Durham Planning Commission Sept 11, 2018
and that statute [Music] [Music] I still say about you ride the protest when I put your hands on my knees going to jail if it takes 100 if I have to call the city the National Guard are so right you know probably I wouldn’t work Orange County we hid that was for school the teachers came back we’re going to take just a minute before we actually open the meeting and give our new Commissioner an opportunity to say hello and tell us a little bit about yourself hello I am Nate Baker I was born and raised in Durham North Carolina I went through Durham public school system and then studied urban regional planning at Cornell became a public sector planner in Texas for two years before coming back and getting my master’s degree in City original planning at UNC and since then I’ve been at clearing association Chapel Hill we do comprehensive plans land development regulations and those types of things so I’m happy to be here thank you we have just a brief delay before we start the meeting our chair is stuck in traffic Tom we’re waiting for some introductory papers so we’d still have just a minute before we actually get started perhaps some of our other commissioners would like to introduce themselves to our newest commissioner who’s joining us tonight for the first time I’ll start with Commissioner al Turk we’re doing just a little brief introductions to our commissioner who is joining us for the first time tonight working on my role I’m working on my PhD and UNC and I’ve been here a couple years two years and the Commission thank you mr.Johnson Cedric Johnson and this month is the first month of year three for my first term on the Planning Commission I have been in Durham since 2012 I think I’m getting over here and my professional work is in the economic development finance space I’m George Bryan I’m a county appointee to the Planning Commission I’ve lived in Durham since late 1967 and I have served off and on on Planning Commission since some time in the mid 1990s I’m Erin this is my third meeting I grew up in Wake County I actually work in New York I’m a lawyer and I have a planning degree and I represent affordable housing developers in New York City and my name is Elaine Hyman and this is my second beginning of my second term I am retired from Durham County government so this is like home for me I’m a county appointee and I am retired HR director from Durham County government so bring a little bit of that administrative policy to the organization to our group so my name is Tom Miller and I’ve been on the Planning Commission for four years I’ve lived in Durham all my life before I retired I spent over 30 years with the Department of Justice here in North Carolina handling land use regulatory questions hey my name is Amir Kenshin and I am starting my second term as a county appointee and I’ve lived in Durham for 20 years now and raised all three of my children here and considered my home so excited to meet you I’m Paul Hornbuckle I’m a retired lieutenant with the Durham Sheriff’s Office I’ve been in Durham all my life I’m a county appointee representing the Mangum township which is the Rougemont and Bahama areas and have been in that you know part of basically all my life and this is going in the end of my first term us starting my third year ok Commissioner Williams Armand Williams Durham native lifer in Durham I think I came in on the back end of someone else’s term so I’m starting my first term I’m not sure that but um that’s about it I work for our architecture firm actually two architectural firms in dirt so thank you I think we can officially get started good afternoon and welcome to the Durham Planning Commission the members of the Durham Planning Commission have been appointed by the City Council and the County Board of Commissioners as an advisory board to the elected officials you should know that the elected officials have the final say on any issue before us tonight if you wish to speak on an agenda item tonight please go to the table to my left and sign up to speak for those of you who wish to speak speaks please state your name your address clearly when you come to the podium please speak clearly and into the microphone each side those speaking in favor of an item and those speaking in opposition to an item will have 10 minutes to present for each side the time has been divided among all persons wishing to speak finally all motions are stated in the affirmative so if a motion fails or ties the recommendation is for denial thank you may we have the roll call please yes I’m gonna do it from here if that’s okay with everyone yes commissioner al Turk yeah Commissioner Baker here Commissioner Brian here Commissioner Buzby is running a little bit late but he is on his way Commissioner docken here Commissioner Gibbs has requested an excused absence so when we get to the end maybe you can make a motion to that effect Commissioner Hornbuckle Commissioner Hyman present Commissioner Johnson present Commissioner kenshin is it commissioner Mahler here mr.Satterfield here Commissioner Williams here and late-breaking just a few minutes ago I received notice that Mr. our Commissioner van has resigned from the Commission he’s got some other duties to fulfill and can’t serve at this time so he will not be here tonight and so a little late you know I just found that out madam chair if it’s appropriate I move that we grant an excused absence to Commission member Gibbs and I suppose we probably since we don’t have two cases um commission member Mosby it’s but moved in properly second that we offer excused absences to Commissioner Gibbs and Commissioner Buzby all in favor of this motion let it be known by raising your right hand I’ll oppose I’m it for some reason um chair Busbee shows up then we’ll know it’s an attendance sorry thank you the first item approval of the minutes and consistency statements from the August 14 2018 meeting recognizes Commissioner Brian madam chair I move approval of the minutes and the consistency statements as presented motion by Commissioner Brian second by Commissioner Hornbuckle was i correct was it commissioner yes that we approve the minutes and consistency statements for the April for the August 14 meeting all in favor of this motion please let it be known by raising your right hand all opposed the first item that we have public hearing zone Matt changes major yes before we get there I want to just let you know that under new business I have two minor items yes and having said that unless or no other adjustments to the agenda I move the agenda as amended could you maybe let us know what the items are and I also need to speak to the advertisements and legal notice items that you’re adding one will be just an announcement about an NCDOT project on commissioners will be interested in and the second is going to be my request for an excused absence for next month’s okay okay no problem all right this time I would like to let the Commission know that the other cases for public image and I have been advertised in accordance with local and state law and affidavits for such your own file in the planning department thank you thank you so that I have a motion to approve the agenda with adjustments second ah motion by Commissioner Brian’s second by Commissioner Miller that we approve the minutes with adjustments
MOTIONEY 
Groundbreaking App Which makes brain awaking video ads & posts from a single picture.
