those things matter. You know, so we don't take you taking the time to come to let us know what you feel lightly. And it is like what Mr. Drake said, it's a challenge because there is this guiding policy document that says one thing and all of that stuff. But what he said and working with your council member, she can guide you through what that looks like because her job is really to look at what's here and look at what you're saying. And if possible, find a medium, right? For where if this can go forward, then she can look at a way for it too. And if it can, it can. Right? But she would be the person who could guide you through that process to make sure that like what Mr. Drake said, I get it. We all have, you know, those things that we feel very passionately about. But in these things, it's like what Mr. Jake said, what will the noise do to where you live? And how will you be affected based on where you live? And she could help you put all that together. You know, feel free to call anybody that you want, but your council member is fully capable and will be able to guide you through this process so that you can continue to, if it's possible, right? And if it's not, then we'll look to her to, you know, while she continues to work with you through this process. A vote won't happen right now because I heard you say vote no. So the hearing process is what this is. This is basically you coming and this is where you can say exactly what you're doing right now and the petitioner says what they're doing and then after this after this is done then you have the continued conversation with your rep. It's not over now, right? You're gonna talk to Miss Brown and she's gonna let you know what's possible, what's not. But typically we have a vote the following month that's important to note that doesn't always happen, but it's possible Based on where you guys arrive in conversation. So lean on your district representative Continue your conversation after you leave here with her because tonight we don't vote. We just listen and we ask questions. That's What the purpose of the hearing process is and then once we've had a hearing, then whatever we're having a hearing about goes to a vote. So that's, and trust me, I got neighbors to, that's not always clear from a neighbor perspective, because why would you have to know that, right? So for anybody watching, and there's a hearing process, where we listen, we gather notes, we do research, we listen to the representative, find out what's happened, listen to the residents if they're present, and then, you know, if there's no issues, then it can actually possibly go to a vote after that, but if there is an issue, then it can continue. I know you guys heard because you were here, there was one that Mr. Drake's been working on for a long, long, long time. just can drag out or it could be quick but it's really going to depend on you guys heard because you were here. There was one that Mr. Drake's been working on for a long long long time. This can drag out or it could be quick, but it's really going to depend on you guys. And that's being as transparent as I possibly can to make sure that you understand when you walk away what your next steps are. So that's all I want to thank you. Thank you. I have Miss Brown. Is there anybody else? Okay. Just me. All right. Thank you so much. Hey, Morris. TAP. My people. I love y'all. It's been amazing to get to know you, to attend your community meetings, to be out there, to change my shoes, to take off my heels for y'all. I mean, to really dig into this petition and to see your concerns, Mr. Phillips has called me, emailed me, sent packages, helped me understand the biologists. Is that correct? May not know how to pronounce your name, but I know Mr. Phillips, and I know he represents. You are very well. I've been out at your property because I care. I want to understand your concerns. My community, my constituents mean a lot to me. Your neighborhood is so spectacular as I'm looking. My mom is aging. She's fine. She's 70, but I take care of my mom and my mom lives with me. And so your neighborhood is a neighborhood that I consider moving into. Let's just be honest about it. It's a neighborhood that's historic, has value. I love everything about your neighborhood. I love the people in the neighborhood. Matter of fact, my aunt took care of one of your residents over there. And that's how I first learned of your neighborhood. But it's a hidden jewel in your neighborhood. I wanna go, and so I've supported more Shapa from day one when they called me. The one concern I did have though, Mr. Phillips, because I'm very transparent, as I asked you to meet with myself in a developer and you never did. I have to be fair, you know, even though I love the community and a huge advocate for my constituents I have to show impartiality. And so I have to be fair, you know, even though I love the community and I'm a huge advocate for my constituents I have to show impartiality and so I have to make sure that we meet and that but you didn't mean it to me. It can't hold on. Hang on, Ms. Brown. Hold on, hang on. No outbursts, okay? Thank you. So what I'm saying Mayor Pro Tem is that I reached out to Mr. Phillips through email. And I asked Mr. Phillips to meet with me and Mr. Carmichael. And I never got a response that never happened. I know they may have met separately, but I'm the district rep. So I need to meet with everybody collectively so I can understand both sides of the spectrum. But that's neither here nor there. I just, for the record, I want people to know that I'm being fair, but I want to go back to staff. I care a lot about community, I care a lot about character, about preserving communities. I want to go back to staff and kind of go back to what Council member, As you may have said, when it came to being inconsistent with the 2040 policy and then the rational for recommendation. Can we see, can we talk about how we got there on this petition when it's inconsistent and the concerns that we have? Is there a reason? I'm just concerned about it. So for my knowledge. So our first kind of look at it is referencing the position it was approved four years ago, aside by beside it kind of examining that rationale, considering the access directly out to the Queen City Drive or to the business center to Little Rock Road. And I understand that sounds like some tractor trailers have been through the neighborhood. I would not, I wouldn't want to drive a tractor trailer through that neighborhood. and sometimes GPS can direct you incorrectly. Access being away from the neighborhood, neighborhood has three access points to Tukkha CG Road. I would imagine a lot of folks prefer going that route versus from the neighborhood. But getting back to the rationale, these are not decisions that we take lightly. We spend a lot of time analyzing, recognizing the surrounding community, working with the petitioner to limit the uses that would be allowable on the property. And recognizing that there is a 100 foot buffer that's required between this use and the adjacent residential zoning and one place type. And that's how we arrived at the decision to recommend approval. Okay, so I'm going to go back to Mr. Phillips because I spent a great deal of time out in the community. And Mr. Phillips prepared a package that was very knowledgeable and authentic and understanding for me on their opposition for the community. And as you can see, some of my colleagues still have concerns, the same concerns that I have and I'm just trying to understand if there is any other concerns that we have that can be addressed. This is for me when I started out with Moorstia Parole, you know, Stan with the community and it was a heart note for me based off of the information that they share with me. But when I look at the information from Mr. Carmichael, being willing to meet, I just hope that we can come to some type of common ground. And if not, feasible for the community, that's something that we have to continue to work for. I like the relationship that I have, professional relationship for the racket with Mr. Phillips, in the more shaple community. I understand their concerns. I've been out in the community more than one time, but I spent a great deal of time. And I understood what they were saying. I got to see with the naked eye, the gas lines, the preservation we did see, a tent, encampment back there that's beginning to develop, but I would have to say in defense to that, that's happening all over the city of Charlotte. District 3 probably is being hit the hardest, not just in your community, but on Woodland Road. And still Creek where I live, off South Trion, off Woodland, on Billy Graham. So the homeless encampment is something that the city of Charlotte and the city council would have to take. A deeper dive dive in and a deeper look at I would have to stand And say that I don't think it's because of the development from the warehouse I if you are unhoused and I support people that don't have anywhere to stay they're going to try to put up A tent anywhere they can or anywhere to see a wooded area and so I am concerned with it being can move forward. I'm not sure if we can move forward. I'm not sure if we can move