►
From YouTube: Zoning Meeting - January 21, 2020
Description
You're watching the Charlotte City Council Zoning Meeting from January 21, 2020. Thanks for joining us!
A
B
Gonna
go
ahead
and
get
started
time
for
the
January
21st
zoning
meeting.
Welcome
thanks
for
coming
out
on
this
cold
night
to
be
here.
We're
gonna
go
ahead
with
our
introductions
around
the
Dyess,
and
then
we
will
go
into
our
invocation.
I
believe
that
councilmember
s
Mira,
are
you:
are
you
doing
our
invocation
this
evening,
which
is
a
reading
or
a
poem
or
a
saying?
That's
meant
to
simonize
our
proceedings,
and
then
we
will
all
I'll
ask
everybody
to
stand
for
the
Pledge
of
Allegiance
and
then
we'll
launch
right
into
our
our
zoning
cases.
B
B
We've
got
a
couple
councilmember
couple
folks
out
tonight.
Mr.
Mitchell
is
not
feeling
well
and
mr.
Bukhari
and
mayor
Lyle's
are
both
traveling
on
City
business
evening.
So
with
that
we're
going
to
I'm
just
going
to
give
a
brief
explanation
of
the
zoning
process
and
then
I'll
go
ahead
and
introduce
our
zoning
committee.
E
B
E
Yesterday,
our
nation
celebrated
the
99th
first
birthday
of
dr.
Martin,
Luther
King,
jr.
I
was
proud
to
see
and
participate
in
parades
events
and
ceremonies
throughout
the
state.
It's
the
least
we
can
do
for
a
man
who
gave
his
life
for
equality
in
honoring.
Dr.
King
I
was
reminded
of
one
of
my
favorite
inspirational,
poems
I'm,
going
to
read
the
poem
for
you
tonight.
It's
it's
still
iodized
by
Maya
Angelou.
E
You
may
write
me
down
in
history
with
your
bitter
twisted
lies.
You
may
trot
me
in
the
very
dirt,
but
still
like
dust
I
will
rise.
Does
my
sassiness
upset
you?
Why
are
you
beset
with
gloom
because
I
walk
like
I've
got
oil
wells
pumping
in
my
living
room,
just
like
moons
and
like
Suns,
with
the
certainty
of
tides,
just
like
hopes
bringing
high
still
I'll
rise?
Did
you
want
to
see
me
broken,
bowed,
head
and
lowered
eyes
shoulders
falling
down
like
teardrops
weakened
by
my
soulful
cries?
E
Does
my
hardness
a
friend
you?
Don't
you
take
it
awful
hard.
Cuz
I
laugh
like
I've
got
gold
mines
digging
in
my
own
backyard.
You
may
shoot
me
with
your
words.
You
may
cut
me
with
your
eyes:
you
may
kill
me
with
your
hatefulness,
but
still
like
air
I'll
rise
out
of
the
hearts
of
history's.
Shame
I
rise
up
from
a
past,
that's
rooted
in
pain,
I
rise,
I'm,
a
black
ocean
leaping
and
wide
Welling
and
swelling
I
bear
in
the
tide,
living
behind
nights
of
terror
and
fear
I
rise
into
a
daybreak.
E
B
Thank
you
so
for
those
of
you
who
haven't
been
to
a
zoning
meeting
before
I'll
go
through
just
the
process
real
briefly,
the
process
begins
with
applications
that
are
submitted
to
our
planning
staff
for
review
and
those
those
are
either.
What
we'll
be
looking
at
tonight
will
either
be
decisions
or
hearings.
The
decisions
are
cases
for
which
the
public
hearing
has
already
been
heard,
and
there
will
be
no
further
comment
and
for
the
hearings.
If
anyone
which
would
like
to
speak
on
a
hearing,
please
see
the
clerk
before
the
start
of
the
hearing
this
evening.
B
To
sign
up
will
then
have
a
staff
presentation
and
the
petitioner
will
get
three
minutes
combined
to
present
cases.
If
there
is
no
opposition.
If
there
is
opposition,
they
will
get
ten
minutes,
and
the
opponent
gets
ten
minutes
with
a
two-minute
rebuttal
from
our
petitioner
and
if
no
one
has
signed
up
it
is
opposed
or
signed
up
to
speak.
Then
the
staff
will
just
provide
a
very
short
presentation
and
then
the
public
hearing
is
closed
and
we'll
move
on
to
the
next
one.
B
After
that,
after
the
hearings,
the
public,
the
petition
will
go
to
the
zoning
committee
of
the
Planning
Commission
for
review
and
recommendation,
and
we
we
like
to
enter
our
sessions
at
10:00
p.m.
that
is
our
goal,
because
we
found
that
any
later
than
that
people
start
to
get
tired
and
maybe
we're
not
always
as
focused
as
we
need
to
be
on
these
case.
So
I,
don't
think
that's
gonna
be
the
case
tonight.
B
I
think
we'll
be
done
earlier
than
that,
but
certainly
if,
for
whatever
reason
that
were,
we
would
certainly
let
those
cases
at
the
end
of
the
docket
know
ahead
of
time.
Try
to
let
you
know
ahead
of
time
that
we
might
not
get
there
so
with
that
I'm
going
to
turn
it
over
to
our
zoning
committee,
led
by
mr.
Sam
Spencer,
absolutely.
K
Thank
You
mayor
persimmon,
Thank,
You
counsel,
hi
I'm,
Sam
Spencer,
chairman
of
the
zoning
committee
of
the
Planning
Commission,
allow
me
to
introduce
my
fellow
committee
members,
Cosi
Watkins
Phillip
Gusman,
Boylan,
McClung
and
John
Hamm.
Additionally
tonight
we'll
be
joined
by
committee
member
Nancy
Wiggins.
The
zoning
committee
will
meet
Thursday
February
4th
2020
at
5:30
p.m.
here
at
the
Government
Center.
At
that
meeting
the
zoning
committee
will
meet
to
discuss
and
make
recommendations
on
the
petitions
that
have
public
hearings
tonight.
K
The
public
is
welcome
at
that
meeting,
but
please
note
is
not
a
continuation
of
the
public
hearing
that
is
being
held
here
tonight.
Prior
to
that
meeting,
you
were
welcome
to
contact
us
prior
input.
You
can
find
contact
information,
our
emails
and
information
on
each
petition
on
the
city's
website
at
Charlotte
planning
that
org
Thank
You
Mayor,
Pro,
Tem
Thank.
B
You
mr.
Spencer,
and
with
that
we're
going
to
just
go
over
the
list
of
our
items
of
decisions
and
hearings
that
have
either
been
deferred
or
withdrawn
and
we'll
have
to
vote
on
those
so
decisions
that
have
had
a
deferral.
Our
item
number
5,
which
is
2019
0:09
Joseph
roads
in
councilmember
to
mr.
mr.
B
Graham's
district,
and
it's
for
a
change
in
zoning
of
approximately
16.0
acres,
located
on
the
east
side
of
Bailey's
Ford
Road
north
of
Trinity
Road
in
south
of
Lakeview
Road
item
number
8,
2019,
Oh,
69,
Harrison,
Tucker,
cohab,
LLC,
council
district
number,
one
mr.
Eccleston's
district,
and
that
is
for
approximately
point:
nine
acres
located
on
the
west
side
of
East,
36th
Street,
north
of
McDowell,
Street
and
south
of
North
Alexander.
A
D
B
In
favor,
ok
and
then
item
number
29
is
2019:
1
1,
7,
Montana,
Drive
opportunity's
own
fund
LLC
in
councilmember
Graham's
district
number
2
located
in
the
south
side
of
Montana
Drive
south
of
I-85
east
of
Tennessee
Avenue,
and
that
hearing
has
a
request
for
withdrawal
of
the
petition.
May
I
have
a
motion
to.
H
B
A
M
B
Back
to
that
one,
so
this
number
four
has
been
deferred.
So
we'll
move
right
on
to
an
item.
Number
six
five
has
been
deferred
item
number.
Six
is
the
one
that
we
were
just
talking
to
about:
2000
1930
by
Continental
475
fund,
LLC,
District,
three
councilmember
Watlington
for
a
change
in
zone.
Zoning
of
approximately
thirty
point:
seven:
three
acres
located
on
the
north
side
of
South
Tryon,
Street,
south
of
urban
Road,
east
of
Choate
circle.
B
The
following
changes
were
made
after
the
zoning
committee's
recommendation
to
add
a
commitment
to
a
right
turn
lane
on
Irwin
Road
to
help
alleviate
the
traffic
at
the
intersection
with
Steele
Creek.
The
staff
recommendation
is
that
they
believe
that
the
changes
are
minor
and
address
traffic
concerned
concerns
raised
as
a
result
of
the
potential
development
from
the
proposed
project,
and
so
they
do
not
warrant
additional
review
by
the
zoning
committee.
Not.
A
A
L
B
I
Approach
to
I
missed
the
discussion
piece.
That's
on
me:
oh
I'm,
sorry,
what
any
discussion
yeah
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
I
addressed
a
couple
of
things
on
this
one.
First
of
all,
I
want
to
say
thank
you
to
staff
into
the
development
engineers.
I
know.
We
worked
on
this
for
quite
some
time,
and
it's
very
very
important
to
me.
That
overall
is
we're.
I
When
it
comes
to
physical
mobility,
we
know
it's
a
key
enabler
for
affordable
housing
and
economic
mobility,
like
I
said,
especially
in
places
where
we
don't
have
transit.
We've
got
to
rely
on
our
vehicular
traffic
to
be
able
to
get
around.
We
know
that,
with
the
delay
in
state-funded
improvements
on
our
highways,
we're
filling
that
strain
of
additional
development,
whether
through
rezoning
or
by
right
development
without
infrastructure
improvements
on
these
roads.
We
understand
that
that's
obviously
a
problem
and
we
need
traffic
congestion
relief
today.
I
So
for
me,
the
fundamental
question
that
I
have
to
ask
with
every
new
development
is:
what
is
the
net
impact
to
commute
time
as
a
result
of
this
proposed
development,
or
in
other
words,
will
this
development
make
traffic?
Worse,
that's
the
fundamental
question,
and
so
in
regards
to
this
particular
petition,
I
work
closely
with
staff
and
development
traffic
engineers
to
answer
that
question.
So,
since
the
last
rezoning,
as
you
heard,
the
changes
that
were
made
a
traffic
study
has
been
conducted
and
I
had
an
opportunity
to
review
the
traffic
study,
which
indicates
the
following.
I
The
current
delay
during
peak
hours
at
urban
and
still
create
intersection
is
56
seconds
in
the
a.m.
and
just
over
11
minutes
in
the
p.m.
as
a
result
of
this
traffic
study,
as
you
know,
has
proposed
an
additional
roadway
investment,
which
is
over
and
above
the
public
road
that
they
already
committed
to,
and
it's
that
250
dedicated
turn
lane
at
Arawa
and
still
Creek
with
this
proposed
improvement,
even
without
the
widening
of
still
Creek.
The
analysis
results
indicate
a
45
percent
decrease
in
delay
in
the
a.m.
I
peak
hour
and
a
54
percent,
or
a
6
minute
reduction
in
delay
in
the
PM
peak
hour
compared
to
the
existing
conditions
at
this
intersection.
That
means
it's
already
better
than
what
we
have
today,
even
without
the
widening
of
still
Creek,
even
with
the
increase
on
trips.
Due
to
this
development,
this
decrease
is
even
larger,
almost
15
minutes
when
compared
to
the
future
scenario,
with
only
by
right
development.
I
So
what
that
saying
is
if
we
looked
into
the
next
couple
of
years-
and
we
only
did
by
right
development
in
this
area
versus
what
this
improvement
that
continental
was
doing.
We
would
see
a
an
increase
in
our
traffic
by
15
minutes,
so
we're
avoiding
a
future
15-minute
addition
to
our
commute
time
by
work
working
the
Continental
to
do
this
improvement
at
the
Irwin
and
South
Tryon
intersection.
The
forecast
impact
to
the
later
and
peak
hours
is
less
than
10
seconds
versus
by
right
development
and
that
doesn't
require
mitigation
plans
versus
our
T
is
regulation.
I
So
that's
why
I'm
supporting
the
approval
of
this
development,
but
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
that's
clear
that
we
did
look
at
the
data
and
I
do
believe
that
we've
got
a
solution
here.
That's
going
to
improve
our
current
traffic
conditions
immediately
and
also
put
us
in
a
position
to
avoid
additional
delays
in
traffic
from
our
by
right
development.
Thank
you.
Miss
Watlington.
I
B
That
takes
us
to
item
number
7
petition
number
2000
1935
by
Novant
Health
Inc,
approximately
forty
point,
four
three
acres
located
at
the
southeast
intersection
of
Johnston
Road
and
Providence
Road
West
in
Council
District,
seven
mr.
drinks
district.
The
current
zoning
is
our
three
single-family
residential
and
the
proposed
zoning
is
institutional
conditional.
The
zoning
committee
recommended
six
to
zero
to
approve
this
petition
and
stay
agreed.
E
J
B
You
number
eight
nine
had
been
deferred
agenda
number
10
is
rezoning
petition,
2019,
Oh
92
by
Carolina
Development
Group,
and
an
NC
LLC,
which
is
approximately
0.98
acres
located
on
the
east
corner
of
the
intersection
of
North
Smith
Street
at
West
10th
Street,
south
of
the
Brookshire
freeway
in
Council
District,
two
mr.
Graham's
district.
The
current
zoning
is
industrial,
one
hgo,
which
is
light,
industrial,
historic
district
overlay
and
the
proposed
zoning
is
you
mod,
o
hgo,
which
is
mixed?
Uptown
mixed-use,
historic
district
overlay?
B
Item
number
11
is
petition
number
2000
1994
by
Andrew
Parker.
This
is
on
North
Davidson
Street
between
Charles
Avenue
in
East,
32nd
Street
in
Council
District
one
mr.
Eccleston's
district.
The
current
zoning
is
our
five
residential
and
the
proposed
zoning
is.
You
are
to
urban
residential
conditional.
B
The
zoning
committee
voted
six
to
zero
to
recommend
approval
of
this
petition,
and
the
staff
also
recommends
approval
of
this
petition.
Is
there
may
I
have
a
motion
to
adopt
the
zoning
committee
statement
of
consistency
as
it
appears
in
our
agendas
and
the
council's
phone
and
approve
or
deny
the
petition
motion.
J
B
Item
number
12,
which
is
in
2019
110
by
jay
patel,
and
that's
approximately
one
point:
two:
four
acres
lauric
located
north
of
Central
Avenue
west
of
Hawthorne
Lane
in
east
of
Heath
Court
in
Council
District,
one
in
Pfister,
Eccleston's
district.
The
current
zoning
is
mixed-use
development,
optional,
pedestrian
overlay
district
and
the
proposed
zoning
is
transit,
oriented
development,
transit
community
center
pedestrian
overlay
district.
The
zoning
committee
recommended
seven
to
zero
to
approve
this
petition,
and
the
staff
also
recommends
approval
ocean.
B
Great
number
13
is
2019
124
by
G,
vest
Capital
LLC,
approximately
five
point:
eight
six
acres
north
of
Monroe
Road
west
of
Eaton
Road
in
east
of
shave,
Valley
Road,
which
is
in
district
5.
Mr.
Newton's
district,
currently
sewed
office
conditional
and
r17
multifamily,
and
the
proposed
zoning
is
urban
residential
conditional.
The
committee,
the
zoning
committee,
voted
seven
to
zero
to
recommend
approval
of
this
petition
and
the
staff
recommends
approval
of
this
petition.
A
pound--
resolution
of
outstanding
issues
that
relate
to
transportation,
environment,
site
and
building
design.
Just.
F
L
Significant
changes
to
the
proposed
transportation
network,
we
still
have
main
access
coming
off
of
Monroe
Road,
the
stub
streets
to
the
church
property,
where
their
parking
lot
is.
That
would
eventually
tie
us
into
Eaton
Road,
and
then
we've
got
a
few
stubs
that
come
in
to
where
the
apartment
complex
is
off
the
shade
Valley.
L
So
if
there's
some
redevelopment
on
any
of
those
adjacent
parcels,
we
could
provide
that
connectivity
back
through
to
shade
valley,
but
for
now
that
we're
focused
mainly
on
the
access
point
on
Monroe
and
then
setting
up
stub
streets
for
future
connectivity
development
occurs
either
on
Eaton,
Road
or
shade
valley
on
those
adjacent
parcels.
We
didn't
get
any
coordination
between
the
church
and
the
petitioner
I.