World’s First, All-In-One, Live Picture Ads & Engagement Posts Creator For All Types Of Ads Spots & Video Posts On 9 Major Social Media Platforms
https://www.ShopMonopoly.com/offer/3144
all in favor this motion let it be known by the usual sign of aye all opposed thank you our first item public hearing item number Z one eight zero zero zero one one Barbie Road townhouse will have our staff report at this time good evening I’m Jamie Sonia with the planning department I will be presenting case number Z one eight zero zero zero eleven Barbie Road 54 townhouses before I get started there were two corruptions in the staff report there was an incorrect reference to the number of units so I made that correction and also there was a corrected reference to a legacy case on page two the applicant for this case is Jared Eden’s from Eden’s land the address is 107 east north nc54 64-52 Barbie Road the property is located within the city’s jurisdiction the request for rezoning is from commercial general with a development plan to commercial general with a development plan the site is fourteen point three eight acres the property is located within the commercial Flom there is no request to change that the applicant is seeking to rezone specifically to allow 112 townhouse units this slide depicts the aerial mapping and the subject site is shown in red it’s two properties located on the west side of Barbie Road on the north side of NC 54 it is located within the suburban tier and within the Cape Fear River Basin the smaller property is these I’m sorry in these slides to pick some of the pictures of the area the smaller property is just under one acre in size and is vacant and the larger property is about 13 acres in size and contains a number of existing residential structures a nursery nursery sales building several greenhouses all of which will be removed if the site is developed there are a number of pictures also within the staff report that show area conditions the site is adjacent to the Greens of Pine Glen residential development there is a cell tower also to the west to the north is the interstate highway the property to the west was recently approved to allow a self storage building up to 120,000 square feet in size to the southeast is a gas station which is also undergoing a rezoning application which will be in front of the Planning Commission ideally in October on the north side of NC 54 south of the property west and south of the property there is a single-family residential neighborhood the seasons at Southpoint memory care community there’s also the meadows at South Pointe residential development on the east side Barbee Road south of the site and then abutting the site on the north side of 54 there are also additional residential development South Pointe towns and 54 station the zoning context map shows the existing and proposed zoning designation so the colors have not changed on the left side you’ll see that proposed the existing zoning is cg and the repose zoning on the right side is also cg the future land use map there is no request to change that the property is currently designated commercial which is consistent with the rezoning request a next slide shows the development plan and I’ll just highlight some of the conditions the max impervious coverage is at 70% proposed a tree preservation requirement of 20% and there are various minimum side yards rear yards and and different setbacks shown on the development plan summary of the key commitments the development plan limits the townhouse units to a maximum of 112 units there are various site access points building and parking envelopes various transportation improvements and roadway improvements and design commitments relative to the building materials and roof and features in terms of consistency with the comp plan the it is consistent with the existing commercial future land use map designation and also consistent with policies to 3-1 a contiguous development to 3-2 a infrastructure capacity 8 1 2 H transportation level of service maintenance 8 1 4d development review and adopted regional bicycle plans and 11 1 1 B adequate school facilities staff determines that this request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and applicable policies and ordinances and I will be happy to answer any questions that you have thank you thank you it’s good to be here I apologize for my tardiness chair Hyman for getting us kicked off and running smoothly as usual at this point we would open the public hearing and we have one individual signed up to speak for the proposal mr.Jared Eden’s good evening Jared Eden’s with Eden’s land here representing the property owner I appreciate Jamie’s summary of our project and I’ll just summarize a couple of key points as Jamie mentioned we were here about a year ago for a retail rezoning on this same site Planning Commission and council both the pre retail zoning at that time what happened after that time was the market never really developed for the retail center it just never came to pass like we thought the next highest and best use in our opinion was townhomes there was definitely a market for townhomes so we started investigating that possibility and that’s brought us here before you today as so as Jamie mentioned about 112 units this would be a much less impactful request than what we had a year ago I think we’re reducing our trips by about eighty three hundred trips by going from retail to townhomes our water usage is way down everything is down generally we did have we had a neighborhood meeting last week volunteer we only had one person show up from the immediate and they were not have any opposition that I’m aware of and I’d be glad to answer any questions you may have Thanks thank you and this is the opportunity if anyone else would like to speak during the public hearing and seeing none I’ll move to close the public hearing and see if there are any questions or comments from the commissioners we’ll start on my right any questions or comments commissioner al Turk the floor is yours Thank You chair I have a question for Jamie so you mentioned that there will be a rezoning case before us next month possibly the gas station can you say a little bit more about that or what you what that’s just a broad contours event yeah the the rezoning case involves upgrades to an existing shell oil station located on the southeast corner of that intersection they are increasing the number of Bay’s on the existing site there will be some improvements to intersection access points and there will be no increase per se in terms of a convenience store it’ll still remain as a pay station so it’s it’s really to improve it increase the number of bays and the applicant can speak for themselves when they come but they are also hoping that that will alleviate some of the existing traffic congestion within that area C so the traffic impact will be minimal or zero or what’s in terms of I mean you don’t off the top of my head I couldn’t provide you with that information but okay thank you yeah I guess I’m asking because in attachment six you mentioned the all of you know if all of the new developments that are going up it would it’s going to increase the the traffic to more than one hundred and ten percent of the capacity but that’s below the one hundred and twenty percent that would be not in compliance with the comprehensive plan so I got that’s good to hear that this rezoning is not going to increase traffic there so thank you for that and one more question and I’ll ask it both to Jared and to Jamie so let me the bicycle and pedestrian Advisory Commission in their first question asked why and I think this is a good question why are we you know why it’s eg zoning or aid or townhomes I understand that that’s allowed but you know when I look at the rezoning map it’s very colorful we have deep pink and light pink and we have office institutional or industrial sorry to the east of this although it has townhomes and I guess I’m curious if that’s going to be addressed at some point or is that something that’s common in planning that we just have a commercial designation but we have a bunch of townhomes in it it just seems like that’s incongruent well these the the previous application for the site amended the zoning to become commercial general with a development plan there was no residential as part of that application the current applicant is interested in billing residential which is permitted within that zone but they are specifically committing to right seneschal so essentially it it is a commercial future land use map which coincides with that but they are specifically committing to residential I guess a more specific question is there a reason not to encourage a PDR or something else from the planning departments the applicants request in terms of what they’re seeking okay can you I’m just curious since we have a lot of time today honestly it’s just for simplicity as much as anything else I mean okay we’re already CJD before I actually have another zoning you’re gonna see in three or four months it’s townhomes on a CG zoned parcel in another part of town so it’s something we’ve done before and we will be doing a little bit down the road but just for simplicity as much as anything else okay just to keep it CCD okay I don’t have any questions Thank You Commissioner Johnson Thank You chairman so just a quick response to