forward. I'm not sure if we can move forward. I'm not sure if we can move forward. I'm not sure if we can move forward. I'm not sure if we can move forward. I'm not sure if we can move forward. I'm not sure if we can move forward. I'm not sure if we can move forward. and see what resolution we can come to or not. But that's all I have, Mayor Procurement. Thank you so much. Thank you. Is there a motion to close the motion? So move. and see what resolution we can come to or not. But that's all I have, Mayor Prozame, thank you so much. Thank you. Is there a motion to close public here? So move. Second. All right. All in favor of closing public hearing, raise hands. Any opposed? That is unanimous. Thank you. Community members for coming out this evening. Absolutely. Thank you, Mr. Carmichael. Thank you. Applause. We will move on to agenda item number 20, petition number 2024144 by Digital Morse Chapel LLC. The location is approximately 156.23 acres located south of I-85 east of Moralschappel Road and west of Sam Wilson Road and district three, Ms. Brown's district. The current zoning is I-2 CD. Proposed zoning is I-2 CD SPA. Staff recommends the approval of this petition upon resolution of outstanding issues related to transportation. After staff's presentation, I have once again Mr. Brown as well as Mr. Shirley and Mr. Alves who will have three minutes and aggregate to address. Thank you. Thank you. The site is over 150 acres located south of I-85 along the east side of Moore's Chapel Road, west of Sam Wilson Road. It's in an area where we have a lot of industrial development as well as some single-family residential uses. Property is currently its own general industrial conditional. That's as a result of the previous reasoning. And they are proposing to go to the UDO's equivalent of that district manufacturing logistics to with the additional plan as well. This would be consistent with the policy-mats recommendation for M&L on the site. The proposal would modify portions of the existing entitlements from petition 2020-049. 2020 petition called for a development of 1.5 million square feet of warehousing and industrial uses across five structures. And this resounding proposes that the site may alternatively be developed with 3 million square feet at data center uses. Much of the conditions in the previous plan will stay in place and the data center uses are genuinely thought to be less intense than the previously entitled warehousing and heavy industrial uses. Staff recommends approval of this petition upon resolution about sending issues related transportation. The petitioner has been working with C.DOT on these items to ensure that commitments from that 2020 plan and the TIS are carried over into this petition. Based on work that's been done in the past couple weeks, the revised site plan going into zoning commission should greatly improve on those out-saving issues. This proposal is consistent with 2040 policy map and proposed modifications to current settlements, so though it is, and industrial development and zoning is already in place surrounding the site. And its location near I-85, Wilkinson Boulevard and the airport helps provide regional access making it suitable location for large-scale industrial development. The equitable growth framework in this area also identifies access to employment as the highest priority. So this development for industrial uses would speak to that. And I'll be happy to take any questions. And sorry, I misspoke, this is a site plan amendment. I think I call it MNL2. This is a site plan amendment to the existing conditions of that 2020 plan. And I'll take any questions following petitioner comments. Thank you, Mr. Brown. Thank you. Mayor Pro Tem, Council Member, Senate Committee members, Colin Brown on behalf of Digital More Chapel LLC, which is digital real-realty Andrew Alves is here from digital. This is interesting. When Holly says this, she says, oh, this is a major rezoning, but just kind of want to recap what does make it interesting. This was a very high profile rezoning, the 150 acres of land about four years ago. It was rezoned by the Keith Corporation to be a logistics facility. So lots of trucks coming in and out of this property. There was great debate with the community. We came, I think we met with this brown at the end of last year, Just say, hey, here's a unique opportunity. So the site is already zoned for industrial. Digital Realty is a developer of data centers. As you know, there are great demand for those. This property is already permitted for data centers. So when they purchased it, they knew they could come in And build a data center right now with no zoning changes, right? What we also know is there's great demand in Charlotte for data centers, and if this is a place where a data center is allowed, what we learned is the zoning on this property allows 1.5 million square feet of warehousing and logistics uses. So if you've seen a warehouse, you know, they're one story, they've got these racks that go up. They can be 60 feet tall. So, digital's got it, and there's great demand for data centers. It's zoned. They can now build 1.5 million square feet of data center. But frankly, that's a little bit of a waste. If this site is already entitled for that, its buildings are allowed. They can have buildings that are 60 feet tall. What digital could do is they could put a second floor on the building and put another set of data centers, not have to serve any more land in Mecklenburg County. But under ordinance, if we add a second floor, it counts as twice as much square feet. So the whole purpose of this rezoning is to allow a second floor. The building does not get any taller, right? Because the building that's allowed today can be a warehouse that gets taller. So this is how we started the conversation. We went out to the neighborhood, which was very involved in the first rezoning. We had an initial community outreach meeting and then we had our official meeting which we had good turnout for too. The feedback was pretty good. You know, frankly, folks said, you know what? We would love for this to be undeveloped. We would love for that to be a conservation area, but that ship is sailed, and so this will probably be less intensive, we'll have less trucks, so that is the look of things. Digital has already dedicated area for a future park and has plans for a green way, so anyway, good conversations with neighbors, they've had good turnout, I think they're pleased to have a less intensive Use in their neighborhood than what's currently loud fewer trucks less traffic and kind of a quieter neighbor So happy to share that we are I do owe dr. Epps a call I was a little bit out of pocket last week on spring break They have had some questions for us about some things we might do for park and wreck and become a follow-up on that as well. Happy to take questions. Thank you. I have Miss Mayfield and then Miss Johnson. Thank you. I'm actually going back to staff to get a better understanding. So this particular current zoning would allow for a data center this close to residential when we have C-AT plans there have been many conversations over multiple years regarding the environmental impacts of data centers this current Prior to this rezoning for a second floor a A data setter can be built on this lot. So the plan previously allowed for warehousing and general industrial uses that did not specify data centers. I don't think it's expressly prohibited data centers, but it wouldn't have been permissible or possible under the current 2020 plan, 2020 049 conditional plan. So this resounding is necessary to allow that as a use to the site, as a site plan amendment to the 2020 plan. Okay, for clarification then I'm going to come to it, you have us around because you mentioned that it currently be built. So could you clarify that please? That's correct. Data center uses are permitted use under the existing zoning. The amount, the square, the second level is the only thing in question here. Yeah, just as it possible under the current plan. So. And Frank, digital purchase this property. They did a great amount of due diligence purchase this property from the Keith Corporation to build a data center instead. center instead. So they're going to build a data center here. It is allowed. It certainly makes sense for us for efficiency sake. If a data center is going here, we might as well have a second floor, heights not increasing, buildings not increasing, do it here and not somewhere else. So coming back to staff. So this initial request, whereas this particular petitioner, their intention was to build a data center. We have put a lot of investment and time into our CF plan. There have been numerous concerns regarding environmental impacts regarding data centers. What is the proximity to the nearest residential to where this proposed center is going? I can get the number of square feet if you, I can get a second, but I will say generally the UDO doesn't parse out that use as needing to be an additional distance from residential uses, but are you looking for the number of feet from the nearest neighborhood one play site because it has neighborhood one along its western edge and then those homes