We start our meetings with uh introductions, and we will start um with our clerk.

Billy Tons, Deputy City Clerk.

Good evening, everyone.

Thanks for coming this evening.

I'm Tijuana Brown representing Charlotte City Council, District Three.

Good evening, Marjorie Molina, District Five.

Allison Craig, Deputy City Manager.

Good evening, Dante Anderson, Mayor Pro Tim, District 1.

Malcolm Graham, District 2.

Dregs, District 7.

Edwin Peacock, District 6.

Good evening, Lawana Mayfield, representing you at Locke.

Good evening, Victoria Watlington, and I have the pleasure of serving you as a council member at large.

Terry Hagler Gray, Senior Assistant City Attorney.

Excellent.

So we began our meetings with an invocation as an expression and inspiration, followed by our Pledge of Allegiance.

The invocation by the council member is intended to underscore our proceedings.

And we celebrate the religious diversity of our entire community, including those without a religious faith.

And tonight, Councilmember Peacock will provide the invitation.

All right.

Let us bow our heads.

May we never take these gifts for granted.

And we'd be ever mindful that they are other parts of this great nation where there's not so much progress as we see here, or nor is it assured.

As we gather to consider matters of land use and development, grant us the wisdom and the patience.

Help us to listen with open minds, speak with clarity and respect, and seek the common good in all our decisions.

We ask for the courage to lead with integrity, the conviction to act justly, and a renewed sense of purpose to serve our neighbors, whether it's in this room, in our homes, or throughout our city.

Bless this meeting, bless those who serve behind the scenes, and bless all who call Charlotte home.

May our work today help shape the city that is much more just and vibrant and welcoming for generations to come.

And all God's people said.

So we'll start officially the meeting by providing an explanation of our zoning process.

And the process begins with applications submitted to our planning staff for review.

There are decisions and there are hearings.

Decisions on cases for which a public hearing was previously held.

We will have no further comment this evening.

But for hearings, anyone wishing to speak is asked to see our clerk before the start of that particular hearing.

And we'll go through the staff's presentation, and that has no time limit.

And the petitioner, um, that is those who are in favor of the petition, get three minutes combined to present their case, unless one of two conditions occur.

One is there is opposition signed up to speak, or if staff is in opposition, the petitioner gets 10 minutes, the opponent gets 10 minutes, and then the petitioners provided a two-minute rebuttal.

If no one is opposed or signed up to speak, staff provides a short presentation.

Uh the hearing is closed and we move forward.

So I'm at this time I will pass it on to our zoning committee chair, uh, Chair Wilton, who will introduce his committee and uh provide uh greetings.

Uh thank you, Mayor Pro Tim, and thank you, members of the council.

My name is Douglas A.

Welton, and I am the chairman of the zoning committee for the planning commission.

Allow me to introduce uh the fellow members of my uh committee, and they include Melissa Gaston, Aaron Shaw, Teresa McDonald, Robin Stewart, Carolyn Millen, and Michael Caprioli.

The zoning committee will meet on Tuesday, September 30th at 5.30 p.m.

At that meeting, uh the zoning committee will meet to discuss and make recommendations on the petitions that have a public hearing here tonight.

The public is welcome to come to that meeting, but please note it is not a continuation of the public hearings that are being held here tonight.

Prior to that meeting, you are welcome to contact us and provide any input that you would like.

You can find contact information for the zoning committee and information about each one of the petitions that is being heard tonight on Charlotte Planning.org.

Back to you, Mayor Proton.

Thank you, uh, Chair Wilton.

Okay, so we will begin with our consent agenda items.

Um rezoning petition items three through 15 may be considered in one motion, um, except for those pulled by a council member.

And please note the following criteria.

All Mayor Pro Tem, would you like to proceed with the deferrals?

Yes, I'm sorry, yes.

We will we'll do that.

So we do we do have a few items that have been uh deferred this evening, and um I will pass it over to staff to speak to those.

Thank you.

We have one decision up for deferral item number 16, petition 2025 027.

Petitioner is Mission City Church Freedom Communities requesting a deferral of their decision to October 20th, 2025.

Then we have three hearings requesting a deferral all to October 20th, 2025.

The first being item number 20, petition 2025-025 by Angelo Tillman, item 21, petition 2025-030 by Trion Advisors, and petition 2025-063, which is item number 27 by Northwood Raven.

Thank you.

Okay.

Can I have those repeated because I could barely hear?

Yes, I and I can give you the item numbers if you like.

It is item number 16 in the decision section as well as for hearings.

Items 20, 21, and 27.

Thank you.

Okay.

Did everyone capture that?

All right.

Is there a motion to defer uh the one decision and the three hearings?

So moved, second.

All right.

Motion and second.

All in favor, raise hands.

Any opposed?

That is unanimous.

Thank you.

So we will move on to the actual consent agenda items, which are items uh three through 15.

And um, these will be considered in one motion unless a council member requests to pull them.