that I initially had the same question at the latter question that was just acts and I tend to agree I tend to agree with the logic of it makes sense that if we if the applicant can do residential within the commercial zone and as it is it was even in the case that the future land use is updated to make that residential then it becomes more in conformity to Wes around it but an applicant would still have to come before a commission at some point if they wanted to reprogram that site but the development it’s just sold is large enough I think that it’d be just too costly to like tear that down and say I’m sorry I had that consent that are concerned but I think that what is being proffered and committed to here addresses the what could potentially happen to that site if we kept it the way there is commercial land the future land use map is there’s another concern some rambling on that one my question is one for Jarrett just to be to try to gain some clarity on the price point for the townhomes do you have a sense of what what that range will be or in some kind of relative to what surrounded the site I mean it all I can say is a market rate which is what people say right but in this market the rate changes pretty often so I’m not I’m not really in the business of trying to guess what the sales price is gonna be for units because things are changing all the time but it’s just a market rate product I can tell it’ll be comparable to what’s been constructed across the road in the multi development across the road comp report of that the market of homes I got and just a comment on the gas station question that that my colleague referenced I will note that fatiah that tends to be a concern to me as well and we’ll hear about it on in the next session the next meeting but what I will share and it has it has some tangential implications on our decision here is that what tends to happen is there’s only like two or three Bay’s right now but people are coming from both ways on these two lanes and they’re literally stopping like it is right at this corner so they’re stopping trying waiting to turn in to get into these bays and so during the peak hours of the day when people are getting off from work and there’s a school right down the road less than a mile or so you’re just seeing like standstill traffic right at a light because people are trying to get into one of those bays and so that’s something to think about when we’re addressing the fact that that infrastructure is can only support so much traffic with two lanes and so I don’t know if more bays will actually us wage that that issue but I think it will just encourage more people they’ll see more bays and it’s like oh there’s opportunity for me to to get into the queue just something to keep in mind so thank you Commissioner Brian Thank You mr.Chair just to in case some commissioners remember of the last time this particular piece of property was before the Commission I had to recuse myself because we were dealing with both a flume Amendment and the rezoning and I live within the notification distance for the flume um ever but not the rezoning so I just wanted to explain that in case some of you were wondering why I was up here tonight you’re mr. 750 yeah well about 910 and living in the area and seeing what’s happened around it I didn’t particularly care for the commercial that was proposed and City Council heard about that but I believe that the townhome proposal is a better fit for this site then what was previously proposed and I’ll shut up with that a Thank You Commissioner Bryan for the record you’re always in a thousand with us Commissioner Baker and welcome aboard thank you very much so I have a few questions gonna take advantage of the fact that there are a few items on the agenda today first I see that commitments are in excess of EDA requirements you know best practices would encourage a mix of housing especially missing missing middle housing and I see that one of the commitments here is to limit this to only townhomes so kind of a homogeneous development with no mix of of housing opportunities for people so I’m just curious about why why there’s a limit on only producing one type of one type of housing typology honestly if the side is really only large enough for one one type I mean these builders I work with them day in and day out all kinds of different projects makes you singles talyn’s apartments 14 acres they just most the builders that I work with they just got to have a certain number of units to be there and I don’t think if you split the uses between singles and towns one your service less people your singles gonna be more expensive than your towns and and I just don’t think many builders wouldn’t jump on that thank you I’m also curious about roadway connectivity I know that this isn’t something that we can necessarily add and and it’s this is certainly not the place to do that but I I think that that’s something that we need need to be working on and encouraging is is improving connectivity and making sure that we have short locks short block lengths and when possible we have things like like alleys I’m curious from the developer if and this is not a asking for a proffer but if there are any green building practices they’re going to be employed if there’s gonna be any low-impact development it’s gonna be employed in this development unfortunately now it’s a market rate mostly builders with their standard product we won’t have that on this project I don’t believe okay okay so we have one one type of housing product here and very little connectivity lastly I just want to bring up the the bicycle and pedestrian Advisory Commission they brought up they cited the you do saying that the development and the cg district should provide safe pedestrian access to adjacent residential areas currently there are no text commitments addressing safe pedestrian access to adjacent residential areas is this in violation my question is is this in violation of the you do and I guess that’s for for Jamie so Jamie’s son yak with the planning department so they will be providing sidewalks in accordance with the you do along the frontage of their property that is the requirement there is also a commitment relative to I think it’s access point to a or bi forget in the event that the access point is provided to the adjacent property to the west which was approved for the self storage they would be providing cross access easements there okay thank you that’s all great thank you Commissioner Miller I’m with mr.Brian I was very much opposed to the rezoning on this property same parcel a year ago to develop a conventional grocery store Laden strip shopping center I think this proposal is dramatically better I have opposed the creation of a new commercial node at Bar B and 54 from the beginning all of highway 54 indeed this whole area of the county that that weaves in and around I forty is its skirts under underneath the city is kind of the pinnacle of automobile does a suburban design its and I don’t want and it is very heavily commercially laden there’s more commercial especially automobile based commercial development in this part of the county than any other place and we don’t need more of it the people who will live on this parcel will have probably more opportunities to shop and to buy groceries and all the other things that are missing in other parts of town than anybody else that lives in Durham and so we don’t need another shopping center here so I’m glad to see a townhouse project normally this is the when we see a townhouse project proposed this is the opportunity that I take to talk about townhouse design and also front loaded garages and all those other things give me heartburn but so thrilled am I to see this turn away from what I thought was a really bad idea of creating a commercial node here – one that is in my opinion a smoother and more contiguous line of development for townhouses I’m gonna lay off that and so I understand what’s going on here I’m glad for the opportunity to fix a mistake that we made a year ago and so I’m going to vote for this for all of those reasons and some I have not articulated Thank You Commissioner Kenton because I think the intersection is really problematic I Drive down Barbee Road almost every single day because 40 and 147 I’m possible with all the growth but I am pleased it’s gonna be by the density I think that’s a better use for it but I really wanted to see the intersection get improved and I’m pleased with the commitments I see here in terms of that left that tone lane on Bobby and some of the other features I see on that intersection is gonna be vastly improved and with the gas station which is not a case right now but you know I can’t wait to see that fix as well because there’s cars literally stacked on 54 trying to turn into that gas station and it’s always a very dangerous intersection so I’m pleased to see this is a great start I think and I’d like to use as well so excited to see that intersection get fixed finally thank you Thank You Commissioner Williams yeah from what I read in terms of the text commitments as it turns as it reads for the access points for access point to a and access 22 B it says that if is decided upon and if it is determined then it will be designated and given the current congestion the issues that are already on Barbie Road and that particularly intersection there overload