are really large lot residential. So there isn't anything extremely close to the boundary of this resounding plan and certainly the development given also the buffers that are required within this plan against the residential areas. But in terms of did we consider data center uses specifically calling that out as part of this plan and what the ordinance requires I.T. under the like see ordinance. It also didn't parse out specific distances from where it has to occur from residential areas. But they do have the buffers, and it is generally thought to be a less intense use than just generally warehousing and industrial as the current plan allows just a broad range of uses. Okay. That really didn't answer my question. So what I'm trying to understand is as we're looking at this particular proposal and we know there is quite a bit of water that is needed. We know the possibility of greenhouse gas emissions strained on local utilities, the utility costs, loss of cultural area. As we're having this discussion, it will be more helpful to get a better understanding of the true potential environmental impact. It's not a hard stretch because we already have communities that have data centers and thankfully California has a lot more. But when we talk about as a council, manufacturing and logistical areas that are far away or that are identified away from residential areas and the impact of that. And then having something like a data center that uses a lot of water, uses a lot of utility communities, unfortunately mainly lower income communities, because that's what the land is sometimes at a lesser cost. All the ones that brought face the biggest impact of this. It is concerning that this will be presented to us without staff providing additional information of the potential impacts. When again, we have invested a number of years and dollars into our environmental protection plan. It is not just a concern of saying, well, let's just add a second floor to this. It is looking long term, what is the potential impact of a data center this close to residential and has that even been investigated to be able to share with the community. Yes, we did our due diligence on this. I'm still of which we can follow up later. I'm still trying to understand what a second floor, what that difference is going to be. But I heard clearly two different statements between petitioner and staff as far as this is on and the data center can go here versus. Well, we really didn't a data center can go there or not and therefore we don't really have any language about it that says that it can or it can't. So, clearer for more clarification which we can follow up later with will be very helpful. So, and yeah, and I apologize if I added to any confusion, it's just that the use data centers could be possible in the IT district. The problem is that they need it could be possible in the IT district. The problem is that they needed more square footage in order to actually accomplish their proposal to make a data center possible at this site. So that's the reason for the site plan a minute. So currently at the site, there's not enough with in order to have a data center. So they're asking instead of having the land mass that will be normally identified for a data center, can they just take it to a second story? Can they go up? Yeah, it sounds like it's an issue of height. And I think Colin probably best to speak to the actual proposal details since they would have done the analysis as to why they had to come back in in the first place. Mr. Brown? Yes, in great question. So currently this site is allowed to have a week digital could build a data center that is 1.5 million square feet on this site under the current zoning without a change. There is more, right, so there's more demand for that. In fact, there's areas right here south of the site that are zone industrial where data centers could be built. Digital owns this property. Rather than building another data center on separate property, it seems much more efficient to concentrate that building here, right? To add the second floor and I'm happy to kind of follow up. I think you're hitting the right questions and these are conversations we've had with the community as well. The entire eastern portion of the site is been dedicated for a public park. We do have some residential there, Holly's right. These are deep lots. The residents are up close to the road. And we do have buffering on that side to create additional separation. But happy to follow up. I can also share. This is, again, there's great demand for data center. We think this is a much more efficient use of the land to concentrate it here rather than having multiple data centers raising the issues you're talking about in other locations in the city. Thank you. Thank you. I have Ms Johnson. Thank you Mayor Pro Tem and thank you for those questions, Councilwoman. Mayfield, because I was confused also, so let me understand, okay? So currently 2020-049 approved and a data center could be developed there. This petition is simply to add a second floor to double the size of the data center. That's correct. So if you're imagining, you know, this, when the zoning was done, it was intended to be a warehouse right, but still data centers are permitted. Digital came in and said, we'll buy this and instead of doing a warehouse, we'll be at build a data center. But we can only do a million square feet. Now, an all a warehouse building, if it was built by right, would be 60 feet tall, right? A data center could have a second floor and not even be 60 feet tall. But when you add a second floor, a floor is square footage and square footage counts. So we, to us, it seems like we're doubling the square footage, but the building does not get any larger, it does not get any taller. It just allows this to happen on this parcel rather than having to go to other parcels. So I know there was a data center that was approved in District 4, and there was a lot of concern and question about the environmental impact. So this seems like a huge data center. I would definitely like to hear from the staff the environmental impact of the data center. I know there was some concerns about the noise. And so we do need more information as far as that, yeah. Happy to be a resource for that. Andrew's here, it's probably more than we want to do it a hearing, but we're happy to set up, means with you and share that information. They are probably the leading developer of data centers around the country. So they know, as we've talked about traffic, that's one of the things we're able to do, is show the traffic going from a warehouse and those trucks going just comes down to a very small level. And then the jobs for data center. How many, I like to know how many jobs that- It depends, and we certainly share that information. It's not an astounding level of jobs, but there will be in the hundreds of jobs ranging from engineers that maintain the equipment to security that maintains the site. And those will be drawn. So I don't want to say it's a huge economic development generator. It's a lot of square footage. It will be several hundred good jobs. And happy to share that, too, as we'll follow up. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Brown, before I pass it over to Councilmember Brown, I just wanted to ask a couple of questions here. It is true that digital is one of the leading data centers, owner of data centers and so certainly they know how to build data centers, right? I think what you're getting both environmental questions, but also I think if you could also offer dot points around sound impact, relative to condensing the data center, right? If a data center is eligible to be here by right, and they clearly have done their due diligence, they're going to build a data center. It's just a matter of how do you condense it so it doesn't have, take up the real estate, land real estate. However, can you just speak to if there is any issue related to sound increase or amplification with the second floor? There's not a significant increase in building size and that's something we've talked about the neighbors about the topography up there and we can follow up with that too. Interestingly, in representing digital I've learned, they had a data center about two blocks from here, uptown that I never knew existed. One of the things we did, Ms. Johnson, that Zenning in your neighborhood, it just takes some folks out to see a data center. We got a van and took the neighbors and they didn't hear it. So I know there are some of the older data centers, we're older technology. Most to the noise they hear from the generators. Now with this generation technology, that's not as much of a concern, but happy to, I know you're a tech expert much more than me, but happy to follow up and share some information on that. Thank you, sir. I have Ms. Brown. Thank you so much, Mayor Motel. I really appreciate it. Mr. Brown, thank you so much for coming today. And I want to go back to, is this where I met you with the family? This, this, this right, we talked to your- Thank you so much for coming today. And I want to go back to, is this where I met you with the family? This, this, this right, we talked to your