The following is criteria around our um consent agenda items.

Oh no, go ahead.

Okay.

Um the first one is it had no public opposition to the petition at the hearing.

Staff recommends approval.

The zoning committee recommends approval, and there are no changes after the zoning committee's recommendation.

Are there any consent agenda items council would like to pull for question, comment, or separate vote?

And I will start by pulling item number 13.

Miss Milina.

Thank you, Mayor Pro Tem.

I would like to pull item number 14 for a comment.

Okay.

Ms.

Mayfield.

Madam Clocky.

Three, five, six, eight, nine, and fifteen.

Okay, I heard three, five, six, eight, nine, nine, and fifteen.

And fifteen.

Okay.

Okay.

And so then that would leave um item four ten, eleven, and twelve.

And um is there a motion to approve the following petition items and adopt the zoning committee statement of consistency as their own for the following items.

I need to read the numbers.

Petition number 2025.

Question from staff.

Item number seven as well was not pulled.

I didn't have that written down.

Should stay in consent.

Yes, okay 368, 9, and 15.

I got you.

So uh petition number item four.

Uh petition number 2025 009.

Item number seven, petition number 2025 046.

Petition number 2025 050, 2025 053, and 2025 054.

Is there a motion to approve and adopt?

So moved.

Second.

All right.

Any discussion?

Hearing none, all in favor, raise hands.

Any opposed?

That is unanimous for those items.

So we will go back to the top, and we'll start with item number three.

Is there a motion to approve and adopt the zoning committee statement of consistency for item number three?

Petition number 2024 141.

Is there a motion to approve and adopted?

That's council member.

This one, that's the one that council member.

Ms.

Johnson.

Johnson is your admission.

I know you just came in.

Oh, motion to approve.

Second.

Second.

Okay.

All right.

Um we have discussion at this time, and I'm recognizing Ms.

Mayfield.

Thank you.

For item number three.

The concern that I have is this is a proposal of a residential community of up to 575 multifamily attached dwellings, so yet more apartments.

I shared with council over the weekend the concerns I have with the number of multifamily that we are seeing seeing in our city.

And we have had plenty of conversations and comparisons from community and others.

I've already stated we have over a hundred thousand single-family homes that are now rental properties within our city.

Also, this for me is a very highly intensive project that is going to create a considerable strain on our infrastructure, specifically our road infrastructure, when we do not have the current financial wherewithal between our funding as well as the state funding to accommodate this infrastructure change.

I will be voting no.

Okay.

Ms.

Johnson.

Thank you, Mayor Pro Tim.

And thank you for that email, Councilmember Mayfield.

And she's she's right about the number of units.

However, this petition is a for sale project.

And in this area, with so many multifamily and apartments in that area, this is diverse housing for that area.

So it is for sale.

We do need for sale units in that area.

Also, they performed a traffic study, so they're going to be making improvements to the infrastructure and to the traffic.

They're also donating uh 5.3 acres to Mecklenburg County for future public park.

There is additional walkability.

Again, it's for sale project.

The University City Partners are supporting this as well as the District 4 coalition.

So for that reason, I will be supporting it today.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Miss Mayfield.

Thank you, Councilmember Johnson.

Along with when I reached out the concern that I have of attached dwellings and the impact and the cost of those.

My greater concern is the proposed 4,331 potential trips per day.

Whereas the entitlement under the current zoning is 1,988.

That infrastructure impact aligns with the conversation you and other company, council members have mentioned regarding cumulative impact when we look at our CAP plans when we look at our environmental goals.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you.

Hearing no additional comment.

All in favor, raise hands.

Any opposed?

Miss Mayfield is opposed.

So we will move on to item number five.

Is there a motion to approve and adopt the zoning committee statement of consistency for petition number 2025 034?

So moved.

All right.

Any discussion?

Miss Mayfield.

Thank you.

Again, when we're looking at the potential of 79 multifamily attached dwellings, we're also looking at an additional 552 trips per day just based on this 79 single family attached dwelling units infrastructure.

We are seeing quite a bit of construction happening around the city on a two-lane roads where we're attempting to do some widening, but the impact that that's having on community is causing quite a bit of congestion and challenges.

So again, for the sake of us pausing long enough to make the investments we need infrastructure-wise before approving yet more development.

I will be a no.

Okay.

Any other discussion?

I don't think so.

No.

Hearing none, all in favor, raise hands.

Any opposed?

Miss Mayfield is opposed, which takes us to item number six.

Is there a motion to approve and adopt the zoning committees statement of consistency for petition item 2025 034?

Go wait on you, ma'am.

So moved.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Uh any discussion.

Miss Mayfield.

Question for staff.

Why is the city the entity that is petitioning for this rezoning of this site versus the actual developer who would in any other circumstance pay whatever development fees that any other developer that wants to do a rezoning?

Why is the city leading this?

So this is a city owned property and it's a conventional request.

There's no developer identified.