on highway 54 and Barbie Road I believe that even though a shopping center on that particular life may have been bad then this is just a lesser of the two evils I feel like the impact of this particular intersection regardless of the gas house that sits on that corner and people traveling through the area is indeed the lesser of two evils unless you address the issue and putting a sidewalk on the big front face of the property – Barbie Road I’m not really sure where that’s going to leave besides maybe highway 40 in the overpass or the apartments across the street or the townhomes across the street so I mean even though it is a need I don’t think that it’s necessarily a need to build new town homes in that area considering the fact that the ones that were just built probably aren’t full but that’s just my personal thought process on it and I feel like this is an opportunity to use land to build on it because the opportunity is there and Durham is growing I don’t know that it’s necessarily a need I would think that some type of if you’re gonna do it for commercial maybe some type of what is it called a like a green house where people walk in like a community you walk in you grow your vegetables you sell them and you leave like that type of area to give people access we can’t depend on the infrastructure to be improved but so much and with another case coming up I’m trying to figure out how they’re gonna build more bathes in there and where they’re gonna expand too because the drop-off for the gasps houses right there because there’s a new property that was just built and then whatever lies behind it and then what is across the street so I’m definitely not inclined to vote for this for the obvious concerns of the stress is going to put on an already stressed intersection and neighboring for neighborhoods the amount of traffic there’s gonna be generated on Barbie Road 54 both east and west so those are my comments thank you any other questions or comments Commissioner Johnson thank you chair so just in response to that is I mean I tend to agree with your presentation of the issues at hand Commissioner Williams my when I put on my reality hat is that the the green house the vision but you vision as being ideal for that site it’s pop I’m inclined to say it’s almost impossible because the cost that it brought that I’m sure that it took to acquire that land just doesn’t make that feasible for the developer I real estate is just getting very expensive and erm and so the question is I mean even if you don’t pursue the height the best and highest use of that site something is gonna go on that site that’s just not gonna be congruent with their current infrastructure like I think that’s a larger city a city issue that we have to figure out like how do we enhance the physical infrastructure in this area of derm along with how many other areas in Durham to support the growth that’s going on and so as we’ve shared with many other applicants or opposition to applicants is that something’s gonna happen on that site which is gonna make it even not the ideal outcome in regards to the congestion the traffic etc etc and so it’s a question of and I’m not saying that this project gets us to the best outcome but it’s like well how do we try to mitigate as much as we can what is going to happen which is that site is going to be developed and I don’t have that utopia answer myself but and I just it’s just important when we like thinking about the reality of what’s happening here some private owner owns that land and they’re gonna do something to it sooner rather than later and so it’s a question of what is it gonna look like and what’s their implications and the impact and do we have an opportunity to assuage the bad and highlight and enhance what we can possibly on the positive side thank you any other questions or comments Commissioner Williams counterpoint yeah I mean I understand where you’re coming from but doing something just because eventually something will get done that’s gonna cause more harm than good and the way I feel about it is we can’t always just say well eventually something that’s gonna happen because our voice is to determine partially what is going to happen and to speak to that effect so if we voice as 14 bodies or 13 or 12 or 11 or whatever the case may be then it goes to another body which they have the opportunity to kind of steer this entire process and so where it may go if it doesn’t sound right first and it doesn’t sound right second then maybe a third will come or a fourth at the end of the day until something get approves nothing gets built so it’s not necessarily a process of approving something just because eventually something will happen until there’s the right fit we have the opportunity to do that to get it right because it’s right now and sitting dormant so it’s not adding any more traffic or any more impacts because it’s not being used and right now I can’t say well because the owner has done this or because the owner has done that then you spent until you get it right and if it’s the right fit then it will generate its own revenue follow-up thank you and I love follow-up and then we actually have other commissioners would question I’m sorry and we’re in response to that and thank you for sharing those comments to staff my question is given what the current zoning allowance is on that site what is what is the max as we said what’s the if you can do the largest development type on that the potential property on the property as it’s currently zoned what could the developer potentially put on that site right now without having to get a yay or nay from us on on what they would pursue Jamie Sun yeah with the Planning Department the rezoning that occurred in 2016 allowed up to 160,000 square feet of uses that are permitted within the cg zoning district there were certain exceptions to that self-storage was one of them but that’s what be the the max on the site right now unless the zoning changed so that’s a rally and I just wanted that to be a record that that can happen right now whether we fall asleep up here or not that you know something is going to happen on that site and that’s the reality commissioner Durkin I just had a follow-up question for the applicant on the question about type of housing you mentioned that single-family was not thought about but what about duplexes or quad plugs except that’s more of a greater need than additional single-family homes I mean that is a different housing type for sure but that that’s a much different builder also the number of builders who build townhomes as opposed to number of builders who are gonna go and build duplexes very different buyer pool and builder pool and the goal here was really to if you funded townhomes was you know to get as many units as we can get I mean the townhomes across the street they’ve sold out and they were selling 15 to 20 a month for the entire time they sold so they’re gone the demand is there so we know that demand is there we obviously need housing in Durham we need townhomes in Durham and condos and apartments in Durham and less of the singles so we felt like this was just the best we could do thank you Commissioner Miller so I wanted to point out there’s no particular virtue in duplexes or triplex as a matter of fact because they are almost invariably rental properties as opposed to homeownership properties I don’t favor them I would like to see us improve the percentage of homeownership properties home ownership properties grow wealth grow wealth for families where rental properties are wealth transfer engines townhouses which are a form of multi-family housing are are technically missing middle houses I don’t want to get caught up in these these new terms were throwing around I think what we need to do is look at if the way these properties perform in terms of of how they supply housing or we need housing and also their general compatibility as that’s contemplated in our comprehensive plan and as a matter of good planning because of the way this area it has been developing even though it has been admittedly taking advantage of the counterintuitive uses you know you name a sown commercial you name it office but you allow certain certain types of residential uses it creates a dissonance that that people have noted here today I’m thrilled at the way this corner is developing now this is going to be at the high end of what I would call of what our comprehensive plan contemplates is medium density housing isn’t that right at about ten units an acre 1011 units an acre so in it so we have a way of we’re adding housing we’re adding it at it at a certain density we are bringing the number of trips per day down by 8,000 on a facility that it’s already crowded and it’s going to get worse I see this particular project is a win-win project and while I would like to see more commitments about the actual townhouse designs I do not want to risk losing the opportunity to fix a mistake that we last that we asked we created last year when we zoned this commercial where we approve the shopping center by insisting on something I don’t believe this developer wants to give thank you seeing no additional questions or comments before I call the question and ask for a motion I’ll say that I also agree that this is an improvement from my personal perspective I do have concerns about the traffic from a long term perspective