Don't
believe
that
was
out
of
any
lack
of
effort
to
do
so.
Just
I,
don't
think
the
church
was
ready
at
this
time
to
provide
any
connection,
their
property.
D
A
maybe
better
clarify
the
point,
so
it's
my
understanding
that
the
petitioner
has
worked
with
the
community
in
resolving
these
access
and
egress
point
issues
and
that
the
the
petitioner
has
reached
out
to
the
adjoining
Church
property
to
allow
for
access
and
egress
through
the
property
for
emergency
purposes.
And
it
might
be
better.
We
might
be
better
suited
to
hear
from
the
petitioner
themselves
if
they
are
willing
or
or
available
for
comment
on
that.
N
Evening,
members
of
council
and
project
grant
with
Maureen
Van
Allen.
We
did
reach
out
to
the
adjacent
purse,
church
property
and
asked
about
emergency
access
to
be,
provided
it's
not
required
and
they're
still
considering
that
option.
So
it
has
not
been
confirmed,
but
they
are
considering
it.
It's
not
a
required
connection.
We
are
providing
the
required
stubs
to
both
property
lines,
as
proposed
rezoning
plan.
B
J
J
B
Item
number
14
is
2019
125
by
SC
OC
Mallard
crossing
LLC,
approximately
eight
point,
four:
three
acres
located
on
the
east
side
of
prosperity,
Church
Road,
north
of
Mallard
Creek
Road
in
councilmember,
Johnson's
district
number.
Four,
the
current
zoning
is
neighborhood
business
conditional
and
the
proposed
zoning
is
neighborhood
business
conditional
with
a
site
plan
amendment.
B
The
zoning
committee
voted
seven
to
zero
to
recommend
approval
of
this
petition
and
the
staff
recommends
approval
of
the
petition
upon
reading
to
building
design.
I
have
a
motion
to
adopt
the
zoning
committee
statement
of
consistency,
as
it
appears
in
our
agendas
in
the
council
zone
and
approve
or
deny
the
petition
just.
C
B
Number
16
is
rezoning
petition,
2019
129
by
Li
min
ma,
min
hearts,
min
hearts,
Investments
LLC,
approximately
approximately
0.34
acres
located
along
the
eastern
portion
of
East
35th
Street
between
North
McDowell
Street
and
Spencer
Street,
that's
in
Council
District,
one
mr.
Eccleston's
district
and
it's
currently
zoned
our
five
single-family
residential
in
the
proposed
zoning
is
our
sixth
single-family
residential.
The
zoning
committee
voted
seven
to
zero
to
approve
this
petition
and
the
staff
also
recommends
approval.
B
Number
17
is
2019
130
by
Greenway
Holdings
LLC,
approximately
0.4
three
acres
located
on
the
west
side
of
Park
Road
and
north
side
of
Drexel
place
in
district
1
Mr
Eggleston
current
zoning
is
mixed-use
development
conditional
and
the
proposed
zoning
is
mint.
Mixed-Use
development
conditional
site
plan
amendment.
The
zoning
committee
recommends
seven
to
zero
to
approve
this
petition
and
the
staff
recommends
approval
upon
resolution
of
outstanding
issues
related
to
transportation.
B
In
favor,
any
discussion
number
18
2019
131
by
red
cedar,
Capital
Partners
for
8.57
acres,
located
at
the
southwest
intersection
of
old
Plank
Road
in
baucom
Street,
which
is
district
2.
Mr.
Graham's
district.
It's
currently
zoned
r3,
single-family,
residential
Lake,
Wylie
protected
area
and
the
proposed
zoning
is
our
for
single-family
residential
lake.
While
a
protected
area,
the
zoning
committee
voted
seven
to
zero
to
recommend
approval
and
the
staff
also
recommends.
Approval
of
this
petition.
B
Any
opposed
thank
you,
19
2009
132
by
Lennar
multi-family
communities,
LLC
approximately
five
point:
nine
acres
located
on
the
south
side
of
verbena
street
north
of
yeoman
Road
west
of
Nations
crossing
Road
in
mr.
Graham's
district
number
two
is
currently
zoned
I
to
general
industrial
and
the
proposed
zoning
is
transit,
oriented
development
transition.
The
zoning
committee
voted
7
to
0
to
approve
the
petition
and
the
staff
also
recommended.
Approval
may
have
a
motion
to
adopt
the
committee
statement
of
consistency,
as
it
appears
in
our
agendas
as
the
council's
own
and
approve
or
deny
the
position.
A
B
O
B
B
H
B
Any
discussion
thank
you
item.
21
is
2019
134
by
deejay
family
farms,
LLC
approximately
1.2,
7
acres,
located
on
the
north
side
of
West
Point
Drive,
east
of
Sam
Wilson
Road
north
of
interest,
interstate
85,
I.
Think
I
should
say
it's
outside
of
the
city
limits
currently
zoned
our
three
single-family
residential
Lower,
Lake,
Wylie,
watershed
protected
area
and
the
proposed
zoning
is
for
light
industrial
Lower,
Lake,
Wylie
watershed
protected
area.
The
zoning
committee
recommended
five
to
two
to
recommend
approval
of
the
petition
and
the
staff
also
recommends
approval.
P
F
I
Q
I
B
Thank
you
item
number.
Twenty-Two
is
approximately
one
point:
eight
nine
acres
located
on
the
west
side
of
mulberry
Church,
Road,
east
side
of
Sloane
Drive
north
of
Queen
City
drive
in
councilmember,
District,
Council,
District,
three
MS
Watlington,
z--
district,
it's
currently
zoned,
oh
one
well,
office,
conditional
airport
and
airport
noise
overlay
and
the
proposed
zoning
is
office.
Conditional
airport
noise
overlay
site
plan
amendment
with
five-year
vested
rights.
B
The
zoning
committee
voted
seven
to
zero
to
recommend
approval
of
this
petition,
and
the
staff
recommends
approval
at
this
petition
upon
resolution
of
outstanding
issues
related
to
transportation
and
site
and
building
design
and
technical
revisions.
There
was
a
change
made
since
that
zoning
committee
met
they
removed
the
request
for
seven-year
veteran
excuse
me
five-year
vested
rights
and
with
that
the
staff
recommends
believes
that
the
changes
minor
in
addresses
concerns
raised
by
staff,
and
so
this
change
does
not
warrant.
H
B
The
zoning
committee
voted
seven
to
zero
to
recommend
approval
of
this
petition,
and
the
staff
recommends
approval
upon
resolution
of
outstanding
issues
related
to
transportation
and
environmental
features
were
those
thank
you.
Man
have
a
motion
to
adopt
a
zoning
committee
statement
of
consistency,
as
it
appears
in
our
agendas
and
as
the
council's
own
and
approve
or
deny
the
petition
motion
to
adopt
and.
C
B
In
favor
aye
any
opposed.
Thank
you
that
passes
the
next
one
is
item
number
24,
which
is
petition,
2019,
147,
buy-guy
properties,
approximately
forty
four
point,
four
four
one:
six
acres
located
at
the
northeast
intersection
of
North
Davidson
Street
in
East,
36th
Street,
that's
an
approximate
by
the
way:
no
district,
1,
mister
Eccleston's
district,
currently
zoned
mixed-use
development,
optional
and
the
proposed
zoning
is
transit,
oriented
development,
neighborhood
center.
The
committee
zoning
committee
voted
7
to
0
to
recommend
approval
of
this
petition,
and
staff
also
recommends.
H
B
Right,
that's
right.
The
last
item
we
have
this
evening
for
a
decision
is
number
25
rezoning
petition
number
2019
149
by
would
partners
approximately
2.8
acres
located
at
the
northern
intersection
of
North
Davidson
Rufus
Street
and
East
21st
Street
in
the
precise
district
number
one
mr.
Eccleston's
district
transit,
oriented
development,
mixed-use
optional
and
the
proposal
is
to
zone
to
transit,
oriented
development
urban
center.
The
zoning
committee
recommends
seven
to
zero
to
approve
this
petition,
and
staff
also
recommends
approval.
P
Q
B
District
conditional
staff
does
not
recommend
approval
of
this
petition
in
its
current
form,
and
tonight
we
have
three
speakers.
Excuse
me
two
speakers
for
this,
and
since
there
is
two
speakers
in
favor
of
this
zoning,
but
since
there
is
opposition,
then
each
side
will
get
ten
minutes.
If
they
would
like
it,
they
don't
have
to
take
it.
They
have
ten
minutes
and
then
there
will
be
a
two-minute
rebuttal
by
the
petitioner.
B
L
L
Thank
you,
20
19
105,
just
over
five
acres,
Benfield
Road,
just
off
with
the
interstate
485,
just
to
give
an
idea.
Zoning.
As
we
mentioned
our
four
proposed
zoning,
his
Neighborhood
Services
NS
district
conditional
plant
by
nature.
So
the
plan
for
this
area's
prosperity,
Hookes
plan
adopted
in
2015,
does
recommend
residential
at
eight
dwelling
units
per
acre
on
the
other
side
of
the
road.
We've
got
more
of
a
mixed-use
office,
retail
institutional
and
then
some
more
mixed
use,
a
pond
at
Ridge
and
Benfield
roads.
L
The
proposal
that
we've
got
in
front
of
us
this
evening
under
this
petition,
is
up
to
84
residential
units.
48,000
square
feet
of
office
uses
in
12,000
just
over
twelve
thousand
six
hundred
square
feet
of
additional
commercial
uses.
We
do
have
some
conversion
rights
to
transfer
some
unused
office
square
footage
to
some
residential
units.
We
do
prohibit
things
like
car
washes,
automotive
service
stations,
drive-through
windows
that
are
accessory
to
eating
and
drinking
establishments
provide
access
from
Benfield
Road
and
summer
Creek
Lane
we've
got
some
turn
lane
commitments.
L
We
do
have
some
concerns,
just
generally
with
the
petition
we'd
like
to
continue
to
work
with
the
petitioner
to
talk
through
some
of
those
issues.
Right
now,
we've
got.
Our
recommendation
is
not
to
support
in
current
form.
Density
is
15
dua.
The
plan
recommends
8.
We've
got
some
things
that
we
have
a
little
bit
of
general
concern
about
just
the
size
and
scale
of
the
building
at
48,000
square
feet,
and
then
some
of
the
height
we'd
like
to
continue
to
talk
through
and
just
get
an
idea
of.
L
If
that's
something
that
we
might
be
able
to
get
a
little
bit
of
reduction
or
get
a
little
bit
more
of
a
step
back
towards
some
of
that
residence.
But
again
no
issues
I,
don't
feel
like.
We
can't
continue
to
have
conversations
with
the
petitioner
and
work
through
prior
to
zoning
committee,
but
that's
our
current
recommendation
we'll
be
happy
to
take
some
questions
following
the
petitioners,
presentation
and
public
presentation.
Thank.
B
R
R
He
says
you
know
why
can't
you
find
a
developer
that
does
a
real
mixed
use
project
when
we
vision
this,
we
vision
it
to
be
like
a
Brookdale
village,
so
we'd
like
to
see
residential
over
retail
and
for
years
I've
said:
hey.
We
just
have
not
had
a
developer.
That's
had
the
appetite
for
that,
and
so,
interestingly,
a
year
or
so
ago
we
were
approached
by
a
developer.
Actually,
this
is
the
property
owner
he's
in
the
site.
For
many
years
he
actually
happens
to
be
developer
in
Atlanta.
R
So
it's
a
great
location
right
off
of
this
is
been
fill
road
and
45.
So
great
visibility
and
this
developer
walked
in
and
said,
hey
I'd
like
to
do
a
mixed-use
project
with
residential
over
retail
and
then
another
component,
and
so
I
think
that
was
welcomed.
I,
don't
want
to
put
words
in
Wills
mouth,
so
let's
speak
for
the
Association,
but
I
did
think
we
were
generally
welcomed.
We've
had
a
few
community
meetings
up
there.
This
has
been
I
think
very
well
received.
R
Staff
has
attended
at
least
one
of
those
and
I
think
they
would
agree
with
that
all
set.
The
challenge
is
that
there's
a
pretty
specific
area
plan
and
the
area
plan.
This
is
our
site
here
says
that
this
should
be
basically
townhomes,
and
so
that's
what
the
plan
calls
for
we're
proposing
a
mixed-use
development.
Those
don't
match
up.
As
we've
talked
to
the
neighbors
and
said
you
know,
townhomes
I
think
we've
got
a
lot
of
support
for
what
we're
doing.
I
won't
belabor.
This
dave
has
gone
through.
R
The
idea
is
to
have
for
sale
condominiums
over
some
ground-floor
retail,
originally
at
the
corner
here,
45,
which
has
great
visibility.
The
original
proposal
was
that
for
to
be
a
hotel,
we
got
neighborhood
pushback
on
hotels,
so
we
took
that
off
the
board
just
quickly.
There
are
a
couple
I
think
very
positive.
This
is
summer
Creek,
which
is
a
residential
subdivision.
R
Currently,
so
all
these
residents
come
out
that
good
this
way
to
45
there's
a
median
and
been
filled
roads,
so
when
they're
coming
from
uptown
or
45,
they
cannot
make
a
left
turn
into
their
homes.
So
what
I
think
this
project
would
bring
is
an
improvement
that
intersection
I,
think
that
was
really
supported
by
the
neighbors
at
the
rear
of
the
site.
There's
plenty
of
green
space.
All
of
this
we've
got
over
a
hundred
feet
of
natural
area
that
would
buffer
the
single-family
neighborhood
behind
from
the
proposed
development.
R
That's
a
look
at
some
of
the
single-family
homes,
so
I
have
a
nice
natural
buffer.
If
it'll
stay
behind
them,
it's
about
a
hundred
feet
wide.
Those
are
some
just
some
renderings
that
we
showed
at
community
meetings
again.
I
think
this
is.
This
has
been
well
received.
I'd
like
for
y'all
gonna,
move
into
your
agenda
quickly
night,
so
I
won't
belabor
the
point.
If
wills
here
he's
happy
to
speak,
if
not
we're
happy
to
take
questions.
B
F
R
Like
that,
so
we
talked
about
it
and
if
that's
good
question
councilman
wants
an
end,
the
parking
for
the
condominium
residence
would
be
Dec.
Parking
underneath
and
behind.
The
development
team
does
think
that
for
there's
a
desire
to
have
this
ground-floor
retail,
like
a
you,
know,
ice
cream
shop.
Things
like
that.
The
development
team
feels
strongly
that
to
make
that
work,
they
need
to
provide
some
parking.
That
is,
convenience
parking
for
those
retailers.
B
C
L
I
think
it's
more
the
as
mr.
brown
and
highlight,
if
there's
some
really
specific
language
in
the
prosperity
plan,
about
different
areas
that
are
recommended
for
different
uses.
They
got
very
site-specific
in
some
areas
you
can
see.
This
is
policy
area
c5,
where
we
really
just
talk
about
townhomes
and
so
I.
Think
if
we're
gonna
be
looking
at
a
project,
that's
a
little
bit
outside
of
the
box
in
terms
of
still
providing
some
residential
but
then
having
some
ground-floor
retail,
maybe
some
office
space,
some
things
that
mr.
L
Winn
said
and
pointed
out
as
well
with
having
those
buildings
a
little
bit
closer,
providing
a
little
bit
more
of
the
pedestrian
kind
of
interface
that
we'd
be
looking
for.
That
was
one
of
the
things
that
we
highlighted
in
our
outstanding
issues,
for
our
plan
or
for
our
recommendation
was
to
maybe
consider
flipping
that
and
having
that
building
closer
up
to
the
street,
not
having
that
parking
area
as
much
out
front.
You
know,
I
think
some
of
the
scaling
of
the
building
we'd
still
like
to
have
us
some
conversations
with.
Is
it
you
know?
L
Do
we
do
we
like
the
scale
in
masking
of
the
building
at
48,000
square
feet?
Is
there
a
reduction
on
that
that
we
might
be
a
little
bit
more
comfortable
with
so
I
think
we're
we're
generally
at
a
position
with
the
project
where
we
understand
what's
being
proposed
and,
and
certainly
if
this
is
on
the
other
side
of
the
road
I
think
we
have
a
you
know
a
little
bit
more
comfort
with
it
just
from
the
policy
standpoint.
L
L
What
are
we
doing
to
enhance
some
of
the
architectural
standards
and
the
massing
of
the
building
to
justify
a
little
bit
of
a
disconnect,
or
that
jump
from
the
policy
recommendation
is
something
that
still
provides
us
that
residential
component,
but
then
has
some
other
mix
of
uses
that
maybe
the
community
is
comfortable
with
as
well,
so
we're
just
still
I
think
trying
to
find
a
little
bit
of
that
balance.
