Town Council - Regular Meeting

Garner and welcome to the town council regular meeting of February 17, 2026. And it is of course a beautiful day in Garner. Uh the thought for the day, they say if you act happy, you'll feel happy. And I'm going a step further. If you act like it's springtime, it'll be springtime. So let's let's keep on shining that sun out there and feeling good. Uh that being said, I'm going to ask our town clerk to please call the role. Okay. Mayor Gupton here. Mayor Protend Ellinger here. Council member Matthews here. Council member Stallings here. Council member Singleton here. And council member Vance here.

Okay. And uh this evening we're going to be led in the pledge of allegiance and the invocation by Mayor Pro Tim Damian Dinger. Please stand for

to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. So for tonight's uh invocation, just a moment of reflection. Uh Jesse Jackson passed away uh today, 84 years old. He was only 24 years old when he witnessed firsthand the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. on April 4th, 1968. According to an article in the Guardian in 2018, Jesse Jackson still remembers the sound of the gunshot and the sight of blood. They've been with him for half a century. Every time I think about it, it's like pulling a scab off a sore, he said. It's a hurtful, painful thought that man of love is killed by hate. That a man of peace should be killed by violence. A man who cared is killed by the careless. When King turned to Ben Branch, a saxoponist standing next to Jackson, and asked him to perform his favorite song, Take My Hand, Precious Lord, at a rally later that night. Play it real pretty. Then came the shot. King was hurled backward violently. Blood gushed from his jaw and neck as his spinal cord was severed. His tie was ripped off by the force of the bullet. Jackson heard police shout, "Get low. get low. And they poured into the scene with guns drawn. Jackson adds, "We were traumatized to see him lying there soaked in blood. 39 years old. He'd done so much to make America better, built bridges, sacrificed his livelihood,

sacrificed his life. I remember Ralph Abernathy coming out and saying, "Get back, my friend. My friend, don't leave us now." But Dr. King was dead on impact. Later in the article, Jesse Jackson said, "Dr. King believed in multi-racial, multicultural coalitions of conscience, not ethnic nationalism." He felt nationalism, whether black, white, or brown, was narrowly conceived given our global challenges. So having a multi-racial setting said much about said as much about his vision of America and the world, what America should stand for as well as the world. Jackson said in that article, "The moral arc of the universe is long and bends towards justice, but you have to pull it to bend. It doesn't bend automatically." In closing, Jesse Jackson was a torchbearer for equality for all, for voting rights, for justice for all, and he was a bridge to the struggles and triumphs of the 1960s for many too young to have witnessed them directly, and of course for those who did. We'd like to believe that those days of hate and bigotry are gone, and indeed would like to believe that they are not a part of our community. Regardless, history teaches us that so long as someone carries the torch of justice and freedom, they do not carry it alone and that that burden and privilege is shared by all those who surround them. Let us take this spirit of hope and with intentionality marshall towards not just tolerance but acceptance and not just acceptance but love in our work tonight as we serve all our residents. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much for those thoughts. Very important time, very important person, and a great loss. Thank you. Uh,

at this point, we move to part B, petitions and comments. And I will ask our town clerk, town attorney, do we have any people signed up to speak tonight? Yes, sir. We have Mr. Ricky Pierce.

Okay. So, I'm obligated to read this disclaimer that we always read uh during petitions and comments. This portion of the meeting is to receive comments from the public on items not included in this agenda regarding matters gerine to town policies or business or subjects within the town council's real or apparent jurisdiction. Individuals or group spokespersons must sign up for the town clerk prior to the start of the meeting. The council is interested in hearing your concerns but will not take action or deliberate on subject matter brought up during the petitions and comments segment. Topics requiring further investigation will be referred to the appropriate town officials or staff and may be scheduled for a future agenda. And you say our speaker tonight is Mr. Ricky Pierce.

Yes, sir.

Mr. Pierce, please come to the podium. Introduce yourself, name, and address, please. I'm Ricky Pierce. Uh lifelong resident of Garner. Lived here since uh since I was born 74 years ago. Family's been here for 200 years. I voted in every election that this town has had since since I was eligible in 1972. Back then, that first election, we elected two people. We elected former mayor Joe Creech and for the first time um gracious can't remember u our first black alderman

Jackie John Jackie John

Jackie Jones forgive me Jackie but anyway it's been a long time since then back then town was you knew if you were in town you knew the town board town board was Garner people garner people they had garner at heart they were gentlemen and every now and then we had lady serve on the board. Um, lot's changed since then. We've, uh, we've reached a point to where we got problems with getting elected. Now, I see this is my my seeing. We We had gentlemen and ladies back then. Now, we've got three gentlemen and three amigos. The gentleman being you, Mr. Mayor, you, Mr. Matthews, and you, Mr. Fence. I don't like what went on last election. I talked about it. I'm going to continue to talk about it until it gets heard. And I can assure you that every time I come here and speak, every time I post on Facebook, I don't get nothing but encouragement. People are dumbfounded as to what happened. Garner is is at a point to where rapid growth. We've got opportunities that we never had. And we've got an individual on this board that has no experience, does not own a square foot of land in Wake County, but yet makes decisions that affect each of us. You can smile all you want to, Mr. Stalins. I'm not three, but I don't like that. And there a lot of other people that don't like, especially people living in these ETJs. And um, you know, I'm going have to deal with it with Mr. Cassins for the next four years. I don't like it. I don't like the sneakiness of went on. For the first time in our town's history, we had a team running, teammates. The only thing missing from this picture is the victory kiss teamed up to run against an individual that would have been an outstanding council member. Now, my time runs out because I speak slow and I left my notes at home, but that's okay because I found out a way I can talk all I want to and

that's on a new Facebook page that I'm developing just to let the people know what goes on in Garner and what goes on after the board meetings. I don't know, but I'm tired of it and a lot of people are tired of it and I want to see to it that they keep getting informed as to what's going on. Mr. Matthews, I know you sit on pins and needles, not not knowing what these other three are going to do come the next election, but let me assure you, I'm having a meeting with Republican party. We're going to protect your seat. I'm going after yours. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Pierce. And that concludes our petition comments. No other folks signed up this evening? No, sir.

Okay. And that takes us to uh item C on our agenda. This is the adoption of the agenda. I believe our council members have had a chance to look this over. Uh is there if there's no discussion, I would accept a motion to accept the agenda. So move second. Uh motion by Mr. Stalins and second by Mr. Matthews. Uh if there's no discussion, all in favor of adopting the agenda, please signify by saying I. I.

Any opposed by nay? Hearing none, that passes unanimously. Thank you. And now the part that most of you came for, presentations. And we've got two great ones. We've got two great ones today. The first one uh is how appropriate we're doing this today. This is recognition of the MLK Dreaming Action Award recipients. This is a very special group and I'm going to turn this over to uh Dr. Jim Ferry to present the recipients and tell us a little bit about what this is. Dr. Ferry, thank you so much for being here. Thank you for the work that you and the MLK Day celebration have put together. and I'll let you kind of tell us what's going on here tonight.

Well, first of all, I want to thank the town for all their support for what we do, what we try to do. We try to make sure all the citizens of this town are represented and celebrated in many, many ways. And we try to serve as Dr. King served. We try to keep his dream alive as he passed it down to each of us. And I think that's important each and every generation. We have a celebration every year and it's open to the public. And as part of that celebration, the part that I admire the most is we have students from both of our high schools come and speak about what the dream means to them. And I think that's so important going forward. I'm not as young as I used to be and neither none of us are. And it's great to have the younger generation coming and giving their perspective. We also believe very much in service and honoring those who've been in service to our community. And every year we've been doing this, we've given awards to different people for what they do. This year we have two sets of awards that we're giving a little bit is internal in our group. Dwight Rogers and Wilma Dunston. Would you please come forward? I I don't know if you want to be called a pillar or not or indispensable or not or the energy the the uh bunny that just keeps running and running and running and giving us the strength to go from the very beginning of this event inspired by Mayor world by by our former mayor and also by um Mrs. Phillips.

You guys have kept the torch going and carried the flag. And so we just want to thank you for being who you are and being the leaders of who you are. And I'll just say this, and I'll also say this to our other recipient, too. There's an old sermon quote that goes something like this. And I'm a preacher, so I can't help myself. I'd rather see a sermon than hear one any day. I'd rather one that walk with me than merely point the way. For the best of all the Christians or those who live their creeds is to see good put in action that everybody needs. And that's who both of you are. And thank you so very, very much. Now, if you'd remain up here, we also want to recognize Springfield Baptist Church for their contributions to us and all the service and things they do for so many people in the community. How many of you are here from Springfield?

And is Reverend here? Yes, sir. Thank you so much for all you do and the sermon that you all you know it's said that we are supposed to be the salt of the earth and carry the light of the world and you have done that so well and so wonderfully so and don't go away no it's never complete without a photo op so so here are the plaques and uh Mr. Mercer will show us where to stand for this occasion.

Why don't we do um one for each recipient if that's okay with the mayor put the whole church up? Let's do that.

First of all, Thank you VERY

Thank you and thank all of you for your support. The whole community was the best MLK day ever and the best attended I think. Thank you so much.

Mr. Mayor, Mayor after that. Would you like to thank due to

Wow, we're going to lose the crowd after this.

Kind of cut off on either either side is kind of within these two columns. We can stay y'all in

this sort of one of the cut off lines here. Tell you what, take one. One more.

I was going to say that was a good one. Thank all of you.

Oh, thank you. Sorry. And just when you thought it couldn't get any more exciting, we we have the next presentation and this concerns engineers week and we're very fortunate to have our chief town engineer Leah Harrison. If you would come up to the staff podium and I'll read the proclamation then come present it to you and Mr. Mercier may demand a photo opportunity on this one too. We'll we'll see. But this this is a real thing. We take engineers for granted and I'm proud to be able to deliver this proclamation. And it reads, "Engineers use their scientific and technical knowledge and skills in creative and innovative ways to fulfill society's needs. And whereas engineers face the major technological challenges of our time, from rebuilding towns devastated by natural disorder, cleaning up the environment and assuring safe, clean, and efficient sources of energy to designing information systems that will speed our country into the future. And whereas engineers are encouraging our young math and science students to realize the practical power

of their knowledge. And whereas we will look more than ever to engineers and their knowledge and skills to meet the challenges of the 21st century. Now therefore, I, Buddy Gupton, mayor of the town of Garner, do hereby proclaim the week of February 22nd through 28, 2026 as engineers week. And I will hand this to you. You may have some prepared remarks. It'll be up to you, but I'm bringing you this. Um, just real quickly tonight, I just want to say I have the pleasure of leading the engineering team for the town. And that is a group of 12 very hardworking individuals who would never ask for recognition like this and probably even resent me for asking for it on their behalf. Um, but they deserve it, so here I am. Um, they are creative problem solvers. They're collaborative workers. They look every day for ways to make things better and do things better and are happy to do it under the radar all the time. Um, so they definitely embody service and I am very proud to be able to lead them. Um, so I appreciate you mayor and town council for taking the time to recognize them and all engineers this week. Thank you. Mr. Mayor,

you got to be faster than that, Rick. Photoshop's back. Are you here for Anything else? Okay, back to business over here. And next we have the consent agenda before us. Item E. Uh, these are a few items of a more administrative nature that have been looked at by staff and town council. And if no member wants to remove any of these items from the consent agenda for further discussion, which we could do. Uh if not, then I would accept a motion to adopt the consent agenda.

So move. Second. Motion by Mr. Stalins and second by Mr. Matthews. Question. If it's possible, could chief Adams come over here and explain to the public will know that the two nonsworn public safety aid positions because that's becoming more and more common in the area. So people will know that we will have uh these positions in Garner and wonder why a police officer came to investigate my wreck and they're not a police officer, not a sworn police officer. You don't mind doing that?

That's right. Like you said, sir, that these positions have become more popular across the country and we thought it was a good time for us to get involved with this with our increased population, more traffic, more crashes in Garner. So, this will be um a hybrid of the civilian traffic investigator position that you see in places like Raleigh and some of our other surrounding municipalities, but we'll also incorporate animal control um capabilities with this position as well and a few other things. So, it'll be more than than what you see from some of those positions, but that'll be a huge part of it. Okay, good. I appreciate you explain it so people will know that when Yes, sir. uh these these people come out and answer calls that uh they are a part of the Goner Police Department. That's right.

Okay. Thank you very much, Chief. Yes, sir. Thank you. Thanks for inter interjecting that. Very help, very helpful. So, that being said, uh there's a motion and a second to adopt the consent agenda. We just had a little explanation one part of it there. Uh I would suggest that all in favor of accepting the consent agenda, please signify by saying I. I.

Any opposed by nay? Hearing none, that passes unanimously. Thank you. And that brings us over to public hearings, item F. And these are legislative hearings. And I always like to read this little part about it. Public hearings are legislative hearings which do not require sworn testimony. However, all persons interested in speaking must sign up with the town clerk. Town staff will present a brief presentation followed by the applicant and other persons who wish to comment on the item will be recognized to speak. Council requests groups of individuals with the same position to designate a representative to speak for the group. And the first item before us this evening is item 1.1. It's a tier one conditional reasonzoning request CZ25-00003 uh lndale. and Miss Jamaia Lions is going to do the presentation. And if I'm not mistaken, this might be her first presentation before the council. Not to make you nervous or anything, just to put you at ease. But you have a great team here with you.

Yes. Yes. This is Miss Jamaia Ryan. She's been with the town and within the planning department uh since December 1st, and it's been a pleasure having her. Um she's just jumped right in and just taken to uh the work. She has her first resoning case. Um, and she's just been working very well with the team. So, we're very pleased to have her. She has an educational background in architecture and urban design. So, we really appreciate her eye uh for detail and for urban design that she brings to the department. So, without further ado, Mr. Maya. Thank you, Erin.