but I do think this particular issue does address some of the most immediate concerns and I do plan to vote to approve it but this is a intersection that’s getting busier and I I do hear some of the other concerns that some of my fellow commissioners have raised and I think we’re gonna have to pay attention to as we move forward that said I will look for a motion if someone is willing to make it Commissioner Brian mr.Chairman I move that we soon case z18 0 0 0 1 1 forward to the city council with a favorable recommendation second I’ve moved by Commissioner Brian seconded by Commissioner Satterfield even though it was close why don’t we have a roll call please Commissioner al Turk yes Commissioner Johnson yes Commissioner Baker no commissioner Braun yes commissioner Satterfield yes commissioner darken yes Commissioner Hyman yes Commissioner Buzby yes Commissioner Miller yes Commissioner kenshin yes Commissioner Hornbuckle yes Commissioner Williams no okay motion passes 10:00 to 10:00 to 2:00 sorry and a – thank you very much Thank You Mr. Eden’s our next item is a case ‘ty c18 quadruple zero six this is the private streets text amendment to the unified development ordinance Mr. stack thank you very much Michael stock with Lion Department X amendment TC 1800 six as a privately initiated request to amend paragraph 12 – to other forms of access specifically it would allow an additional instance where private streets would be allowed currently the ordinance allows private residential private streets and for circumstances for him to serve a maximum of six Fingal single-family or duplex Lots for multifamily developments if shown on a development plan and within conservation subdivisions in this proposal the private streets would be allowed for only single-family developments only within the county jurisdiction so any single-family development within the county jurisdiction only private streets must be designed and constructed to city or NCDOT standards as applicable but they would not be maintained by either the city or the state the applicant is here to answer any questions and I’d also be happy to answer any questions thank you thank you very much and can we do you mind if we can see if anyone has signed up for the public hearing and we’ll move to open the public hearing thank you and we have one individual signed up to speak mr.Mitch Craig the microphone is yours you know Mike if you can come up and give us your name your address and make your statement sir Joseph M Craig 301 Glenwood Avenue week 2:20 Riley North Carolina 276 0 3 and I’m representing the applicant and here to answer any questions the main issue for this subdivision is the majority of subdivision is in Chatham County it’s completely developed in Chatham County with private streets there’s a private street that comes off of 751 it serves the majority of this development and they would like for their streets to be private how many names here any questions yes thank you very much is there anyone else who’d like to speak as part of the public hearing seeing none I’ll move to close the public hearing and come back to the commissioners any questions or comments from the commissioners Commissioner Baker um so questions for staff it’s my understanding that communities that have historically been more liberal in allowing private streets are in fact moving away from that policy so I’m curious has staff conducted an assessment or held a dialogue with some other communities that have this policy and/or have you looked at what are the potential consequences of this policy if you allow it countywide well allowing a County why if there wouldn’t be a countywide it would just be within the county jurisdiction so it wouldn’t apply to the city at all okay County jurisdiction yes so the really the only negative impacts that we would believe would be to the development to the property owners themselves if they could not maintain it and then they went to seek acceptance from NCDOT because from my understanding is that it would have to be maintained the reason why we require it for to be built to city or NCDOT standards so if they sought acceptance by those by those entities and they’re already built to those standards and they could be taken over they would need to be maintained to a certain level for NCDOT to accept them so they data there have to be a certain quality to the to and so that wrote that would be the biggest drawback okay I have two other questions so as the city grows in population and municipal borders move out would it be correct to assume that eventually the city is going to be asked to annex some of these properties that have private streets and potentially have to annex properties in this scenario where the HOA fails have to take over maintenance of those streets usually when we see a number of new developments that are coming in they’re already going in through city annexation process so it’s pretty rare to see those kind of instances happen any new developments are going to go again go through the annexation process with the city and they’d have to develop through the city processes so it’s but it’s rare today but then we would permit private streets so it might not become rare anymore I still would be pretty rare there’s a good part of Durham County that is not likely to be served by the city in any foreseeable future okay and last question to me this is this is a pretty easy no but I would like to ask are there other more site-specific alternative solutions to the problem that that it exists today for the applicant I’m not aware of any but you could ask the applicant to see what kind of solutions they saw that’s all and Commissioner Baker if you’d like you can directly answer them this week we looked at doing public roads and the reason they want to do private is because small subdivision roads are just not a priority of the city or the d-o-t and they have you know in this particular instance they have the means to maintain in most instances I will say that’s the case because they’re going to be developed as private so people that are buying in that subdivision would know that those streets are private and you know frankly it’s just the the biggest deal is just not a priority for the deity and that’s that’s the biggest issue is your question yeah thank you very much other questions or comments commissioner out Turk yeah thanks thank you another question for staff so you mentioned that the streets would have to be maintained up to NCDOT standards how often I mean do you have any sense of how often in sidi OT does this they go around and say oh these private streets are up to our standards I think they’re only gonna look at it if they’re petitioned to take over the street so that’s it that’s it thank you thank you Commissioner Miller so while you’re standing there instead of doing a text amendment they could have applied to rezone this property to a PDR with essentially the same lot layout that’s that’s on the ground right and then they could have had private streets under the existing code provision correct so there is a site-specific solution what this does because I think it’s it isn’t immediately intuitive for me when we say for any single-family subdivision we’re talking about subdivisions that are zoned between our youth well I guess you we probably don’t have any of those in the county jurisdiction but we could it would be any no you couldn’t now in a county jurisdiction unless it’s d for ru and send some Lester’s County within the urban tier you couldn’t are you all right most of it you’re gonna see is RS code it’s it’s unlikely that it could be ru but we’re talking about the single-family zones there’s that are described in the code that have the r the r prefix and probably rural residential as well correct and that’s but that’s a lot of land mm-hmm and so the development limitations if I understood you before though in the county jurisdiction since we’re talking about the county only here are the availability of water and sewer utilities primarily and the city controls the those under its current policy so moving forward new sub subdivisions I know there are plenty of existing subdivisions out there that have septic tanks or private wells and those kinds of things we’re not creating those much anymore No so those will come into the city and once they’re in the city they could do private streets if they wanted good name or do we just have no private streets in the private streets it would be limited to very small so the first instance that’s already allowed so serving six or less or PDR or PDR as if it’s on the development and we do a lot of so and we don’t we you know it my experience here is only four years old but we’ve had very few cases that have have been to ourselves you know it’s usually a PDR because of the improved flexibility of lot sizes and housing types so I personally do not see a real threat with this private streets provision I realized though it gives mr.Baker whose expertise I think I’m going to become accustomed to deferring to some heartburn and there is a property-specific solution here I would like to ask the developer if I may Mr. chairman you know whether or not they had considered rezoning this property where they want private streets to a PDR zone as opposed to this text amendment which runs from from the person county line all the way down to where you are at Chatham County because