office that day and it was a, it was an interesting political day. So that was the, but we have not talked with the, you and I have not met with constituents on this. This is the Northwest Coalition doctor ups. Okay, no problem. I got to mix up with another family. Okay. So then I just would have to defer back to my colleagues with the questions and concerns that they have. You know, when you get into the community and you hear 156 acres, people lose their mind. So we really have to dig, deep the way that our colleagues, my colleagues have done to ask questions and do I do diligence? Going back to what Mayor Pro Tem has said, they are the number one digital company and they know how to build and they know what is needed. But we also do not want to excuse the fact of the environmental concerns, the concerns that have been addressed. and so we would be looking to see how those are going to be appropriated, how we address those. As well as I would like just to know the community aspect of the residents around the 156 acres in which we're going to be attempting to put the Digital Center at if we could just get together and talk more closely about that impact. Happy that we've had great conversations with the neighbors or first community meeting with a tech guy on and he was frankly I'd much rather have this than all the trucks coming out the warehouse so that kind of started the conversation off with community well but Happened follow up as well Yeah, we definitely need to do that and just make sure that we're staying out in front of all of the questions that may come if we could be proactive that way we've done all I'll do diligence we check our boxes and We can move forward we're trying to see how we can make this, but we definitely would not want to be remiss if we did not address the concerns that my colleagues have and the concerns that I'm sure some community members, business leaders, people that are in residence area around the area, their concerns that they will have. Just, you know, we worked together on tough projects before. I know this is the preliminary and initial state, but we want to make sure we get out in front of it. That way we can move forward with making sure that we have address all of the concerns that may come before us. So Mr. Collins has all, Mr. Brown has all been. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you. Is there a motion to close the window? I have four to close. Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't see your hand. Hang on, we have Ms. Mayfield again. Thank you. Actually, the question's up with Mr. Shirley, I believe. Because you might be able to answer Mr. Bail. Do we know if this is going to be back up battery or generator? that's going to be used for this. Andrew Alvaz is here. I'll let him come up and answer that. Please. All great questions, by the way. Can we back up generator and tier four generators are what we typically use, which are the best from an emission standards perspective. Also to address some of your other questions as a publicly traded company, we have a full ESG report that we publish annually and in that report we document all of our best practices when it comes to water, noise, community engagement and how we really impact the people around us that matter most to us. And this location is near the Kataba River. Where this is okay. It is the Kataba River is just to the west of this cross-morsh chapel. Thank you for staff. I would appreciate a detailed report from Charlotte Water because data centers access a lot of water. We have heard conversations in community from other developments as far as access to water for some of their developments. And if we're talking about a data center and depending on the size of this data center, for us to have a better idea of what. Board of Consumption, we are committing to if we were to move forward with this and exactly how do we plan on offsetting so that that does not impede access to the water of our residents. That will be very helpful to have a better understanding. I will say Charlotte Water provided advisory comments on this petition, but I can follow up with them to see what other data they have availability to you to speak to your questions. Right, because what I read was preliminary and it really just, for me it didn't address the real concern. Data centers utilize quite a bit of water. We have communities across the nation that have seen negative impacts of their water sources being tied to certain businesses. I want to make sure that Charlotte is in a position where our water is protected for our residents and have a clear idea of how much water we are looking at needing access to and whether or not you have a separate agreement With the Katapa River Keeper and any of their representatives or if the expectation For all of the water needed for cooling is going to be coming from and provided by the City of Charlotte So those are all very good points typically what we use is either a closed loop system or an air cooled system So we effectively use the same amount of water as an office building. It's really just toilets and sinks. It will be helpful when we have the follow-up minutes around for a little bit more detail. And when the time comes, if this comes back, there being some very clear written commitments to ensure that our air quality as well as our water quality is protected. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayfield. It also might be helpful with your ESG report if you could distribute that to the Balance of Council as well as underscore any of your best practices that you utilize or have landed on in your existing facilities. I think that would be helpful for the Council to understand the mode of operations. I have Ms. Johnson and Ms. Brown and then we have a motion to close. Okay. So Ms. Johnson and then Ms. Brown. Thank you and I was just talking with Ms. Craig. And I would ask staff, because this references a past petition, 2020-04, I understand that we can't upload all documents for all petitions. But I think it's important if petition is referencing another petition that that information be available to us. For this petition, I wanted to know with the community reports indicated for the other petition. It seems like I remember opposition, but I could be getting it. Yeah, like a lot of opposition, if I recall correctly. There was opposition. So are you asking for specifically, you would like committee meeting reports from the previous petition? Yeah, I'm asking when a petitioner filed a motion and is referencing a formal petition that that information be updated on the website. It's currently not or all of the information is not available. It still shows status is pending and we're not able to see the site plans and there's just information that wasn't transferred due to archiving or something. So during the application process, if that's something that you all can cross check to make sure that council is able to have access to all of the archive or past information it helps us in making decision because if I recall correctly and Miss Watlington or Dr. Watlington's not here, but I think this was a highly contested petition so I think that's important for us to consider. Okay, and we do have a background sectional of staff analysis but it's probably a bit more bridged than what you're looking for. It speaks to the previous petition and the entitlements allow it under its current zoning but we can certainly provide the additional documentation on that 2020 petition for you and staff is of course available at any time for anybody who needs petition information that's no longer available on the website since we're limited in the number of years in what petition information we can house on the website. Okay. Just as a process, I don't know that it happens very often if you all could just update that petition on the website just for the public consumption as well. I think it's important. But okay. Thank you. This is good. Thank you, I have Ms. Brown. Are you finished? Yes, thanks. Yeah. Okay, then she was looking through a book, so I wasn't sure. If she was there, thank you, Mayor Proteman. Thank you so much for the way that you are conducting this needed tonight. I will give you a close for that. Great job. Good seeing you. We have a great job sitting there. I too. I miss you. Mr. Brown, I just say there, I have jot down a list of concerns on the petition and I hope that we could talk and give all these together. It'll leave into the concerns that you have. We don't have to go back over them. They're already on record, but I do have a list of them. You and I can get together and we can discuss them. Accordantly and appropriately, and make sure that we can move forward with truth and transparency to try to get this resolved to bring it into the district as it will see fit according to what we need to do to be in compliance with everything. And so that's how that I have. Thank you, thank you. We had a motion to close public serving in second. Did you get that clerk? No, I didn't. Okay, so Ms. Brown was the motion. Make the motion to move forward to close. Good thing you're here. Second. And Miss Johnson is the second. I thought it was Mr. Drake's. Okay, all in. It's back