Technically, it is a conventional request, but given that it is a city owned property, it's typical that we would be at the petitioner in this situation.

So I'm gonna rephrase the question.

Why are we rezoning it ahead of time versus when and if there is interest in that property, that individual, that business then going through our proper rezoning property process?

Why are we being proactive with rezoning this?

So it's a city owned property, so we understand what they're maybe intending to do at the site, and it could be done through a conventional request.

So we were bringing it through the process conventionally, but since it's a city-owned property, we're the petitioner.

So we're not gonna see eye to eye on this particular question for the simple fact that I still don't think you answered the question of why we are initiating it versus waiting for and when there's a developer that's interested in this property for them to go through the same process that the other two projects that we just discussed, which consists of a number of conversations going through committee and fees that evidently we need right now.

So yeah, I understand your question.

I believe it's for additional parking for the entertainment complex that's there.

Uh so the first step is to get that zoning in place, and then they would go through the process uh with whoever they want to choose for potential development of that site.

It's not uh you know out of the ordinary for us to take this step.

We've done it for a couple affordable housing projects where we've zoned it in two or R 17 back in the day when we then would put it out for bid from there.

So it will come back to y'all if they do go through that process for a selection if they go through like a bid process to develop the property.

But for now, it's just to get the zoning in place so they know you know who they can work with, what the standards are, what type of project they would need to uh consider, and then go through the next steps from there.

So they haven't identified exactly who would do anything with the property, what they will do in the final you know, and product of it, but for now they know they need a different zoning than what they currently have for them to even consider uh working with another development partner uh to move this property forward.

Thank you.

Attorney Hagler Gray, just for clarification.

If there were to be a petitioner or someone that's interested in a piece of land, there's a avenue for them to outreach for the city to rezone the land prior to with the anticipation that there may be a potential RFP or a request to redevelop that land versus going through the process that we uh normally go through.

Uh I'm not sure I understand, um, but I want let me rephrase it.

My apologies.

Based on what was just shared, does this give the opportunity for a potential developer to meet with staff in order for the city to rezone land in anticipation of a project they might be interested in?

The um property owner must be the petitioner.

City.

The city.

Um I think if there were a situation where there were a developer that uh is was interested and had um was um consulting with the city with respect to the property, which I don't know if that's the case here.

Um it would still be the city that would be rezoning the property.

Thank you for the clarification.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Any additional comment?

Hearing none, all in favor, raise hands.

Any opposed that is unanimous, which we will move on to item number eight.

Is there a motion to adopt, approve and adopt the zoning committee's statement of consistency for petition number 2025 048?

So move.

Second.

Second.

Oh four eight or zero four number eight.

Any discussion?

Okay.

Someone someone requested to pull this.

Just go through the book.

Okay.

All right.

Hearing no dis further discussion, all in favor, raise hands.

Any opposed?

Mr.

Mayfield is opposed.

Uh is there a motion to approve and adopt the zoning committee statement of consistency for item number nine, petition number 2025 049.

So moved.

Second.

Okay.

Any discussion?

Hearing none, all in favor, raise hands.

Any opposed?

Ms.

Mayfield is opposed.

Is there a motion to approve and adopt the zoning committee statement of consistency for item number 14?

Petition number 2025 060.

We do 30.

You're 13.

Oh, do we skip?

Oh, I'm sorry.

Yeah.

Bad handwriting.

Um, is there a motion to approve and adopt petition number 2025 055?

Item number 13.

So moved.

Second.

Okay.

Uh I'll start off the discussion and and we can take it from there.

Um, this petition, the community has had conversation with the petitioner and have some requests around what is meant to be on this site.

And I've been in contact with them.

I know other council members have as well.

And so I want to, I'm gonna actually make a motion, a substitute motion to defer this item.

Um because uh I want to give the the community an opportunity to continue to work with the petitioner.

I think there's some good work to be done, and Belmont has a um a very strong neighborhood association and land use individual who's really tapped into this.

So I would like to make a substitute motion to defer this item into the next month.

Point of order.

I don't know that you need to do a substitute motion.

You can just amend your original motion since you're the motion maker.

Okay, yeah, I I want I I agree.

I think it would be a little unusual for the maker of the motion to make a substitute motion.

So I can amend I'll just amend it.

So I'll amend my original motion um and make it for a deferral to the next month.

Second, and I have Miss Mayfield as a second.

Any comment hearing none, all in favor for the deferral, please raise hands.

Any opposed?

Okay, that is unanimous.

Thank you for helping me get through that.

Um is there a motion to approve and adopt the zoning committee's statement of consistency for petition number 2025 060, item number 14.

So moved.

Second, we have a motion and second.

Any discussion?

Absolutely.

All right, Miss Molina.

Thank you, Madam Mayor Pro Tim.

I just um I want to draw some attention to this particular uh petition because not for any bad reason at all.

First, I want to start by thanking our partners in Mecklenburg County because this is a substantial investment in East Charlotte.