Good evening, council members, mayor. Um today I will be presenting to you KCZ25003 a tier one reszoning uh for Lnell Street. Um the applicant for this uh case is Brett Mangum and he is representing Woods Holding LLC and they are requesting to reszone approximately 2.4 acres of uh residential 2 and residential 4 to a residential 4 conditional. Um the site is made up of three parcels located along Lndale. Those addresses are 925 Londale Street, 981 Lndale Street, and 107 Londell Street. Uh as a reminder, because this is a tier one uh reszone, there is no sight specific master plan. So the current zoning is residential 2 and residential 4. Uh within these districts, we typically see single family homes, uh suburban neighborhoods with duplexes and housing types of that nature. With residential 2, public water and sewer may be present and within residential 4, uh it does require public water and sewer as well as amenities for walking and recreation. the context for this site. So, the site is currently vacant um and is located again along Lndale Street between Lakeside Drive and Pool Drive. To the west of the site, we have non-residential uses, specifically Huckleberry Friends Childcare and Preschool, Lndale Manor Assisted Living Center, and Garner Executive Center. And to the east of the site, we have a horiculture use uh with Western Farms. So most of this site um as far as the framework goes that is outlined in the comprehensive plan uh the site mainly lies within a neighborhood activity center which is centered on the western side of Aversboro Road. In this

particular area area we primarily see single family residential and multif family with neighborhoods serving non-residential uses. So the applicant has profered um one of the 14 permitted uses for residential four that being single family detached. Um he has also outlined various architectural conditions. Specifically homes must be at least 2,000 square feet with twocar garages. Um he has profered that front facad require two high quality materials as well as entry doors to include design features such as side lights, transom windows or glazing. You can find a full list of conditions at the end of at the end of your report. So the overall observations made by staff. Um staff notes that the applicable plan for tier one reszoning is typically only the 2023 garner for comprehensive plan as there is no sight sight specific master plan. Um and the staff and staff has observed that while the proposed development does not introduce significant variety or scale to the surrounding area, the proper conditions are considerate inconsistent with the existing context and aligns with the character types defined in the comprehensive plan. The neighborhood meeting for this uh request was held on March 29th, 2024 and staff identified 204 properties and occupants within the radius. Um and the meeting was held at Garner Shrine Holding Corp with three persons in attendance and you can find further information and details at the end of the report. So for the growth framework consistency there were 10 criteria that the uh proposed project was uh evaluated against all of which we found strongly consistent. Um and so the overall

project is favorable um was rated favorable with the residential for and the single family housing type. And then within the land use and community character consistency, again without a master plan or additional rating conditions, it was difficult to evaluate the land use community character consistency. However, we did evaluate against eight criteria with an overall strong support. Um, there was a negative rating given for lack of variety in housing and scale. Overall, staff has found that the requested reszone is consistent with the plan's growth framework and support an overall finding of consistency at this time. For next steps, we ask that we close the public hearing and move this request to planning commission for plan consistency and recommendation of approve or deny. And staff is here to answer any questions.

Hey, thank you very much. Great presentation. Oh, let's see. Does the applicant wish to make a statement? Yes. If you would come to this podium, introduce yourself, name, and address.

Uh, good evening. My name is Brett Mangum, uh, lifelong resident of Garner, uh, and, uh, have been in the, uh, home building and land development business. uh just recently retired, but uh this was a a a small deal that I had begun working on several years ago. Uh to give you a little bit of history, these these three vacant lots were owned by the local Garner Shriners uh organization, which I am a a member of Shriners. And uh at one of their meetings uh several years uh couple of years ago, they had expressed an interest in selling the the lots and and liquidating some of their assets. the they bought these lots over 30 years ago and at the time had a desire to build a community center there for for for their events, but they never did. Uh not sure why, but it just never uh came to fruition. And like a lot of organizations, the membership is aging. the membership declined. There's only a handful of members that they have now. And so they they said that the best thing to do would be to liquidate and uh go ahead and make their donation to the Masonic Children's Home and and other organizations. I happened to be at the meeting and and uh you know expressed an interest in in de buying and and getting a buyer

involved to help them out. So uh that's what we did. We and when we first started I actually thought that that town homes would be the best thing to do there. And uh I I never even got so far as to make a plan until the word circulated uh around and and a few of the neighbors were very upset. So uh and so we we scratched that plan immediately and and uh uh what we would like to do with these three lots is that they were larger than normal lots. And so we would like to just subdivide those three into six lots uh which will be more in keeping with the the neighborhood there. uh and build six single family homes. Uh the the gentleman that will actually be building the homes uh he he showed me three or four plans that he had uh intended to to build and at least two of those had first floor masters. Uh so and I know that's a a desire for some of the people in the neighborhood. Uh so we we feel like that we're going to build something that not only just fits in with the neighborhood but will enhance it. Uh we're going to use uh fiber cement siding. Uh there's several quality features. Uh and uh we uh would minim minimum 2,000 square ft uh which may be a little bit

larger than than what some of the existing homes have. Uh we had our community meeting and uh we only had three people come, but uh all three of those were not opposed to it. And they they came kind of loaded for bear because they thought I was still going to build town homes and and as soon as I told them no, that's not what we're going to do, then then they were perfectly fine. So, uh I think the community is around it is excited to see something there, but uh and uh she mentioned Jeremiah mentioned that there's no master plan and and this didn't get included, but this is our idea and it just roughly just you can just see that there's three lots that are now equally divided into six lots. That's all we're going to do. Uh this zoning, which is the same zoning all around us, this zoning request allows for a 60 ft minimum lot. And we're proposing uh 63 to 72 foot. So, it'll be a little larger than is the the minimum, but uh it allows for us to put a nicer product there.

Uh I guess that's all I have. Okay. Well, thank you, Mr. Mangum. Stand by. We may get a question from some council members here. This is the part uh where we do get to run through the council here and uh give them an opportunity to ask questions for clarification. Uh so, let's start with Mr. advance down at this end and work our way down. Mr. Vance, questions, comments about this project.

Uh, yes. For Mr. Mang, just a question for you, several of them. Thank you for providing a number of houses that you're planning to put there. And in reading the agenda, we saw the questions from one of the one of the citizens that pertain to old growth, an old tree or some trees that were there trying to maintain them. Uh do do you think that you'll be able to maintain the

Well, there was one really big oak tree that that blew over and uh dur during a storm maybe a year ago or nine months ago, something like that. And so obviously we can't we had to take that stuff out. There's two or three other trees up next to the road and we're going to save everyone that we possibly can. Uh but I think one of them has to come out so that one of these lots will have a a driveway in but we'll say we're going to save everything that we can.

Gotcha. One question for Mr. Mang, another one for the town in reference to the transitional from your homes to the other homes that were assigned. Is it compat is it comparable compatible to the neighborhood that you're building?

Yes, they are very compatible to the to the other homes. Uh now, when you're when you're facing these lots, which would be to the east, there's an existing home to the north, that would be a a one-story brick ranch. Uh but to the other side of us uh to the south uh those homes are very much exactly like our style that we're going to be building here. Okay. Uh they'll be one and a half to two and twotory homes that fit in with with everything that's to our south.

Okay. Thank you. Question for the town. Uh is the request consistent with the comprehensive plan future plan designations? Yes, it is. Um, so the comprehensive plan has the area as a neighborhood um area and with it being a neighborhood activity center, we usually want to see, you know, uh, single family homes there as well as any non-residential um, neighborhood serving uses as well. So, we did find that his plan is consistent with that. Okay. Thank you, Mayor, Mr. Dinger.

No questions. just thanks for listening to the neighbors and you listening to the neighbors and um doing goodized houses on goodsized lots that even on that 2.4 divided by six still ends up being a good size lot for those houses. So thank you very much. No no questions. Thank you Mr. Stalins. No questions. Mr. Singleton.

Yes, Mr. Mang. You had the question from the neighbors about the water issue. I know a couple times in the last few years word has seeped from that lot down to the house to the south into their driveway and you talk about a pipe being on there and the shrine people of the shrine club were alerted that the pipe had a hole had to be repaired. Somebody said they didn't know there was a spring but you're aware of that issue and they it says on here you answer the question about a pipe that goes down to the pond. Are you aware that there was there has been some issues there in the past with water and it's seeping down toward the house at the south?

So, I haven't seen the water because it's in a pipe covered up now. But the story that I've heard was that there's actually an artisian well that that maybe up close to the street and uh and they tapped into it with a pipe and ran a pipe down to the pond. Uh, I wasn't aware that it's leaking of any kind cuz I haven't seen any water. But I've already made our builder aware of that situation so that when he builds his homes, we don't know where that pipe runs, uh, the exact location, but I've already made him aware that it's there. If he breaches it, he'll tap into it, repair it, and keep it run out to the pond down there. So, yeah, we're aware of of that. They say there's quite a bit of water comes out of it.

Yes. I I got called there a few years ago, went to the residence and looked at it and called staff and I think they contacted the uh the Shriners. I'm wondering if if maybe the previous land owner may have been Mr. Weston, and he may have he may have done that. That's possible. Uh because I knew one time he was a heated pool on that piece of property years ago. That's a whole another story we won't get into because I saw the diagram for it. Uh but anyway, I just wanted to you're aware of that because again I I got called there twice in the last few years and you know saw the water seeping. It was saw you called staff and they were able to address it. So you're aware of it. That's that was just a bit big concern. Right. All right. Thank you. You Mr. Matthew

appreciate your project you got coming and you're straightforward and working with the neighbors and I think you're going to have a good project and uh great presentation for you first. I'm sure the rest of them are going to be equally that well. Okay. Congratulations. Okay. Thank you. If there's no other questions from council, uh I'm going to ask, have any individual signed up to speak on this item at this hearing? Uh Mr. Mayor, we did have someone sign up, but I'm not sure they still want to speak. Yes. Um her name is Judy Cox. Would you like to speak on this item? Yeah, this is I'm gonna speak for her. Okay. Yes. Please, please come to the podium. Introduce yourself by name and address.

I'm Joanna Cox Lewis. My mom's Judy Cotch lives at 901 Lndale right beside this lot. It's the house that was not mentioned in the report. They mentioned everything on the other side, but they didn't mention my mom's house. She built that house 45 years ago. And we knew that eventually one day something was going to be built here. Um, but we never thought it would be six houses cuz at first it was supposed to be I think two or three. Then he told us five and now we learned tonight's six. So if you look at the when you do the QR code with the sign, it goes to the the plot there and it's five. So now tonight it's 6. And um when it comes to the water issue, I talked to Aaron Weston who now owns the the land behind there. There is a water issue. That's why they never built back there because her family knows it's a flood zone. So that is right. And it did flood that house, that greenhouse on the other side of this lot. Absolutely right. And I think they end up maybe having she thinks and she's not sure. She was coming tonight but she's sick and she couldn't that they had to give them some extra land. She can't remember though. But that's someone that y'all may want to talk to. Um but I just want y'all to take my mother in consideration when you plan this cuz she's in that house right beside them. Miss Bernita beside her. She lives behind my mother. Um, also she'll be impacted by this. We'll be impacted by um traffic, uh, parking. How are you going to put six lots that match any house there? I don't know. Six houses, I mean, that match any house there. I don't know. It's not going to match. I mean, it's not um it just it concerns me for my mom and my mom's safety and for the neighborhood. I mean, it's going to be a lot. We got a daycare right there. It's going to be a lot. It's already a lot of trick. People fly down that road and we're not opposed to um speed bumps already because they fly down that road. When I grew up on that road, it dead end. There was no daycare. It stopped right there and it

was woods and I grew up right there and it's like I mean I understand everything changes. But something you need to really look is going to impact the neighborhood and the people have been there for a long time. Miss Bernita and my mother and others too. They just didn't come. But we come. We came. Um, so that's what I want y'all to think about when you allow this to happen. We just learned tonight it was going to be six. We thought thought it's five and we thought five was too much. And twotory that's going to really impact these houses because the older houses from my mom's house the other way are all one story. There's a few split levels and whatnot, but they're mainly smaller, you know, shorter houses. And it's going to be right up against my mom's lot. I mean, her lot is literally probably 12 to 15 inches as the property line from her driveway. So, I mean, Mr. Weston sold her that lot, you know. So, we've been there a long time. She has. I just want y'all to really think about this before you plan that many or allow that many to be built there.

Okay. Thank you very much. You make a lot of good points. And let me remind Yeah, thank you. That's good. Uh, I do want to remind everyone, we're not make the council is not making a decision on this tonight. This is a public hearing and the object of the council here this evening is to take testimony, get some facts and some concerns out and then and then pass this case to the planning commission for further plan consistency review and their recommendation to come back for final decision. So, this is part of the process. Thank you for expressing your concerns. They're adequate. Uh and I'm guessing that our applicant would like to address some of those issues. I I made a mistake. Uh we are we are proposing five. I'm sorry. I I said six and I don't know what I was thinking. We are proposing five lots, not six.

Nothing like communication communication helps. Thank you. And I I think it is safe to say that as construction and building permits go along, our engineering department, our inspection department will be making sure that every uh tea is crossed and every eye is dotted. uh everything is safe. Water control is is a factor that will be looked at in detail as well as the planning commission which will be receiving this within a few weeks for and have another public hearing as well. So yeah, continue to express your concerns uh get some answers and we want the neighbors to feel good about the project and I think the applicant being a local guy and a member of the Shriners uh he's got nothing but the best interest of the community involved too. So

we appreciate the project but you know we just to all the older residents that we take in consideration. Oh. Oh, yeah. Every action has a reaction. We have to be very conscious of what we're doing. Thank you for being good neighbors. Uh that's what I call one of our classic neighborhoods over there that's been around more than this century. They started in the previous century and we want to preserve that. We want to keep people living at home and happy at home. So, so thank you for for being here. Uh any other observations or comments?

I would just like to mentioned the staff and also Miss Lewis. Um, if you get a chance, call our planning department and the information that you got from the western the granddaughter who lives there at the home and make sure that they're aware of the things you talked about with flood plane this that and the other. I know they're aware of that and it goes back to the pond, but that just needs to be clarification. This is as as Mr. Manga mentioned, this artisian whale might have to be addressed, but uh just want to make sure that that water issue is addressed as best it can. So, if you'll contact the planning staff. Okay. All righty. Thank you.

Okay. Uh, if there's not further input or questions from council, I will close the public hearing portion of this. Now, we'll close the hearing and I'll ask council members if there's a motion to forward this case to the planning commission uh for plan further plan review. So, moved. Mr. Vance, make the motion. Is there a second?