I think it is the extent and the difficulty of contemplating the consequences of so great a change that is giving or giving some of my colleagues here heartburn when we could have done something that was just for your property to fit it within the current code requirement for private streets correct me if I’m wrong Michael but some of the development is developed is being developed can it still be reason home to a PDR if it’s already been developed it’s well with a PDR you would have to get signatures from all property owners with him.the within the developed within the site so if it’s an area that is still controlled by one or maybe two entities that might be easier to do this already has multiple property owners that would be a more difficult task which would not be a problem in this instance to rezone it to a PDR it’s just the timeframe is probably the biggest issue to be framed the timeframe to rezone it to a PDR is more than this thank you I had not actually considered the the practical implications of having to go get everybody to sign on to it that’s a good point thank you thank you any additional questions or comments I’d seen none this is also an opportunity just for any either emotion or for continued discussion if people have thoughts they want to share I see a half Commissioner Johnson there it is Commissioner Johnson Renison with the question things chair so it’s just a response to I just follow-up to the comment about the time process so if if this was approved in in favor of the request tonight would it likely go to Council for vote next month or what would be trying to get a sense of the shortest versus the potential longest so if this happens tonight in favor how quickly will final affirmation we’re probably looking at before the end of the year in November December we’re talking about the board of County Commission or the county commissioners correct and and math applicant so how many signatures would at this point what you have to go back and get in regards to the alternative option potential option of getting the PDR with private streets and how many and then the follow-up question would be the process once that happens about how many signatures which you have to go and fish out fish out of society currently there’s 40 houses in phase 9 and 16 of them are inhabited so probably 16 plus 17 so the homeowners association would be and what do you have a idea of how quickly you would be able to get 16 plus one that would be fairly quick I think is the process that and frankly we you know when we talked with the city and we’ve talked with the JCCC PC as well nobody felt like this would be a negative proposal to anyone so that’s why we chose to pursue this first because you know it’s it allows it but it doesn’t require private street it allows private streets and you know most people don’t don’t want private streets so they would develop them to be taken over by the city or the d-o-t where we are developing them to be per the requirements of the city and the DFT I get the logic I was China so based on this information upon getting out the signatures how quickly would the applicant well how long with the appling have to wait before they are back before this body with the requests jamie-san yack with the Planning Department so my understanding and I don’t know this site 100% but they would need to seek a rezoning so they would need to seek a rezoning at a minimum future land use map amendment is uncertain at this time the process would be that they would need to start with a request for a pre-sub that’s a requirement before the zoning if there’s a future land use map amendment associated with that they would have to hold a neighborhood meeting prior to submission once they got all their application materials together then we start the review process so ideally the rezoning could be in front of the Planning Commission I would say no less than three to four months depending on the type of application that’s submitted again I am not familiar with this application per se once the Planning Commission makes a recommendation and ultimately would need to go to the Board of County Commissioners so they would ultimately be the one who would adopt the rezoning and it would become effective immediately and final question I promise so in the case that there are some unforeseen implications negative consequences with the decision we make tonight what would be the retroactive response like would it be that no longer going forward would subdivision like if we had to roll back what we’re what we would potentially agree on tonight how would that work if we wanted to address something that we are not thinking about tonight and so we don’t want it to happen to future subdivision or opportunity having the ability to have private roles because X Y Z is likely to happen and we don’t want X Y Z to happen not quite sure how to answer that question possibly may I try to reframe the question please help me if we believe this is the fastest path forward we don’t see that there will be many if any unintended consequences let’s find out how about what if we find out there are unintended consequences and we wish to try to then remedy the situation if it turns out we’ve opened a can of worms we don’t think we will but let’s say we do how would that move forward for us to remedy the change that we’re making tonight is that an accurate question thank you for the clarity well that’s something that we we do on a regular basis with our ordinance and taking a look at how new provisions function and perform we do that through omnibus 10 11 12 13 up to 20 you know we haven’t gotten there yet but it’s probably gonna happen so one of our jobs is to to make sure that we that any new provisions are functioning in a way that we’re at least anticipating or not negatively impacting things and if we see that there are negative policy implications or real-world implications even to that then we will make corrections to it and bring it back to you thank you and Commissioner Johnson thank you because that’s the same question that I was sitting here thinking as well Commissioner Durkin and then Commissioner Miller just it’s not quite a question but I just the the idea that you’d have a universal text amendment for a very project specific project gives me heartburn personally and if there’s a solution that is solely project specific then I would much prefer that route be taken also keep in mind that the ordinance does allow private streets for single-family up to six dwelling units so I would think that you probably have some of those in the city as well and when I guess a follow-up question to that statement is you said that most of the development is in Chatham County how many houses are in Durham County in this development on the when is completed there’ll be 91 and within Durham County and 31 are allowed to be to have private roads already you know and I understand that that makes sense so that it’s contiguous throughout your development I just would rather have a project specific application Thank You Commissioner Miller so I feel the same way Commissioner Durkin does but on the other hand I think it’s our job to actually to do the very best job we can to anticipate the consequences and do not go forward if we’re if we’re uncertain but I also believe that with the people in the room especially our staff the likelihood of very many unintended or discoverable unintended consequences when we vote is small all if we if we search them out and satisfy ourselves with the answers to the questions I know mr.Baker said this was an easy no and so I’d like for him to articulate for me to guide me in my voting what the negative policy consequences of voting in favor of this text amendment might be why would I vote against this so we come across a lot of counties in our work that are experiencing issues with HOAs failing they then have to take over the street oftentimes there’s a situation where folks buy into a neighborhood not realizing that it’s on a private street look at their neighbors down the road and you know they say you know why am I paying my taxes but at the same time I have to I have to pay extra to maintain the street weight County is experiencing this right now so and then we see San Francisco where I mean this is an extraordinary case where a private street was actually purchased by someone who didn’t live in the neighborhood and so we see lots of unintended consequences H always fail all the time you know I totally feel for that applicant and I want to find a solution here but to to go ahead and change make a text amendment that applies to entire county based on hardship being experienced by a single applicant on a single property does not seem to me to be the most appropriate solution in this case mr.Mellott and I know we have one commission member here who has lived through the circumstances that you have described of being a development caught with its trousers down and left old and the homeowners left holding and the city left holding the bag I was wondering if miss Hyman had anything she wanted to add only that you know of course it’s an issue that gives us heartburn because there are unintended consequences that happen to homeowners and when HOAs fail so had you know I’ve experienced both but to have but to address it from an goodness perspective does give me heartburn so and only because I’ve experienced it but