Um this is currently a 27.47 acre park uh that's located on the east side of East WT Harris.

It's just north of Albemar Road and south of Hickory Grove Road.

And what I want to bring your attention to is some of the things that it promotes because we're actually there's one other petition in relationship to this, yes, uh, that I want to highlight.

So actually, oddly, um, something that we don't see very often.

This petition is actually already consistent with the 2040 plan and the policy map.

It's currently zoned as multi-family residential, which means that's why we're having to do this because it's actually now going to be kind of a neighborhood 2C.

I'm saying these things out loud for a reason.

Um there are public benefits in the categories of sustainability.

It's a public amenity, it's uh includes the preservation of open space, and it actually exceeds the UDO requirements.

Um this area is largely um a residential neighborhood area.

Everything that surrounds it to the left and to the right is um is is residential, it's all residential.

So it's just a wealth of community benefit for healthy, safe, active, integrated, you know, environmentally friendly.

I mean, just a number of different great things, and so um I can't thank our partners at the county enough.

Um I want to hold that because in relationship to um something that I'll speak about later, which is why I'm going on public record to make sure that I highlight the benefit and the proximity.

This is also uh literally almost adjacent to Spark Central, one of our um opportunity hubs.

You literally can walk across the street and walk into a 27-acre park, which is on our Albemarle and Central Avenue corridor of opportunity.

I ironically located on WT Harris, but still um proximate enough for it to be a district wide community benefit.

So shout out to Mecklenburg County for your investment.

Thank you for partnering with us, and I am absolutely aesthetic to say yes to this.

Thank you, Miss Molina.

Any additional comment?

Hearing none, all in favor, raise hands.

Any opposed?

Miss Mayfield is opposed.

Is there a motion to approve and adopt the zoning committee statement of consistency for item number 15, petition number 2025 081?

So moved.

Second second.

Okay.

Any discussion?

Miss Mayfield.

Thank you.

For staff, I'm gonna ask the question again.

Why is the city the petition on behalf of this business?

Yeah, so this one originally came through maybe a year or two ago, and they were requesting a district to modify their entitlement so that they could build surface parking essentially to act as accessory to the Smeritans Purse development.

Something changed in the UDO, they needed that at the time.

Their current when they originally went through a rezoning, their current district didn't accomplish, didn't accommodate what they needed.

The UDO since was amended, and we also found in a table deep within the UDAO, as you do with any new ordinance.

There is a small note about what can occur within an established setback.

And because it was missed in our initial review, and they're trying to go through permitting right now so that they can be ready for their operations comes closer to Christmas time when they need to make use of this site.

Um we're taking it through the process on behalf of Samaritan's Purse.

So we're not the petitioner directly, but we're taking it through the process on behalf of Samaritan's Purse because it was essentially um caught out by ordinance changes and during the review of it because of a small footnote and the ordinance.

So we took care of we held their community meeting for them.

They've been involved in the process, and they're still working through the permitting process concurrently.

So for clarification, when we made changes, basically a sentence was missed.

So this is to help correct for the correct rezoning.

Correct.

Right.

Thank you.

Okay.

Any additional comment?

Hearing none, all in favor, raise hands.

Any opposed?

That is unanimous, which concludes our consent agenda portion of the meeting, and we will move forward with decisions beginning with agenda item number 17.

Is there a motion to uh approve and adopt the zoning committee statement of assistency for agenda 17 as it appears on our agenda?

So moved.

Second.

17.

Second, 17.

Okay.

Any comment?

Thank you.

Hearing none, all in favor, raise hands.

That is you.

Any opposed?

That is unanimous.

So we will move on to agenda item 18.

And I'll try to be a little bit more structured here.

Agenda item 18 is in my district.

And I would like to start by making a motion to defer this item to the next second zoning meeting.

I have a second, so we'll start with discussion.

So with this particular uh petition, there has been work, and as you you all know, during the hearing the last time, there was good conversation around a number of concerns for for the community on this particular.

Well, there's three different um parcels here that's involved in this one petition.

And we were able to make traction on one effort, which is the hybrid pedestrian crossing, which the community was uh very pleased to hear.

But there's still a number of items that um I would like to see the committee the community work with the petitioner on.

Um is about an ingress and additional ingress and egress to this property, but there's a list of others and um to not rush this process and want it to allow the community to have this time, and they've agreed.

So I'd like to move forward with a deferral and hopefully pushing for the best outcome for the community.

Any additional let's do it.

Okay.

Hearing no additional commentary.

All in favor of deferring to this item until next month's zoning meeting.

Any opposed?

Okay.

That is unanimous.

We will move on to agenda item number 19.

Is there a motion to approve and adopt the zoning committee statement of consistency for agenda number 19 as it appears in our agenda?

So moved.

I have one change.

Oh, is there a change?

Yes.

Let's say it here.

Yes, okay.

We do have one change.

So I'll pass it over to you to discuss the change.