Second. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Stalins. So, there's a motion and a second to refer this on to the planning commission. Is there any other discussion from council? Any other questions? Okay. Hearing none, uh, I will then ask for a a voice vote to forward this case on to the planning commission. All in favor of moving this ahead, please signify by saying I. I. Any opposed by nay? Hearing none, it passes unanimously. Thank you very much. You did a great job on your first appearance and also the neighbors did a great job. It might have been your first appearance. I'm not sure, but did did a great job.

Well, well, thank you very much. So, that that concludes uh item 1.1 CZ25-3. Thank Thank you all who are part of that discussion. Okay. Uh the next item on the agenda, item 1.2. This is going to be a little bit tricky. is the first time I've had to do this, but it's going to be two things at once. It's going to be an annexation and a resoning. So, bear with me. I'll depend on our planning director, our attorney, our town manager, and all of my council members up here to keep me between the ditches as we attempt to do two things at one time. But I think we'll have it. And we're going to start off by having a public hearing for a satellite annexation uh for this for this location on at 8401 Old Stage Road. And then we'll we'll kind of blend that in the public hearing along with uh a discussion on on the resoning request that kind of goes hand in hand with this. Then we'll have two different votes. We'll have two separate votes. One for the annexation and then a separate vote uh for the uh statement of reasonleness or basically accepting the conditional reszoning at that location. And I'm going to depend on Mr. Tensenberg to give us the details and a little more of the background here.

Sure. Good evening. Good evening, Mr. Mayor, council members, uh, members of the public. Yes, we have two cases that kind of go hand in hand together tonight. Um, they follow different processes, so we have to make sure that they get lined up for action. Um, so whereas you've already had the public hearing for the resoning, that will be coming back for decision and and Mr. Griffy will present on that shortly. Um this is the first time other than setting the public hearing that you have heard about the annexation. Um so tonight is the public hearing on the annexation portion and again uh this is for Ms. Gregorio's property on Old Stage Road. It's a small parcel located uh kind of directly across from Eagle Ridge. A few intervening homes along Old Stage Road. Um but just about threequarters of an acre because we do have corporate limits on the other side of old stage. Um the parts of the roadway that lie in between uh would automatically be included in the corporate limits. So that's an additional.16 acres approximately. Uh this portion that it is connecting to though is a satellite. Um so this will actually expand the existing satellite area. So, it's not physically connected to the the main corporate limits of Garner, but it is largely ETJ uh to the west of Old Stage. Uh this eastern side of Old Stage though is Wake County zoning currently. Um of course, they are wanting to connect to or needing to connect to utilities. Uh so that brings along the annexation petition request and so that is here before you tonight. The staff report documents the additional findings uh that that we need to make in regards to satellite uh annexations, proximity

to other municipalities, overall size. Um those are all satisfied. Um so if you have any questions, I'm happy to answer them. Otherwise, I'll um let you go ahead and we'll transfer to to Mr. Griffy to give you the zoning report and update from planning commission's consideration of the resoning request. Okay. Thank you. And we'll start at this end with council members. We'll start with Mr. Matthews and come down if there's questions or comments related to the annexation. Nothing this time. Mr. S. No sir. Mr. Stalin. No. Mr. Dinger. Mr. Vance. No questions.

Okay. Hearing no questions. Uh were there any individuals signed up to speak? Yes, sir. We have a one individual, Michael King. We do have someone signed up to speak to to the annexation this evening. Okay. Is that you, sir? Yes. Please come to the podium and uh identify yourself by by name and address and we'll give you your three minutes of fame.

Thank you, sir. Um my name is Michael King. I appreciate y'all's time to live on 316 Brunol Circle. Um, I wanted to address that before this honorable council and for the members of the community. Um, just a little bit of a concern I have with um, the annexation really um, that's been going on in the area. Um, obviously we have the Panther Branch Township that I live in. Um, I guess it's obvious by my attire. I'm in the livestock industry. I run cattle very close um, to the area. Um, did not always live. In fact, I'm actually originally from Kerry. Um, but I came out here, as did many of my neighbors, into the area to to build a life, a life with its rural character, a life that is only possible outside of town limits. Um, got nothing against Garn Town Garner by any stretch of the imagination. Great town, as good as they get, North Carolina. I say that in all sincerity. Um, love coming to Cabelas. Um, but, uh, you know, I'm not a town person. I came out to where I could to start a life um with cattle, with horses. Um I have right here actually, this is my registered brand uh by the North Carolina Department of Bag Culture, the triple CS brand. That's what my cattle are branded with. Um all traditional by horseback. Um obviously a lot that you can't have in annexation. The difficulty with annexation is it tends to um promulgate itself. one site is annexed, it tends to feed on itself and make it so that other properties are annexed to and there are simply things that we cannot do in those annex properties and I feel like it would be a shame to see uh the area I have disappear and lose its character that so many people love and cherish. Um I think a lot of y'all who have been there probably enjoy seeing the woods, the farms, the deer. Um, so I want to ask respectfully, humbly, yet with a sense of urgency to the council that a

reconsideration would be made on this uh movement and the rethought perhaps that annexation may not be the best thing to do. Um, appreciation. Okay. Thank you very much for expressing your opinion. I'm going to ask Mr. Trezenberg, if you'd like to just make a general statement about what annexation means and what how how you get be annexed and how do you change from ETJ to in the city limits. That's kind of the issue before us,

right? Um so in this particular area um generally east of Old Stage Road where this property is located um most of it will not ever be eligible for annexation. um the properties that are directly adjacent to Old Stage Road though. However, there are public utility lines in Old Stage um that they can connect to. Um so those private connections into the public lines are permitted and it's with that utility connection that the annexation is required. Um, for properties that are further off of old stage, they would in order to get public utilities, they would actually have to extend public lines. So, a public sewer line or a public water line that is not allowed east of Old Stage Road. Um, so it's a it's a fine kind of a fine line difference. It creates a little bit of a fuzzy edge to things. Um but that will that prohibition would prevent um annexation from going further than those properties that just abut Old Stage Road.

Thank you very much. Mr. Trezenberg, is it safe to say in a general way uh that the the only parcels that get annexed are the ones who request to be annexed? In general, yes. Um, but in this case, like I say, properties further to the east, even if they asked, um, would not be eligible due to the utility situation. But in general, you probably would not be annexing Mr. King until he asked for it. Correct. Okay. Mr. Mayor, if I could ask one question of Jeff, too. There are also, if I understand correctly, restrictions because of the Swift Creek um, watershed.

Watershed. that there are limitations from north of 1010 all the way up to Lake Benson where there are such restrictions, density restrictions that there won't be this sort of mass development won't come into that area because you're really limited to um like one house per acre or something. And even that it's um it's not cost-effective a lot of times, you know, development, but that also is areas we probably wouldn't be inclined to annex in. um because of the watershed situation. Correct.

Okay. Good observation. So sometimes there are other factors at play to keep this from going big d subdivisions. So who can tell what the future holds? But I I don't think this is a direct infringement on your your farm your ranch for what that's worth. Okay. Uh if there's no other Yes, sir.

Comment is to mention also as as the mayor and Mr. Mr. Fmer mentioned everything has annexation has to be voluntary but because they're requesting connection to the city of Raleigh water that's part of the requirements. I'm I'm making the assumption maybe they're having some well issues out there and they need they're shaking their head behind yes and they need to get municipal water because they're having well issues and so that's they they're able to access the municipal water and this is part of the process but no uh the town cannot go and uh take property and annex it any longer. That's that's illegal in North Carolina. Atlantic stations have to be voluntary. So, uh, Mr. Fusmer is going to explain the the watershed issue. So, this is basically because they need to connect to Raleigh and that's part of the process.

Okay. Thank you. Yeah, good good observations, good comments. Uh, that being said, I will close the public hearing at this point and I will ask council members for a motion uh to adopt ordinance 20265375 approving. Mr. Mayor, it might uh be appropriate to hear the resoning. Oh, okay. Thank you. As I said, we need training wheels here. Okay. All this is an unusual situation where we'll we'll hold this open then we we close the hearing, but we won't take a vote. Yes. If if council is not inclined to grant the resoning request, the the applicants may want to withdraw that request for annexation before the vote.

Thank goodness we have a smart attorney who will keep us out of jail on this. Thank you. Okay. So, we'll close we've closed the hearing on the annexation and now we're going to uh talk about the reasonableness of the conditional reszoning for the same plot. Uh this is known as CZ 26001 at 8401 Old Road. the same premises we've been talking about, but this will be not to put the cart before the horse, but to talk about now the reasonzoning before we vote on the annexation. And we have Mr. Griffy, uh, to explain this for us.

Appreciate that, mayor. Good evening, uh, council. Um, for the second half of this particular case, this particular show, I'm Julian Griffy, senior planner. Um, I'll be presenting the resoning portion of this, uh, for this case is CZ26001. The applicant is here. Um, that's going to be Lynn and Joseph Gregorio on behalf of the listed property owners, Mass and WBLE LLC. Um, this may look somewhat similar to a previous case we've had. This originally came as a general reasonzoning request back in November. Um, following discussions with staff as well as hearing feedback from the council, um, the applicants have modified this resoning position to a tier one uh, resoning request. So, um it has changed now to a tier one uh conditional reszoning request roughly about 74 acres asking to switch from uh R40W Wake County zoning to the R4 town zoning um but in a conditional sense.

How many acres? 74.74. Yes, sir.

So, as I just mentioned, the previous uh excuse me, the proposed zoning is going to be that R4 conditional. Um being a tier one, there's not an associated site plan. Um there is however a table of uh permitted uses that has been profered by the applicant narrowing 14 per uh possible uses within the R4 to um a list of seven and those have been included within your uh staff report. Um generally speaking, the R4 zoning district accommodates moderate um residential development and it's very similar to the residential development that's located across the ride ofway within old stage. uh when reflected against uh the plan consistency um for what we could reflect against with that criteria. Um again it's a tier one no specific site plan um there were three of 15 growth framework that were evaluated um it was found to be uh in strong support against those three criteria. Um the in-depth report again is embedded within your staff report but generally speaking with this zoning ask it is consistent across the board. This was presented before the planning commission at their January 12th meeting. Um again, those those documents and those statements are within your staff report. Um general questions coming from planning commission related to similar concerns. Um right ofway impacts, ownership, utility connections, things of that nature. Um highlighted in that brown yellow font is going to be the difference that occurred from the planning commission before this particular u this meeting. um that being the documents that were submitted on behalf of the applicant, they were submitted before the planning commission. However, they were submitted after the publishing of the agenda. So, they didn't meet that deadline. So, when planning commission uh assessed this particular case, it was under the uh direction that it was still a general resoning. However, the applicant did submit those documents modifying the petition. So, that's where it changed

from the general resoning to the tier one that's presented before you today. Um that being said, planning commission did um concur with staff's draft consistency. They did find it um in strong level of consistency uh switching from that zoning district to the R4 that's being requested. And that was made um by commission member. It was seconded by commission member uh Carson and it did pass unanimously finding the GZ25001 consistent. But again to reiterate this has switched to a tier one. So, it's still the same zoning district. It has just whittleled down from 14 possible uses in a general reasonzoning to seven possible uses within a tier one conditional. Um, of course, before this board, um, you would assess it from the reasonable uh, reasonable list, excuse me. Um, again, it was, uh, found to be consistent by the board, um, unanimously. So, this would be the assessment by this particular council. Um, there are four motions before you. Um if you uh go to page 73 of your agenda packet um the highlighted sections are what would be recommended by staff as well as what would concur with planning commission more than happy to answer any questions. The property owners are also here um to answer any questions that might be yielded to them as well.

Okay, let's get a chance to uh ask questions from council members uh concerning the conditional reasonzoning of the plot at 8401 Old Stage Road. Uh we'll start with Mr. Vance. Any other questions, observations on on this part of it? Uh yes, just uh just amplify what was stated by Mr. Dillinger. Question for you. Does the property remain subject to watershed protection regulations after annexation?

It does. So um one interesting piece about this and if I defer back to um an aerial map, it might kind of shed a little bit more light. So, uh, Old Stage bisects that circle to the right and in this general vicinity, the Gregorios and all those properties are subject to the Swift Creek land management plan. That classification is zoned as rural. That plan supersedes our any of our ordinances and any of our jurisdictional um regulations. So, they are capped at a certain density. They're not allowed to connect into sewer. Even though sewer runs along old stage, they are prohibited from connecting into sewer. They can get water, but sewer is prohibited. So there are overarching regulations from that plan that we can't navigate around with our own jurisdictional regulations.

Okay, two more questions. What is the maximum number if you know units that can be uh permitted under the current conditions? So per our zoning ordinance, the R4, the density allowance is four. However, that Swift Creek land management plan, and I've conferred with the city of Raleigh about this, is that their dwelling unit maximum is one. um that is a that rural classification that they're only allowed to get up to. It looks a little different across the street. That's a different classification. That's going to be new urban. That's going to be suburban per that Swift Creek land management plan. However, the properties east of old stage that rideway are subject to that rural classification with a one unit density.

Okay. And knowing and knowing that we're in this waterershed, what storm water treatment measures are required?

That potentially could be an engineering question. I'm not entirely sure the answer to that one. So, if I could yield over to uh our director from engineering, Leah, good evening. Um so, what measures would be required really depends on what ends up um developing on any given property. So, um, if there's property that already has development on it, there is no retroactive requirement to go back and provide storm water control measures. If the property were to redevelop or to add on to what's currently there, then it would be based on how much impervious surface they are adding, what the requirements would be. Um, because of the location, there is that higher requirement to treat the quality of the water because of the watershed that it's in. Um, and there is a higher restriction on the overall amount of impervious. um with the caveat that any impervious that existed before those regulations were in place is exempt from those rules. So in a lot of these um parcels that we see redevelop that's the case there's exempt impervious. So they're allowed to redevelop that amount of impervious plus up to you know 30% um and it depends parcel to parcel but um in general you know 30 to 70% additional impervious but they would have to have a water quality um treatment device.

Oh thank you Mr. D. No questions Mr. challenge. I'm just trying to understand. So, what was submitted to us out of the planning commission was when this was a general reasonzoning and now the request is a tier one. Correct.