Well,.
C
S
L
It's
really
a
case-by-case
project
by
project
type
of
scenario,
particularly
in
a
project
like
this
or
we're
very
specific,
with
square
footages
with
architectural
standards,
with
some
design
features
with
parking
orientation.
You
know
we
look
at
those
that
are
inconsistent
with
the
plan.
You
know,
as
we
had
mentioned,
what
are
we
doing
to
kind
of
elevate
the
project
to
a
point
where,
if
we
do
have
they
didn't
consistency?
What
gives
us
that
public
benefit
to
where
we
have
that?
L
You
know
I,
guess
a
little
bit
more
of
a
comfort
level
with
having
that
disconnect
from
policy
versus
what's
being
proposed.
So
what
are
we
doing
to
really
bring
that
project
to
provide
that
public
benefit
and
provide
that
justification
for
that
inconsistency?
So
again,
it's
it's
really
a
case-by-case
project-by-project
basis
that
we
have
to
evaluate
those
on.
B
E
Q
R
E
G
G
What
kind
of
land
use
would
be
feasible
not
just
now,
but
also
for
the
foreseeable
future.
So
if
it's
hard
for
me
to
tell
you
right
now
that
this
is
a
type
of
use
that
unless,
of
course
with
and
I'm
sure
that
there
are
a
comprehensive
plan,
engagement
we've
had
that
conversation.
But
nothing
really
comes
to
me
right
now
as
to
what
the
community
preference
for
this
specific.
C
I
was
just
thinking
as
far
as
the
plan.
If
there
could
be
some
direction,
some
informal
information
will
be
acceptable
for
this
petition
or
in
that
in
that
area,
it's
very
difficult
in
absent.
If
we're
going
to
approve
things
that
are
outside
of
the
plan.
Sometimes
men
constantly
what
is
acceptable.
So
what
would
be
acceptable
for
this
petition?
I
think.
E
G
Not
predicting
a
future
land
use,
there's
something
you
don't
know
right
now.
The
2015
area
plan
for
this
place
is
what
we
have
and
how
just
say
that
we
you
want
to
stick
with
that
for
now,
so
that
we're
not
making
it
rejection
of
if
we
do
it
for
this
place.
The
woman
has
well
begin
to
do
the
same
thing
for
the
entire
city,
and
we
have
to
be
very
careful
that
we
don't
do
that.
P
J
Just
can't
arbitrarily
decide
to
ignore
a
current
plan,
it's
not
obsolete
and
we
decided
a
few
years
ago.
This
is
what
we
wanted
and
I'm
looking,
but
I
haven't
heard.
Yet
what
the
special
circumstances
are
at
this
site
that
would
warrant
an
exception.
So
I
don't
need
an
answer
that
question
right
now:
I'm
just
telling
you
that
I'm
gonna
want
to
understand
that
better
before
I'm
able
to
support
this.
Thank
you.
I'd.
B
B
Expert
village
and
we
went
against
the
Area
Plan
and
the
community
group
that
was
so
involved
with
that
stopped
getting
engaged,
and
it
really
I
have
regrets
over
that
one,
because
what
it
was
really
telling
the
community
that
put
all
the
time
into
the
area
plan
is
that
work
doesn't
really
speak
to
us
anymore.
So
I
do
think.
We
have
to
be
really
careful
when
we
go
against
a
more
recent
area
plan
to
justify
it.
If
we're
gonna
go
against
it
and
make
sure
that
the
community.
Q
B
Know
and
really
hear
what
the
community
has
to
say,
because
people
put
a
lot
of
time
into
these
area
plans,
especially
the
more
recent
ones,
and
we
want
their
engagement
and
to
you
know
with
that,
one
in
particular
we
just
sort
of
ignored
it,
and
you
know
we
lost
their
engagement,
so
we
have
MS
ish,
Mira,
I.
Think
again,
the
Miss
Johnson
and
the
mister
drinks
did.
E
You
have
a
comment,
no
I.
My
comment
was
addressed
by
both
of
us
sorry
terms
of
the
planning.
You
know.
If
you're
going
to
move
away
from,
what's
been
recommended,
then
it
becomes
again
deal-making
rather
than
what
we
are
trying
to
go
towards,
which
is
really
consistency.
So
I
struggle
with
this
one
I
know
Porto
having
conversation
the
petitioner
on
this.
This
Johnson
yeah.
C
I'm
not
proposing
that
we
go
against
the
area
plan.
What
I'm
saying
is
there
are
there's
another
petition
further
later
in
the
evening,
that
is
against
the
planets
and
it's
being
recommended.
So
that's
just
what
I'm
asking
is
for
the
consistency
and
when
that's
done
so
it
does
prevent
deal-making
and
we
just
have
consistency,
and
we
have
policies
and
transparency.
C
J
Wanted
to
comment:
you
mentioned
the
area
residents
I'm
a
little
bit
leery
of
undermining
the
staff
I
mean
they
have
analyzed
the
plan
that
we
put
in
place
in
accordance
with
the
way
that
we
wanted
it
to
be,
and
they've
come
back
with
a
recommendation
to
us
and
I
want
to
be
sure
they
understand
why
we
decided
to
proceed
in
spite
of
that.
Otherwise
it
really
undermines
their
efforts.
I
think
it's
confusing
message
to
send
to
them
as
well.
B
B
That
really,
okay,
excuse
me
mr.
Drake's
district,
it's
currently
zoned
r3,
single-family
residential
and
the
proposed
zoning
is
for
urban
residential
conditional.
The
staff
recommends
approval
of
this
petition
upon
resolution
of
outstanding
issues
related
to
site
and
building
to
design
transportation,
and
we've
got
four
speakers
signed
up
in
favor
in
one
against,
so
we
will
give
them
each
ten
minutes
after
we
hear
our
staff
presentation,
Thank.
L
You
mayor
pro
tem
of
2019
1:40,
just
over
two
acres,
some
Providence
Road
West.
We
were
looking
at
a
r32.
You
are
two
CD
requests
this
evening
for
this
petition.
The
adaptive
future
land-use
comes
from
our
South
District
plan,
which
was
adopted
in
1993.
So
in
this
case
we
are
looking
at
the
general
development
policies
for
some
additional
guidance.
L
The
proposal
itself
is
21
single-family
attached
units
as
we're
looking
at
just
under
10
units
per
acre
9.45
six
units
per
building,
maximum
building
height
of
40
feet,
which
is
generally
consistent
with
the
presidential
zoning.
That's
surrounding
the
property
visitor
parking
spaces
are
being
provided
as
well
as
architectural
standards,
landscaping
between
sidewalks
and
building
on
Providence,
Road
West
and
a
buffer
between
the
north
and
east
property
lines
to
those
adjacent
residential
properties,
as
well
as
a
14-foot
planting
strip
in
16.
Excuse
me,
six-foot
sidewalk,
along
the
site,
frontage
and
then
six-foot
sidewalk,
along
Edendale.
L
Drive
staff
does
recommend
approval
of
this
petition
upon
resolution,
some
issues
related
to
site
and
building
design
and
transportation.
As
we
mentioned,
it's
inconsistent
with
the
93
district
plan,
but
consistent
with
the
general
development
policies.
So
we
do
have
that
guidance
that
is
in
front
of
us
this
evening.
This
approval,
this
petition
would
revise
the
future
land
use
of
that
south
district
plan
from
3
units
per
acre
to
12
units
per
acre
for
the
site.
So
if
you
happen
to
take
any
questions
following
presentations
from
the
petitioner
and
the
Jen
public,
thank.
B
B
R
Me
I'm
with
Mayor
Pro
Tem
councilmembers
Colin
brown
on
behalf
of
the
petitioner
property
location.
This
is
south
of
Ballentine.
This
is
a
fast-growing
area,
I'm
sure
you're.
Here
you
know
questions
about
traffic.
This
is
an
area
that
folks
really
want
to
live
you're.
Looking
at
here,
this
is
an
over
a
two
acre
site.
It's
got
a
single-family
home
on
it.
These
folks
have
been
there
for
a
long
time,
the
property
owners
they
watched,
everything
develop
around
them,
and
so
now
they
have
it
two
and
a
half
acre
parcel.
R
My
client
would
like
to
develop
the
site
for
count
homes
again,
I
think
it's
a
great
location,
so
Providence
Road
West.
You
are
walkable
to
a
shopping
center.
Here
it
has
a
lot
of
eating
drinking
entertainment
services
walkable
to
an
elementary
school
just
to
the
under
Providence
Road,
West
I,
don't
know
if
you'd
make
that
walk,
but
you
could
walk
down
there
that
grocery
stores
hotel
uses.
So
it's
really
a
fantastic
location.
This
is
an
example
of
an
infill
project.
It
gives
us
an
opportunity
to
locate
housing
in
walking
distance
to
good
infrastructure.
R
So
that's
a
look
at
the
property
today.
There's
a
lot
of
development
going
on
in
the
area.
Current
zoning
instead
mentions
r4,
but
it's
not
on
an
island
of
all
single-family.
As
I
mentioned,
you've
got
commercial
development
nearby.
You
have
many
examples
of
residential
at
higher
density.
We've
got
our
12
our
age
or
our
eight
around
the
site.
The
plan
recommendations
from
93
I
think
that's
pretty
obsolete,
based
on
where
we
are
today.
So
the
GDPs
do
provide
the
guidance
and
support
a
density
of
what
we're
proposing.
I.
R
Think
Dave
supports
up
to
12
we're
at
below
10
dua,
which
is
21
townhomes
on
the
site.
Here's
a
look
at
it
in
color,
so
you've
got
a
couple:
townhome
pods,
it's
kind
of
a
self-sufficient
townhome
community.
There's
a
look
at
it.
If
we
laid
our
site
plans,
so
you
can
see
the
context
shopping,
Valentina
elementary
would
G
just
to
the
south.
Here
mr.
McCorkle
has
developed
a
number
townhome
comedians
in
South
Charlotte.
These
are
just
a
couple
examples
that
we
should
the
community
meetings,
so
they
could
get
a
feel
for
it.
R
He
does
not
actually
do
the
building,
so
he
would
develop
town
home
pads
and
work
with
a
builder
we
had
an
initial
outreach
meeting
before
our
official
community
meeting
and
then
another
and
community.
Sir
concerns
are
what
you
hear
a
lot
of
these
infill
deals.
We
we
talked
about
a
need
for
visitor
parking,
there's
a
dark
desire
for
tree
preservation,
questions
about
privacy,
fencing.
You
know
if
this
is
going
in
someone's
backyard.
How
do
we
buffer
it?
R
There
was
a
desire
for
high
quality
high
price
point
product
in
the
area
and
an
ask
which
this
is
one
I
think
we
have
a
nice
compromise,
the
sidewalk
connection
so
I
mentioned
our
site
is
here
there's
a
shopping
center
in
this
area
we
would
build
sidewalks
on
our
frontage,
but
there's
no
sidewalk
for
a
gap,
and
so
the
develop
wood
filler
has
agreed
and
work
with
CDOT
to
provide
that.
So
you
could
actually
now
walk
to
that
chopping.
So
we'd
be
doing
some
off-site
sidewalk
improvements,
which
I
think
is
a
win.
R
Some
folks
ask
had
concerns
about
dustin
noise
when
the
site
is
developed,
and
then
there
are
questions
of
whether
we
could
provide
a
gated
community
here
short
answer
on
that
is
no
can't
have
a
gated
community.
I'll
walk
you
through
a
couple
of
the
others
questions
about
parking
each
site.
Each
townhome
has
a
two-car
garage
room
for
two
parking
spaces
in
the
driveway,
and
we've
created
some
additional
on
street
parking
here.
So
that's
five
spaces.
So
for
21
units
we
would
have
89
parking
spaces
along
the
I.
R
Think
a
lot
of
attention
has
come
to
screening
around
the
site,
and
so
we
have
worked.
We
actually
said
hey
if
you
want
to
come
out
and
walk
it
with
us.
Let's
talk
about
how
to
do
it,
because
so
many
areas
there's
really
mature
vegetation.
That
provides
a
good
screen,
and
sometimes
we
say
well
we'll
the
fence,
but
if
you
build
the
fence,
you've
got
to
tear
out
the
good
vegetation.
R
So
one
of
the
property
owners,
I
think
you'll
hear
from
tonight
came
out
met
with
the
development
team
and
we've
proposed
a
landscaping
plan
adjacent
to
this
Goolsbee
cul-de-sac.
I.
Think
there's
a
lot
of
nice
natural
vegetation
I
think
they
asked
if
we
could
do
a
split
rail
fence
which
would
be
less
invasive,
so
we've
proposed
that
our
revised
plan
will
show
that
treatment
towards
the
rear
of
the
site
site
I,
don't
think
anyone
from
those
homes
met
with
the
design
team
and
so
we're
still
proposing
a
fence
and
plantings
in
that
area.
R
These
would
not
be
affordable
just
to
get
that
out
there
construction
some
folks
mentioned
nuisance
of
the
construction
development
team
did
point
out
as
opposed
to
single-family
homes
which
take
a
while
to
develop
out
the
townhome
product.
We
think
would
construct
much
faster
say
there
would
be
in
and
wrapped
up,
probably
in
one
phase
and
generally
that's
our
presentation,
the
community.
We
came
out
the
only
new
information
from
that
is
last
week
we
did
meet
with
some
adjoining
owners
here
and
agreed
on
a
more
detailed
landscaping
plan.
R
T
T
Perfect
great
thanks,
yeah
I'm
one
of
the
old
people,
not
technology,
nothing
appreciate
you
having
us
tonight,
Cameron
right
our
rosada
wrong
goals
before
time.
One
of
the
residents
have
been
in
the
neighborhood
for
a
couple
years
now
and
when
we
moved
in,
we
were
very
aware
of
the
project
or
the
the
neighborhood
would
eventually
be
developed
as
far
as
what
was
going
to
happen
in
this
property,
this
round's
our
neighborhood
Edberg
kind
of
circumnavigates,
the
entire
property,
and
so
we
moving
into
it.
We
were
very
cognizant
of
that.
T
There's
gonna
be
development
at
some
point
and
what
we
had
no
idea.
Until
several
months
ago,
we
got
involved
with
the
rezoning
the
because
did
their
due
diligence
sent
out
notifications
to
us.
Let
us
know:
we've
met
two
or
three
times,
at
least
with
the
the
planners
and
the
developer
and
their
counsel
pretty
excited.
Quite
honestly,
you
know
we
rather
have
just
a
nice
natural
park
there
by
itself
sure
that'd
be
nice,
but
let's
be
realistic,
it's
not
going
to
happen.
These
guys
have
done
their
due
diligence.
T
They've
done
the
work,
we're
pleased
with
the
plan.
As
you
see
up
in
front
of
us
at
that,
if
that's
what's
going
to
happen,
we're
very
content
to
have
that
move
forward
and
have
these
guys,
as
our
neighbors
very
excited
about
the
egress.
Having
one
single
point
there
on
Providence
Road
West,
that's
nice
don't
have
any
connectivity
issues
which
very
much
is
all
of
our
neighbors
are
in
favor.
T
Of
these
guys
have
gone
out
of
the
way
to
help
us
out
and
do
some
Screaming
planting
some
trees
and
some
other
barriers
and
buffers
it'll
make
it
more
aesthetically
pleasing.
So
we
are
pretty
excited
about.
This
could
be
a
lot
of
the
things
that's
going
there.
That
would
not
be
as
mean
able
to
our
neighborhood,
but
I.
Think
as
it'll
stands.
Now
is
what
the
developers
laid
out.
This
will
be
a
very
good
project
and
I
welcome
and
encouraging
was
our
new
neighbors,
so
I
appreciate
the
time.
Thank.
T
You
Oh
cabinet
mr.
Driggs,
thank
you
for
reaching
out
you've
I'm,
not
sure.
If
all
of
you
folks
on
that
on
council,
do
this,
but
I
had
a
phone
call
from
from
Edie
last
week
after
I've.
Never
these
guys
and
it's
like
wow,
you
know
I
was
thoroughly
impressed
that
he
actually
reached
out
in
Kaunas
constituents
to
an
outrage
to
see
how
we
feel
and
how
we
do
on
things,
and
that
meant
a
lot.
We
appreciate
that
celebrities.
B
U
Hello,
thank
you
well,
first
of
all,
mr.
right
said
the
majority
of
her
communities
in
support
of
this.
That's
actually
not
true.