Yes, just one minor change, and as you see it printed out in your agenda, it says that there is an outstanding issue regarding a fence along that southern property line.

So they did amend the site plan today to include the commitment to add that fence.

So we are in good shape and staff recommends approval of this petition.

Okay, is there a motion to not send back to the zoning committee?

Second.

All right.

Any discussion?

Hearing none, all in favor, raise hands.

Any opposed?

That is unanimous.

So is there anything?

Mayfield you were opposed to sending it back?

No.

You're your projects.

Is unanimous to not send it back.

Okay.

It is unanimous to not send it back.

Thank you.

Is there we had it?

Well, is there a motion to approve and adopt?

Okay.

Thank you.

Um, any discussion?

Second.

Second.

I had the second.

She said.

Any discussion on item 19?

Hearing none, all in favor, raise hands.

Any opposed of 19.

Ms.

Mayfield is in opposition of number 19.

And that concludes our decision portion of the meeting.

And we will move forward with the hearings.

And agenda item 20, 21, and 20 20 and 21 were deferred.

So we will begin with agenda item 22.

Petition number 2025 021 by Harold Jordan.

The location is approximately 1.24 acres, located on east of East W.

T.

Harris Boulevard, north of Idlewild Road, and south of Meadowdale Lane and District 5, Miss Molina's district.

The current zoning is in 1B.

Proposed zoning is in C C D.

Staff recommends does not recommend approval of this petition.

And after staff's presentation, Mr.

Harold Johnson will have 10 minutes to address.

Thank you.

All right, thank you, Mayor Pro Tem 2025 021.

It's 1.24 acres.

It is on East WT Harris Boulevard, North Middlewild, south of Meadowdale Lane.

It is currently zone neighborhood 1B.

And the proposed rezoning request would take the property to an NC neighborhood center conditional.

The adopted place type, as you can see on the map, is for neighborhood one.

You can see the other three corners of this intersection are suggested or excuse me, recommended for neighborhood center place type.

The proposal is for a vehicle fueling facility with four pump islands and a principal building that would include commercial kitchen and a retail space.

Access would be provided through both uh WT Harris as well as Idlewild is generally depicted there on the site plan.

Uh there will be a dedication of 53 feet of right-of-way from the center line of WT Harris at a 52-foot right-of-way from the center line of Idlewild Road.

There also would be a two-foot sidewalk utility easement behind the sidewalk there.

A 12-foot multi-use path will be constructed along East WT Harris Boulevard.

You can see that with that thick red line there.

An eight-foot planning strip and six-foot sidewalk would be constructed along the frontage on Idlewild, and then architectural landscape standards that are being proposed are 25-foot Class B landscape yard that's provided along the eastern property boundary where it abuts that neighborhood one place type.

As uh mentioned, staff does not recommend the petition in its current form.

We are still working through uh some of the constraints on the site.

There are some utility easements, the site size itself uh does pose some challenges that we're continuing to work through uh to see if uh the gas station that's being proposed, which is permitted in the NC zoning district, uh, can meet all the prescribed conditions uh that are intended to improve the design for these types of uses.

Uh but again we'll continue to work through uh the project with the petitioner uh with our partners in in CDOT and others just to uh again continue that evaluation as it goes through the process uh prior to zoning committee.

So with that, we will turn it over to the petitioner uh and take any questions that you might have following the presentation.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Mr.

Jordan, when you come down to the podium, please uh be careful, and you will have 10 minutes.

The one right behind you, sir.

Thank you.

Well, good evening, everyone.

How is everyone doing today?

Doing well council as well as the neighbors and the staff.

Um with our particular project, my client is um this gas station will provide a service to the community.

Um as of right now on WT Harris in this core, the closest gas station is across the street, but we have a median in the middle of the road.

So with this gas station being provided, we're gonna be able to cut down the amount of people that are doing U-turns, leaving the gas station to be at a service to the community on the side that our gas station is on.

Um we do have a couple of issues that we still are working out with staff as far as the landscaping of the lot, but we do have already provided those particular um corrections, but we just didn't make the deadline for when it had to be submitted per for the um comments that we receive from CDOT.

Um, as of right now, the gas station will only have four pumps there.

Uh site is actually designed to be able to um allow for fire truck egress as well as leaving.

Um we are, as they just said, providing the 35-foot right-of-way as well as the 12-foot special use on WT Harris side.

Um just to keep it plain short and simple.

But this is actually this site from my understanding is still part of the 2024 from what we rezoning our lot to be for the usage in that area.

Okay, thank you.

Any comment or question?

Miss Molina.

Thank you, Mayor Pro Tim.

Um I want to start by first of all, thank you for coming tonight.

I um I I've not met you in person yet, but uh I'm the council member for the district.

Um so the reason why I I made the comment on the public park is because that public park with nearly 28 acres of space is 0.4 miles up the street.

Yes.

Um, and so let me let me start with some with some um with some general information.