Correct. Um, so just to shed light on the timeline, um, and if I'm recollecting correctly, this was presented as a public hearing back in November. It came as a general request and from my recollection there was some airing of caution about the general reasonzoning request navigating through this legislative process and it was advised to potentially switch to a conditional resoning. And so as this request navigated that process, went to planning commission, we worked with the property owner to kind of again discuss that idea and she has since or excuse me, they have since submitted documents to formally modify to a tier one resoning request. Um what that kind of looks like is the general request has it as it was going through that particular process if it went through they would be permissible to do any of the 14 uses that were permissible by right within the R4 zoning district. What has since done is it's dwindled down to seven uses. So whatever they would have been able to do beforehand has now shrunk to those seven specific uses for the question. Just to clarify, it it is um under state law and and the UDO uh projects can become more restrictive as they go through the approval process. They cannot become less restrictive.

Good, good, good questions. Thank you, Mr. Singleton. Questions, comments? No, sir. Any questions, Mr. Matthews? Okay. So, we've had discussion on that one, and I guess I'm calling on our attorney for some guidance here. Now, do we want to go back and take a vote on the annexation? Yes. Technically, because this is not in the ETJ and not in the town limits, you have to vote on the annexation before you can apply town zoning to the parcel.

We want to go by the law. That's very important. Okay. So, at this point, we will go back up to talk about the annexation petition that was discussed earlier. Uh we had closed the public hearing on that. Uh now I will accept a a motion from council to approve the annexation portion of this. Is there such a motion? So move second.

Mr. Vance makes the motion. Mr. Matthews makes the second. If there's any other discussion on the on the annexation portion, we'll hear that. If not, we'll take a voice vote. All those in favor of approving the annexation petition anx-25-016 u the re they're at 8401 old stage road please signify by saying I

any opposed by nay hearing none the annexation passes unanimously and now if my instructions are clear we move down to the conditional reasonzoning that's just been discussed which is CZ-26 6-001 at 8401 Oldage Road. We've heard the discussion. We had good questions, uh, good answers there. And so, my question to council, uh, is there a motion to adopt to approve that conditional reszoning? Mayor, I move that the town council accept the planning commission's written statement regarding consistency of the zoning amendment request with adopted land use plans detailed in section 3 of the staff report as our own. And I further move that the town council adopt ordinance number uh 20265376 approving reszoning of CZ26001 as requested is reasonable and in the public interest because the proposed district is conditioned to be compatible with present zoning and conforming uses on nearby property with the character of the neighborhood and the available sewer, water, transportation, infrastructure, storm water facilities and other necessary infrastructure are suitable and adequate for the proposed uses.

Thank you, Mr. Vance. Is there a second? Second. Is that Mr. Matthews? Thank you. Okay, there's been a motion and a second. Is there any more discussion uh about the conditional reasonzoning?

Just a comment. I just want to thank the applicant for their patience going through the process and adaptability and also thank the public for showing up and being eagle-eyed and participating. Thank you. Yes, it has been a rather convoluted path and it took us four of us to get it through, figure out what we're going to do here tonight. But thanks for the guidance from our attorney, our town manager, and all the planning staff of making this go as expeditiously as possible. And congratulations to you, uh, Mr. and Miss Gregorio, and I hope you'll be able to complete your project and move ahead as you as you desired there. So saying that uh we we will take a a voice vote on approval of the conditional reszoning. We had a motion and a second. We had a little more discussion. Uh all in favor of approving this conditional resoning, please signify by saying I. I.

Any opposed by nay? Hearing none, it passes unanimously. Thank you. And thank you Mr. Griffy for walking us through that as well. Well, that concludes that exciting two at once. is like juggling cats or something or a cat in a bowling ball and a change all at the same time. But we all came through. Okay. So, thank you very much. And that brings us along to new and old business. And this is a tier one uh conditional reszoning at uh excuse me, let me get to the next page here. This is a tier 2 conditional reszoning at Quality Oil. And again, Mr. Griffy will be our senior planner who's going to kind of walk us through uh this conditional resoning here this evening. Appreciate that second introduction, mayor. Let's see. Yes. So, this is going to be the second case of the night for me. Um it's going to be CZMP25002. As mentioned, it is a tier 2 reasonzoning. So, this does have a site plan associated with this particular ask. Um, so the applicant is Sarah Van Every with McAdams Group on behalf of CTW Properties LLC. The particular ask is to reszone the current zoning from CMX conditional and NMX conditional to a CMX conditional. Um, roughly about 5.76 acres. Um, it's also requested that this uh designation of the uh residential thoroughfare overlay district be removed. Um the site is generally located at the southeast corner of Benson Road, NC50 and Evolve Drive. So as I mentioned previously, um they are petitioning for a commercial mixeduse conditional. Um again, it is a tier 2. So there is a sub or a site uh associated with this particular plan. Um there's also profer conditions. Those conditions are uh come in the form of limited permitted uses as well as um proper conditions related designs, site

amenities, things of that nature. Um I will run through the site plan, but just to kind of set the stage, we're looking at two commercial structures, building one hosting the convenience store with the fuel canopy and then the second uh secondary structure uh hosting all that commercial space. Um as I mentioned earlier, there are proper conditions. um they are within the staff report more in depth but they do um relate to specific guidelines regarding uh design architectural standards buffering and plantings as well as the open space and recreational amenities. Um they do relate to site design as well as specific building materials height limitation and whatnot. Um, one specific thing that changed with this particular case written in that brown yellow is um, as was discussed during the planning commission, they wanted to set and the applicant agreed to a minimum square footage of the dog park. So that was set at 5,000 square foot. Um, that was mentioned during the planning commission by several members of the planning commission and it was agreed to by the applicant. Breaking down the site plan. Um again as I had mentioned previously there are two structures to be constructed on site as well as a fuel canopy. Um they're laid out here. So uh on this image to the left side that faces north. Um so on the northern half of the site is going to be the convenience store with a fuel canopy and the southern half will be that secondary commercial structure um with an underground storm water control measure. Going into access um it's certainly presented in a multiodal um facet. There's going to be vehicular access off of Evolve Drive as well as NC50. Um, three points of access. Uh, particularly uh there's going to be a rightin, right out access off50 south of the Evolve Drive intersection. There will be a right in um only access off of Evolve Drive. And lastly, um it's proposed a full access movement towards that bulb out at the end of Evolve Drive. Um as I mentioned earlier, uh I mentioned

multimodal. Um they are profering an easement dedication for a greenway in the event that that does get constructed and the town wants to pursue a groomment connection to this development. Um a bus stop shelter has been proposed at that bulb out as well as um the crosswalk that'll be delineated along Evolve Drive um traversing that intersection. Going into amenities, mentioned it earlier, there's the dedication for that easement for the greenway profer by the applicant. That dog park I mentioned um stemming from the public uh the commission of um wanting it to at least be a minimum of 5,000 square ft. The bus stop shelter located at that bulb out and then a centralized public seating area within the um within the development. Going into landscape and buffering, it this subject site does uh run adjacent to residential properties along the eastern and southern boundaries. The eastern boundaries being single family dwellings as well as a multif family development. And then to the south is going to be single family dwellings. So there will be varying widths of those buffers as required against a single family dwelling versus a multif family unit. Um but they do range from 35 ft to 55 ft. Um streetyard buffers are also um delineated on this particular site uh running along NC50 of a 25- ft streetard buffer and then a 15 foot streetyard buffer is proposed along Evolve Drive. Going into storm water utilities um as I had mentioned it was delineated on the site plan. There is a proposed underground storm water control measure and then there are utilities that traverse a site being a 48 inch water line on the north side as well as an existing sewer line on the western site. There were no identified sign uh significant environmental and/or cultural uh features on this particular subject site. Going into the traffic impact analysis,

it was conducted in July of 2025 by the McAdams Group. Um, and then it was assessed by NC DOT in August of 2025. Um, the development is anticipated to generate 4,787 trips on an average weekday. Um, the majority of these trips being passed by trips. I do believe the applicant has a traffic engineer on hand that can go probably more in depth about the TIA than myself. Um, but the full TIA is embedded within that staff report. Regarding meetings, um several meetings did take place, two of which were neighborhood meetings occurring in summer and fall of 25. Um the contents of that have been embedded within the staff report as well as developer meetings with six members um from the development team meeting with various members from council um occurring in mid and late June of the of 25 pertaining to the framework and reflecting this against the comprehensive plan. Um it fits pretty nicely in this particular area. It's located within the neighborhood activity center. It's got that retail center area um typology um right for commercial development and it's also in a level three development intensity um for areas to enhance. When reflected into the framework consistency, there were 16 growth framework criteria that were evaluated, all of which were found strongly consistent across the board. And then going into land use and community uh character consistency, 22 applicable criteria were determined um and assessed. They were found primarily consistent. Some were strong, some were modest. Um there's uh identified opportunities where it could be increased. Um however, there was an extra point added um that again is embedded within the staff report and I can get into uh taking these uh two assessments into account. Um again overall it's found to be generally consistent strong consistency regarding the framework um and then strong and modest support when regarded to uh land use and community

character and then again some some modest and some um strong non-sup support that were assessed when reflected against those 22 criteria. It did get presented before the planning commission as I mentioned at their January 12th meeting. um topics of comment and discussion related to traffic and the roadway signalization of NC50 and Evolve Drive. Um vehicular and pedestrian access um neighborhood meeting contents was one of the uh talking points and again those documents are embedded within the staff report. Um and then they did go into and there's discussion about the site layout, the design, square footages, amenity locations, things of that nature. Um as well as scaling of buildings and hours of operation. Um ultimately uh planning commission did concur with the drafted uh consistency statement as profered by or as drafted by um the planning department and the vote fell um by a 6 to1. Um so the motion was made by uh council member excuse me council member commission member Carson seconded by uh commission member Hodes. Um the one takeaway from this and it's again highlighted in that in that green or green uh that yellow brown being that um condition number two was the one that was edited and agreed to by the applicant um changing the zoning condition to a minimum square footage of 5,000 square ft. Um again, as mentioned previously, this uh council will assess it for reasonleness um based off of these six criteria and the draft motions are found on page 114 of your agenda packet. Um there are four within there. The highlighted ones would be the ones that are recommended by staff. Um more than happy to answer any questions to my ability. Um as well as the development team is here that can answer any of the questions yielded to them.

Okay. Excellent. Thanks for an excellent refreshing of the the process we've gone through previously, including what the planning commission's already done, too. So, let's start with Mr. Matthews this time and worked and see what questions or comments we might have from council at this point. Uh, no questions. I think presentation was excellent. I know we have reviewed this uh project thoroughly. Uh, I found the, uh, uh, folks to be very good to work with and they really wanted to make sure it was a great project and family-owned business. So, uh, I have no questions at this time, Mr. Mayor. Okay, Mr. Singleton.

Yes. Just a clarification on the uh, residential properties to the south and the east. This is some single family homes at the Forest Landing neighborhood. uh the buffer uh some of the buffer is shown here will be undisturbed and then there'll be the additional plantings the trees to go around the parking lot which is around building two. So this is substantial based off what we have here the landscape buffers a total of 55 ft that's the 10 foot setback line show but basically is it'll be undisturbed and then they'll do some clearing and then plant trees. So, and um I wish I could obviously default to the UDO the exact language, but that 55- foot typeD requirement is going to be the requirement from the single family dwellings to the south. That's why it's a bit more enhanced and a bit larger than the 35- ft type B from from the uh

and and it's from the property line. Yes. Right. Okay. Just clarify that. Yeah. Yeah. Sorry. Setbacks and buffering are taken from the property line. Okay. All right. Thank you. I just want clarification. Thank you. Yes, sir. Thank you, Mr. Dallas. Um, definitely appreciate you hearing and incorporating the feedback from the planning commission regarding the dog park. Everybody loves a dog park. Mr. Dallinger.

Yeah. My question is a followup to Mr. Singleton's question on the buffer and clarification on the type D because he said undisturbed, but is type D undisturbed or is it it not undisturbed buffer? Is it undisturbed type D? I'm curious to know as far as the aerial goes of what existing vegetation there is and if my coworker Erin could somehow look up quickly for me um the type of buffering what a type B is and what a type D is.

Yeah. And because I'm just curious because it it often gets confused. People hear buffer and they think there's something there when buffer is just a distance. And so I just want real clarity because it it's not clear from the site plan. It looks like a lot of replanted vegetation and if that type D. So your your 10 foot is a building setback and then you got the 55 buffer. But we've seen a lot of times there's that buffer and they'll go right up to that property line taking everything down and then replanting and it's never as good as what was there. So, I'm curious as to what is the actual what what's going there and how close are those houses on the east and the south, how close they are and how much vegetation natural vegetation would be taken down,

right? Um, so someone can probably speak to the the actual the the requirement would be that if there's vegetation that's greater than 4 in in diameter within that 55 ft zone, that has to be protected. Um, so with that protection, if there was a 4-in tree right within the first few inches, um, the tree protection fencing will need to be pushed out either the minimum of 10 ft or the drip line. Um, so if there is existing vegetation there, the tree protection fencing will be at least 65 ft in, if not a little bit further in spots. Um if there's no vegetation in that first 10 feet then yeah they can go put the tree protection fencing right at the 55. Um

got it. So the type D is not completely undisturbed but it is sort of as a preservation element to it and do we know if they've done a tree survey for that 55 ft buffer area so we to know what would that kind of

usually we don't get that level of detail until we get to the site plan but they may have already done it. I think Mr. Ter one of the big concerns I have is what happened with the project grove mountain and timber and how it backed up to Greenbryer. I mean it they ain't nothing there's nothing left and that's what I'm concerned. I don't want to see that happen here. If I known that happened there we would have addressed that in a different way. That's the concern is how the Hamilton on Parkland there's no trees. There's nothing. What was there gone? So the replanting may take care of it but um Okay. Yeah. Let me let me check on that one. They don't send you drive also because I go on I was there last week delivering meals on wheels and I see that too and it's okay. There's nothing there.

Okay, that's my concern. I'll check on that one. Okay.