We
we
actually
have
a
name,
a
lot
of
the
property
owners
that
but
up
to
this
property
are
the
worth
our
proposed.
A
plan
is
and
I
think
nine
out
of
the
twelve
we're
able
to
sign
the
petition
against
so
the
overwhelming
consensus
for
our
communities
that
we
do
not
want
this
to
happen.
U
U
Lancaster
highway
is
a
one
lane
per
side
road
as
well
that
runs
very
close
and
is
also
extremely
heavily
used
during
rush
hour.
Traffic
at
the
school
we
mentioned
was
nearby.
Unfortunately,
it
is
currently
very
overcrowded.
Ballentine
Elementary
has
had
to
use
portable
classrooms
to
meet
the
demand,
classes
routinely
are
in
the
upper
20s,
and
so
unfortunately,
our
education
system
and
their
kids
are
the
ones
who
suffer.
The
building's
themselves
are
three-story
high
versus
two-story
residential
I
know
they
mentioned
the
height
being
40
feet,
but
still
those
are
very
short,
roofs.
U
So
to
make
that
work,
the
these
houses
will
be
much
taller
than
the
nearby
buildings.
This
obviously
creates
a
lack
of
privacy
and
it
takes
away
from
the
residential
feel
that
the
Edinboro
community
currently
has
today
and
last
they
are
really
already
has
significant
or
urban
housing.
So,
if
we're
looking
for
more
urban
housing
in
this
area,
it
just
doesn't
make
sense
and
the
roughly
one
mount
radius.
U
There
are
no
less
than
11
communities
that
are
apartments,
condominiums
or
townhomes,
a
newly
rezone
area
for
a
hundred
and
ten
townhomes
off
of
Lancaster
Highway
that
has
yet
to
impact
the
community.
Additional
plans
are
in
place
further
up.
Johnston
Road,
the
Ballentine
Hotel
is
removing
its
golf
course,
which
I'm
sure
you
guys
are
aware
to
replace
with
mixed
commercial
and
urban
housing.
In
light
of
all
these
reasons,
we
feel
that
this
plan,
as
it
is
today,
should
not
be
approved.
R
I,
don't
have
much
response
for
that
again
we're
looking
for
an
infill
site.
This
is
a
fast-growing
area,
the
mention
of
Valentine.
This
is
there
plenty
of
employment.
This
is
a
place
that
people
want
to
live,
we're,
probably
black
less
than
a
mile
from
the
South
Carolina
side.
As
I
say.
A
lot
of
these
meeting
I
think
that
people
are
coming
and
they're
gonna
come
and
they're
gonna
drive
on
those
roads
and
we
got
to
capture
them
in
Mecklenburg
County
and
the
City
of
Charlotte,
rather
than
have
them
go
across
the
border.
R
H
Of
quick
things
would
come
in
my
colleague
mr.
Drake's
were
not
letting
his
fame
go
to
his
head.
Still
returning
phone
calls.
The
reference
to
the
schools
I
obviously
understand
that
the
crowding
that
you're
facing
at
schools
in
South
Charlotte,
as
well
as
schools
everywhere
I,
did
want
to
note
in
here.
It
says
the
proposed
development
is
not
projected
to
increase
school
utilization
over
existing
conditions,
given
the
nature
of
the
housing
type.
That's
being
proposed
here
so
forth
at
one
point:
I
think
that
there's
there's
probably
not
as
much
concerned
some
of
your
others.
H
H
Two
of
those
things
are,
unfortunately
in
conflict
with
each
other,
one
of
those
being
parking,
one
of
them
being
trees
and
I.
Think
that,
in
a
situation
where
you've
got
21
units
that
each
have
four
parking
spaces
dedicated
right,
two-car
garage,
two
car
pad,
then,
where
these
five
additional
spaces
are-
which
I
would
contend,
are
probably
not
necessary.
Given
you
know,
they're
nice
to
have,
but
maybe
not
need
to
have
I
would
I
would
prefer
us
prioritize
trees
there.
Then
that
would
be
a
place
that
we
could
plant
street
trees.
J
R
J
So
I
guess
I
would
want
to
review
the
staff
tape
on
parking
I
mean
if
anybody
has
a
gathering
of
any
kind,
there's
really
no
place
to
go
for
people
that
don't
fit
into
those
five
spaces
and
other
concerns
I
heard
were
there's
no
open
space
there.
It's
actually
I've
been
in
these
developments
before
it's
very
crowded,
so
people
and
the
surrounding
neighborhood
are
afraid
that
every
time
anybody
wants
to
go
out
anywhere,
it's
going
to
be
in
into
their
areas.
J
J
Will
mention
also
one
concern
that
was
raised
to
me
that
I'd
like
to
discuss
with
seedot
is
all
the
entrances
onto
Providence,
Road,
West
and
the
nature
of
the
traffic
there
is
such
the
getting
on
and
off
of
Providence
Road
rest
is
difficult.
So,
as
we
add,
more
entrances,
I've
had
frequent
complaints
from
people
in
neighborhoods
about
not
being
able
to
get
out
because
of
the
nature
of
the
traffic.
So
I'd
like
to
take
a
closer
look
at
that.
J
U
You
know
I
I'm,
not
sure
I
could
represent
everyone.
I
could
certainly
get
my
own
opinion
I'm,
not
sure
if
that
would
be
helpful
or
not
I.
Think
a
townhome
in
general
is
not
necessarily
a
problem,
certainly
having
twenty-one
townhomes
in
such
a
tight
area.
You
know,
creates
its
own
set
of
difficulties,
whether
it
be
traffic
I
mean
he
didn't
mention
they're
there
for
bed
three
to
four
bedrooms,
so
the
fact
is,
there
probably
will
be
families
in
some
of
those.
J
B
B
But
that
doesn't
really
speak
to
what,
if
they
look
like
I
mean
you
know,
I
just
noticed.
One
of
the
pictures
in
there
is
looks
like
it's
taken
in
another
from
another
development
and
it's
from
the
street
and
there's
like
one
little
window
on
the
side
of
the
house.
So
I
guess
I
just
have
some
concerns
as
to
what
these
you
know,
what
kind
of
standards
are
being
asked
of?
B
L
So
we
try
to
treat
that
side
as
much
of
the
front
as
we
can
and
those
are
committed
to
in
the
architectural
notes
in
the
conditional
plan.
So
well,
we
don't
have
a
visual
representation
of
the
buildings.
We
do
have
some
standards
that
would
guide
the
design
of
whoever
comes
in
to
build
them,
whether
it
be
you
know,
somebody
that
we've
worked
with
before
just
picks
up
this
plan
and
knows
what
the
standards
are
they'd,
be
able
to
design
their
home
style
around.
What
those
standard
notes
are
in
the
plan
at
this
point
and.
L
The
notes
that
would
be
in
in
the
plan
that
are
in
there
would
prevent
those
you
know
from
having
that
blank
wall
as
you're
driving
down
Providence,
Road,
West
and
you'd,
see
like
one
small
window
there
that
wouldn't
be
something
I'd
be
permitted
and
currently
in
the
conditional
notes,
so
that
those
buildings
as
are
driving
along
Providence
Road
should
have
that
side.
Elevation
that
almost
mimics
a
front
elevation.
Like
said
whether
you
wrap
that
porch
around
from
the
front
on
to
that
side
view
you
know,
provide
a
little
bit
more
architectural
features.
I
I
just
had
a
question:
it's
really
I
guess
it's
for
staff,
but
it's
also
for
a
gentleman.
That's
here
representing
the
opposition
from
a
transportation
standpoint.
I
see
that
the
proposed
zoning
is
120
trips
per
day
versus
an
entitlement
of
60.
So
obviously
it
does
trigger
a
traffic
study
or
anything
like
that.
I
U
I
think
from
our
standpoint,
certainly,
the
rush-hour
traffic
can
get
very
thick,
especially
especially
on
Johnston
Road.
You
know,
Providence
Road
West
is
really
you
know
it's
going
to
either
channel
into
Johnston
Road.
You
know
a
lot
of
people
going
up
to
45
or
into
Valentine
or
Lancaster.
Highway
and
I
mean
it's
very
difficult
to
take
that
left
turn
onto
Johnston
Road
I
mean
they
have
improved
that
intersection,
but
it's
just
not
enough
for
the
amount
of
people
that
are
leaving.
Unfortunately,
for
you
know
townhomes.
U
If
it
is
more,
you
know
you
know,
I
know
they
say.
Six
trips
is
all
per
townhome,
but
those
are
people
that
are
most
likely
working
there,
maybe
traveling
during
rush
hour.
You
know
we're
not
concerned
about
traffic
at
one
o'clock
in
the
afternoon.
We're
concerned
during
rush
hours,
and
so
those
were
some
of
our
concerns
specifically
from
living
in
that
area
and
just
what
we
see.
F
F
You
know
if
our
priority
you
know,
is
traffic
and
and
and
and
reducing
that,
but
still
developing
again,
we
have
to
have
policy
that
that
provides
for
pedestrian
centric
development.
That
is
ridiculous.
That
is
ridiculous.
Have
that
many
parking
spaces
for
that
amount
of
of
townhomes
and
that
doesn't
fall
on
the
developer
or
the
current
residents
that
that
falls
on
us.
We
have
to
do
something
to
push
that.
R
F
Q
J
Want
to
say
in
fairness:
if
we
don't
have
a
public
transportation
option
yeah-
and
this
is
an
area
where
you
cannot
get
around
by
any
means
other
than
an
uber
or
a
car,
or
maybe
a
bicycle
on
a
good
day,
but
I
to
take
away
the
parking
spaces
before
we
have
a
place
for
people
to
go.
Instead,
it's
probably
the
wrong
way
around.
It.
B
F
Well,
yeah,
we
transportation
is
as
a
totality
it's
not
simply
public
transportation
and
as
I'm
looking
at
the
map
here,
I'm
not
saying
that
people
shouldn't
drive
cars
there
necessarily,
but
we
shouldn't
be
developing
simply
for
for
those
parking
spaces.
As
I
look
around
you
know
there
should
be
plenty
of
public
places
on
the
street.
You
should
be
able
to
park
the
there's
plenty
of
road
and
and
there's
a
shopping
center
right.
F
There
there's
another
neighborhood
that
that
has
plenty
of
roads
that
if
somebody
did
have
a
party
or
something
on
that
somebody
should
be
able
to
park
there
and
walk
on
this
nice
new
sidewalk
to
this
small
home
development.
Again,
if
we
are
developing
a
city
that
is
pedestrian
centric,
we
have
to
do
that
in
all
parts
of
town
and
it
can't.
We
can't
have
the
cop
out
that
we
don't
have
a
rail
going
there
right
now.
I
L
So
I
mean
I
know
this
petition
particular
is
restriping.
The
turn
lane
on
Providence
Road
West
at
least
provide
some
access
far
as
a
large-scale
transportation
vision.
That's
really
not
something.
I,
probably
am
the
best
to
comment
on
I'd,
probably
have
to
defer
to
see
down
what
they're
looking
at
in
terms
of
anything
comprehensive
for
Providence,
Road
West
in
that
general
area.
I
know
this
petition,
like
I,
said
we're
really
only
looking
at
an
average
of
sixty
trips
more
than
what
could
be
built
by
right.
So
it's
not
a
significant
increase.
L
The
addition
of
that
stripe
turn
lane
in
the
existing
right-of-way.
It
doesn't
require
any
additional
acquisition.
It's
just
really
going
out
and
restriping
part
of
that
roadway
to
allow
folks
to
get
out
of
the
travel
lanes
to
get
into
this
project
and
traffic
to
continue
to
flow
on
Providence,
Road
West.
L
Then
the
addition
of
the
sidewalk
along
the
frontage
and
then
off-site
sidewalk
that
they're
providing
will
at
least
give
us
another
option
of
you
know
mode
of
transportation
just
from
a
pedestrian
standpoint,
but
comprehensively
what
we're
looking
at
from
Providence,
Road,
West
and
parts
of
Lancaster
in
five
tonal
and
I'd
have
to
defer
to
see
that
we
could
either
discuss
that
now
offline
or
in
a
follow-up
report.
Just
whichever
you
prefer.
You.
J
V
Storm
around
with
seat
on
the
comprehensive
infrastructure
needs
out
here
we
would
rely
on
our
Charlotte
regional
transportation
planning
organization,
where
we
would
look
at
the
thoroughfares
out
here
and
to
determine
exactly
what
would
be
needed
in
the
future,
and
then
we
would
work
as
well
with
the
comp
plan
in
the
you
do
to
determine
right.
What
would
be
the
appropriate
infrastructure
needed
for
this
part
of
town,
but
also
for
the
entire
city
I.
B
Just
want
to
sit
my
my
feeling
about
the
parking
spaces
are
not
so
much
I'm,
not
sure
that
more
parking
spaces
creates
more
traffic
necessarily
but
more
parking
spaces
creates
more
impervious
space,
and
that
concerns
me
because,
as
we
pave
everything
over
in
Charlotte,
the
water
has
to
go
somewhere,
and
so
that's
something
that
I
don't
think
we
pay
enough
attention
to
in
our
zonings.
But
so
I
just
like
to
see
the
number
of
parking
spaces
or.
H
I
just
wanted
to
clarify
and
I
won't
belabor
it,
but
I
have
less
poems
about
the
way
this
parking
is
set
up
because
it
is
underneath
the
home
and
on
the
pad
outside
of
the
garage.
If
we
were
creating
a
creating
surface
parking
for
42
spaces
or
something
one
part
of
this
lot.
I
think
that
would
be
more
problematic,
but
I
I
just
wanted
to
kind
of
draw
the
distinction
that
when
we
act
when
we
want
to
preserve
trees,
but
we
want
to
add
more
parking,
that's
away
from
the
homes.
H
Those
two
things
are
very
difficult
to
do
in
concert,
and
so
we've
got
to
figure
out
what
our
priority
is
and
I
do.
Think.
I
think
the
the
shopping
center
owner
might
take
exception
of
the
idea
that
we're
going
to
use
their
parking
lot
for
for
someone
having
a
house
party,
but
you
know
I,
take
take
the
point
to
that.
We've
eventually
got
to
get
to
a
place
where
we
are
lost.
Car-Centric,
unfortunately,
right
here
is,
is
probably
not
as
walkable
as
a
lot
of
parts
of
the
city
and.
H
E
L
P
E
E
E
L
E
L
So,
under
the
under
the
existing
zoning,
they
could
build
single-family
houses
that
would
generate
for
students
under
the
proposed
zoning
21
townhomes
there's
a
different
generation
rate
for
townhomes
and
single-family
home,
so
they're
still
looking
at
for
students
even
out
of
21
attached
units
versus
you
know
the
the
single-family
they
could
build.
So
there's
no
net
increase
versus.
What's
allowed
right
now
today
and
what's
being
proposed
in
this
rezoning.
Okay.
E
E
And
I
think
it
goes
back
to
the
point
that
mr.
Brown
had
mentioned.
I
mean
this
is
one
of
the
area
where
we
are
seeing
a
lot
of
development.
I
mean
you're
looking
at
schools
that
aren't
161
55
percentage,
which
is
this
is
over
significantly
over
than
other
parts,
and
this
really
concerns
me
when
you're
looking
at
our
education
system
and
I
know.
As
many
of
you,
many
of
you
have
brought
this
point
of,
we
got
to
work
with
our
CMS
rafi.
E
B
You
all
in
favor
of
closing
the
public
here.
Thank
you
all
right
item
number
31
is
rezoning:
2019
121
by
Mario
Rickenbacker,
approximately
1.1,
five
acres,
located
on
the
north
side
of
West
Boulevard
west
side
of
elaborate
Lane
district,
3,
Miss
Watlington
district,
and
it's
currently
a
zone.
Neighborhood
business
conditional
urban
residential
commercial
is
the
proposed.
Rezoning
staff
recommends
approval
of
this
petition.
It
doesn't
look
like
we
have
any
speakers
signed
up
for
this
tonight,
so
we'll
go
ahead.
Sir.
L
And
we
can
you
keep
this
one
generally
brief.
This
is
actually
a
petition
that
we've
seen
gone
through.
Public
hearing
has
gone
through
zoning
committee
as
we
got
through
getting
close
to
decision,
which
I
believe
was
scheduled
for
last
month.
We
had
some
general
concerns
raised
from
some
folks
in
the
community
about
the
potential
uses
it
was
originally
proposed
as
just
a
conventional
b1
petition.
L
We
were
concerned
about
some
of
the
auto
area,
or
we
heard
concerns
about
some
of
the
auto
oriented
uses
that
could
be
developed
as
a
result
of
that
b1
conventional
zoning.