I do want to point out that that was in the city and those were streets that were caught half-completed on their way to becoming public streets through the subdivision approval process so voting against this isn’t necessarily going to prevent homeowners from being caught with incomplete developer built public streets hey Thank You Commissioner Miller commissioner out Turk you’ve been very patient thank you cheering it sounds like we need to stock up on Tom’s along with our water here I’m you know I think I’m have been convinced by Commissioner Baker and and I won’t repeat why and so I would be inclined to vote against this but I would like to at least give the applicant an opportunity to you know if you want to have a continuance or think about it and if you if you want us to consider that to do that container to grant that continuance I think we would probably be happy to but I want to leave that in your court like that or whether you want us to vote on it as it stands let me let me confer thank you thank you I’ll give you a moment I’ll ask if there any additional questions or comments commissioner Satterfield well I just wanted to take a different tack we’re looking at individual request to change an ordinance and we really feel a lot of us like we would rather have a solution for that particular property as opposed to something that will impact multiple properties countywide other piece of it to me is setting a precedent for an applicant who may not be able to meet their timeline for whatever type of a situation they’re looking at and so well you know we’ll just see if we can’t get the ordinance changed instead so that was just what I was thinking about that was on my mind thank you other questions or comments and you’re welcome to come back up and I did I would just ask Commissioner Outsider if you don’t mind just repeating your question sure I think the question is would you like a continuance where would you like us to vote on the matter today Michael do you know any developments in the county of Durham that are owned by AG ways that have private streets that have failed there’s a city know of any of those I’m not aware of any but that doesn’t mean that there aren’t
Brooklyn Bridge – Blessed Is The Rain – [STEREO] “MusicMike’s “Flashback Favorites”
okay no we think is that it is a it’s a good proposal I don’t see any we’ve talked about it for the last three months with the city with the JCCC PC and we don’t see any negative things that could come up it’s it’s not a requirement and it’s not changing that the ordinance is actually just amending the ordinance to allow private streets for a subdivision that is larger than six single family units like I said you could come in with six single family units and have a private street and I don’t see how that’s any different then allowing an entire subdivision to have private streets you have more homeowners that pays into an HOA when you have more units in the subdivision and I don’t see how that’s any different than a is just allowing more units into a private street subdivision so no we wish for you to vote on it we appreciate the input thank you for answering the question Commissioner Johnson and Commissioner Brian just want to find a question to the from from my perch here so what what happens what does your project look like if this request is not granted what does the final product look like well well again we can as it’s a mixture of things really we have a development plan for 31 Lots that shows private streets that has been approved which is you know it’s adjacent to the only the only part of this subdivision that that that can’t be private is phase 9 which is 40 Lots because it’s already been approved it’s being developed the previous engineer didn’t come in with a development plan for private streets and that was one of the reasons why we were coming in is so we have private streets for phase 9 and I get that we can have a PDR and I get that we can have you know a development plan and but I just don’t see what adding this to the ordinance I don’t see you know the negativity to that but it looks like a it’s jumbled up there’s some private streets there’s some public streets there’s some public streets that haven’t been taken over by do – yeah that will be taken over by the LT and then when we come in with a PDR the homeowners association will take them back over from so just be clear so phase 9 is the component in Durham County that you’re asking for the requests and so and so in the event that you’re not granted the ordinance change the streets will be public maintained by then we’ll be public some of them do tea and then they will some of them will lead to private yep okay you know doing this for for us is for continuity but I really don’t think that this would be developer specific I think it would be a good plan for the county if you have a developer that is willing to put in private streets and can do it per the ordinance you know I don’t see how that doesn’t help the city the county I mean this is and we’re really not talking about the entire county we’re talking about areas outside of the city Commissioner Brian Thank You Mr. Chair I’ve been listening and actually learning quite a bit for the listening to the arguments one way or the other my own feeling on the matter is is that I trust our staff has done their homework and has a fault of some of the same things that we’ve brought up so from my perspective I’m going to take a chance we know what we’re doing and though YES on this knowledge as we have discussed if we mess it up we have a way to fix it thank you any additional questions or comments and if not this is the appropriate time for a motion and a reminder we make motions in the affirmative and then you can also vote against your own motion Mr. Chair I move that we spend TC one eight zero zero zero zero six forward to the governing bodies with a favorable recommendation properly moved we have a second okay all right moved by Commissioner brine seconded by Commissioner Williams I think before we do vote we one just give an opportunity for any discussion on the motion Commissioner a little too late but I I would actually like to hear from the Transportation Department I I mean I’m in a case like this where we know that NCDOT has you know limited capacity to maintain roads I mean is there a public is there a benefit to actually having counties subdivisions like this have private streets I mean just from a not just for the subdivision itself but for the city and the county as a whole bill judge City transportation so this is a County case right and only I was you know and so we are City Department so I don’t know that I can particularly answer your question and other than I mean the state VOT is constantly challenged for maintaining roads all over the county basically that they’re constantly looking for opportunities to reduce their maintenance responsibilities because there’s never enough money to maintain roads okay thank you and I’ll say as part of the discussion before the vote I’ve been on the fence on this issue I’m inclined to vote with Commissioner Brian knowing that we have the ability to come back even though I do share some of the concerns I know the staffs thought about this and worked on this so I’m inclined to vote for it any additional comments or discussion Commissioner Johnson I just broke my promise last question so today for the African one one last question and just may not meet I think through so can you give us a sense of the price point of this subdivision that you’re developing what’s the price point of the the units that you’re building and do you have a sense of what the HOA fee is associated to these units I can say that the Lots are going for like yeah the houses are million dollars a Lots are selling for 600,000 and so do you have an idea of winter hom monthly HOA fee would equate to for a lot unit can you repeat that fourth over four minutes $1,500 a household per year and currently there’s a hundred and eighty-three households that have been developed thank you okay so I’m gonna ask that we can just ask very focused questions we’ve had our time for discussion we have a live motion this is normally when we vote but I do want to allow further discussion but let’s try to keep it brief if we’re able to Commissioner Baker yeah so I just on on the back of those questions and I think those were good questions but I just want to remind everyone that this is something that will apply to the to the county jurisdiction to the entire county jurisdiction not just in this one case so just a reminder that’s a that’s a fair reminder in Commissioner Miller so I want to throw something out there that as I’ve been trying to decide how to vote on this backwards back and forth one of the things that when I look at the current rules and the limitations there they seem to be for private streets are allowed but where we allow them we want them to be fairly small applications the exception to that I suppose would be PD ours and I suppose you could have big multifamily developments but an even big conservation subdivisions but it seems to me that this would allow possibly in land that’s already zoned for single-family development in the county fairly large systems of private streets and I have to say there’s something in me that I can understand a fairly small system of private streets that don’t necessarily