then. It was Mr. Drake's. I thought it was Mr. Drake's. And again, all in favor of the close public here, and please raise hands. Any opposed? That is unanimous. Thank you for coming out. And that will take us to agenda item number 21, petition number 2024-145 by David Land, LLC. The location is approximately 8.85 acres located along the west side of I-85. South of Cuey Road and North of Ridge Road in District 4, Ms. Johnson's District. The current zoning is N1A, proposed zoning is ML1CD. Staff recommends the approval of this petition and after staff's presentation, our friend Mr. Brown will be back with us for three minutes. Thank you. Thank you. This site is just under 90, goes along the Cameras line west of I-85 South of Cuey Road. Much of the surrounding areas vacant land at zone for industrial uses. Additionally, we have some commercial uses just to the north-air concord mills as well as some residential uses dispersed throughout the area. The site is currently zone neighbourhood 1a. They are requesting to go to manufacturing logistics conditional. This would be inconsistent with the policy-moutes recommendation for the neighborhood one place type at this property. Reposal includes a couple of development standards. It doesn't have a full site plan, but it does have a couple of development standards. These note that the site may be developed with MNL1 uses. Driveway access to the site would come from the Caberra County side, and the existing outdoor advertising sign shall on the site. Staff recommends approval of this petition. The site is directly adjacent to nearly 300 acres of land that was resand as petition 2021-028. That allows for primarily manufacturing with warehousing uses and petition 224-145 this subject petition is also adjacent to industrial zoning on the Cabiras County side. These entitlements in their scale have changed the context of the uses in the broader area. And the subject petition is a continuation of that trend. The site does not directly about existing residential uses or share boundaries with other properties in the N1 place type. Sequentially, the N1A district is not reflective of that surrounding development police type or the sanding districts. The equitable growth framework notes that access to employment opportunity is one of the highest priority needs in this area. So this petition has a potential to increase that job opportunity and speak directly to that goal. I'll take any questions following the commissioner comments. Thank you, Mr. Brown. Mayor Pro Tem, commissioners, interesting one here. I've had a couple interesting ones tonight. But this is up at the very, I guess, edge of Caberis and Meckmer County. And what makes it interesting is this property enters parcel is in both counties. The most of their property is north of this in Caberis County. So what they really want to do is develop, if you can see here, here's the Caberis County side. That's where most of their property is that they want to do is develop, if you can see here, here's the Cabarice County side. That's where most of their property is that they want to develop. A little tail of the property sneaks down here into Mecklenburg County and the city of Charlotte. So they're really just trying to develop up here with a tail in here. So their Cabarice County's parcels are properly zoned. They'd like to do kind of a flex small warehouse space and so we'd like to just bring if you can see here's the Meckermurk side There's a creek on it County's parcels are properly zoned. They'd like to do kind of a flex small warehouse space. And so we'd like to just bring, if you can see, here's the Meckermurg side. There's a creek on it. There's wetlands, so most of this can't be used. It may be that they just have their BMP pond, a little bit of parking, or maybe a small building in that area. So happy to have staff support. We hosted a community meeting, we got no attendees, we did reach out to the district for coalition. We spoke to Mr. Chisholm about it, he said, I thought this is kind of a funny one. So we talked to him about it, he said, you know what, that makes sense. So again, we've got just kind of a funny remainder parcel that has a little tail in Charlotte. The development mostly will occur in Caberis. As Holly mentioned, there won't even be a drive, there's no driveway access to Charlotte. The driveway will be on the Cabarice side and just come down into this parcel. So we did some basic zoning conditions and kind of said, hey, if there's anything, you want us to rule out, we're happy to do that. But there is also the commitment that driveway access would only be from the Cabarice County side. Okay. Ms. Johnson. Thank you. Thank you, Colin. Did we discuss this a long time ago, or is there another petition that's exactly like this one? This one's been a long time ago. It was just kind of this funny remainder piece with not much effort on it. And we're hearing it instead of Caberis County. Well Caberis, now most of their property is in Caberis and it's already zoned. So I mean, here's Concord Mill. I mean, there's Concord Mill's, his pieces are right here and he just happens to own, the rest of his property just happens to be down in Mechaburg. So Caberis is properly zoned, the portion in Charlotte won't be much. There will probably be some stormwater detention, maybe some parking areas in a small building. Okay, and sign it. There's an existing... the portion in Charlotte won't be much. It'll probably be some stormwater detention, maybe some parking areas in a small building. Okay, and sign it. There's an existing sign on it. It'll stay. And is this part of the King's Grant? No, it's not. It's adjacent to it. It's adjacent to it. I mean, so it's, all King's Grant happens over here. This is just kind of this funny little, it's a left over. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Move to close. I agree. Okay. All in favor of close public hearing. Raise hands. Any opposed? That is unanimous and that takes us to agenda item number 22. Petition number 205-0-0-2 by Kelsey Mills. The location is approximately .2828 acres located on the north east side of East 36th Street, west of the Plaza and south of North Davidson Street and District 1, my district. The current zoning is N1C, proposed zoning is NCCD. Staff recommends approval of this petition and after staff's presentation, Ms. Miles, you will have three minutes. Thank you. Petition 2020-5-022, or 0-0-2, is developed with single-family dwelling. It's approximately 0.28 acres in size and is located on the north side of 36th street about an eighth mile from the west of the plaza. Current zoning is N1C, neighborhood one. The proposed zoning is NCCD, neighborhood center conditional. 2040 policy map recommends the neighborhood two place type. NC district is inconsistent with this place type approval. This petition would advise the policy map to the NC place type. The proposal calls for the adapted reuse of the existing structure on the property for a medical office use. Staff recommends approval of this petition as the neighbourhood centre zoning district allows flexibility in how the building is used but the requirements for the district to ensure the property were main consistent with the character of the area. Happy to take any questions following the petitioner's presentation. Thank you. Welcome, Miss Miles. Good evening. Thank you. I do have to speak. Thank you. I'm happy to speak. Thank you. I'm Kelsey Miles. Thank you guys very much for having me here today to speak in front of you. I am talking about two zero two five zero zero two. This property is at 1107 East 36th Street as, 002. This property is at 1107 East 36th Street as you already indicated. It is adjacent to commercial buildings. It's across the street from multi-family housing units and so there are restaurants across the street as well. That's the current property. That's the property that's there now. That's the property that you will see when it's hopefully re-zoned. There will be no major outward changes. As you address, it's an adaptive reuse property. So there are very minor changes overall to the structure. Current zoning where you discuss. I'm not requesting any conditions or exceptions to that NCCD zoning. And my intended use is a medical slash dental office for specialized pediatric physical therapy practice. I'm a physical therapist. Just a little bit about my practice. I am currently working about half a mile away. I just need a little bit more space. And I work with children mostly age year to six with severe brain injuries and rare genetic conditions. I see kids from around the country and around the world. They come in supporting the local economy. They're staying in Airbnb's. They're eating at restaurants. So just a small part, but it is helping the local neighborhood. And in terms of traffic increase, there will not be any. I walk to work, I live in the community, and I see one patient every one to two hours. So maximum amount of patients per day is around six. Minimum is around three. And Percy dot, no need for walk with with that. In terms of the changes to the current structure it is an adaptive reuse so that current structure that I showed you before will remain exactly the same no major outward changes. If it is rezoned there will be a ramp added to the back to allow for accessibility for wheelchairs and walkers. There will be, there's a current driveway that's gravel right now. It will be paved for ease of use of mobility devices as about 95% of my children use wheelchairs to maneuver around. And 30 seconds. 