Thank you. Um for the record, Sarah Vanvery, 621 Hillsboro Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27603. Uh thank you Mr. Mayor, council staff. Thank you everyone for um your time and your work and support on this that so far. So I'll go ahead and answer the tree survey questions. Um yes, we have had a tree survey done and um and it is in our plan set package um but probably not up on the slides um but there is some existing um vegetation that meets the criteria that Mr. Trezenberg was speaking to um in the well in the south portion so sort of on the plan east of this page so on the right hand side of this page so we will work during site plan and I do have our engineer here and we'll work during site plan to make sure that those um trees are protected during um during design and during construction. Does that help address those questions? And on the e on the east side, what?

Well, it's on the south side. So, adjacent to the single family, it's south, but on the way that it shows on the page, it's um yeah, I know the south is the right, but on the east side of the property, there are three residential parcels, correct? That back up to it. So my question is you mentioned the south part but the east part is there also a certain preservation of so existing trees there too or

there's so the adjacent to the single family detached is also that 55 ft type D buffer and then adjacent to the multif family is the 35 foot type buffer so it is wider in one portion of the east than along the additional part of the east but from the tree survey It looks like most of that larger ve vegetation is along the south side. Okay. For the existing vegetation, but as far as supplemental plantings, we would have to meet the type D opacity and type B opacity. Thank you. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Vance. Question.

Yes. This may be for Miss Sarah here. How does the project align with the town's long-term vision for this area? um going off of memory from the Garner Forward comp plan is that it fits not only um with the framework, but it also fits with several of the activity centers um for this area. So, if I recall correctly, we we got a pretty good consistency rating. Good.

Okay. Thank you. Any other questions? Any other questions for staff or the applicant? a question in reference to the TIA. Uh just uh what were the major findings of the TIA? Uh that about 75% of the trips both in the AM and the PEM peak hour are going to be pass trips. So what we're finding is that um a lot of the folks coming here will be coming here on their way to somewhere else. So it'll be a lot of writeins and write outs will be those pass by trips.

Question of reference to uh the single uh is it is it warranted?

Um not at this time. It what it is more so about is the um existing and future lanage that will need to be constructed. Um that goes beyond this site. Um, so what would happen now is if this light were here, there's not exactly enough existing lanage for that queuing to happen south of the light north of here. So until more improvements are made and more through lanes are constructed also further south, then when warranted and when those facilities are available, then the light will be installed. And I I feel pretty confident that based on um this proposed use and the other approved uses that the signal will be warranted.

I have Okay. Excellent. A lot a lot of good questions. Any other questions or comments? Okay. Uh thank you very much. Thank you so much.

Thank you. And uh I'll I'll ask now council members if there's a motion to adopt ordinance 20265377. Mr. Mayor, I move that the town council accept the planning commission's written statement regarding consistency of the zoning amendment request with the adopted land use plans detailing section three of staff report as our own. And I further move that the town council adopt ordinance number 2025 5377 approving reszoning CZMP25-00002 is request is reasonable in the public interest because the subject property would be more suitable for the usage permitted by the proposed district versus current districts.

Okay. Motion made by Mr. Matthews. Is there a second? Second. Second by Mr. Vance. Uh is there any more discussion? on the motion hearing. None. Let's call for a voice vote on this. Uh all in favor of the motion to adopt ordinance 2026 5377, please signify by saying I.

I. Any opposed by nay? Uh hearing none. It passes unanimously. Thanks for doing a good job council and staff and applicant. A lot of work went into this. A lot of improvement was was refined going through the process. uh the planning commission had great input uh a good example of how things can work when there's good communication going on. So, thank you all very much. And that brings us to item number three, which is a tier one conditional resoning request on the Rock Quarry Assemblage. And our presenter is going to be our assistant planning director, Miss Aaron Joseph.

Good evening, mayor and council members. It's good to see you all this evening. All righty. I will present the staff report for this uh CZ 24-006 resoning request, also known as Rock Quarry Assemblage. This is a tier one reszoning request uh to reszone 82.94 acres from rural agricultural to commercial mixed use uh conditional. The site is located within the northeastern part of the town. It's uh right at the intersection of East Garner Road and uh Rock Quarry Road. The entire site encompasses five uh parcels. Currently, tier one does not include a sight sightspecific master plan. And I'll briefly go through some of the changes that have occurred with this case since it was before you in December. the applicant has uh made some several changes in response to the public hearing as well as uh the um the appearance before the planning commission in January. So they have removed uh the self storage, mini storage, vehicle sales, rental sales, and repair uses from the pod. And I'll just draw your attention to the screen. Uh this uh image here is an exhibit that is attached to the resoning. And so you have three separate pods. This is pod A,

pod B, and pod C. So you will hear references to these three pods. Uh they do have specific um uses uh standards uh that pertain to um some pod individually and then some pods uh across the site. So they have added upper store residential as a use to pot C. Uh they have included additional standards above the what the unified development ordinance calls for for self- storage facility buildings uh which include size, scale and appearance. They have conditioned uh the lighting to be consistent across the site. that they have profered a condition to increase the playground elements within the within the site. Uh there was language referencing the North Carolina building code. They have since removed that language. Um they have also added architectural standards for town homes and conditioned multif family uh units to a minimum of four stories. Also, they have restricted town homes and prohibited them from being within 400 ft of Rock Quarry Road. And they also, not on the screen, but they also have um added since the uh planning commission um a definition for vertical mix use. And so with those changes, um overall looking at the comprehensive land use plan, um staff does continue to support a a strong finding with the plan's uh growth framework. Um and you do have that report in your agenda packet. During the planning commission, there

were um several comments. Uh there was support. um appreciation was given for walkability, a mix of uses and the community amenities. There was a question raised about the uh request coming in as a tier one as opposed to a tier 2 reasonzoning and as well as a question as to why um potentially the site could have been broken into smaller area master plans instead of this larger tier one request. Um, a commissioner asked about the infrastructure that is being um, brought to the site and how that infrastructure as far as water and sewer could potentially benefit the surrounding area. And there was an a question about the potential for an inclusion of a grocery store. Uh there was a concern raised about the proximity of residential uses to uh 540 and if uh um sound dampening measures could be uh incorporated into the site and feedback. Ultimately, there are opportunities that the planning commission suggest suggested um as far as including and conditioning um more public art installations throughout the site and to just ensure that any uh future greenway connections be made. Ultimately, the planning commission adopted a statement of consistency agreeing that the plan is consistent with the comprehensive land use plan with a motion um to recommend approval to council which was unanimously approved. During the public hearing, uh, council requested a high-level analysis of the

potential, um, buildout for this site. Um, and to how the site could potentially or could develop under the permitted uses and profit conditions. This isn't saying this is how the site will uh develop, but it does um give an analysis of the potential for it and the range of possible outcomes um including a lowest benefit scenario where development trends uh toward standalone low inensity uses rather than a cohesive mixeduse district. And so analyzing that based upon the profer conditions um when we look at pod A, the uh conditions profer 10 acres along Rock Quarry Road um and also at East Garner Road that could develop with uses uh such as autooriented um lower intensity uses such as a religious institution, a parking lot or minor utilities. Um, also it could include, you know, a convenience store or drive-through restaurant. Um, the remaining land in pod A could develop as garden style apartments or town home. So, it could have that residential use there. um the required public art, the plaza and the square, it would be built. But if those uh lower benefit, lower uh intensity uses um were to develop it potentially um the surrounding uses may not create a active and active or walkable environment. And looking specifically at pod B have here on the screen. Uh the site it could develop entirely as residential garden style apartments or town homes or as standalone civic or institutional

uses. Um they required open space as far as athletic fields and playgrounds are only triggered when uh residential is built. they are profering uh public squares within throughout the site uh that's not tied to any um residential use. Um also within uh pod B vertical mix use is required only if commercial office retail uses are provided. So upper story, residential um with must occur with um commercial, office, retail, uh land use category, which I believe in in their uh table of uses is about um six uses I believe. And within pot C, um the site could develop uh standalone again with civic or institutional uses similar to other other pods in A and A and B. um and it would offer limited contribution to a mixeduse activity. So that was really the analysis that based upon the written conditions and profit conditions if you were looking at a potential buildout scenario um with lowest uh benefit lowest intense uses how that could shape out um within the development. And so given the the um tonight uh the task before you is to consider the reasonleness. Um there are six criteria to be considered as outlined on the screen with uh within our unified development ordinance. I won't read all of them. Um but those are the six reasonableness criteria that you have to consider. Um, and within your agenda packet, uh, on page 224, you do have, uh, draft motions, um, that reflect staff's, uh,

analysis with consistency as well as the planning commission's um, uh, consistency analysis as well. Um, and so we have highlighted uh, consistent and reasonable or consistent but not reasonable. And that concludes my presentation. uh staff, we are here to answer any questions. The applicant has uh provided an updated presentation they would like to uh present to you all this evening and more than happy to answer any questions that may come about. Thank you.

Okay, if it's okay with council, I'm going to say let's see the applicant's presentation, then we can ask questions of both the applicant and the staff. Thank you. Introduction, please.

Thank you. to uh Daniel Smoke, uh Madison Holding, developer 409, Ramblewood Drive, Raleigh, North Carolina 27609. Thank you, Aaron, for your presentation. Uh good evening, Mayor Gupton, Mayor Pro Tim Dinger, and council members. We are grateful for the opportunity to stand before you on this decision night, the culmination of a process we began more than two years ago. I'm joined by my brother and business partner David Smoot and our partner Jeff Smurko. You will hear directly from us rather than from our attorneys, engineers, and consultants. Our approach to this process has been to listen and then take action at each step and with every stakeholder. from meetings with staff to two-on-one meetings with the mayor and council members to meetings with our land owners and neighbors, which by the way, we held a second voluntary neighborhood drop-in meeting in December, a report of which is included in the full agenda packet where you can get a flavor for the discussion and support for our development. So, it's been an iterative process whereby we have made changes and improvements to our conditions. Most recently, after listening to council's comments and questions at the initial public hearing and again after the planning commission meeting and when talking with staff, we listened and we took action. We appreciate this level of collaboration and care to make our development the best it can be.

As a result, we are thankful for staff's overwhelmingly strong consistency review and recommendation for approval. We are thankful for council's unanimous vote to send our case to the planning commission. And we are honored to have received a unanimous recommendation for approval from uh from the planning commission. We and our land owners are excited for a favorable decision this evening. We are going to talk about what we heard you say. Garner has a finite amount of land. The conditions must ensure the development maximizes this precious resource. On the following slides, you will see how we addressed each of these comments with changes to the conditions. All solid requests. We also heard you ask broader questions. We gave careful consideration to these questions and made changes to the conditions to answer them. We will go into detail on our responses. Let's start with a more pointed comment. Mr. Singleton, you said that vehicle repair should not be in pod A. We recognize your concern, so we removed it along with vehicle sales, rental, and service. And you may note that we changed the picture from a big Gerber Collision auto body shop. We are now showing aa store, which is more what we had in mind. Anyway, Mark, hey, marketing matters. Mr. Singleton, we heard you say that

self storage should not be in pod A, so we removed it. It can only be in pod C by the railroad. We also heard you say that self storage should not be single story 10 barns. So we made it a minimum of height of three stories just like the picture we showed at the public hearing and what we are showing now. And we added that access to individual units shall be provided from inside the building. We heard Mr. Singleton say that playgrounds should have more than a minimum of two elements and that four would be more appropriate. And we did as you suggested and consulted with our experts, our children, and they agreed with you. We played and we tested and we decided to increase the minimum number to four elements. We heard Mr. Dinger point out that the building code already requires elevators for fourstory and taller buildings. So we removed the unnecessary reference. Now that we have addressed the more pointed comments, we come back to the broader questions. Mr. Dinger asked, "How do we define mixed uses and how do we ensure the verticality and intensity of uses envisioned in the Garner Ford plan?" Mr. Dinger asked staff to think about the high and low buildout cases, and we thought about it, too. Mayor Gupton asked what other conditions would ensure the quality of the development and Mr. Vance asked about the area served by this new sewer basin. All great questions that we put a lot of

thought into answering. Mr. Dinger asked about mixed use and at the public hearing I said I meant vertical mixed use. Well, we defined it in the preamble to our written conditions. When we say vertical mixed use, we mean multiple distinct and complimentary uses within a single multi-story structure such as food and beverage and residential or retail and office stacked in one building. Our profer is to develop a minimum of 10 acres, that's over 430,000 square feet for non-residential and vertical mixed uses located within 400 ft of rock quarry and East Garner roads. Previously that had been within 400 ft of rock quarry and or East Garner roads. So we strengthened the language to ensure concentrated intense development along both corridors. We also added upper story residential to pod C. Mr. Dinger have a question. Yes sir. And like basketball. Did you watch the Duke basketball Carolina game? Duke was ahead the whole game and then Seth Tremble at the end kind of just ruined it. You all been Duke through this process and you've let Seth Tremble sneak into your conditions a little bit. I think minimum of 10 acre some of the language isn't quite it doesn't seem quite as tight. So help help me understand because you said your word said we're

going to ensure we have this vertical

sure mixed use and I'm not seeing that in your conditions. So before the condition read and or so we could have concentrated the 10 acres along East Garner Road and not done anything along Rock Quarry by saying and we have to have non-residential and vertical mixed uses a minimum of 10 acres along Rock Quarry and East Garner Road. In aggregate, it's 10 acres. But before, we could have said, well, we can concentrate all of that on East Garner Road and not on Rock Corey. Condition three, I'm reading the condition and not your presentation. Says, a minimum of 10 acres in aggregate of the site will be reserved for non-residential or vertical mixed uses, which that translates to me as it could be a non-residential use or it could be vertical. But that it means it could just be one of them, which means it could just be nonresidential, which means then you wouldn't have any vertical mixed use.

Well, I I'll happy I'm happy to come back and look at that particular language on it. So, I'm I was I was rooting for you. I we want you to root for us. I'm rooting for you, but I'm seeing some Seth tremble in your conditions. Well, that we're probably we may not be able to resolve tonight. So, I'll let you keep going, but thank you. Your conditions aren't aligning up with your your slide because your slide says minimum 10 acres non-residential and vertical mixed use, which is a little different than how the condition rates. Sure. And the conditions that's written in the packet is what we need to go by. So, I'm just maybe it's a I understand.