So
in
working
with
the
zoning
staff,
looking
at
some
different
district
options,
we
still
wanted
to
provide
the
petitioners,
some
flexibility
with
what
he
was
proposing
on
the
site,
which
was
some
commercial
uses,
possibly
some
residential
attached
units
of
the
ability
to
potentially
work
with
the
community
to
provide
potentially
some
affordable
housing
units
on
the
site.
L
So
we're
back
in
front
of
a
public
hearing,
because
we
did
amend
that
zoning
districts
wholly
from
b12.
You
are
see
again.
This
was
something
that
both
staff
and
zoning
committee
had
recommended
for
approval.
Of
course,
this
will
go
back
to
zoning
committee
again
for
the
reconsideration.
It
is
consistent
with
the
central
district
plan,
which
was
adopted
in
93
for
retail
uses.
Staff
continues
to
recommend
approval.
This
petition.
We
think
the
amended
zoning
district
alleviates.
L
Those
concerns
that
we
heard
about
potential
gas
stations
or
auto
sales
or
auto
repairs-
and
the
you
are
see,
is
a
fitting
district
that
implements
the
district
plan
and
also
maintains
the
the
general
kind
of
development
opportunities
that
the
petitioner
was
looking
for.
So
be
happy
to
take
any
questions.
B
I
Just
wanted
to
say
thank
you
to
mr.
Rickenbacker
and
to
the
staff,
and
also
what's
cool
about
coalition,
for
working
through
some
options.
Exactly
like
you
said
that
took
care
of
the
community
concern
and
was
thoughtful
about
what
we
were
going
to
see
there,
but
also
enable
the
petitioner
to
be
able
to
build
and
I
look
forward
to
this
welcome
to
options
for
small
business
space
on
the
corner.
B
District
number:
two:
the
current
zoning
is
in
tight
industrial
pedestrian
overlay
proposed
zoning
is
light.
Industrial
pedestrian,
overlay,
optional
staff,
recommends
approval
of
this
petition
upon
resolution
of
outstanding
issues
related
to
transportation
in
environment
and
check
revisions
related
to
site
and
building
design,
and
we
after
mr.
Patton
speaks,
we've
got
three
speakers
in
favor
Thank.
L
You
Mayor
Pro
time,
2019
123,
just
under
2
acres,
you
mentioned
Bryant
Street,
Summit
Avenue,
just
off
I-70
7
interchange
at
Wilkinson,
Boulevard
and
Freedom
Drive,
so
a
rapidly
developing
area
of
the
city.
At
the
moment
we
are
looking
at
an
i1
head
to
an
i1
pit
with
some
optional
provisions.
We
have
adopted
future
land
use
here
from
the
Moorhead
land
use
and
streetscape
plan
does
recommend
Park
open
space
for
this
general
area.
L
We
were
looking
at
essentially
maintaining
the
existing
zoning
redeveloping
some
of
that
site
with
a
little
bit
higher
intensity
than
what
is
currently
out
there.
The
property
is
adjacent
to
the
proposed
Katz
silver
lion,
light
rail
alignment,
which
is
a
long
urban
Creek,
there's
also
a
station.
That's
proposed
just
on
the
other
side
of
Summit
half.
Currently,
of
course,
that's
all
under
consideration
and
study
at
the
moment,
but
should
that
silver
line
alignment
continue
to
stay
in
that
location.
Katz
has
work
with
a
petitioner
to
get
some
preservation
and
potential
dedication
of
that
right-of-way
I'll.
L
Let
the
petitioner
kind
of
talk
through
that
a
little
bit
on
what
that
looks
like
moving
forward
for
the
Silver
Line
project,
but,
as
we
had
mentioned,
this
is
an
area
where
we're
seeing
continued
increase
development.
This
petition
would
allow
a
structured
parking
lot
that
currently
is
not
designed
for
active
uses
on
the
ground
floor.
So
we've
got
some
optional
provisions
for
some
of
that.
Obviously,
we've
got
some
floodplain
that
we've
got
to
work
through
and
that
parking
on
that
ground
level
certainly
helps
us
alleviate
some
of
that.
L
The
one
principal
building
would
be
at
a
building
out
of
200
feet.
Again,
we've
got
a
70
foot
wide
transit
corridor.
For
that
future
light
rail
extension,
we've
got
8-foot
sidewall
complaining
strips
proposed
for
the
site,
and
then
we've
got
some
industrial
uses
that
we're
prohibiting
that
are
related
to
automotive
repair
and
sales.
L
Car
washes
recycling
centers
things
that
wouldn't
necessarily
be
desirable
from
the
petitioners
standpoint
from
our
standpoint,
in
terms
of
what
they'd
like
to
see
in
terms
of
redevelopment
of
the
site,
with
the
building
that
they're
proposing
so
staff
does
recommend
approval
this
petition.
We
have
some
outstanding
issues.
We're
continuing
to
work
through
related
transportation,
environment,
some
technical
revisions.
It
is
consistently
that
the
adopted
land-use
plan
for
the
West
Moore's
Moorhead
land
use
the
streetscape
plan
will
be
happy
to
take
any
questions
following
petitioners.
Presentation.
L
B
N
N
Evening,
mayor
pro-tem
members
of
council
members
of
the
zoning
committee,
Bridget
grant
with
Maureen
Van
Alen
I'm
here
tonight,
representing
Vishal
Arora
with
Magnus
Capital
and
Greg
Hartley.
The
engineer
with
am
agency
I
want
to
start
by
saying
that
Magnus
Capital
focuses
on
urbanization,
opportunities
and
fast-paced
market
and
they
historically
like
to
develop
an
opportunities
where
their
public
and
private
partnerships
or
a
long
transit,
which
made
sense
for
this
site.
These
are
a
range
of
the
projects
they've
completed.
Most
notable
is
the
first
one
up
there,
which
was
an
adaptive
reuse
at
332,
Westland
Street.
N
N
This
is
just
a
zoom
in
on
the
site,
as
Dave
mentioned,
it's
a
1.99
acre
site.
It's
currently
zoned
by
one
ped
and
the
requested
zone
needs
to
go
to
I
1
pedo,
just
to
increase
the
height.
He
also
mentioned
that
we're
on
the
line
of
the
proposed
future
Silver
Line
location.
It's
anticipated
to
go
from
Matthews
to
the
airport.
You
can
see,
there's
a
small
star
on
the
site
where
the
Silver
Line
is
expected
to
go
along
the
periphery
of
our
site
when
we
were
originally
going
in
for
our
rezoning.
N
This
is
brought
to
our
attention.
What
it
gave
us
the
opportunity
to
do
is
to
go
ahead
and
limit
the
range
of
uses
on
the
site
and
do
a
site
design
that
will
complement
the
potential
future
Silver
Line.
This
gave
us
the
opportunity
to,
rather
than
wait
for
development
occurring
by
right,
use
the
conditional
zoning
opportunity
to
go
ahead
and
reserve
the
her
line
corridor
and
also
reserved
space
for
the
future
Greenway
in
that
location,
the
updated
building
design
comply
with
all
the
current
floodplain
regulations.
N
Again,
the
development
benefit
includes
reserving
that
corridor
for
the
light
rail
and
for
the
Greenway
in
that
locations.
We've
significantly
limited
the
uses
that
are
permitted
on
the
site
and
will
be
improving
the
streetscape
as
well
as
incorporating
some
open
space
and
public
art
features
to
compensate
for
the
fact
that,
with
the
development
we
aren't
able
to
meet
all
the
streetscape
design
guidelines
with
a
pet
overlay
and
with
that
I'm
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
Thank.
J
B
In
favor
of
closing
the
public
hearing,
thank
you
item
number
33
is
rezoning
number
2019
126
by
Harrison
Tucker,
approximately
approximately
0.397
acres
having
frontages
along
a
portion
of
East
7th
17th
Street
and
North
Davidson
Street
general,
situated
generally
situated
along
the
northern
portion
of
North
Davidson
Street
between
East
17th
Street
and
East
18th
Street
in
the
optimist,
Park
community
council
member
districts,
council
I
can't
talk
to
district
1,
which
is
mr.
Eccleston's
district.
It's
currently
zoned
r8,
single-family
residential
and
the
proposed
zoning
is
urban.
B
L
Right,
thank
you.
2019
126
point
three:
nine,
seven
acres
on
both
17th
and
Davidson
streets.
We've
got
a
several
properties
that
kind
of
wrap
around
some
existing
properties
that
are
out
there.
Currently,
it's
in
the
optimist,
Park
community,
as
we
can
see
the
zoning
currently
is
r8.
We've
got
a
proposed.
Zoning
of
you
are
2-cd
with
a
proposal
for
five-year
wrested
rights.
The
park
would
transit
plan
which
is
from
2013
does
recommend
residential
uses
of
up
to
12
dwelling
units
Aker.
L
This
petition
is
proposing
up
to
16
dwelling
units
as
mental
as
any
incidental
accessory
uses
at
Heights
not
exceeding
40
feet
in
height
at
40.
Feet
is
generally
the
residential
height
on
the
surrounding
zoning
districts
that
are
adjacent
to
this
property
as
well.
Architectural
standards
include
identification
of
primary
building
materials,
slope,
roof
materials,
fully
capped
and
downward
facing
lighting
for
any
of
the
lighting.
L
Elements
that
are
on
site,
provide
an
eight-foot-wide
planting
strip
and
sidewalk
along
North,
Davidson
Street
and
then
commits
to
the
provision
of
at
least
one
affordable
housing
unit
at
a
rate
eligible
for
Federal
Housing
Choice
Voucher
program.
This
petition
is
in
the
same
general
area.
We
had
a
petition
just
adjacent
here
on
the
corner
of
17th
and
Davidson
I
was
petitioned,
2018
0
1.
That
was
also
for
a
townhome
infill
project.
L
This
petition
here
is
really
on
all
vacant
property,
so
we're
not
losing
any
existing
home
sites
sort
of
generally
keeping
the
neighborhood
fairly
well
intact,
while
providing
some
increased
density.
We're
3/10
of
a
mile
from
the
park
would
station.
So
we've
got
some
rationale
to
consider
some
additional
lanyard
density.
That's
in
that
area,
certainly,
we
feel
like
if
this
were
something
that
we're
looking
at.
We've
got
the
40
feet
in
height.
That's
matching
that
r8
surrounding
zoning
we're
not
losing
any
existing
single-family
homes
or
in
the
neighborhood.
L
So
we
feel
like
it's
a
reasonable
infill
project
within
that
close
proximity
to
transit
staff
does
recommend
approval
the
position
of
petition.
We've
got
some
outstanding
issues
related
to
transportation
to
work
through
we'll
continue
to
work
with
the
petitioner
prior
to
zoning
committee,
hopefully
to
get
those
resolved
so
I'll
be
happy
to
take
any
questions
following
the
petitioners
presentation.
B
S
S
Yeah
so
I'll
start
with
quickly
the
context
of
the
neighborhood,
which
is
that
this
site
is
within
a
six
minute,
walk
to
the
light
rail
station
at
Parkwood.
It's
within
about
half
an
hour,
walk
or
half
that
time
by
a
light
rail
to
thousands
of
jobs
in
damage
in
Uptown,
as
well
as
entertainment,
options
at
Spectrum,
Center
and
other
stadiums,
it's
across
the
street
from
the
Greenway
and
it's
within
walking
distance
to
several
retail
options,
both
new,
like
optimist,
Hall
and
long-standing,
like
pelicans
or
area
15.
S
So
that's
where
the
context
were
we're
developing
the
site
in
here's,
a
close-up
of
the
site
plan,
the
staff
did
I
think
a
great
job
of
fighting
a
detailed
overview,
but
just
kind
of
orient
us
on
the
right
of
this.
Of
this
graphic
is
North
Davidson
and
the
bottom
is
17th
Street
we're
building
16
units
across
this
three
site,
assemblage
we're
committing
to
all
buildings
under
three
stories,
and
we
really
think
this
is
a
an
appropriate
moderate
density
to
add
housing
in
the
neighborhood
in
a
really
effective
way.
S
W
Russell
Ferguson
here,
the
petitioner,
they,
the
form
of
our
proposal,
is
designed
within
the
context
of
the
block
in
mind
and
previously
we're
going
on
vacant
land.
Here,
we've
limited
the
height
of
the
buildings,
to
three
stories
and
to
three
separate
buildings,
so
that
the
forum
will
be
comparable
to
the
by
right
projects
that
are
already
being
built
in
the
area,
and
this
is
something
that's
already
happening
at
three
storeys
these
by
right
projects,
there's
two
of
them
pictured
here
that
are
one
block
in
each
direction.
Although
they
look
nearly
identical.
W
The
bottom
right
picture
is
actually
from
our
site
of
one
of
the
three-story
buildings
that
are
going
in
by
right,
so
kind
of
we're.
Putting
is
that
the
these
by
right
projects,
don't
necessarily
align,
but
the
city
goals
in
the
same
way
that
we
do
they
don't
support
the
infrastructure
investments,
but
they
also
don't
for
serve
the
neighborhood
because
of
the
rapid,
gentrification
and
expensive
projects
for
single-family
homes
or
duplexes,
which
I
think
this
is.
W
B
W
Good
question,
so
we
are
still
working
to
seek
community
support
working
with
them.
The
concern
in
this
area
has
has
been
as
we've
done,
projects
in
the
area
with
with
cohab
as
well
as
many
others.
They
wrap
identification
to
the
area,
the
changing
nature
to
the
community,
both
in
terms
of
buildings,
but
also
in
terms
of
community.
W
H
W
Have
again,
too
far
into
the
specifics,
there's
been
a
general
emphasis
on
providing
as
much
capital
a
affordability
as
we
can
to
help
to
preserve
the
neighborhood
in
that
manner,
we've
been
working
with
them
to
to
accommodate
requests
on
parking
in
part
to
make
the
streetscape
compliant
compatible
with
the
existing
Street
scapes,
as
you
know,
sometimes
with
the
sidewalks
they
take.
90-Degree
turns
over
working
on
those
projects
with
them
as
well.
L
It
technically
it
could
fit
a
Tod
district
yet
because
it's
within
proximity
of
the
station
so
like
a
TR
district,
can
be
applied
within
a
mile
of
a
station.
This
is
three
tenths
of
a
mile,
so
certainly
we
could
look
at
that.
The
proposal
was
for
the
ur2
district,
so
we
continue
to
work
with
the
petitioner
to
just
work
through
conditions
that
could
help
mitigate
any
impacts
of
the
surrounding
community
and
work
with
the
community
to
address
any
of
their
concerns,
but
certainly
activity
could
be
considered
just
given
the
proximity
to
Parkwood
station.
Why.
F
L
The
alignment
itself
really
was
tied
to
adopt
a
policy
when
you
do
an
alignment
of
that
nature
and
that
scale
and
scope.
You
really
want
to
make
sure
that
it's
ties
directly
to
your
adopted
policy.
So
that's
why
only
only
properties
that
were
already
recommended
in
our
various
station
area
plans
and
land
use
plans
for
transit
oriented
development
got
pulled
into
the
alignment,
because
really
it
was
a
situation
where
we
needed
all
of
those
properties
to
be
aligned
with
the
policy.
L
So
that's
why
we
did
that
alignment
rezoning
to
Tod
so
properties
that
fell
outside
of
that
at
least
policy
recommendation,
even
though
they
may
fit
now
what
the
regulatory
component
of
Tod
is
with
the
distance
to
station
areas,
the
policy
itself
didn't
support
some
of
those
areas
where
we
could
see
Tod
based
on
the
ordinance,
but
the
policy
didn't
support
it
through
the
alignment
rezoning.
So
again,
the
alignment
really
just
was
truly
that
aligning
policy
with
the
ordinance.
L
Is
probably
one
I
don't
think
we
might
still
have
an
issue
with?
Let
me
go
back
into
our
staff
report
and
see
the
outstanding
issues
we
typically
like
to
get
that
removed
yeah.
We
have
that
as
one
of
our
technical
outstanding
issues
same
buildings
as
I,
remove
requests
for
five-year,
Bessette
rights,
okay,.
B
And
just
a
comment:
it's
not
really
about
this
particular
resuming,
but
in
this
area
as
we're
really
increasing
the
density,
we've
had
a
lot
of
emails
about
the
sidewalk
connectivity
in
the
lighting
with
people
getting
off
the
park
with
stations.
So
I
hope
that
work
will
see
that
planning
to
really
look
at
where
the
density
is
moving
and
makes
sure
that
we're
moving
up
or
aligning
some
of
those
projects
so
that
we
can
get
people
to
feel
safe
in
those
areas.