30 seconds. Thank you. And there will be minor changes to the inside of the house to make it ADA compliant. There will be no changes to buffer setbacks, building high open land space, architectural elevations, house-fronted sidewalks or the tree canopy. All trees will be saved, and we will be actually planting additional trees. And then green building practices do not apply, affording housing practices don't apply, no change in trash, no change in pedestrian practices. Again, trees will all be saved. And then I, as stated. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. And great job with the presentation. Thank you. You actually answered a couple questions that I had. I wanted to ask some questions around the number of patients that you have. And first and foremost, very noble work that you're doing. That's wonderful. Thank you. The adaptive reuse in this particular area is quite common, is relatively common in a no-da area. And so I see that you conducted a neighborhood meeting and you had six attendees. What was the feedback from the neighbors? So I actually conducted two neighborhood meetings. The first one was the virtual meeting with the six attendees. Everyone was very supportive. Most people were just kind of curious as to what was going to be happening there in the space. And then the in-person meeting was in front of the entire neighborhood of Noda and they were all very supportive. They actually, I believe if they have not sent it to yet, are in the process of writing a letter in support of this adaptive reuse. Absolutely. Okay. Any additional questions? Ms. Johnson. Thank you. I was just going to ask if the neighbors were supportive and you said they are. Yes. I have not heard anything bad in any regard. Everyone's been very supportive and excited to see this. The house is 98 years old this year and they're excited to see that house remain. And you said you treat children with brain injuries? Yes, correct. You know I'm a brain injury advocate. I do not know that, but I love that. I am as well. You didn't see the skyline on March 24th. We'll have to talk. I would love that. Thank you. Thank you. All right. OK. Excellent. Hearing no additional comments. Second. All right, all in favor of close public hearing raise hands. Any opposed? That is unanimous. Thank you, Ms. Miles, for coming out. Thank you very much. And we will proceed with agenda item number 23. Petition number 2025-006 by Beacon RCPLLC. The location is approximately 94.46 acres located on the east side of Rhine Road, south of Mount Holly Road, and north of Bellmead Drive, and the ETJ closest to County Commission District 2, Miss Leakes District, as well as City Council District 3, Miss Brown's district. The current zoning is I-1-CD. Proposed zoning is ML-1-CD. Staff recommends approval of this petition upon outstanding issues related to the environment. And after staff's presentation presentation we have Mr. Brown. Thank you. Thank you. 2025-006 is approximately 94 acres located on the west side of Rine Road, south of Mount Holly Road, and north of Delmi Drive. This follows a 2021 petition that included an additional 52 acres. So the site remains undeveloped, surrounded by a residential neighborhood to the west, and mostly industrial commercial uses to the north east and south. Current zoning is I-1 CD. Proposed zoning is ML-1 CD. 2040 policy map recommends manufacturing and logistics place type. The proposal would allow for 1.275 million square feet of gross floor area of warehousing, warehouse distribution, manufacturing, office, and other primary and accessory uses permitted in the ML1 zoning district with the exception of a long list of more noxious uses. Most of the transportation commitments that under the 2021 rezoning have been completed would provide for a minimum 100 foot class a landscape yard along the Western property boundary as well as a dedication of three acres to Mecklenburg County for a future neighborhood park. Commits to dedication of a minimum 90 foot wide trail easement along the western property boundary to Mecklenburg County for future trail connection and confirms that a development will have zero foot candles at the property lines of adjacent single family zoning. Staff recommends approval of this petition upon resolution of outstanding issues related to the environment That is a tree survey that is outstanding Titian is consistent with the manufacturing and logistics place type And and the uses that are proposed is in this rezoning are consistent with those that were approved in the 2021 Resoning I'll be having to take any questions after petitioners comments Thank. Thank you, Mr. Brown. All right, let me close it out. Mayor of Pro-Tem council members, any committee members, Colin Brown, on behalf of the legislature. Beacon. Pete Kidwell is here to end the night with us as well. I've told you I've had a couple interesting ones tonight, but this is pretty simple. The whole point of this reasoning is to change the letters. It's to change the letters. I guess that's the purpose of all of them. But this one, the current zoning on the property is industrial one CD. Had this not had a conditional zoning when the UDA was in place, it would have translated to the new ML. I know that UDA gets a lot of bad rap, but Beacon is actually telling us, hey, we'd actually like to have more modern ML1 zoning. So we're just getting rid of the old industrial zoning, becoming the new ML1 zoning, bringing all the commitments forward. Everything that was prior in the prior rezoning, there were uses that were prohibited. All of those uses are prohibited. In the rezoning when it came through, we had transportation commenced. They have all been completed. So the purpose is to take, as Beacon is taking this to market and attracting tenants to the site, we have a lot of people are now familiar with the UDO. They know they're looking for manufacturing and logistics, and Be wants them to find the ML here rather than the I-1. So it is just really the change of our district classification, but really no changes to the site plan or the other commitments. We have had community, this was a contested zoning previously. I think the neighbors understand what's going on here. They're happy with those commitments and so the feedback we've gotten was positive. Okay, thank you. Are there any questions? Yeah, Ms. Brown. Yeah, so that I understand you correctly, Mr. Brown, you're stating that what you're proposing for this petition is already in place? Well, it's already been approved. Essentially, this is the zoning that's approved. We're not trying to do anything different. Eacon would develop essentially what the current zoning allows. They'll just have a different zoning designation being ML. So we're not looking to increase any entitlements ever what we already have. Right. You said... I did say the transportation improvements were in place. Okay. So there are certain things that the beacon had to do and those have already been done and completed. All right. And so... So now development can take place. All right. So what transportation concerns were in place that they have already completed? Well, I'd have to get your list of those. I'm happy to follow up and do that. Yeah, I know you will, sir. No problem. And I just want to ask that you put it out there because people are listening. You want to make sure that we address those concerns as well as previously contested by the community. What were they contested? When the prior rezoning went through, they asked us to prohibit certain uses. There is the list of them. We have prohibited all of those uses. All right. And so this, this, right? When the prior rezoning went through, they asked us to prohibit certain uses. There is the list of them. We have prohibited all of those uses. All right, and so this, this right here, according to what was asked for you by the community, our position and the concerns that they had you address those accordingly and appropriately. That's correct. And you and I should be pretty good on this, if it all takes that. This is pretty straightforward. Okay. All right. Anybody else got any questions? I have Ms. Johnson. Thank you. And thank you for that information about this list. Yes. So this is another example of council needing that. I knew you were going to say that. I did not say that right. So yes. So this and I would ask, Allison, if, when there's a reference to a previous petition, if that, is it possible that that petition can be updated in the system? Yep, well, we will make sure you have that information. No, not just me having it. Is it possible that, can this information be updated in the system? Let me check with our communications team because it's really, they're the ones that lead a lot of that. So we will make sure you have the information no matter what, whether it's part of the new petition that's being requested or on the website. Okay. And hopefully we can update it because it's not just for Renee or council, it's for the public to be able to access this information. So if we know that they're going to reference a past petition, a previous petition, that information's important. So things like community meeting and petition documents, I think are important for us to be able to see and transfer that information in the new petition. And you're just saying, are you saying when you go to the website that it's available? No, it's not there. You're right, because on the community meeting, we spend half the community meeting explaining the prior rezoning. Yeah. So I'm going to. Okay. She's very helpful to have that information. And especially when you know that they're referencing, cross-referencing another petition. So that information is available. I think it would be helpful for everyone. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Brown. referencing, cross-referencing another petition. So if that information is available, I think it would be helpful for everyone. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Brown. You had an additional comment. I did. I said, because that was not done, because it's a significant amount of time with the community in the beginning. Well, I just, you know, when to Ms. Johnson's point, when you're saying, hey, I'm changing the prior zoning, We spend a lot of time at the community meeting, talking about the prior zoning. And for us, it's kind of easy, because we know who to talk to, because they were involved last time. So. When you're saying, hey, I'm changing the prior zoning, we spend a lot of time at the community meeting talking about the prior zoning. And for us, it's kind of easy because we know who to talk to because they were involved last time. So that's the case on this. So for clarification, and for the clarification for people that are watching, we will, Allison, try to do our best to get it updated so that it's cross reference in the future. All right, Ms. Johnson-Pontwell, take it you so much. All right, Collin. Thank you. Hearing no additional comments. Second, I have a motion to close public hearing and second, all in favor, raise hands. Any opposed? That is unanimous. Thank you. Mr. Brown, I think you're done for the evening. And that brings us to our final agenda item this evening, agenda item number 24, petition number 2025-022 by Bill Scanlon. The location is approximately 5.80 acres located on east of East WT Harris Boulevard, north of Harris Park Boulevard, and south of Delta Landing Road in District 5, Ms. Molina's District. The current zoning is R20MFCD. Proposed zoning is N2BCD. Staff recommends approval of this petition upon resolution of outstanding issues related to site and building design, transportation and environment as well as requested technical revisions. After staff's presentation, we have Bill Scantlin here, who will have three minutes to speak in the affirmative for the petition. Thank you. Thank you. This property is just under six acres on the east side of WT Harris Boulevard, north of Albumaro Road in an area where we have quite a bit of multi-family and single-family residential developments, as well as some vacant, as you can see to the south and west there. Currently, uses are located just south of the site along Albumaril and further north along the WT Harris Boulevard. Properties currently zone are 20 multi-family conditional. That's as a result of a petition from 1988, and they are requesting to go to neighborhood 2B conditional. That request is consistent with the policy-mots recommendation for a neighborhood to please type at this site. The petition itself proposes 60 multifamily stock units in the site may also be developed for the clubhouse as an accessory use. Access to the site would be via an extension of Delta landing road. A class B landscape yard would be installed along the northern western and southern boundaries of the site. A eight foot sidewalks and planting strips would be provided along existing streets. Staff recommends approval petition upon resolution of several outstanding issues as well as technical or visions. The petition proposes uses that are consistent with the policy-mouse recommendation for the neighborhood to place type as well as the existing improved entitlements on the site. But it would update the zoning to UDO district more reflective of our current standards. The site is well connected to public transit and is just over a half mile two-nactivity center, which would help provide good services to future residents. And I'll take questions following petitioner comments. Thank you. You have three minutes, sir. We've got a presentation going. And while it's firing up, I will say I'm Bill Scatlin, Louisville North Carolina, a multi-family developer, have been for about 21 years and focusing most recently in North Carolina specifically. This project, Ryan's Way, the BTR communities group, is the sponsor for this. It is a 2024 allocation from North Carolina Housing Finance Agency for about $1.29 million of credits per year and as you probably know that goes for 10 years. So we're looking at approximately a $16 million development which will pay probably taxes in the range of $45,000 a year based on NLI evaluations. This is a 60-unit development. We're looking at focusing on individuals from the 30 to 60% AMI range. The market study that was used along with the NCHFA application a year ago indicated that in this market area there's a need for about 7,000 units of affordable housing that address the 30 to 60% AMI category. We're posing 60 on this property. So we're looking at probably about 9% of addressing the need. The need is huge, as you all know. compatible affordable housing developments in the market area are all 100% full with waiting lists. We're looking at one, two and three bedroom units running anywhere from 715 square feet to 1158 square feet. in rents from $480 to $1,400 a month, those specifically keep the tenants rent payment for housing in the 35% range of their adjusted income. I'm sure these are numbers that you all are familiar with as much affordable housing as you attend to here in Charlotte. I want to also point out to you that this is a brownfield site. From 1948 to about 1990, there was flight training and aircraft maintenance on this site. So we are working with DEQ, already have an environmental work plan in place. We have just been approved for the brownfield's program and we're proceeding home with the Brownfield Agreement which we think we'll have in a few months. So we're being able with this project to not only bring affordable housing to the area but also to put a parcel land back into service that otherwise would not be. 20 seconds. Answer questions. Thank you, sir. I have Miss Malina. Thank you, Mayor Pro Tem. Mr. Scanlan, thank you for coming out tonight. We've not spoken yet, so I definitely look forward to having a conversation. Sure. And colleagues, just for context, I want to let you know where the Hickory Grove Baptist Church or the Hickory Grove Library is. I just put the map is? I just put the map up. It's literally like a quarter mile down. So the area where it used to be, there is actually an existing apartment complex there. I drove it. It's an existing complex right there. And it used to be like an old, it used to be an old airport, landing area. Aircraft maintenance. Yeah, years and years ago. And so that area I know well, but I'm wondering that there was only one person to show up at the community meeting in it. So what I'm starting to find, and that's not to say that was on you, but what I'm starting to find often is like I got one opportunity that we're pedaling backwards because I have to say that was on you, but what I'm starting to find often is, I got one opportunity that we're peddling backwards because, as soon as the community found out about it, they started contacting me. And especially in zoning petitions, often that's what happens. And that's why I've been explaining incrementally for the night because what I find the longer I'm in this position is that we have community members that really aren't adept at this process. And so by the time they understand what's going on, we're probably right at the decision making. And this is a new phenomenon. This has been happening forever, right? But if let's say tonight there's no one here to oppose, I haven't spoken to you or spoken to anyone Who's adjacent to the neighborhood based on what I'm saying and what I'm hearing from you It don't sound too far from what's already starting to happen some Presenting any type of opposition. I'm just saying that you know I haven't been able to speak with anybody at all including you So I need to able to do that. But then what we find in some cases is that when we get to that decision, someone actually figures out what's going on. And then they're like, we want you to vote no, because they haven't really been brought along on the journey with us. And so I think once this is done, what I would like to be able to do is to speak to you to learn more about what you're proposing. You're absolutely right. There is always a need for affordable living opportunities not only in East Charlotte but