Okay. I just want to make raise that up as one. I appreciate the point,

Mr. Dinger. We heard your comments about the Garner Ford plan and your question about how do we ensure the verticality and intensity of uses envisioned. You said that you did not see any town houses on our conceptual plan and yet it is a permitted use. Here is a snippet. You can see here's a snippet of our conceptual plan along Rock Quarry Road. Here we see the Garner Ford plans vision with the verticality of the apartments and structured parking and intense uses with stacked vertical mixeduse buildings along with the public plaza, public square and public art that will be in this area. So even though this is a tier one resoning and there is not an associated site master plan, we added conditions that match our conceptual drawing and therefore will ensure the verticality and intensity of uses envisioned in the Garner Ford plan. Townhouse use shall not be permitted within 400 ft of Rock Quarry Road. Any multi-story apartment will be a minimum of four stories here. And again, upper story residential is now permitted in pod C, which helps along the East Garner uh road corridor. Mr. Delinger, you also asked staff to think about the high and low buildout cases. We thought about it, too. Mayor Gupton pointed out that Garner has a finite amount of land and we need need to maximize its value. We have a high cost of development both in the raw land and in the sewer

infrastructure which we will go into in further detail. Because of this high cost of development, we need vertical and intense uses to pay for it. The worst case scenario described by staff, a church, a community center, a gas station, a fast food joint, a parking deck, and some apartments and town homes is uneconomic to build because of our high cost of development. Our base case includes 76,000 square feet of retail and over a thousand residential units. In our best case, we would like to add more retail and residential units. And we would like to add a hotel and office as well, which were already included and studied in our TIA. We can make that fit. So, in terms of tax value to the town, our development will be huge in either our base or our best cases. Not to mention the potential tax value of the new sewer basin which is close to 700 acres which will be opened up for development once we put the sewer infrastructure in place. We will speak on that as well. We all know Garner is growing and under Mayor Gupton's leadership the goal has been to do better. So, Mayor Gupton pushed us asking us to craft conditions that would ensure the quality of the development is better and not just more development. Great challenge. Well, we already had a robust set of conditions, but we thought about it some more to add elements that will enhance the development and make it the best it

can be. So for instance, we strengthened the language about the light poles, specifically no wooden poles, and we added language to ensure the pedestrian network is built in a cohesive manner to match the phased construction of the entire development. And we strengthened the architectural language around town houses whether fee simple or townhouse for multif family to say town homes shall have the same high standards we profered for apartments. So for example, no vinyl siding is allowed. These conditions add to the quality of the development and will translate into an enhanced environment to live, work, and play. Mr. Vance asked, "What is the area of the new sewer basin? What is the area unlocked for development by our extension of sewer across the railroad and Highway 70? It's nearly 700 acres. Of course, without existing sewer, this area is predominantly vacant. Let's take a look at the Garner Ford maps for this area. It's planned for intense vertical uses areas to transform with mid-rise and even high-rise with mixed use centers and employment centers and even more concentrated mixeduse activity centers and a neighborhood activity center along with transit oriented development. This 700 acres represents a huge potential tax base of intense uses that are revenue positive to the town and that will help to subsidize existing

uses that have become a drain on the town's resources. All of which is only made possible when the steward infrastructure we will pay to put in place once our project is approved. We thank you for your comments and questions. We listened and we acted. This iterative collaborative process has helped to produce the best conditions which will make for not just more, not just better, but the best development we can do. We have our conceptual plans and full list of revised conditions ready to go. If you want to examine any in detail, our team is here to answer your questions. We and our land owners respectfully request you vote in favor of our resoning requests. Thank you.

Yeah. Thank you. And thank you for your patience as we go through a very exacting process. Thanks council to all council members who have looked at this so thoughtfully and from so many angles. This is so important. This project is not just large. is at a critical area with critical impact and and as you've said a couple times, it has the ability to be barely okay or really spectacular and we're pushing for the really spectacular. So, thanks again to council members who have each had their input on this. That being said, let's start with Mr. Vance and come back through for more questions or comments so far. Mr. Bance.

Oh, yes. In reference to Rockar Road, uh that is a uh is it consider is it considered a major arterial? I'm not sure what the planning designation is. Okay. Okay. No, no worries. No worries. Uh based upon the capacity that you're the size of the development that you're proposing here, will Rock Quarry Road be able to handle the the traffic there with the with the proposed improvements at the various locations. So, it's already been widened on the edge of Auburn side of the road. We will also widen it. And yes, the the road will be widened and be able to handle the traffic. Okay. I hold my next question. Okay, Mr. Dallinger.

Yeah, our question and a comment. I think it it's interesting because this is very similar to a project we had off of 540 that had different pods and um there were some very strict uh uses and dimensional standards with that sort of more industrial commercial project. And I think what we're where we're at with this one is there's still not enough specificity. There's a the the your best case is 76,000 square foot of retail, but that doesn't translate necessarily into what's in the conditions. And I don't see what your your worst case is on the buildout scenario. I see the town's interpretation of a worst case. I see your best case and another your base case and your best case. Are you saying that your base case is the minimum that you all will actually build?

We need a return on the capital invested. It is a huge expenditure to buy this property, do all of the road improvements, all of the off-site improvements, all the traffic signals that are required, and to bring sewer nearly a mile across a railroad, across a highway, across natural stream features. And uh putting in a fast food joint and a gas station and some garden apartments isn't going to cover that return on investment. So staff's worst case scenario, as I said, it's it's just not e economic to do. So that wouldn't happen.

I think there's still a gap between your base case for success and what's present in the UD in in the conditions. And so if you have a a minimum build out that it will be your green light to go and finish this thing out, then we need to have conditions that are a little bit closer to that because there are scenarios in which you may change direction and you may sell the property and you may do and then these conditions live on somebody might come in. I mean so I think

within this robust set of conditions uh we've identified uh many uses for the different pods so that the property can be developed but the flexibility of the tier one process is designed specifically to allow us not to be tied to a specific plan today when this is going to be a buildout over many years where the market may shift and say nobody wants to be in offices right now people aren't building offices one day that'll come back one day there could be an office building here but we don't want to be tied to saying we have to put in an this number of square feet of office because we will not be able to underwrite that type of development. So it's it's really a uh that's why we followed this tier one plan and that's why we have not put in any specific u you know minimums like that. we've identified uses that we want uh to pursue and uh that's the path that we've gone down with this set of conditions and also with uh what the land owners are are willing to sign up for. Um so we feel like this has been a very iterative collaborative process and we're very happy with the conditions that we have. Yeah, I I agree. It's been iterative and you've been at it for a long time, couple years, and you know, it might be beneficial to spend few more weeks or a month working on some of these because I think at the end of the day, what it comes down to, our our charge is a is a fiscal one. We have a fiscal responsibility to make sure whatever ends up getting built here is an addition to our tax base and not a burden to the tax base. Particularly in our comprehensive plan, it specifically outlines one of the primary responsibilities or ambitions of this council is to protect our 540 interchanges and maximize them. And the

way the conditions are written now could be overly residential, which is interesting to be off of 540 and across from edge of Auburn that is I don't think it's completely built out yet either, and end up in a situation where we have all this residential and no commercial tax base. And this is a plaguing many municipalities right now. This overburd this the overburden the burden on the re residents is higher because of this lack of commercial and we're suffering from it too. So we're having to plan years and years out just like you. Um, so I think that's one of my concerns is your your worst case buildout still has to be fiscally sound for the town and it also in a best case scenario also add a minuteitize that part of the town so that people edge of Auburn to get a cup of coffee don't have to get on 540 or go down Garner Road or go, you know, so you're building a town between Edge of Auburn and this project you're a small town and and sort of be an expectation that there's a a commercial hub of some sort there and I'm not seeing in the conditions that commitment to commercial and that that's the and we got caught up on a word an and or an or. Those are significant words. So, um that's my only qu I I don't really have a question. I just think there's you've come a long way. You've done a great job.

Um you tighten it up just a little bit more. I I appreciate that feedback. We think that the 10acre minimum commitment for non-residential, commercial, or vertical mix use will have the commercial elements that you're talking about needing here for this mix activity center. and u further. Yeah, it's been two years and we're at we're at a time crunch now that we don't have more time to um extend further. Okay, that's my last question.

Excellent observations. Crit, this is critical stuff. Let's continue our our dialogue. Uh Mr. So that um those responses kind of shifted um how I was thinking about this project cuz I love everything about this project's idea and principle. Um I've heard in multiple presentations you reference all of the ironclad um as you've referenced them commitments that you have made towards this project. the green space, the mix of residential, commercial spaces because in my mind it's just amazing concept and I would love for it all to come to fruition. But one question I did have was around on why going the tier one route instead of the tier 2 route because of all of the detail and the commitments that you have made.

So the tier 2 process is a really a it's an ownorous process that we've been through before. It's ownorous because you have to spend a lot of money on engineers and a site plan that then you show to the neighbors and they say, "Well, move that there." And then they show it to the council members and they say, "We'll move that there. Do this. Do that." And all of that cost is upfront before you even know if it's going to be approved or not. And it's really it it deters growth. It deters development and investment because people don't want to go to that level of expense not knowing and having certainty of the outcome. Now, alternatively, the tier one process allows you to say, "Okay, well, we're not exactly sure how this site is going to play out, but we know it's going to have a public square. We know it's going to have a public plaza. It's going to have public art. It's going to have all these things that we want that we see in the Garner Ford plan. Those aren't things in the UDO. That's in the Garner Ford plan. That's uh the wish list of if you were planning this mixed activity center, it would have all of these elements. It would have playgrounds. It would have athletic fields. And then how you program that with apartments or town homes or apartments above retail. uh that is going to be more market driven of you know what you can underwrite at the time you go to develop that one pod but one pod that would be small enough for us to say okay well we can do one site here it wouldn't pay for the tremendous expenditure that we'd have to go to to put in the sewer. So, it's just from a costbenefit analysis. If you go to the tier 2 master plan and you said, "Well, that's the only way to develop this site." It would just won't get developed because nobody's going to go to that expense and trouble without

the certainty of the outcome with the high cost of development for this site, which is why it hasn't been developed yet. And I know commission member Carson asked a similar question about if you break it out. That's right. And you have g you've given that response in in the planning commission. So I guess my question would be cuz you referenced this as if the market shifts. So if the market shifts will any of these ironclad as you have referenced them as will these ironclad commitments shift?

The ironclad commitments are there. They're the conditions. They're tied to the property. I mean Miss Jones could weigh in here as well, but they are tied to the property. So they can't change. Um, you know, we have our permitted use table. We can't deviate from that permitted use table. Um, so no, the conditions are what the conditions are. Thank you. Well, there's a lot lot of good dialogue here. A lot of good dialogue. Let's go to Mr. Singleton.

Yes. Thank you for addressing the concerns I had at the last meeting. I appreciate that. Uh, adding more to the playgrounds always important. Um, as I recall when this first we first discussed this, POD C was just commercial, but you have now added because you move some things to POD C the uh condition where you can have uh mix retail or some type of business activity on the bottom and uh uh multif family above. Everything's a minimum of four stories. You said it on Go ahead. I'm sorry. Go go go ahead and ask. I remember seeing minimum of four stories for multif family. I believe

fourstory multif family only by the interchange. There's in our other buildings where you could have a mixeduse building um it could be less than four stories for sure.

The reason why we added the upper story residential uh was in response to Mr. Dinger saying Pod C could be developed as a singlestory commercial use and that's not a good utilization of the land. So we added upper story residential as a possibility that it could be developed that way uh to help maximize the value of the land. Um and our scoring with staff improved actually as a result of adding upper story residential. our consistency review went up and our score went up. So,

uh question is you talk about the best case scenario for the potential for these these sites. You mentioned the hotel, you mentioned the uh office as I recall, there's a piece of property that is which is uh north or west. It's above potentially fits into where 540 in the road is. That's a piece of property that you would like to acquire, may acquire. But if you hadn't included it with this because you wanted to get this done first before you determine what you may put there, which you mentioned could be something like a hotel or office space. Correct. And we know office space is

the market went away and it's kind of coming back, but it's not coming back like it anything like it was. So you that was more market driven and the the need for something one of the one of those uses or another in that parcel of land will be a separate is a separate It's a separate reasonzoning. We don't own it. We would like to own it. Um we think that this generally we think that this location next to this interchange could support a hotel and could support an office building. U and again we're in this tier one process. So we are not tied to the site plan that we had. If we wanted to uh move the food around on the plate and add a hotel and an office, we'll figure out a way to do it. We want to maximize our return and build something that's great, but the more things we can put on this site and spread out those infrastructure costs, the better it is for us.

And again, the the length that you have to uh run the uh to extend the sewer to and through the property uh through under Highway 70 and the uh also the railroad is almost 5,000 square ft. Correct, sir. Okay. All right. Linear feet. Yes. 5,000 linear feet. Yes, sir. That's all for now. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Matthew.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. We've had some good questions here and uh this is going to be a tremendous project obviously and you folks have uh thank you for following up all the details, the questions all the different board members had and concerns and you you most certainly identified them and and you made a a good statement there that tier one, you know, uh times are changing. Here's what we want to go in. We're going to make it the best we can, but things happen. Uh we there was used to be a Kmart out here on 401 and a lot of money got put in that project for uh if I remember it's going to be pharmaceutical what have you cuz that was the trend at Kmart's still setting empty because things changed. You brought up a very good point, sir. And I said things change and I understand that that's a business move and it's like you said, they might be here, but maybe the trend changes with that 540 loop going through right down the street from that's going to open that whole corridor up to unlimited development, commercial as well as residential. So, that's why I think this is in a great location and you got your eye on that other piece over there because I got a feeling in time it'll come. But uh I understand it is a smart move to go in this as a tier one. It's good uh business sense, good investment and it can pay out long term because that does give you that level of flex flexibility. But those requirements we already got those things taken care of and you you've agreed to that and the planning commission did also. And uh but uh you know the I think the sore investment is going to be tremendous. uh what it's going to do for the the uh area off your property line as well as 70 in there. The what's going to generate for Garner and the revenue could be unbelievable. The the sky's is the limit. And if interest rates will come down like we're hoping they will, who knows what's going to happen. So, you can get a lot more

bang for your money. And uh but uh I think this entire area is going to be a tremendous thing. and I I like your attitude of we want to make it the best it can be because once you finish this project, you want to come back with another project and we look back and say you did what you said you were going to do and that's important. Your reputation is what you only thing you can stand on and uh and I appreciate your honesty and what your group has done here and uh I think it'd be an excellent project. I think it's going to be uh not only for residential, for jobs, uh and good development in there and for future growth. So, uh thank you for answering all the questions, working with staff. And uh if you got through the planning commission like you did that, I'm sure they they know, Mr. Carson, y'all got worked over pretty good down there. So, but if they approved you, that's good. So, m Mr. Mayor, I have no further question. I know had a lot of comments here, but a lot of questions already got asked and uh uh I truly think this will be a great project for that area as well as Garner and Bars the revenue coming to town for many years down the road.