B
If
we
want
it
to
be
walkable,
and
we
want
people
to
be
able
to
walk
to
the
light
rail,
they
need
to
be
able
to
feel
safe,
and
we
have
had
a
lot
of
concerns
about
people
in
the
area.
I
realize
that's
more
to
see
that
issues
that
we
need
to
coordinate
that
when
we
approve
zonings
that
are
going
to
continue
to
increase
density.
Q
B
B
Item
is
34
2019
138
by
roma
homes,
approximately
0.55
acres
located
at
the
southern
intersection
of
Charles
Avenue
and
whiting
Avenue
in
mr.
Eccleston's
district
number
one
currently
zoned,
our
five
single-family
residential
proposed
rezoning
is
r8
single-family
residential,
traditional
staffers
recommends
approval
of
the
petition
upon
transportation,
related
issues,
and
we
have
got
two
speakers
tonight
sign
up
in
favor.
We'll
have
three
minutes
after
mr.
Ames
presentation.
All.
M
Right,
so
this
is
a
little
more
than
a
half
an
acre.
It
is
in
the
know,
diarrhea
you
can
see
on
the
map.
Here's
36th
Street-
and
this
is
on
whiting
Avenue
right
at
Charles
Street,
and
it
is
there's
the
aerial.
You
will
see
one
thing
missing
from
this
aerial,
and
that
is
this
proposed
new
development
that
is
was
approved.
That's
just
across
the
street
from
there
for
single-family
homes
as
well,
and
the
current
zoning
of
this
property
is
r5.
You
can
see
the
extent
of
r5
all
around
there.
M
This
was
the
mud
optional
that
was
approved
recently
for
those
other
single-family
fairly
small
Lots
singles
that
were
built
as
a
part
of
the
redevelopment
of
that
church
site.
This
is
the
adopted
future
land
use
the
Central
District
plan,
so
we're
outside
of
the
station
area
plan
at
this
point,
which
calls
for
up
to
five
units
per
acre,
but
the
general
development
policies
will
support
higher
densities
than
that,
and
certainly
approves
recommends
what
is
approved
or
recommended
here,
which
is
for
single-family
homes.
M
That's
about
eight
units
per
acre,
and
so
it
does
have
planted
15
sidewalks
along
the
edges
and
pedestrian
connectivity
from
sidewalks
coming
out
from
each
unit.
Again,
this
is
the
new
single-family
that
was
approved
fairly.
Recently.
Staff
does
recommend
approval
of
this
petition
upon
resolution
of
just
a
few
outstanding
issues,
it's
inconsistent
with
the
plan,
but
it
is
consistent
with
the
densities
that
are
proposed
for
the
within
the
general
development
policies
for
this
area.
B
X
Evening,
council,
zoning
committee
Mayor
Pro
Tem.
Thank
you
we're
here
to
discuss
today.
Rezoning
petition
2019
138
today,
which
is
approximately
half
an
acre
of
vacant
land
along
Widing,
Avenue
at
corner
of
whiting
and
Charles
Avenue
you
may
be
familiar
with
the
parcel-
has
actually
been
an
RV
parked
on
the
parcel
for
quite
some
time
and
it's
also
perpetually
wet
for
some
reason.
We
are
currently
proposing
for
single-family
homes
along
Widing,
Avenue,
fronting
whiting
Avenue.
X
We
had
a
priest
modal
meeting
with
neighbors
prior
to
submitting
the
rezoning
petition
a
few
months
back
where
they
were
concerned
about
what
could
potentially
be
done
here
by
right,
which
would
be
a
large
duplex
and
a
large
single-family
home
I.
Don't
think
anyone
agreed
that
it
was
something
that's
within
character
of
the
community,
so
the
four
single-family
homes
I
think
was
well
received
by
everyone.
There
were
some
concerns
that
we
had
from
the
neighbors
utilization
of
the
existing
paper
alley.
X
That's
their
current
drainage
on
site,
which
we
have
resolved
sustainability
of
building
practices,
which
I
think
are
being
addressed
with
Roma
homes,
sustainable
building
practices
and
height
concerns,
which
will
be
maximum
two
and
a
half
stories
again
for
single-family
homes,
graphic
representation
of
these
for
single
family
homes.
The
alley
will
not
be
utilized.
All
of
these
homes
will
either
be
side-loaded
or
front-load
with
long
whiting
Avenue,
and
this
is
an
architectural
representation
of
the
home
that
Roma
homes
would
like
to
construct
here
and
with
that
we'd
like
to
open
it
up
to
questions
bill.
B
H
Helps
that
neighbors
are
to
lose
the
historic
RV.
They
said
that
you
had
been
in
good
communication
with
them
had
worked
through
a
lot
of
issues
that
they
had
voiced,
see
you
that
were
concerns
and
incorporated
them
into
your
plan
before
you
got
to
us
here
at
the
hearing.
So
we're
very
appreciative
when
people
do
that
and
with
that
motion
to
close.
B
Thank
you.
Thank
you
very
much
item
number
35
is
2019
139
by
JD,
si
LLC
approximately
five
point
three
two
to
five
acres
located
along
the
eastern
portion
of
w
w
Harris
Boulevard
at
its
intersection
with
Wallace
Avenue
north
of
Albemarle
Road,
and
that's
Council,
District
five
mr.
Newton's
district,
currently
zoned
r12,
multifamily
residential
and
our
three
single-family
residential
and
the
proposed
zoning
is
our
eighth
single-family
development
staff
recommends
approval
of
this
petition
and
we
have
got
one
speaker
mr.
Judson
Stringfellow
after
mr.
means.
M
This
is
a
proposed
conventional
rezoning,
it's
for
a
little
over
five
acres,
approximately
a
little
over
five
acres,
and
it
is
just
north
of
Albemarle
Road,
which
runs
just
off
the
slide
below
here
on
WT
Harris
at
Wallace
Road.
This
wallace
road
leads
into
this
neighborhood
back
in
here.
Otherwise
this
is
undeveloped.
Land,
though
this
is
the
aerial
photograph
that
shows
the
existing
neighborhood
and
the
proximity
to
Albemarle
Road,
which
is
down
here
at
the
bottom.
M
M
B
M
Y
D
B
F
Have
a
question
about
that:
little
strip
of
land
I,
don't
even
know
how
to
describe
the
direction.
Is
no
these
north/south
east/west
rows
on
here
that
keeps
that
land
r12
that
that's
between
the
development
and
the
slip
of
our
three.
Are
there
any
concerns
about?
You
know
kind
of
splitting
up
that
that
zoning
does
will
that
be
developable,
Lane
you're.
M
M
F
B
Thank
you
all
in
favor
of
closing
the
public
hearing.
Thank
you.
Okay.
The
next
item
is
number
36
petition:
number
2019
141
by
marvelous,
approximately
0.44
acres
located
on
the
west
corner
of
North
Sharon
Amity
Road
in
Casselton
Road,
that's
also
Council
District,
five,
mr.
Newton's
district.
Currently
it's
zone,
our
three
single-family
residential
and
the
proposed
zoning
is
urban.
Residential,
conditional
and
staff
does
not
recommend
approval
of
this
petition
in
its
current
form.
B
L
You
2019
141,
that's
about
point
four:
four
acres
on
the
west
corner
of
North
Sharon,
tammany,
Casselton
Road,
we're
looking
at
an
r3
zoning.
You
are
conditional,
you
can
see,
there's
some
are
12
and
just
adjacent
to
it,
but
the
majority
of
the
zoning
in
the
areas
are
three
adoptive
future
land
uses
from
the
South
District
plan,
which
recommends
single
family
units
at
three
dua.
The
general
development
policy
does
provide
some
guidance
on
this.
However,
as
the
project
is
proposed,
part
of
the
component
of
the
GDP
calculations
also
have
to
do
with
site
design.
L
You
get
additional
points
for
designing
site
in
a
way,
that's
more
conducive
to
some
of
the
land-use
patterns
and
other
elements
of
just
general
development
for
the
property.
Currently,
as
the
site
is
designed
as
part
of
some
of
our
outstanding
issues
which
we'll
get
through,
we
didn't
get
the
entirety
of
the
points
for
the
GDP
analysis,
so
even
though
the
GDP
could
get
up
to
about
twelve
dua,
we
still
have
to
work
through
some
of
those
design
guideline
issues
to
actually
get
the
project
to
be
more
consistent
with
what
the
GDP
would
support.
L
So
currently,
you've
got
a
proposal
for
five
dwelling
units
or
one
single-family
detached
home
at
North,
Sharon,
Amity,
Road
and
then
two
single-family
attached
units
with
two
unit
seats
are
looking
at
duplexes
facing
Casselton
Road
maximum
building
height
of
forty
feet.
Again,
that's
compatible
with
the
residential
zoning
and
uses
around
that
area.
L
Then
we
also
have
eight-foot
playing
strip
and
six-foot
sidewalk
along
those
existing
Street
frontiers
of
both
Sharon
Amity
and
Castleton,
and
again,
we've
limit
the
height
of
detached
pedestrian
scale,
lighting
to
16
feet
for
any
of
those
pedestrian
elements.
Currently,
staff
does
not
recommend
approval
in
its
current
form.
We
could
support
a
revised
layout
and
plan,
as
described
knows
outstanding
issues
that
meet
the
residential
design
guidelines
of
the
GDP,
particularly
those
would
be
elements
that
would
orient
the
uses
on
the
property
a
little
bit
differently.
L
Looking
at
getting
some
of
those,
the
duplex
is
in
a
different
location,
more
along
the
frontage
of
Sharon
Amity
versus
Casselton
Road,
so
we'd
like
to
see
those
kind
of
uses
flip
flop
a
bit
on
the
site.
So
again,
we've
got
some
issues
that
we
still
like
to
work
through
with
the
petitioner
on,
but
currently
we're
not
supporting
it.
In
its
current
form,
it
is
inconsistent
with
the
South
District
plan,
which
is
recommending
three
units
per
acre
for
the
site.
We
can
work
through
some
of
those
design
and
building
issues.
L
B
Z
B
Z
Thank
you
so
mark
bolus
would
Thank
You
mayor
Mayor,
Pro,
tenant
and
council
men
and
women.
This
mark
bolus
from
white
stone,
Holdings
incorporated,
were
a
local
land,
development
and
and
builder
teamed,
along
with
salt
and
light
builders,
we're
seeking
to
develop
for
sale
homes,
we're
working
with
Planning
Department
playing
departments,
request
to
reduce
from
five
units
to
four
units
and
reduce
the
density
and
minimize
site
disturbance.
Z
So
this
is
the
original
plan.
This
is
the
the
castle,
the
castle
moon,
Road
elevation
with
the
single-family
home
on
Sharon
Amity
and
two
duplexes
modern
farmhouse
style
homes.
This
is
the
view
from
the
corner,
rear
elevation
and
from
the
temple
entrance
the
rears
and
then
some
upper
and
lower
plans
in
order
to
make
the
project
viable
at
a
price
point
comparable
to
the
surrounding
neighborhood.
We
would
need
to
do
four
units
at
a
minimum.
We
believe
moving
forward
with
the
four
units
is
better
than
leaving
the
corner
and
the
abandoned
and
dilapidated
condition.
Z
The
home
that
sits
there
now
is
in
and
our
neighborhood
meeting
we
did
have
about
four
neighbors
come
out
and
didn't
have
any
major
objections.
They
asked
about
parking
mass
and
we
addressed
that
with
the
driveways
and
the
two-car
garages
that
were
that
we're
proposing,
but
now
based
on
planning
and
and
the
representative
Newton's
recommendation
were
happy
to
reduce
to
the
four
units
we'll
continue
to
work
with
our
engineering
team
and
city
zoning
and
council
to
work
on
the
site
plan
so
that
it's
more
viable
for
all
parties.
Z
We've
made
ourselves
available,
even
at
short
notice,
to
neighbors
to
listen
to
their
concerns
and
do
everything
that
we
can
to
appease
any
concerns
that
are
raised
and
we'll
continue
to
do
so
throughout
the
process.
We
really
like
the
neighborhood
and
look
forward
to
a
long
term
relationship
with
to
develop
more
single-family
homes.
However,
sometimes
there
will
be
opportunities
to
need
to
create
a
duplex,
but
the
price
point
that
these
that
these
properties
will
be
in
will
will
attract
homeowners
more
than
renters
and
developing
rentals
here
is
not
being
targeted
at
all.
Z
These
are
for
sale
products.
We
don't
believe
that
the
addition
of
the
four
dwelling
units
significantly
increases
the
number
of
cars
that
will
be
passing
through
the
neighborhood
and
all
the
homes
will
have
a
two-car
garage
like
I
mentioned
and
driveways
of
parking
and
we'll
plan
to
revise
the
site
plan
to
reflect
the
front
loaded
garage
as
with
driveways
so
yeah.
We
understand
that
residents
are
always
concerned
when
changes
occur
close
to
home,
but
new
residents
that
want
to
live
in
these
neighborhoods
for
the
same
reasons
as
others
do,
because
it's
desirable.
Z
AA
I'm
Andrew
Maroney
I
live
in
the
neighborhood.
A
few
blocks
away,
so
mainly
here.
Just
commenting
on
my
view
that
bringing
in
new
homes
that
look
great
and
kind
of
bring
neighbors
into
the
neighbor,
with
with
higher
price
points,
I
think
is
generally
a
good
thing
for
the
neighborhood
we've
seen
a
lot
of
development
in
the
neighborhood
and
I
think
it's
been
for
the
best
I've
personally
been
there
for
about
six
years
now.
AA
AB
Good
evening,
Samantha
Starling
I'm,
the
resident
and
owner
of
property
up
the
street
on
Sharon
Amity,
not
few.
Just
short
months
ago,
I
stood
in
the
exact
same
spot
and
made
arguments
for
four
homes
that
detached
single-family
home
development.
That
was
going
to
be
on
a
corner
lot
on
Sharon
Amity
at
Emory.
We
went
through
all
of
the
reasons
why
this
was
not
a
good
idea.
AB
Consistency
which
we've
heard
a
lot
tonight
already
again,
was
one
of
the
big
things
land
use
in
a
leapfrog
and
density
from
an
r3
to
an
r8,
and
this
one
will
be
almost
an
or
nine.
We
talked
about
taking
stamps
of
little
rezoning
properties
and
putting
them
in
the
middle
of
something
whether
or
not
consistent
with
the
surrounding
area
and-
and
we
talked
about
the
traffic
and
the
egress
onto
Sharon,
Amity
and
being
unsafe
at
every
intersection
there,
where
there's,
not
a
stoplight,
and
here
we
are
again
talking
about
the
exact
same
thing.
AB
AB
You
know
ludes
any
of
us
here
that
if
it
wasn't
okay,
just
a
few
short
months
ago
to
build
for
separated
for
single-family
homes
or
at
0.5,
2
acre
lot
that
now
we're
talking
about
even
small
or
even
higher
density,
but
the
multifamily
component
I
could
have
brought
my
old
presentation
here
and
showed
it
to
you.
I
think
a
lot
of
you
remember
getting
the
detailed
maps
and
overlays
and
everything
from
me
not
quite
a
year
ago.
Some
of
you
knew
and
didn't
get
those
and
nothing
has
changed.
AB
That's
in
the
traffic
certainly
hasn't
gotten
better.
The
runoff
certainly
hasn't
gotten
any
better.
The
school
certainly
haven't
gotten
less
crowded,
and
you
know
the
over
the
building
and
everything
about
the
area
of
Cotswolds,
Sherwood,
Forest
and
Oakhurst
certainly
hasn't
changed
to
have
any
more
of
this
kind
of
development
in
our
neighborhoods
I.
AB
Would
like
to
point
to
the
planning
departments:
they
did
an
amazing
job
and
if
you
look
at
the
aerial
photos
that
they're
showing
of
the
area
without
that
again,
you
can
see
there's
nothing
with
this
density
there.
So
it
just
doesn't
make
sense.
When
you
look
at
the
consistency
of
the
one-off
rezoning
that
are
going
to
take
place
in
the
area,
everything
or
three,
even
though
the
r12
is
right
behind
it.
The
council
that
approved
that
was
smart
enough
to
put
a
CD
on
there.
So
it's
not
zoned
for
residential
12
units
multifamily.
AB
If
you
look
at
the
structure
of
the
lot
as
well,
it
would
be
very
difficult
to
put
a
maximum
number
of
homes
on
that
lot.
To
put
about
20
numbers,
20
units
that
locked,
even
half,
multifamily
and
again
wouldn't
be
consistent
with
the
rest
of
the
area.