Um and it pains me to say this, but I live across the street, and I never heard anything.

I didn't even get a postcard.

Um I I know what the Z means, so I I already started researching it.

So I I already started researching it.

And I was actually told that I live too far away to get a postcard.

And I've lived there for 16 years.

So I want to make sure that I bring that up.

So I actually have to say that I agree with staff's assessment that it's it's just not where it needs to be.

I mean, I'm I'm familiar with the area.

I grew up in the area, so you keep almost I'm sorry.

Um I'm not asking him a question.

Um, sir, just so you're aware you can't make a comment unless a council member specifically asked you a question.

So let me just you guys have gotten my information about this, so I'll I'll make sure I read it out loud.

Uh we're investing in a 27-acre park, Mecklenburg County is investing in a 27-acre park.

The corridor already has multiple fueling convenience operations and advancing additional fuel uses because the the challenge isn't there being a community use, it's the fuel uses.

The fuel and convenience operations where you're continuing to feed people at gas stations is the biggest problem.

Where it's already a very highly residential area, this is implying that the person who leaves the gas leaves the 27-acre park with their family to go for a walk.

There are no restaurants, and there's only two grocery stores within a five to ten mile radius.

So the only place you take your kid to get some water or something to eat is a gas station that is, you know, got a food component to it.

That's what the CD is, right?

So NCCD, the CD allows the gas station to be able to prepare and sell food on the inside.

That's the second portion of it.

Um so the let me just go down because this is a very long set of notes.

Um I know that the UDO team is actively reviewing audio oriented uses in centers, and this would be a neighborhood center place type, but I think this particular um gas station, it's premature.

Um again, it doesn't align with what the current what I feel like planning should be for this particular area.

I mean, I think it's almost an oxymoron to say that you're going to give a 27-acre park and two gas stations within uh less than a mile radius.

We're talking like 0.9.

Um, and there's another gas station too, like literally, actually it's 0.4 on the other side, right beside the Walmart.

So no matter what the outcome of the upcoming election is, I'm sending y'all information to keep that on your radar.

Uh but this one in particular, um, I absolutely don't see where we could meet the standards of this being a neighborhood oriented opportunity.

Um again, in my mind, when I see anything that comes to the council, it's an exception, right?

So we have the the council, the previous councils worked on a 2040 plan that was anticipatory of the growth that we would have.

So when we have a petition, that petition in it it intends to make a good argument that what we've already planned is wrong, and you have an exception to that rule, right?

So it's it's already zoned neighborhood 1B.

That that's what it's zoned.

And so that says that you you would like for there to be an exception.

And when we raise our hands, we're making an exception to that rule, right?

And so it implying that it's consistent, it's not consistent with the 2040 plan.

And I don't feel comfortable with just three people having been there with a very, very, very large residential area saying that this exception meets that due diligence.

So I will not be supporting this petition.

Um and I want to make sure that I'm clear about that.

Okay, thank you.

Miss Ajmira.

Thank you.

So my question is for staff.

Um I know this site is unique in a way that our utility easements and other restrictions.

Um what changes that would be required to get the staff support?

I don't know if I'd be able to go on and explain what exactly would it take to get staff support because there's a lot of factors that go into it outside of just the site design.

Contextual factors.

There are some ordinance things that they could do with you know trying to get us some clarity on some of the screening, some again how they're going to deal with that utility easement, some of the access points that we have asked some questions about.

But as far as saying what exactly needs to be done and provide a list of what it would take to get staff support, I I wouldn't be in a position right now to be able to communicate that because again, there's a lot of other factors than just the site plan that goes into it and some of the things that once we see that revised site plan, then we'll go back and start to do that full evaluation again prior to zoning committee in a few weeks.

So again, not really sure I can provide that in a good list form for you.

Thank you, Mr.

Benton.

So for Mr.

Jordan, you mentioned that you had missed the deadline to submit the revised side plan.

So what's the difference between the plan that you submitted that's infernal for us versus the revised site plan?

Oh it was okay.

Go ahead.

Okay, I'm sorry.

It was it was a couple of um items that need to just be cleared up so they can be legible and be readable.

Um bunch of real minor things, just making sure that we're showing the the 12 foot uh special use passageway.

Um wasn't nothing really major.

Okay, and calling out the um center line of the right-of-way from the uh you know from the from Idawa Road as well as East WT has okay.

I I'm looking at notes here from staff in terms of outstanding issues uh prior to public hearing, transportation, and site and building design.

Have they been addressed?

Mr.

Again, we we will get those on the revised planning.

On revised plan.

Yeah, we can't accept plans four weeks before the hearing, so they may have made some changes that they'll submit to us.

The deadline for that will be this Thursday.

Uh we'll take a look at that, and then again, even if there are things that uh you know identify and address some of those outstanding issues, there's the whole uh policy side of things that we still have to go through with that analysis.

And uh Mr.

Jordan, I know there are three people that attended.

I agree with Ms.