And that's all of my comments.

Uh we we're not finished discussing this. This is a big deal. This this is a really really big deal in so many ways. It's large acreage. It's a critical area. uh we're searching our souls trying to find a way to say yes. You know, we believe in you. We believe in the process uh that you've been through, which is uh great communication with staff, uh council, planning commission all the way through. But I still understand our concern about what's the worst case scenario. We we just have not dealt with enough of these tier ones to have total confidence. And this is the most complex one we've seen. and maybe has the most potential of any. I certainly understand the need for the need for the tier one flexibility because a few years ago we would have built offices and then now we'd be trying to turn them into self stoages or or anything except offices and as Mr. Matthews pointed out the old uh Kmart being turned into a life science center uh and it's sitting empty for years because the economic condition changed. So that that's why we have to have a tier one. We have to have some trust and it's just it's like getting married. We want to make sure this is really the the right thing. And what are the safeguards? Uh you go on your judgments, you go on your experience, you go on where you've been together. Uh and this thing at the end of the day, we're probably being asked to depend on not just the worst case scenario that's been laid out by staff. It could be many marts and single story and all that, but what's going to prevent that is the law of economics. You've made it clear if you do those things, you're bankrupt and and so you you can't do that. You you'll do this process whether it takes two years or 10 years or you'll go bust

and we don't want want that. So it it's a tight rope that we're walking. It's a tight rope. uh how much can we take the flexibility out and get more and more details and at what point do we have to say these are people who have worked with us the process has worked through the staff through the planning commission through the council back to council a lot of interaction at what point are we willing to take a little bit of a leap here and get married on this thing we all have a lot to gain or a lot to lose so I I don't know the answer, but I applaud the thought that's gone into this by all the people involved. With that being said, let's come back through start with Mr. Vance again and run back through for other questions and comments.

So, yes, a question for the staff. What was the the planning commission's final determination follow?

Uh planning commission's final determination was favorable. They deemed it consistent with the comprehensive land use plan. and there was a unanimous vote to recommend approval. Um so they like I said in the um presentation there were um minor concerns about you know um the um the residential adjacent to 540 but there wasn't a whole lot of discussion. staff did present the information regarding the potential of the lowest case benefit. Um and it was overall wellreceived I would say and they you know express sentiment that they hope that this um this will develop as presented um because they believe it is a great opportunity but you know um they they're hoping for that. So yeah.

Okay. Thank you. Yes sir. Mr. Smoot you're showing us the the pods the pods. Yes sir. And uh providing with the tier one the general layout and with typically with the tier one you don't even have to show things the way you're doing it now in the details that you have. Uh and with that general layout you're showing where the commercials will be allowed and where the basically the buffers and the access points are located. So you're going into much more detail than you typically would do for uh for tier one. Uh, and you as a developer, can you move these around later? Can you move the pods can't move? No. No, sir. Okay. So,

the pod lines are are set as part of the tier one process and uh each property owner, they're tied to properties and each property owner has signed the conditions um that bind their land. Gotcha. So what I'm hearing is that any major changes that would be would be need necessary have to come back to this council for consideration. Yes. Okay. Uh and you mentioned the final zoning conditions those written rules that will limit what will be built and how it can be developed and we've already started to go into the details of those conditions. Yes, we we've we've got all the conditions.

Okay. So you have the conditions and those are those are those uh conditions legally binding. I believe that they are. Yes. Yes. Um if council were to adopt the ordinance um those conditions are included in the ordinance and they can only be changed by the applicant coming back through the same process of a public hearing, planning commission uh review and then a decision by council. Okay. and and those uh and those conditions stay with the property. Yes, they run with the land.

Okay. And if the uh again going back to Peter what I see if the developer ever wants to make any major changes, they will come back to the council for public hearing and for council vote. Yes, sir. That would be the process that we don't anticipate doing that. Okay. For the question. Okay. Mr. Dinger. Yeah. I'm looking at staff's pod a buildout potential that 10 acres along Rock Corey Road could develop with autoor oriented low inensity uses. Is that true? It it is true. I mean for instance it could be developed as a church which you wouldn't do that but could

we wouldn't do that because why would we why would we have gone through this whole reasoning because church is already a permitted use under the rural agricultural zoning that we have. So but

that was one of the uses that they identified or that it could be developed as a community center. Well again that's a permitted use under the rural agricultural and we wouldn't have needed to go through this resoning to allow it. And I think my point is that staff in staff's review, they noted it. It would be actually be if you imagine 401, you'd end up with something that looks more like 401 and some sort of mixeduse development. And I think I'm going back to condition three again. And I'm going to go to our attorney and ask our attorney to interpret condition three for us since it was presented as an and, but in our conditions, it's an or. And I really have a I have as much hesitation as I've ever had on council about a condition. And I've been on council for six years. And I've seen what's come out of some of our conditions around town that we've looked later and sort of given pause and I think we need to revise that at the very least that condition. Um, and also discard any visual site plan information that is shown and disregard any sort of assertions on how much tax revenue this is going to generate, particularly if it doesn't include a significant amount of commercial. Um, I don't and I don't know what the definition of non-residential is necessarily in this case. It could refer to the UDO's definition of non-residential. Could also be referring to tax version of non-residential, which would be apartments, which would then not be commercial. It' be residential. So, I'm going to ask our attorney for her.

I I I was the understanding the apartments were a residential use. So, uh non-residential means non-residential. They could be commercial for sure, but for tax purposes, they're commercial. So, they're non-residential. Mr. Dinger, for tax purposes, council, um, the zoning commissions, this, sorry, the zoning conditions would relate back to the UDO definitions. It would ultimately be up to the planning director to interpret those, but but you're in the UDO, apartments are considered a residential use. Okay. But the or

right, you're you're reading it correctly. This says a minimum of 10 acres in aggregate for non-residential or vertical. The and appears to be the 400 and 400 ft from Rock Quarry Road and East Garner Road. And so this talk that we've had and seen about mixed vertical mixed use may not even appear in this project by virtue of that or Theoretically that's true. The theoretically that's true. He said that's true. And so theoretically that's true.

So if we want to develop this interchange in a way that is garner forward and comparable to what our peers are doing around the county. That is the type of development of this region particularly around a major interchange. They want amenitized vertical mixed use. They don't want just apartments, which again this we could end up with a Starbucks and a who knows along Rock Quarry and then just a bunch of town homes and apartments and look just like everything else in Garner, but this is a major interchange.

Again, the the use of the land for a singlestory commercial use, what the staff has identified as we do a a fast food restaurant isn't going to pay for 5,000 linear feet of sewer. It's it's not so if it's not and the way that we wrote it of saying we want to make a commitment to 10 acres of commercial. That's what we started with with the town and then they said uh well you know what you've said about let's make it uh vertical. So we wrote it as or vertical mixed uses. But you're not going to see 10 acres of vertical mixed use there or 10 acres of commercial there. It will be both. But so you're agreeing with me this condition is a little ambiguous. I don't think it's ambiguous. Now

let's I don't think it's ambiguous. Let's hang Whoa. Whoa. Hang on, guys. Uh I'm going to ask Mr. Trezenberg to come back and weigh in. Put him on the spot for a moment to talk about what the conditions say or don't say or permit or don't permit because we we'll live or die by these words later, you know. So, let's let's get another uh professional to tell us what is being said in condition three or by the whole project really. What's going to make sure it produces what we want and what we expect? That that's that's our question, isn't it council? How do we make sure the words match up with our dream?

Mr. Trainberg. So, I'm going to take my I'm going to take my personal hat off as the planning director of the day um and just try to speak more generally to whoever might be sitting in the seat whether now or in the future. Um I feel pretty strongly that the way it's worded now, it could be completely one or the other. in order to ensure that it has a little bit of both would require it to be worded differently. Okay. Say say that again and then I want Mr. Dinger to repeat it back. What what you're saying that that the way it is currently written with the or

that 10 acres could be all non-residential or it could be all vertical mixed use or it or it could be a mix of both that totals up to 10 acres. But the way that is written to me now does not require that it have both non-residential and vertical mixed use. Well, the worst it could have would be it can't be all residential,

right? Because residential is not like vertical mix is residential above non-residential. So there's no opportunity for that 10 acres just to be residential. But at the same time it also does not require any mixed use being vertical mixed use. It doesn't. If you want to be assured that you have a vertical mixeduse component somewhere in this development.

If it's within that 10 acres that's fine, but that condition will need to be rewarded. How does how does that address your concern?

That's my primary concern is is the there's a little well maybe it's not ambiguous at all. It is very clear and it's very clear that you wouldn't have to do what some of the sort of visualizations envision. So I I I lean on Mr. Trezenberg's interpretation that it it's not quite achieving um I think what our expectation would be for this this this project specifically but also this location next to an interchange. Are we talking about this condition number three which applies to 10 acres or are we talking about a bigger wider discussion here twisted

right now talking about condition three I think there's some other conversation to be had about how do we make sure we get some vertical mixed use in the project whether it's in that and if it's an economics but if you can't do question well but that's sort of Again, the visualizations and sort of the talk is we're going to do this and people will congregate and this kind of thing, but if it all ends up being some kind of strip commercial on the front and

you can't afford to commit 40,000 square feet for a public plaza and 20,000 square feet for a public square with public art for a fast food joint and a church. You need the verticality. You need the rooftops, the residences, or it could be offices above retail. You need that level of intense vertical use for this project to work. So again, it's a it's a question of economics. We need the flexibility of it. We never uh put much thought uh of that it would only be commercial or only vertical mixed uses here. That that didn't cross our minds. But we are at a point where we've pushed the land owners as far as we can. They've signed these conditions and we're at the place where we need to have a vote. The word smithing of changing it to and and the additional time that would be required to get those signatures, we're at the place where we need to have a vote. So we would respectfully take on board your your question but u again it's a question of economics and we see it developing as outlined in our our plan Mr. Stalin.

No further questions Mr. advance any other way in. I think you just answered my question in reference to possibly going back and looking at putting in stronger language. Uh that that is uh you you you want to vote to go back and try and uh word is really not not desired. That's why I'm here by hand. We want to vote and not delay. I'm done. Mr. Dinger, would you like to speak again?

Yeah, I'll I'll try I'll make a motion we continue this until March 17th to clean up this language on condition three. So your your thought is to delay, but yet we delay. Well, I mean continue. Yeah, continue to clean it up. what what you see as a delay that could be catastrophic. Let me ask for other other questions or input. Mr. Singleton, thoughts. What I would do is I would ask let's have a recess for 10 minutes and everybody can think and we can have our bathroom break and you can come back after 10 minutes or somebody you can think.

I like that recommendation. Before you take a break, can I just clarify that um under state law, it is required that any change to these conditions be in writing and signed by all the property owners. So, it would not be my understanding is not possible to do tonight because there's a number of different individual property owners that have to sign. it it would it would be impossible to make any changes in the written requirements here this evening in the conditions offered by because these are voluntary conditions offered by the property owner.

But by the same token, we're at least 40 minutes past our usual break time. So, I think I'm going to defer to Mr. Singleton's judgment uh and other old people's needs whose needs are locking up on us over here. Let's take a 10-minute recess. Please be back in here no later than 10 minutes until 9. Okay. Thank you.

Okay, we're back from recess. Thanks for your patience. Uh th this is again a big deal. It deserves every piece of scrutiny that we give it. This is a once in a-lifetime opportunity for us. I know you guys have been working hard a long time. Uh we we didn't make any back any any back room deals. We just each had a chance to stop and think about where we are in this. And we are at the one yard line of the Super Bowl. We're right there and we've got a chance to take a timeout or we can push ahead and do whatever that magic move that some of them work there. But my my thought it'll be up to council if it's if there's any way that in two weeks time we could get words that give us more comfort level, more security that will meet everybody's expectation as much as humanly possible. If if those two weeks are available, that might be uh time worth taking one more time out at at the one one yard line and really think and make sure we're doing the best possible job for our citizens and for future generations because this is going to take more than my lifetime to to get done. This will go beyond that. That's just just my my thought and I guess I'm I'm asking as part of our dialogue here. Is that is that physically possible to be done in in two weeks from your from your end?

I don't think that it is. And what's a shame about that is to think that uh this would just die withering on the vine after all this work. Um and I I think this uh third condition about uh the 10 acre minimum commitment to non-residential and mixed uses as we had originally proposed. Mr. Dinger asked the question, what do you mean by mixed use? And we thought about it saying, well, would you satisfy this 10acre minimum requirement if you had all commercial and one residential building in one 10acre area horizontally separated. Is that a mixeduse area of commercial and residential? And no, no, that that was not what we wanted to say. What we wanted to say was you'll satisfy this 10acre minimum commitment with commercial and vertical mixed uses. and we defined it here on the screen as part of that preamble to the whole list of conditions. And then everywhere that we'd had mixed uses in all of our conditions, we changed them to say vertical mixed uses. So you can have an area that has horizontal horizontally separated uses and say that that's a mixeduse area. Fenton has is an example of that that there are residential uses and a movie theater and a restaurant and there it's in one area and that's a mixeduse area but it's not vertically integrated. So we changed our conditions to address this concern so

that it wasn't that we were going to have that wasn't our intent. So we feel as though we have structured these conditions in such a way that fulfills the Garner Ford vision and that ensures the best development that we can. Um and the idea of continuing is not something that uh it's just not something that's in the cards right now. Mr. Mayor, just a comment in the motion. It was interesting in in speaking back to us, you used the word and you said non-residential and you didn't use or which is in the condition. And I still think that needs to be cleaned up and we'll see where this goes. But and we want to meet you where you are, but you got to meet us a little bit where we are. Um, so I'll make a motion that we continue this to March 3rd. Second.