throughout our city and so anytime that we can achieve that especially where there are you know additional credits and you didn't even speak of the Housing Trust Fund. So this is something that you've endeavored on your own, which is commendable. But anytime we can do that successfully, it's a win. I just need to make sure that the community perspective has already been taking care of and that I have some kind of conversation with you To meet you and know what you'd like to do in the district. I can address a couple of points there. The surrounding area, it did not surprise me that we did not have folks show up for this, because as you mentioned, immediately to our Northeast is hub on Harris, which is 200 and plus affordable housing units that were just recently completed. And so, you know, the individuals there from the apartments are not gonna be invited to public hearing. It's the owners of that complex. So right behind that complex is some condo owners, and I know about, hold on. I know a bunch of them that live there right so one of them ran for the North Carolina House many many years ago and is very very active in the community and they're about five people that I could call on the phone right now that I know it say I've lived in Charlotte for 21 years too and that's telling my age but it's a good portion of my life but I've always been active so when we start talking neighborhoods and I've done everything from community organizing to knocking on doors to really getting to know people I went to see where this is there is a townhome community that's a walk that's right behind hub on. On. On. Yeah. And there's a whole neighborhood of ownership right there. I know there are apartments on both sides and I live about 10 miles from here, 5 to 10 miles. So I drive it every day. So I that's also another thing. So I know it well. I get what you're saying. This is an opposition. is really just saying I want to make sure we check that box so that if it comes to a point where we're saying as a council we'd like to move forward with this that we've done the the check box position of reaching out to the neighborhood and You know making sure that we've covered that sure and we did reach out to everyone that was names Or provide it from the from your zoning staff. Yeah, well, I look forward to having a conversation with you And we can we go from there. I think it'd be great. Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Molina. I too am a bit surprised that only one person showed up to the community meeting given the level of involvement of some members in that area and the proximity to the church. And so, you know, just a question for staff, you know, it's a constant battle. We have these recurring conversations around more exposure, trying to reach community, ensure they know when they see that Z up there, what that means, adding a QR code, et cetera. But I wonder if we can look into the possibility of leveraging the churches that are in our community to disseminate information such as this with such a large church so proximate to this area. And you're talking about 60 units, which is not insignificant. They're all affordable. I just wonder, I would love for staff to look at some opportunity to push communication or have a push poll communication with churches perhaps on a monthly basis around development that's proposed approximate to their area. Okay, yeah, I mean, I can look at what's possible. I will just add in terms of our communication. Of course we have the required noticing when a petition becomes active. We also do additional noticing beyond that and beyond the rezoning side sign that you see posted at the site. We post on next door twice throughout a petition's life cycle when it becomes active and right before public hearing and that's begun to get a lot more engagement than it did at first and that's been a good avenue for us and the Housing and Neighborhood Services provides that list of the neighborhood leaders that we have to reach out to on our notices as well as the petitioners community meeting notice but I can ask about what data we have in terms of churches and how to best reach them. But honestly, a lot of that work would typically maybe best done through the petitioners as well in their community engagement if they're not formally captured on our community engagement list provided by Housing and Neighborhood Services. But I'll see what's possible and get more information on that. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. I have Ms. Johnson. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor Pro Tem. And thank you, Mr. Scanlan, for the proposal. I'd love to know more about Ryan's way, LLC, perhaps we can talk offline also. But I want to clarify, and let me say when we're talking about the outreach, we know that you've done what you were required to do this is a discussion that council has often so hopefully it's too often right so hopefully in our referral that's something we can discuss in changing or improving the outcome or outreach I wanted to clarify the numbers that you gave. Sure. Okay. You mentioned the housing deficit. Did you say $7,070,000? I said in the market study that was performed for the North Carolina Housing Finance Agency proposal that the market analyst calculated a need, this a year ago of over approximately 7,000 units of affordable housing needed in the range that we're targeting which is 30 to 60% of the AMI. 7.0 or 7.0 to 0.0. 7,000. Okay thousand. Okay, so. Seven and three zeroes. Hang on, I think you were to add another level of specificity. You were talking about a 30 to 60% and not all affordable. Yeah, this was 30 to 60% of which we would be addressing about 1%. That was one of them. and why I ask is we've been told that the deficit is 30 to 40,000 years ago. So we think in this area, it's closer to 70,000. So that's what I'd love to know where you got your information because we've been given numbers at least 30,000 per year. And thenhmm. So, and then you mentioned 45,000. The $45,000 is what based on net operating income evaluation would be the taxes that this project would be paying on a yearly basis. Okay. But in fact, 1,000 taxes. As you probably know, affordable housing is evaluated differently in terms of calculating taxes. I suspect you know that. And then you said the rent's going to start at $480. Right now and these would be subject to change because these are the rents that we had when we put our application together last year. They'll be re-evaluated. It'll be another 18, 24 months before this project is completed. But at the time of the application, we were looking at the lowest rents, which would be for one bedroom at 30% AMI at $480. And on the higher end, which would be a three bedroom for 60% at $1,400. So that's the range that we're working with. I'm sorry, 16. 14. 14. 14. 14, that translates into income range from about $22,000 to $60,000. We're in for individuals and families who would be living there. In 2016. And so 60,000 is at 60% AMI? That would be correct. Okay. So what AMI number do you have in your report? Because I asked staff for this information during our last committee meeting. So I'm hoping to get that information. What AMI, what median income are you using? I'm not sure I completely understand the question question the project will have units available to 30% up through 60%. 30% to 60% of the area median income. That's correct. Right. So do you have the number of the median? The area median income that you're using? I mean, I guess we could do some. Oh, area median income. Miss Johnson. Yeah, Miss Johnson, I guess we can do some math. Area median income. Ms. Johnson? Yes, Ms. Johnson, I think it's 60% and he's saying $60,000 is the ceiling. Okay. And that's going to be on a basis of $100,000 being a hundred percent AMI. So our area median income in Charlotte now is $100,000. It's about 107, I believe. I don't have it written down here, but I think it's about $107,000. $107,000, okay. And we can staff to verify that? Yes, so this petition in its current form doesn't have the affordability commitment lined out because they were needing to get to a public hearing sooner rather than later because the credits that they're dealing with. But we're going to be working with Housing and Neighborhood Services to make sure that every condition about the affordable housing meets what they would define for the area median income and is enforceable by Housing and Neighborhood Standards needs. Let me clarify before our city attorney says anything, I know that it's not just based on this income. He's bringing up area median income. I had asked the staff, we would like information on what the area median income is. Erin Charlotte. Yes, so we can get you, not today. I'm just saying staff. Thank you. I don't expect, you know what, thank you for the work you do. I don't expect the zoning manager to know that. Allison, if we can get that information, that'd be great. Thank you. OK. Any additional comments? We'll close. Second. Second. OK. All in favor to close public hearing, raise hands. Any opposed? Second. That's unanimous. I have a motion to adjourn and second. Everyone go home and have a wonderful evening. Thank you. Thank you. you