Councilmember Molina.

That's uh very low attendance.

What's been their feedback?

Have you seen or have you heard any opposition to this?

Um the well, one main thing, one um neighbor asked for us to be able to provide a wood fence.

Um it's our client.

I mean, it's our neighbor that's the Jehovah Witness that owns a lot of the land behind us.

Um, but then one person raised the concern that if you have a wood fence, that might give the kids the opportunity to hide behind the fence, you know, eat and throwing trash.

But while client, they clean up their property daily and actually have a cleaning crew that comes out weekly to keep the properties clean and everything.

And then we do have security cameras throughout the facility as well as the exterior.

Well, I look forward to reviewing staff's comments on the revised site plan.

Um, and I'll continue to work with uh district councilmember Melina on this.

Well, that's all I have.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Any additional comment, Mr.

Driggs?

Uh I just want to say I've discussed this uh with Councilmember Melina.

Uh and I think she is doing her duty as a district rep.

Uh looking after the interests.

Um I agree with her analysis.

And uh particularly if you don't have staff support, I just have to caution you.

The path from here to an approval is uh is bumpy.

And I hope that before this comes up for a vote, you will satisfy yourself as to the likely outcome of that vote and not set yourself up for disappointment.

Because it's not in a good place right now.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Any additional comment?

No, those I have a motion and a second.

All in favor, closing public hearing, raise hands.

Any opposed?

That is unanimous.

We move on to agenda item number 23.

Petition number 2024 113 by 410 SG Partners LLC.

The location is approximately one acre located on the northwest intersection of South Gardner Ave and Chamberlain Ave and north of State Street and District 2, Mr.

Graham's district.

The current zoning is ML2, proposed zoning, IMU.

Staff recommends approval, and after staff's presentation, we will have uh Mr.

Papanostos join us for a presentation as well.

Thank you.

Thank you.

This site is right at an acre.

It's located at the intersection of South Gardner Avenue and Chamberlain Avenue.

Adjacent to the Savona Mill project that has seen a lot of redevelopments and a mix of uses.

Current zoning is ML2 with the proposed zoning of IMU.

2040 policy map recommends the innovation mixed use place type.

Staff recommends approval of the petition.

The IMU district permits a variety of uses that are in keeping with the character of the area, which is rapidly diversifying from heavy industrial to a mix of light industry, office retail, restaurant, and residential development.

Position is consistent with recent rezonings in the vicinity that include both adaptive reuse of existing structures as well as new mixed use developments while utilizing UDF UDO design standards that are pedestrian pedestrian oriented.

I will turn it over to the petitioner and be happy to take questions.

All right.

When you get to the podium, you will have three minutes.

Welcome.

Okay.

Thank you, Madam Mayor Potem, members of council and staff and the committee.

Thanks for having me tonight.

I I won't, I'll be very brief.

This might be the most straightforward thing I've ever done.

So I'm here to take questions if you have any.

This is a one-acre site, as staff mentioned, uh, 10,000 square foot building.

The improvements to the shell have uh almost been completed.

We're about 95% of the way there.

So we're bringing this rezoning into kind of the modern day.

Uh this was a heavy industrial site at one point in time, 30 acres.

We owned the entire site and have uh kept this property and and another property across the street from it, which is currently zoned under the master rezoning uh mud conditional.

Um we're looking to do things in this building that uh complement the neighborhood retail office studio space food and beverage.

Thank you.

And did I pronounce your last name correctly?

Great.

Excellent.

I just wanted to make sure any comment.

Close public hearing.

Second.

All right, all in favor of closing public hearing, raise hands.

Any opposed?

That is unanimous.

Thank you for joining us.

We will move on to agenda item number 24, petition number 2025 033 by BRI 1882 Innovation Park Development LLC.

The location is approximately 40.13 acres, located on the northeast side of IMB Drive, south of West WT Harris Boulevard, and west of Vinok Boulevard and District 4, Miss Johnson's district.

The current zoning is RE3 and RC.

Proposed zoning is in two ACD.

Staff recommends approval of this petition upon resolutions of outstanding issues related to site design.

And after staff's presentation, Mr.

Brown will have three minutes.

Thank you.

Thank you.

This site is just over 40 acres along IBM Drive, south of WT Harris, just west of a lot of the University City Area Development site zoning area with institutional office, commercial, and some residential uses, though much of the area within the rezoning site itself is currently used as surface parking.

Property is zoned RE3 and research campus, and they are proposing to go to neighborhood to A conditional, which is inconsistent with the policy map's recommendation for campus and the community activity center place types at this site.

The proposal itself is for up to 260 townhome style units.

Buildings would have no more than six units, and a 12-foot Maltese path would be built along the site's IBM drive frontage.

Petitioner details commitment to three amenities such as a clubhouse, butterfly garden, dog park art installation, among other options.

They also have preferred open space standards that exceed ordnance requirements and ensure amenitized and accessible open space areas for all residents.