because private streets may be exclusive private streets mean private you don’t have to let it be just anybody drive on them there’s something in me that says that while it’s it’s appropriate to allow some of that to allow a lot of that is bad public policy and because I don’t have a very strong sense of of how my concern is is that we could one one consequence of this could be as we could wind up with some large subdivisions in the county jurisdiction that are already zoned single-family don’t have to come for us we would never know no rezoning required systems big swaths of land that are subject to a regime of private streets maintained by the state but available only to the to limited number of persons that makes me uncomfortable and so I’m going I’m gonna vote against that against this because of that but primarily I’m persuaded by a commission remember Durkin whose argument if I understood it correctly is a countywide change for one phase of one subdivision is not the way to go unless there’s obvious countywide Mary thank you mister stock just wanted to make sure we are clear that when we’re talking about county jurisdiction we’re talking about anything outside of the incorporated so just want to make sure we’re clear thank you all right with that we do have a motion and a second on the table and seeing no additional discussion on the motion I would ask for a roll call vote please Commissioner Turk no Commissioner Johnson no Commissioner Baker no Commissioner Brian yes mr.Satterfield no Commissioner docken no Commissioner Hyman no Commissioner Buzby yes Commissioner Miller no missioner kenshin yes Commissioner Hornbuckle yes Commissioner Williams yes the motion fails 5 7 ok thank you very much a reminder even a failed motion will continue to the governing body for review and the right yes we are on to new business and we have two major items we have the annual election of officers and then Commissioner Bryan has ended items as well on the commissioner and the election annual election of officers s Miss Smith – OH number one remind us of the process that we have and then also to open the election process and I’ll just note that and Miss Smith you can remind me if I get this correct or not we have one year terms for a chair in a vice chair and they can serve two consecutive terms there then term limited and we then switch from a city between a city appointee and a County appointee that is correct I’m a City appointee I finished my first year vice chair Hyneman is the vice chair and his finishing her first year having been chair previously that is correct okay basically you just said what I was going to say normally on for time no you’re good now you’re right on time so you are a little free election and you obviously anyone else is eligible for election our staff will take the nomination and I’ll be glad to tally a vote for you if that’s what you’d like for me to do I think it’s a nice way to go about things okay so um normally we go ahead and do the nomination for the chair so who would like I would like to nominate Commissioner Buzby for chair second okay and can I get a show of hands or Commissioner Buzby mr.Mellor did you have something are you good well I was just wondering if there were other nominations well since we just voted I’m sorry I mean no one else substitute motion so you should have probably had a jumped in ahead of me button so it looks like you got reelected sorry I put you in there now we’ll take a nomination for Vice Chair uh nominate Commissioner Hyman for first year second do we have any other nominations okay can I get a vote show of hands please thank you very much enjoy your continued in rank I get a raise after this meeting I think what’s double of nothing now I did personally just want to say thank you I’ve enjoyed it I’ve enjoyed working with all of you and looking forward to one final year as the chair I think mr. Brown had a couple of announcements thank you something that in viewed the discussion tonight people might find interesting the North Carolina Department of Transportation is initiating at least information gathering phase of a project to widen NC 54 from 15501 in Chapel Hill to NC 55 in Durham it’s going to take a while it’s probably going to be much more expensive than they’re thinking but at least there’s a project number STI PU five seven seven four so we may get some improvements in that roadway down the line the second item I wanted to mention is that I have another set of duties on the board of trustees at the University of the South and I will be at a trustee meeting on October the 9th so I would appreciate it an excused absence okay thank you for the heads-up and then we will remember to vote to give you an excused absence next month thank you a commission I’m so glad speaking of next month I’m will make a note of that mr.Brahn for you and we’ll be sure that we bring that back next month for your attention we do have several items on the agenda for next month and I was actually working on that summary and didn’t quite finish before I came up with it’s rather long anyway there are several zoning cases I’m not limited to but including Pine Crest and the Roth, yes and we have the continued future land use map change for Forest Hills coming back mm-hmm several items on the agenda so I send out a summary tomorrow and if you have any questions please contact the case planner directly or myself great thank you and if you’re reading between the lines it’s gonna be a long meeting with a lot of hot issues so brings neck to bring a snack or find a board like Commissioner Bryan to serve on Commissioner Miller so Mr.Chairman I have a request and it’s a request not only the Commission but of staff because I’m actually asking for staff work the North Carolina independent The Indie ran an article probably three or four weeks ago about controversy associated with development and rules having to do with the the open space land near paterson Place compact neighborhood tier would it be possible to get kind of a staff briefing on on that and the staffs perspective of what’s going on there how we handle the conversion of compact neighborhood tiers to design districts and the what actually happens on the ground we’ve seen it happen we’ve had experience at ninth Street and now it’s it’s happening in other places I’d kind of like to know be briefed on what’s happening with these and I read that article I’m not sure from reading the article I underst all of the issues we at least I received an email from an interest group associate who cares about what’s happening over there and I would like to hear the staffs perspective at some at some future media maybe not the next meeting and then I also have to say that you know we’re the Planning Commission we have a statutory duty to advise the elected bodies on what’s happening in planning and I’d say I’m a little disturbed to see that the expanding housing choices program is so far along briefings to the elected body we’ve had no briefings at this level at all and at some point I would like to have us have a briefing I would hate to have that come to us as a ten minutes per side public hearing vote and then we’re done too big a deal for your first request the about the article in the nd I will check with staff and we can probably get something for you on the November agenda October is fairly loaded down and I’m sure we can fit it in but I’ll let you know what the next meeting for sure Sarah young with the planning department you are slated to get an informational item both on Patterson place and on the expanding housing choices projects so those will be coming to you they will come to you in advance of a public hearing I don’t know off the top of my head what the schedule says but you will you will get briefings in advance on both those items those are already built into the schedules excellent thank you thank you Commissioner Hyman yes I wanted to make a statement only because I was asked a question about something that happened in our community that I am very proud of and that I owe a debt of gratitude to the city of Durham for and that includes the streets in front of my house in our community I happen to move in one of those fail communities and the streets were not done and it was not something that we you know were aware but I do I worked on that particular project and I just wanted to say because I know that my neighbors could be listening and everybody else that the City of Durham was able to complete those streets for us in conjunction with a new developer and it’s something that we’re very proud of and very proud of the way that we work with the city of Durham in getting that done so just wanted to say kudos thank you that’s great any other comments Commissioner Baker I’m curious about the zoning map change reports is there any way can I can I make a request that some additional information is provided is that within our view here I would be curious if in these reports we could see when there’s a resident an application for residential development if we could see walking distance to schools parks and maybe a grocery store it’s impossible I don’t want to add to you I’m not gonna be able to answer that like on the fly tonight we certainly look into that and report back okay thank you great seeing no additional comments I just want to thank you all for your time this meeting is adjourned we’ll see you next month