When
you
look
at
it,
so
we're
asking
that
you
look
at
this
plan.
Mart
has
been
really
great.
AB
We've
met
a
couple
times
even
earlier
today
and
he
is
very
willing
to
work
with
the
neighborhood
I
think
that
we
would
be
most
happy
to
see
three
single-family
homes
with
a
little
less
a
little
more
yard
and
he's
looked
at
some
of
the
parking
issue.
Street
parking
is
not
possible
on
Casselton,
it's
too
dangerous
to
come
in
and
out
as
people
fly
in
and
off
Sharon
amedy
and
he's
already
shown
his
willingness
to
work
on
that
I
think
at
some
point
we
could
have
a
compromise.
AB
I
feel
like
I'm
speaking
on
behalf
of
hundreds
of
neighbors,
just
like
I
did
last
time,
but
still
the
multifamily
component
with
the
four
homes.
In
the
point.
One
one
acre
of
the
law
is
not
consistent
in
our
area
and
the
characteristics
that
we've
come
to
know
and
love
in
a
traditional
Charlotte
neighborhood.
Z
The
own
thing
I
would
say
is
that
there
is
triplex
on
Craig
Avenue,
just
one
Street
up
north-northeast
of
that
site
there
that
was
recently
approved.
You
know
this
would
be
adding
one
duplex
to
the
neighborhood.
The
price
point
that
these
would
be
at
would
be
very
good
price
points,
high
price
points,
so
the
the
concern
with
rentals
or
rental
type
properties,
I,
don't
think,
is
necessarily
there.
I.
Certainly
I
hear
the
the
opposition
of
potentially
now
opening
the
opportunity
for
a
lot
of
condo
development
and
and
major
development
in
the
neighborhood
I.
Z
B
D
I
would
agree
with
staff
I
think
under
its
current
format,
have
a
lot
of
trouble
supporting
this.
Having
said
that,
you
don't
have
anything
to
indicate
for
us
what
anything
other
than
five
units
would
look
like.
So
assuming
there
is
a
change
here.
My
question
is
for
staff
on
this:
would
that
be
required
to
be
submitted
prior
to
the
zoning
committee
meeting
and
then
again,
I
guess
thereafter,
I'm
assuming
we
would
have
to
to
decide
whether
that
changes
minimal
minor.
You
know
larger
or
requiring
to
come
back
before
us
right.
So.
L
If
they,
if
they
reduce
the
units
as
a
result
of
this
public
hearing,
we
would
have
that
submitted
prior
to
zoning
committee,
so
they
can
make
a
recommendation
based
off
of
that
plan,
so
they
wouldn't.
Those
changes,
wouldn't
necessarily
have
to
be
voted
on
as
a
change
that,
because
you
guys
would
see
that
change
and
the
zoning
committee
would
see
that
change.
Now.
L
If
we
went
to
zoning
committee
with
a
plan,
as
is
then
after
zoning
committee,
we
made
a
change
to
reduce
the
units
that
be
something
that
you
guys
would
have
to
look
at
and
vote
on
to
say.
Should
we
go
back
to
zoning
committee?
Are
we
comfortable
with
that
change,
but
any
changes
that
would
happen
as
a
result
of
input
from
this
public
meeting
and
any
continued
dialogue
with
staff
in
the
community?
We
would
want
those
changes
presented
to
zoning
committee
at
their
next
meeting.
L
If
there's
not
enough
time
to
do
that,
then
we
would
have
to
look
at
doing
zoning
committee
another
month
out
so
right
now
we
have
about
two
weeks
to
the
next
zone
in
committee
meetings.
So
it'd
have
to
be
a
pretty
quick
turnaround,
but
certainly
we've
got
time
to
to
do
that
either
prior
to
the
February
zoning
committee
meeting
or
even
March,
if
we
need
some
more
time
to
just
work
through
some
of
those
issues
but
we'd
like
those
changes
to
be
ironed
out.
L
D
We
see
some
tree
save
area
in
the
front
and
I'm
wondering
what
what
we
would
be
looking
at
from
the
standpoint
of
tree,
save
in
some
future
site
plans.
So
maybe
take
that
into
consideration
as
well
and
I
wanted
to
also
ask
about
the
parking,
because
I
would
be
interested
to
know
exactly
where
that
parking
would
would
exist.
On
the
frontage
with
the
duplex
yeah.
Z
D
I
think
so
I,
you
know
what
we're
talking
about.
Here's
the
magic
number
and
I
would
be
really
interested
to
see
that
site
plan
myself
I,
so
so
I
will
be
I.
Keep
an
eye
on
my
email,
I
suppose,
with
that
and
I
would
encourage
the
petitioner
to
please
continue
working
with
the
community
so
that
you
know
everyone
wins
here.
Absolutely.
U
B
Favor
of
closing
the
public
hearing
very
much
number
37,
his
petition
number
2019
143
by
Tara
Ellerby
elite,
approximately
four
point:
three:
three
acres
located
at
the
southern
intersection
of
North
Tryon
Street
in
Liddell,
Street,
0.2,
miles
northeast
of
the
brookster
freeway,
and
that's
in
Council,
District,
six,
so
district
1,
mister,
Eccleston's
district,
it's
currently
zoned
industrial
and
the
proposal
is
to
zone
mixed-use
development.
Optional
staff
recommends
approval
of
this
petition
on
resolution
of
outstanding
issues
related
to
transportation,
insight
and
building
designs.
M
So
this
is
a
very
small
lot
again
just
outside
of
the
freeway
loop
of
the
Center
City
0.33
acres,
and
here
is
the
location
you
can
see
for
just
for
reference.
There's
the
auto
Bell.
This
is
a
storage
component
over
here.
The
rail
yard
is
just
behind
there.
The
current
zoning
is
i2.
Industrial
again
proposed
is
mud
optional,
and
the
proposal
is
for
well.
The
North
Tryon
area
plan
actually
calls
for
industrial
uses,
specifically.
M
Office,
industrial
warehouse
and
distribution
uses,
and
so
we
are
a
little
bit
outside
of
what
the
plan
area
says.
The
plan
was
from
2000
I've
worked
on
that
plan
and
I
can
tell
you
that
the
expectations
at
the
time
were
less
than
we
have
today.
This
is
the
proposal
for
an
adaptive
reuse
of
the
building.
It
is
very
close
to
the
street,
both
in
both
directions
less
than
our
mud
standards
call
for
as
an
existing
building.
You
can
do
that.
M
The
one
of
the
optional
provisions
that
is
sort
of
woven
through
their
presentation
is
that
all
buildings
that
they
would
be
allowed
to
build
and
not
honor
those
setbacks
for
any
additions
and
any
future
buildings
on
this
site,
and
those
are
some
of
the
things
that
we
are
not
pleased
with
the
we
are
recommending
approval
of
this
petition
upon
resolution
of
those
outstanding
issues
that
being
the
the
primary
issue.
Also,
we
need
to
just
get
those
optional
notes
all
together
in
one
place,
so
that
we
can
see
what
they
are.
M
It's
inconsistent
with
the
plan
which
now
calls
for
office,
industrial
warehouse
and
distribution
uses
it
would
allow
for
all
uses
in
the
mud
except
for
residential
uses.
So
it
does
extend
those
uses
to
the
restaurant
that
they've
proposed
and
other
mud
uses
as
well.
If
approved,
this
will
revise
the
land-use
plan
from
that
industrial
office
to
office
retail
uses.
B
AC
You
and
good
evening,
madam
mayor
pro-temp,
council,
members
and
staff,
my
name
is
Melissa.
Oliver
I
am
with
design
I'm
here
representing
the
petitioner
for
this
rezoning.
The
reason
for
this
rezoning
is
this
is
an
existing
historic
building.
It
is
to
be
used
for
commercial
uses,
office,
restaurant,
food
and
beverage
and
with
the
existing
site
constraints
in
order
to
get
parking
on
these
site
constraints,
we
are
rezoning
to
mud,
optional
and
I'm
going
to
hand
it
over
to
Luke.
Welcome
our
to
talk
about
the
building.
AD
Thank
You
Melissa
good
evening,
Council
I'll,
be
brief,
as
Melissa
mentioned,
we're
looking
at
a
full
rehabilitation
of
a
1925
structure,
it's
been
built
or
it's
been
vacant
for
over
a
decade.
At
this
point,
I'm
sure
many
of
you
have
seen
it
on
your
way
up
into
uptown.
So
you
know
brick
repair,
a
lot
of
structural
reinforcement,
new
windows,
the
first
floor,
restaurant
space,
an
office
on
the
second
floor
and
then
rooftop
space
as
well
parking
behind
with
access.
AD
H
Have
passed
this
building
a
lot,
it
has
been
empty
for
a
long
time,
but
it's
a
really
cool
building,
so
just
wanted
to
express
my
appreciation,
as
always,
for
someone
who
comes
in
and
does
the
hard
thing,
but
the
right
thing,
which
is
to
find
a
way
to
give
new
life
to
these
old
buildings,
and
it
would
arguably
be
easier
to
tear
down.
So
thank
you
for
your
doing
it
the
right
way,
but
probably
the
hard
way
and
I'm
excited
to
see
what
y'all
do
with
it.
F
M
F
AC
F
Guess
so
a
follow-up
question
I,
just
looking
at
your
rendering
is
there
some
plan
to
remove
utility
lines
that
kind
of
trip
transverse
traverse
the
the
area,
especially
that
pole
that
sits
right
there
on
the
corner
that
makes
that
sidewalk
pretty
inaccessible
or
folks
that
might
be
traveling
there
with
special
needs.
So.
AC
The
plan
is
to
keep
that
pole
in
existing
where
it
is.
Currently,
it
is
pretty
much
right
at
the
back
of
curb
relocating
it.
I
mean
it's
an
existing
building
and
you
it
doesn't
matter
which
way
we
push
the
pole.
We
still
have
power
lines
going
to
the
all
the
way
back
at
Liddell,
serving
those
people
and
then
down
Tryon,
but
the
purpose
of
the
ATA
ramp
at
that
corner,
having
a
landing
pad
a
landing
pad
all
the
requirements
that
c.com
requires
480
access
across
the
street.
H
Mr.
Winston
sparked
an
idea
that
I'm
not
looking
at
the
developer
to
do
in
this
particular
project,
but
I
just
will
plant
the
seed
with
staff
in
case
there's
any
way
for
us
to
see
fit
to
do
this,
but
given
the
constraints
of
the
sidewalk
and
there's
another
historic
property,
two
parcels
towards
town.
If
you
look
at
the
at
the
picture
there,
it's
a
kind
of
a
peach,
pinkish
old
service
station,
that's
really
cool
and
I
hope
we'll
be
preserved
as
well.
H
Given
the
constraints
of
these
sidewalks,
and
we
have
a
couple
buildings
that
I
hope
will
not
be
torn
down
and
given
that
we
are
currently
looking
to
beautify
and
revitalize
this
particular
corridor,
particularly
between
16th
Street
and
the
277
bridge
on
North
Tryon
into
Uptown.
It's
one
of
the
it's
the
one
of
our
four
main
gateways
into
Uptown.
That
really
has
not
seen
much
love
or
much
investment
I
would
just
plant
the
seed
with
staff
to
explore
whether
there's
a
way
that
we
could
bury
the
power
lines
in
this.
H
B
It
is
in
district
4,
is
it
okay
district
for
miss
Johnson's
district
and
it's
for
our
three
single-family
residential
and
our
12
is
the
current
zoning
and
the
proposal
is
for
our
12
multi-family
condition.
Residential
conditional
staff
recommends
approval
of
this
petition
upon
resolution
of
outstanding
issues
related
to
transportation
and
site
and
building
design.
B
M
So
we've
got
approximately
twenty
three
and
a
half
meters
of,
and
it's
on,
North
Tryon
Street
and
it
is
just
inside
the
485
loop.
Also,
the
University
is
just
off
this
slide
further
down
North
Tryon
just
to
the
south
of
there,
which
is
significant,
because
this
is
proposed
for
housing.
For
our
students.
This
is
the
aerial
photograph,
so
you'll
see
that
it
is
fairly
non.
M
M
The
North
East
District
plan,
which
is
a
two
thousand
plan,
calls
for
residential
at
twelve
units.
Four
acre
for
what
you
see
in
dark
green,
that
we
choose
includes
these
pieces
right
here
and
residential
at
four
units
per
acre.
For
that
just
right.
There,
along
sir
Anthony
dry
Sir
Anthony
drive,
is
a
dead-end
street
that
goes
back
into
large
lot.
Single-Family
homes.
M
The
property
is
accessed
primarily
from
I
a
an
access
road
that
is
off
of
Tryon
Street
over
here
and
the
site
sort
of
surrounds
the
Hunt
Club
resin
multi-family
residential
as
well.
The
proposal
is
for
194
multifamily
units
forty-one
buildings.
There
will
be
largely
three
storeys
in
height
there's
a
clubhouse
in
a
minute,
the
area
which
is
over
here
again.
This
is
the
same
of
the
single-family
street,
so
we've
been
working
with
them
to
get
the
clubhouse
area
and
some
of
the
lower
density
lower
scale
buildings
along
the
edge
of
Sir
Anthony
suit.
M
It
is
a
little
more
compatible
with
the
single-family
and
with
higher
unit
higher
heights.
Further
back
along
the
other
areas,
there
is
a
foot
landing
strip,
six
foot,
sidewalks,
crosswalks,
open
space
and
open
area
improvements,
including
that
Clubhouse
area,
architectural
standards
will
be
provided
that
provide
for
building
materials
and
massing
and
such
as
that,
we
do
recommend
approval
of
this
upon
resolution
of
you
outstanding
issues
related
to
design
and
transportation.
M
Again,
it
is
consistent
for
most
of
the
area.
It
is
inconsistent
with
that
portion
that
is
right
along
Sir
Anthony
Road,
which
is
recommended
for
the
single-family
residential.
We
think
that
this
provides
a
step
down
in
density.
Again,
we've
been
working
to
get
less
of
the
bill
more
of
the
buildings
that
are
more
dense
away
from
the
single-family
area
as
well,
and
so
that's
our
rationale
for
this
one.
It
approved
it
will
a
change
the
adopted
land
use
or
that
portion
over
there
along
sir
Anthony
from
four
units
per
acre
to
12
units
per
acre.
O
Evening,
mayor
pro-tem
members
of
City
Council
members
of
the
zoning
committee,
Keith
mcvane,
with
more
Van
Alen
assisting
York
acquisitions,
the
petitioner
on
this
site
with
me
tonight,
representative
petitioner,
is
Stephan
Gastner
and
Dan
Coble
with
Aspen
Heights
York
acquisitions
is
a
subsidiary
or
an
entity.
That's
part
of
the
Aspen
Heights
Aspen
Heights
will
be.
The
developer.
Construed
will
be
developing
constructing
and
managing
this
proposed
residential
community
also
with
me
tonight,
as
Andrew
eagle
with
Ramey
Kemp
and
associates
our
traffic
engineer
and
Eddie
more
with
John.
O
Our
McAdams
want
to
thank
the
staff
for
their
support.
We
are
working
to
resolve
the
remaining
outstanding
issues.
We'll
have
those
plan
to
the
zoning
committee
prior
to
their
meeting
on
the
4th
as
I
mentioned,
Aspen
Heights
is
a
national,
is
the
developer
and
will
be
the
constructing
and
managing
the
community
formed
in
2006.
Headquartered
in
Texas
does
have
an
office
here
in
Charlotte,
a
national
multifamily
and
student
housing
developer
has
a
is
a
fully
integrated
company
in
terms
of
development,
construction,
property
management,
marketing
and
leasing
of
their
communities.
O
A
little
bit
about
this
is
a
purpose-built
student
housing
community
with
up
to
one
hundred
ninety
four
units,
as
Ken
mentioned.
This
slide
just
talks
a
little
bit
about
the
demand
for
student
housing.
There's
a
in
there's
about
a
forty
percent
of
the
students
who
go
to
UNCC
currently
are
looking
for
how
to
have
housing
needs
that
are
not
met
by
are.
O
There
are
other
purpose-built
student
housing
developments
in
the
area
or
by
on
on-site
student
housing
that
the
university
provides
that's
roughly
about
nine
thousand
folks
that
are
could
potentially
be
tenants
of
this
proposed
community.
The
location
is
Kent
mentioned
we're
just
south
of
forty
five
on
the
west
side
of
North
Tryon
Street,
Mallard
Creek
is
here
we're
just
so
we're
between
45
and
Mallard
Creek
I
85
is
here
the
university's
here
or
about
up
just
a
little
bit
over
amount.