An area of the site would be dedicated and conveyed to the county or may have an easement over the 100-foot swim or floodplain buffer to the Dubby Creek Tributary.

They also have preferred architectural and design standards.

Staff recommends approval of this petition upon resolution of outstanding issues related to site design.

The project is adjacent to both the community activity center and campus place types that offer potential access to a range of goods, employment opportunities, health care and essential services.

Adding residential uses at this location will enhance the area's mixed use character and intent.

And the area meets several of the variables that we look for when we're considering a place type change to neighborhood too, such as preferred minimum acreage, preferred place type adjacencies, proximity to an activity center, access to transit and frontage along in arterial.

And I'll take questions following the petitioner's comments.

Thank you.

Welcome, Mr.

Brown.

Thank you.

Um Mayor Pro Tim, Councilmember's any committee members, Colin Brown on behalf of the petitioner, um Taylor Morrison.

Where slides come up, it'd be great.

Um as Holly mentioned, what's interesting about this is this is part of Innovation Park, which, as you know, most of you know in University City was a major employer, had large footprint office buildings, has kind of struggled as as work has changed.

So Innovation Park owns this, they own the land that we're operating on.

They've kind of selected our petitioners, so they're very much trying to revitalize this development.

They've they've come in, they've got uh some restaurants, some coffee shops, and they're trying to invigorate.

So if you can see here, I don't know if you can see most of the area that we're talking about are empty surface parking lots.

So they are asphalt parking lots that have been sitting out there for years and not used.

And so Innovation Park again wants to revitalize this.

They've got Elevation Church out there, they've brought in some residential, and so uh they partnered with Taylor Morrison to come in and um and propose the proposal that you're hearing about tonight, which is to come in and bring in townhome style units.

Um, as we've talked about, there is a lot of multifamily university city area.

Taylor Morrison does both for sale and for rent.

This is initially targeted to be their rental.

So this is for folks that you know maybe are moving out of a single family home, they don't want to be in a small apartment, they've got pets, they've got kids, they want a little space.

We think it's a great um location for it.

I skipped through a map I wanted to share with you.

Uh here, I know it's a little hard to see, you can't quite see, but I've got a half a mile ring.

Within half a mile, you can walk to retail nodes, you can walk to all of Innovation Park, you can walk to elementary school, middle school, and high school.

Um, so folks that have students that want to go, that's a great place to live.

Educators looking for a home, it gives them a different product type.

Uh we think it's a great addition.

I think you'll see we had no attendees at our official community meeting, but we have been meeting on several occasions with the District 4 coalition, which is great to have kind of a clearing house up there.

Um I think Innovation Park is working directly with university city partners on this, so we're hopeful to kind of hopefully when we're back to see you next month.

Uh we've kind of got a bow on it and have uh support wrapped up.

I did want to mention, because we do talk about it all the time.

Um, Councilmember Johnson.

Uh, I mentioned we got three schools in walking distance, two of those schools are under capacity at 74 percent.

The high school is over capacity.

CMS has noted that it's still within their flex zone, but we actually think the school site is a real amenity to this site, you know, for folks working at the schools, and then that's just a great campus to walk to.

Happy to take uh questions.

Thank you.

The comment.

Um Ms.

Johnson.

Thank you, Mr.

Brown, for the presentation, and we can talk off offline.

I don't have any questions tonight.

Thank you.

Move to close.

Second.

All right.

All in favor of closing hearing, raise hands.

Any opposed?

That is unanimous, and we will move on to agenda item number 25, petition number 2025 041 by Concord Charlotte Uptown LLC.

The location is approximately 0.42 acres, located on the east corner of East Eighth Street and North College Street and West of East Ninth in District 1, my district.

The current zoning is UMUD O.

Proposed zoning is UMUDO SPA.

The staff recommends approval of this petition upon resolution of requested technical revisions.

And after staff's appro uh presentation, Mr.

Brown will once again join us.

Thank you.

Thank you.

The site is just under half an acre in uptown along North College and East 8th Street.

It's currently developed with a homewood suites hotel.

This is a request for a site plan amendment to the existing Uptown Mixed Use District optional plans from petition 2010-065, which allowed for a multi-use project that included hotel uses just as a portion of the plan.

The site plan amendment is consistent with policy maps recommendation for the regional activity center place type, which is across all of Uptown.

This site plan amendment just requests one note, and it that is just to add an optional provision to eliminate the parking requirement for the existing hotel use.

Staff recommends approval of the petition upon resolution of a minor technical revision.

The site is being located in uptown and within the regional activity center place type and generally accessible to transit is in an area where we want to be less reliant on personal auto usage, and this amendment does not alter the number of on-site parking spaces developed under the previously approved plan.

Any additional comment?

Second.

All right.

All in favor of closing public hearing, raise hands.

Any opposed?

That is unanimous.

We'll move on to agenda item number twenty-six, petition number twenty twenty-five, zero five, one by bow and property.