Half
from
the
actual
campus.
A
walk
drive
do
have
good
pedestrian
amenities.
O
O
We
have
had
several
outreach
meetings
with
both
Senate
University
partners,
captain's
cell
in
terms
of
looking
at
safety
and
security
for
the
students,
UNCC
representatives,
as
well
as
community
median
than
the
residents
of
the
homes
Sir
Anthony
drive,
and
we
continue
to
have
outreach
for
those
with
the
folks
on
sir
Anthony
as
well
again
194
units
slightly
at
a
density
just
of
a
units
to
the
acre.
It
is
a
combination
of
duplex
and
quadruplex
units,
these
smaller
buildings,
you
see
here
and
be
glad
to
answer
any
questions.
Thank.
C
O
We've
had
good
meetings
with
both
those
folks,
as
you
mentioned
and
I,
think
some
of
the
folks
from
Sir
Anthony
driver
here,
and
there
we
believe,
are
in
support
of
the
petition.
We
are
continue.
The
petition
will
be
meeting
with
them
again
regarding
access,
so
Sir,
Anthony
and
and
and
the
location
of
the
driveways,
as
well
as
some
other
site
issues.
They
have
questions
about
meeting
with
the
University
partner.
O
It
went
well,
they
have
asked
us
a
number
of
questions
to
look
at
in
terms
of
additional
meeting
with
captain's
cell
committing
to
some
open
space
in
this
area.
I'm,
looking
at
some
other
factors
to
dealing
with
how
the
community
will
be
run
and
the
amenities
for
the
community
is
like
I
mentioned
purpose-built
student
housing,
it
is
it's
targeted
for
students.
The
amenities
are
designed
for
students.
O
The
community
will
be
part
of
the
Niner
choice
goal
program,
which
is
a
program
that
UNCC
has
developed
for
purpose-built
student
housing
that
helps
assure
the
university
that
their
students
are
being
served
appropriately
and
housing
in
quality
developments.
The
developer
has
committed
to
be
part
of
that,
and
it
has
as
part
of
our
meetings
with
you,
know,
UNC
representives,
so
meetings
have
gone
well
and
we
feel
we
have
support
of
everyone
involved
at
this
time.
I
O
40%
that
you
mentioned
that
aren't
currently
on
campus
or
an
other
student
purpose-built
housing
communities
are
probably
in
market
rate,
multifamily
communities
or
throughout
the
Charlotte
area,
maybe
in
houses
in
homes
near
the
campus.
We
part
of
this
is
to
show
whether
there
is
a
demand
for
purpose-built
housing
or
it's
it's
designed
for
with
students
in
mind,
amenities
are
for
them.
The
security
is
and,
and
the
folks
that
live
there
are
may
our
students.
For
the
most
part,
we
do
have
some
fair
housing
things
to
deal
with,
but
targeted
to
students.
O
O
I'm
sorry
I
did
not
mention
it's
actually.
My
next
slide.
There
is
an
on-site
shuttle
service
that
will
be
provided
to
the
students
that
allows
them
to
get
to
them
from
campus
without
having
to
walk
or
drive
their
cars,
and
we
are
one
of
the
things
the
university
city
partners
was
mentioned
and
we're
investigating
and
will
do
is
being
part
of
the
university's
bike
sharing
program
as
well.
B
Next
one
is
item
number
38,
39,
2019
148
by
brand
Co
LLC,
approximately
one
point:
five:
five
acres
located
on
the
west
side
of
West
Sugar,
Creek,
Road,
south
of
Olson
lane
south
of
interstate
85;
and
then
that
is
in
district
1.
Mr.
Olsen's
district,
it's
currently
zone
neighborhood
business,
conditional
and
neighborhood
services
and
the
proposed
zoning
is
for
neighborhood
services
and
neighborhood
services
site
plan.
Amendment
staff
recommends
approval
of
this
petition
upon
resolution
about
setting
issues.
B
M
The
current
zoning
here
is
b1
and
conditional,
and
it
consists
of
essentially
two
parcels.
One
is
a
site
right
at
the
corner
of
Wilson
Lane
and
Sugar
Creek,
Road
and
I
should
mention.
485
is
just
85
is
just
off
the
slide
to
the
north
zone
here,
and
so
it
consists
of
a
sand
parcel
that
is
right
now
on
Bojangles,
fast
food
and
a
vacant
site
here.
That
is
actually
a
part
of
the
site
to
the
south.
So
it's
sort
of
integrating
two
parcels.
H
M
M
So
the
existing
zoning
again
is
b1
conditional,
the
site
below
is
and
neighborhood
services.
So
it's
combining
two
parcels
essentially
replacing
that
existing
Taco,
Bell
and
building
on
to
that
vacant
piece.
That's
a
part
of
the
site
of
the
family
dollar,
the
adopted
youth
future
land
use
is
a
little
disjointed
here,
but
basically
is
support
retail
uses
in
both
cases.
It's
disjointed,
basically
because
we've
reasonings
over
time
that
have
done
that
to
us,
but
it
is
essentially
consistent
with
the
plan.
The
design
limits
the
square
footage
to
5000
square
feet.
M
It
does
provide
the
building
with
sidewalks
that
will
access
the
building
from
both
directions.
The
drive-through,
as
you
see,
runs
around
this
edge
and
is
screened
from
the
view
from
Sugar
Creek.
There
is
a
dedication
of
right-of-way
for
our
Sugar
Creek,
again
sidewalks
along
both
streets,
and
it
does
provide
some
architectural
standards
as
well.
We
do
recommend
approval
of
this
petition
upon
resolution
of
a
few
outstanding
issues.
N
Thank
you.
Thank
you
good
evening
again,
Mayor
Pro
Tem
members
of
council
members
of
the
zoning
committee
Bridgette
grant
with
more
in
Van
Alen
assisting
Adam
McCurry
with
Franzel
gonna,
give
her
the
PowerPoint
presentation
there.
We
go
it's
a
fairly
simple
rezoning,
so
I'm
not
going
to
take
a
lot
of
your
time.
As
Ken
mentioned,
it's
a
combination
of
an
existing
Taco
Bell
and
the
vacant
parcel
that's
next
to
the
Family
Dollar.
The
rezoning
would
allow
the
site
to
be
redeveloped
with
an
updated
building
and
uses.
N
These
are
some
conceptual
renderings
that
weren't
included
in
the
application,
but
we're
intended
to
be
shared
during
our
community
meeting
to
just
show
the
type
of
building
that's
going
to
be
constructed
on
the
site.
The
updated
building
will
also
increase
the
visibility
into
the
site
eliminates
another
proposed
building.
In
addition
to
the
talked
about,
and
so
we
don't
get
to
say
this
very
often,
but
it
only
it's
a
one-for-one
replacement
or
drive-through,
but
it's
actually
anticipated
to
generate
less
trips
than
permitted
by
Wright,
and
so
with
that
I'm
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
Q
F
B
H
I
mean
I
I,
just
think
any
time
we
can
get
investment
there,
where
we
have
a
higher
quality
building,
better
lighting,
better
sidewalks
I,
don't
frequent
KFC,
but
I.
Don't
think
that
it's
any
worse
for
the
community,
in
fact,
I
think
it's
better
for
the
community,
not
the
restaurant
concept,
but
the
investments
will
be
made
there
and
the
improvements
that
they
made
around
the
site
will
improve
the
community
compared
to
the
existing
condition.
B
Our
last
second
last
item
number
forty
number
2019
151
by
Long
Branch
development,
approximately
eleven
point,
six,
three
acres
located
on
Johnson
olla,
Road,
east
of
Euler
bridge
drive
south
of
interstate
485
in
Council,
District,
four,
miss
Johnson's
district
and
the
current
zoning
is
our
three
single-family
residential
and
the
proposed
zoning
is
for
urban
residential
conditional
staff
recommends
approval
of
this
petition
upon
resolution
of
outstanding
issues
related
to
transportation,
environment
and
site
and
building
design,
and
we
have
got
three
speakers
in
favor
today
to
speak
after
mr.
main.
Thank
you.
B
M
Is
site
this
site
is
11
and
a
half
plus
acres
located
on
both
sides
of
Johnston
Naylor
Road,
which
runs
as
you
see
right
here,
which
is
the
first
Road
off
of
I-4
85
hi.
This
is
within
the
area
of
prosperity,
hooks
area
plan
and
other
things
that
you
may
well.
Let's
look
at
this
site,
so
there's
the
freeway.
The
property
is
essentially
here.
It's
that
green
spot
there
as
well.
This
is
the
high
school
right
here
and
recreation
facilities
there.
M
So
we
are
right
along
the
edge
of
the
freeway,
there's,
also
a
brand
new
roundabout
right
there
that
crosses
into
the
other
side
of
the
freeway
and
the
other
elements
of
the
prosperity
area.
The
current
zoning
is
r3
they're.
Looking
for
you
are
two
conditional
urban
residential
conditional
and
the
prosperity,
Hux
area
plan
from
2015.
This
is
the
one
that
we
had
discussed
in
the
earlier
proposal
or
the
it
recommends
residential
up
to
four
units
per
acre.
M
This
is
part
of
the
wedge
element
of
the
prosperity
health
plan
and
there
is
an
element
in
there
that
makes
a
reference
to
small
areas
of
higher
density
at
key
locations,
close
to
open
space
and
close
to
institutional
uses.
So
the
proposal
here
is
for
124
attached
dwelling
units
a
maximum
height
of
two
storeys.
It
is
I,
got
a
multi-use
path
connection.
M
We
do
recommend
approval
of
this
petition
upon
our
resolution
of
some
outstanding
issues,
and
it
is
consistent,
inconsistent
with
that
Matt
use
of
four
units
per
acre
it
at
ten
points,
seven
units
per
acre.
It
is
denser
than
what
the
plan
recommends.
However,
again
it
does
commit
to
attached
dwellings
and
not
to
multifamily,
which
is
what
we
have
heard
the
most
vociferously
when
we
were
preparing
that
plan.
O
You
Mayor
Pro
Tem
members
of
City
Council
members,
ona
committee,
Keith
McMahon,
with
more
of
an
Allen
representing
Long
Branch
development
with
me
tonight
as
Bret
basnight
and
Long
Branch
development,
as
well
as
Brent
stout
with
DPR
and
Associates.
The
land
planner
for
the
site.
Kent
has
done
a
great
job,
explaining
what
we're
proposing
it's
up
to
124
town
homes
for
sale
or
townhomes
that
can
be
for
rent
or
for
sale
adjacent
to
the
Mount
Creek
High
School
and
Malak
Creek
Park,
two
separate
parcels,
one
per
smaller
parcel
between
Johnson,
Dale,
Road
and
45.
O
In
terms
of
the
site
plan.
Here's
the
cyclone
internal
private
streets,
designed
to
look
like
public
streets
will
have
vehicular
access
to
Johnson
Taylor.
We
are
improving
this
access
right
away.
That's
located
here
at
the
intersection
of
Johnson
&,
Johnson
and
I
route.
The
roundabouts
have
made
connections
to
the
Mountain
Creek
Park.
That's
a
jason
have
a
buffer
next
to
the
high
school
property
as
well
as
above
for
next
to
these
single-family
homes
and
a
buffer.
Next
to
the
I-45
internal
private
streets.
Each
unit
does
have
garages.
O
AE
Thank
You
counsel,
my
name
is:
will
Russell
I'm
representing
a
prosperity,
village,
Area
Association
and
we
take
responsibility
for
managing
I,
don't
know
the
development
of
our
area,
but
the
growth
and
the
consensus
of
community
that
comes
along
with
prosperity,
village.
We
generally
support
this
petition.
We
think
that
the
town
home
use,
especially
in
this
area,
would
be
a
good
addition
to
our
area,
and
we
really
appreciate
mr.
bast
night
and
mr.
mcvane
yin
working
to
improve
the
pedestrian
connections
along
just
near
the
road,
especially
in
the
right-of-way.
AE
We
also
are
excited
that
they
followed
our
suggestion
to
include
a
connection
to
the
Mallard
Creek
Park
Regional
Park,
which
is
next
door,
so
we
think
that
is
very
consistent
with
what's
going
on,
but
it
does
raise
a
greater
issue
of
consistency
with
rezoning
in
our
area.
We
have
found
that
they
are
not
normally
consistent
altogether.
AE
We've
noticed
that
in
this
instance,
staff
has
said
that
this
is
denser
than
what
was
on
the
area
plan
and
you've
heard
that
same
analysis
for
2019
105,
which
came
before
you
previously,
that
it
was
also
denser
than
the
area
plan.
But
yet
the
differences
between
the
two
is
one
is
being
recommended
for
approval
by
council,
and
one
is
not.
AE
This
one
is
being
recommended
for
approval,
but
the
other
project,
which
also
includes
density,
that
we're
that
was
prescribed
by
the
area
plan
and
makes
use
which
was
prescribed
by
the
area
plan,
and
it
was
not
recommended
for
approval.
So
in
order
to
maintain
our
consistency
and
understanding
how
we
can
communicate
not
only
with
the
developers
but
with
the
community
for
which
we
are
entrusted
to
to
lead
and
protect,
we
need
to
understand
that
one
key
word
of
consistency,
Thank.
J
Just
think,
given
the
conversation
we
had
earlier,
we
really
need
to
be
careful
about
the
distinction
that
we're
making
between
this
situation
of
that
one.
So
in
your
justification,
I
would
just
ask
that
you
target
that
more
specifically,
because
an
argument
like
this
could
have
been
made
for
the
other
one,
and
you
know
I,
said
earlier.
We
want
to
work
with
you
guys
so
the
uniqueness
of
this
situation
what's
going
on
around
it.
That
would
cause
it
not
to
be
suitable
for
the
intended
area,
plan,
development
and
things
like
that.
B
That
point
two
and
I
have
a
question
how
you
feel
about
this
because
it
it
goes,
it
will
change
the
area
plan
and
it
will
increase
density
by
two
and
a
half
times
of
what
the
area
plan
calls
for,
and
the
justification
for
this
by
staff
was
that
because
there's
really
very
little
single-family
housing
around
it
that
it's
okay
to
have
that
density.
But
if
it
changes
the
area
plan,
then
it
changes
the
area
plan
and
the
next
project
could
be
where
there
is
single-family
housing
where
it
impacts
it
more.
AE
B
F
Just
have
a
question
for
point
of
clarity:
I
went
back
and
looked
at
the
zoning
petition,
20
19
105
that
we
talked
about
earlier
today,
but
the
first
page
says
it
was
the
proposed
zoning
is
mud,
C
D,
but
I'll
flip
it
and
it
says:
go.
Zoning
is
neighborhood
services
on
the
second
page.
So
can
I
just
get
some
clarity
as
to
what
we're
looking
at
is
that
old
one
that.
M
F
B
Is
there
any
other
questions
close
the
public
hearing?
Thank
you
now.
Our
last
one
item
number
41
is
petition
number
2019
153
by
650
South,
Tryon
development,
and
this
is
approximately
point:
six
four
acres
bounded
by
South
Tryon
Street
and
West
Hill
Street
east
of
John
belt
freeway
in
councilman,
remember:
Graham's
district
district,
two,
it's
currently
zoned
as
uptown
mixed-use
optional,
and
the
proposed
zoning
is
uptown
mixed
mixed-use,
optional,
site
plan.
B
L
You
Miriam
2019
153,
just
2.6
four
acres,
we're
looking
at
on
West
Hill,
Street
and
South
Tryon,
just
inside
John,
Belk
freeway.
Just
to
give
you
some
context,
this
was
a
humid
rezoning
with
some
optional
provisions,
we're
still
considering
you
might
optional
provisions
or
a
site
plan
amendment
mainly
just
to
accommodate
a
valet
drop-off
pick
off
a
pickup
area
along
the
site
that
wasn't
envisioned
when
the
initial
site
plan
was
approved.
It's
something
we've
talked
with
the
petitioner
with
we
looked
at
some
other
options
to
potentially
do
that
as
an
administrative
amendment.
L
Rezoning
was
the
best
option
to
move
forward
with.
So
essentially,
this
petition
is
really
keeping
the
previous
rezoning
intact.
You
know
we
do
modify
the
streetscape
just
a
bit
on
East
Hill,
Street,
really
again
to
just
accommodate
that
pick-up
and
drop-off
area
for
some
valet
service.
So
no
major
concerns
that
from
staff
we
just
have
a
few
outstanding
items
related
to
site
and
built
in
design
which
are
fairly
minor,
we'll
continue
to
work
with
the
petitioner
on,
but
again
really.