Okay. And now we can have a discussion on the motion that's been made about the continuence. Uh and we'll start with Mr. Vance down here for comments or questions about the motion that's on the floor to continue this to March 3rd. Your your thoughts, sir. Uh- with the motion and the second continuing. We're asking for what? We're asking for stronger languages language in the conditions condition three specifically and conditions three specific stronger stronger language in condition three specifically and may I ask what what type of language are we asking specifically to be in condition three

sure I can't give you specifics but I think what we want something is a little more clear that this vertical mixed use that we keep talking about will be included and not by virtue of the language that's in there now potentially excluded regardless of what the hopes and expectations and wishful thinking are of everyone in this room for the success of the project the way it is worded does not give us that that use that uh that form and function. Um so that that's where we just want a little more clarity and even in conversations with staff they believe there's room for more clarity as well. Thank you. Mr. Stalin's comments, questions?

No comments.

Okay. Mr. Stleton, comments, questions on the motion before us. Just the when Mr. Trezenberg answered what the or means. Maybe look at it in a different way because basically you could say a minimum of 10 acres in aggregate of the site will be reserved for non-residential uses. I mean or just or miss vertical mix use or I mean vertical mix doesn't even have to be there. say just non-residential uses. So his clarification of saying that from his professional uh career in knowing these things um let me look at it a different way just get some language cleared up with through M to the staff Mr. M. Joseph and two weeks instead of a month we could do it next week in the work session but we usually don't take action in a work session. might be fine with me if you got it done that soon. But, uh, that's it. I understand what what Mr. Dillinger is focusing on just to make clear and the tier one is what makes it so I won't say vague, but because you got all this stuff, you know, with your presentation what it lists, but again, it may be market condition, but again, it could just be will be reserved for non-residential uses make vertical mix used part of it because of the or So I just want clarifi clarifying language that I think everyone's kind of understand what we're trying to focus on and Mr. a trees understands what we're focusing on just to change that in coming two weeks and we ain't we don't have to go through the presentation basically we send the condition if the condition is is uh agreeable to the council vote and move on because this is a really good project and as the mayor said we're at the one yard line and let's don't uh throw an interception like the Seahawks did to the Patriots about 10 or 12 years ago at the one yard line we're almost there so I I'll just use his football analogy

Mr. Matthews, I got a question on work session. Uh, is there a reason you can't vote on anything at a work session? No, I you can take votes at a work session. It's just not traditionally that you do it. It just has to be clearly on the agenda that it would be for adoption of an ordinance. And if I could add, mayor, members of council, for the work session agenda, we are actually finalizing that tomorrow. It'll be posted on Thursday. So, in order to get this completed um with any revisions, I think the work session is probably unlikely um based on just the time frame for posting the agenda. So, the next possible opportunity would be your first meeting in March.

So, we're saying we couldn't get it on the work session. I don't believe it's possible. I I don't think we would have the conditions signed by all the property owners in order to post it by Thursday. Yes, sir. We're having a discussion of the discussion.

Thank you, sir. Um, I think that it would be helpful for us to talk tonight now on what language condition number three council would find acceptable so that we can present that to the property owners and say if you make this change, we believe that we will get a favorable vote from council because it's possible. We talk with staff. We make changes. We go to extraordinary efforts with people that were contracted with if it's even possible to do and still maybe misfire on what the language needs to be. So, if we could agree tonight on what that language needs to be, we would be in a position to reach out to each one of these land owners and say, "This is the deal."

Thank you. I understand exactly what you're saying. Uh yeah, and that because I'm still a little vague on this too, exactly what we're trying to result. It it seems to me that the way it's written that for these 10 acres that in this area will will be reserved for non-residential, which means all commercial or vertical mixed use, which you defined commercial on the on the first floor and then residential above. So what are we trying to get beyond that? What what words should it be and instead of or or Yeah, I'm I'm a little confused too, Mr. Dinger, I'm going to call on you. What What should those if we could write the words that would give us comfort about condition three, what would those words be?

I think the at the moment where we are is we have a motion in a second. We're having discussion on a motion in a second. So, I think

that's right. that is what we need to discuss and if the motion survives then we move forward with that if it fails then we got to sit here all night until 1:00 figuring out the terms. Um which doesn't really increase the time for anyone anyway because we still have to go through the same process. Whatever we come out with tonight still has to go through the same process of getting signed and getting on the agenda. So I don't think we save any time by having that dialogue this evening. I think council is very responsive to meeting with staff and the town manager and town attorney and assistant town managers to craft this language expeditiously. Um,

we're here right now as I said to craft this language expeditiously uh to have that dialogue um and we can have something and be back here on the third with something that they are confident and staff and council confident meet our requirements and concerns. Well, I I couldn't agree more. We're trying to get words that make sense and I thought we were within a word or two here uh that we could settle on because it's going to take you several days to get the property owners to sign off on the new words and if we can give you those new words now that would make your job more conceivably done. Mr. Mr. St.

I have a question for um the planning director. Is this as simple as a and or or word change? Not quite. Um, at a at a bare minimum, I think what what you would have to have to get at what the council is saying just to a minimum degree, the or would have to become and some. There needs to be an and with some kind of indication of a minimum commitment that that second element has to be required, you know, has to be required in some fashion. Some would be like the least because it could be any size, any amount. Um, but that would be that would be the minimum.

Okay. Thank you. So it could be as few as a few words. And I'm thinking back on another project that we had seen recently where we it was zoned for commercial mixed use unrelated to your project but just talking about why why we're concerned about the details. We had another project where it was already where the land was already reserved uh already zoned for commercial mixed use. And in our minds that meant it would have some commercial and some non-commercial. But it turned out that they only had they could be all residential and they chose all residential and we were very disappointed. But we were the ones who left the loophole there over just a word or two. It didn't say you must choose at least two different uses here to be mixed use. They chose one out of the variable. The and or the or or the period was critical and we didn't get what we wanted because we didn't pay attention to the details. And I think what I'm hearing uh Mr. Traberg say it it could be as simple as as a couple words. Mr. Matthews, this is a good discussion. We're working towards the same goal. Uh I got I got a question for the planning team here. I know they're in conference down there right now. I I'm going to gather the planning department knows the words this thing needs to say. Is that a fair statement the way it needs to be written? I mean, we've danced around this thing and danced around it. What do you need? Do you know what do you know how it needs to be written using your professional talents that you could say here's what here's what it needs to be. Let's change it and then when we come in here if it's on the third it's been changed and we got to kick this thing down the road and kick it down the road. These people have got a right to know what's going on and there's a way we can meet in the middle. I truly believe what all the education we got sitting out there that we can expedite this and come up with a correct

wording. Is that a fair assumption sir? Devil's always in the details. Um it is to the degree that we understand that there is coming out of this discussion a desire to have to ensure that when this is all built and done that there is a vertical mixeduse component. What we are not clear on is if there is some expectation of a minimum amount. How much?

If you're tier one, how you going to determine that? Cuz market conditions can change. I mean, hell, I ain't going to put six buildings up, not knowing that two years from now if I'm going to be able to fill them up or not. I'm out a lot of money. I've just spent millions in getting a sewer in here that's going to help everybody. And I'm, you know, these ain't the bad guys out here. We've got a great project here. I don't want to see it walk away. Yeah. Do I support it? Yes, I do. I don't make no bones about that. I'm trying to find a way we can meet in the middle and satisfy whatever somebody's concerns are so we don't have to kick this can down the road and kick the can down the road and let's let's find out what that is and fix it and move on. This this ain't rocket sign. We're we're killing this thing. This

Thank you. Mr. Smoot has some other Yes, sir. Building on what Mr. Trezenberg mentioned he said non-residential and some vertical mixed use and then he thought about it some more and said non-residential and a minimum of one vertical mixeduse building. That's something that is enforcable. Some is not enforceable. one vertical mixeduse building is that's a written condition and that's something that we could take back to these property owners.

Back to Mr. Treesber. Is that making sense? Are we saying the same thing here? Yeah, that just I mean that just clarifies it further. I I would disagree on the enforcibility side of the sum, but disagree on I would I would disagree as to the characterization of what some requires versus one, but one building is certainly much more clear. Yes.

Okay. So, okay. Does that address the concerns we have of not of not getting what we want? you know, the cost to build a vertical mixeduse and to build a non-mixeduse vertical is not astronomically different. So, we're not really equivalent over form. We're quibbling over function and and um use. And so, I guess the reason sort of to push this to the third is to have that dialogue immediately, right? Because we can you don't want us to sit up here and say you need to do three vertical mixeduse buildings, which we could and then you'd have to figure out how to make it happen. we don't you know your numbers and what you can make work and that's the that's the time for the dialogue is this week to say let's get the language bounce it back and forth and say does this fit with what you what you in the highest high probability of what you think you can do and make those things align right and say we could I guess we can sit here until midnight um but I don't think we actually gain a lot of time

the economic reality is that we would want to do more than one vertical mixuse building. The question is what the property owners are going to put their signature on. So right now we don't have any minimum uh amount and you've identified this as one or the other. Uh and again we're against the clock. So in order for this to happen, it's going to take extraordinary effort for us to do in the first place. So we're willing to do that and we're willing to say we will try to save this project that we've been working on by including a condition that says non-residential and at least one vertical mixeduse building for condition number three. And that's where we are

in base. Well, I mean, we really shouldn't be having a lot of dialogue with you, but what are your what are your land owners opposition to that? What would what would it be that they don't want vertical mixed use on this project? The likelihood of well, they have their own reasons why they want to support our project or not. And it has to do with the likelihood of will we get approved? Will we actually uh get our our development plans in place and agreeing to something that would then bind their land that wouldn't actually uh get built is problematic for them.

We we don't own it. So we're not able to say tonight, yeah, we'll agree to these conditions. So you are you going to develop this or are you broker? Yes, our plan is to develop it. Okay. So, I think where we are, Mr. Mayor, and I think council from Mr. Matthews down is in tune with the urgency of this. And I think that council will be very responsive this week. We have a retreat this week that if we needed to tag on a conversation. I don't know if we can legally do that. Probably not. Special meeting. Um, but we'd find some way to have this conversation this week and well,

Mr. Stal had an observation you wanted to share or your thoughts or question. Okay. Uh, yeah, we we we want to make this happen. If if if this doesn't happen, uh, the worst case scenario, and we've seen it in other places, is somebody says, "Well, if we can't do that, we'll just do the best we can under current zoning with the county. Let's put in some septic tanks and some wells. Let's do something this week. Even if it's not the maximum thing, we're we're we're teetering on the brink of greatness and and it's not really great or mildly great. It's going to be really great or or it's going to be trailer parks in the county and not and not Garner. You It's not is is this good or that good. This happens or the next thing we'll wish this had happened. I I just fear that there's always an alternative and the alternative would not be your advantage, not our advantage, not to the neighbors advantage, not the Garner's advantage. Something will be built there uh under the current zoning whether we like it or not. We've seen it happen in other places. They just say, "Well, instead of what we were going to do, we're just going to go back to the county and work with the zoning that's there for just a little bit." So, it's it's it's complicated and it's so important. I made a dollar bet that would be finished by eight, but I'll pay I don't care what it cost. We need to get this resolved to keep this moving. You have another observation to make, sir.

Yes, sir. Um, respectfully, we would hold off speaking to to the land owners until we got clear direction from council as to what would be acceptable because it's just moving the goalpost and moving the goalpost. So to have a productive, hard, difficult conversation with the land owners, we need to have clear direction from council.

Yes. And the motion that's before us, of course, is to is to continue this uh decision uh for two weeks. And there's no point in continuing that if if it's just going to die with lack of direction. So it is important to have an extended conversation to figure out how can they realistically uh get their property owners and the people on board to make a rational decision not to go back and forth another time because if they come back on the third uh it and it's not suitable to them. I think we owe them if we possibly can to come up with the words tonight that would satisfy us and I'm going to call plan.

Yes sir. Mr. Okay, M. You just said you said a sentence for non-residential and a minimum or at least one vertical mixuse building. You said yes, sir. One of those.

That's what Mr. Trezenberg suggested. That was what we would need. It sounds like to me I can handle and agree with that. That sounds like an a. Now, you may want to write the sentence slightly different, but it sounds like that we're we're between the ditches with that type of of uh condition because a minimum of at least one vertical use or one ver whatever a veruse building is not going to be, you know, as big as this room. If you're going to spend that much money to go up, it's going to be a a decent size building. So that sounds like that helps us realize there will be a mixeduse vertical mixeduse building within this project is is and you y'all determine a minimum or at least one. I don't know. Ask the attorney. I'm fine with that. That that addresses there's going to be a vertical a vertical mixeduse building at least one or a minimum of one, however you want to write it. But that is okay with me because there will be a vertical mixeduse building on that is that condition within that 10 acres.

I can work with that. This is what we call having a discussion and we need it to be broad at this point. This is not part of the motion. The motion stands as it was. This is just getting a feel for for what uh council members would would be accept would find acceptable. And I think it's the same words we were hearing from our planning director. And make sure I'm saying this correctly, Mr. Singleton. The words would would be on condition number three. This is not part of the motion. This is just our for our understanding. Condition number three would read a minimum of 10 acres in aggregate of the site will be reserved for non-residential and at least one vertical mixed use. If that's what the planning staff says satisfies and that's what you

and I think that's what Mr. Trezenberg said andor attorney Jones if that's that's that kind of meets what you said correct I would say the way this is written 10 acres cannot be 10 acres on the frontage of these pro of these roads cannot be used solely for residential uses. This condition does not say they're going to actually construct anything. So that second lap again that so they're reserving they're reserving the frontage basically of Rquari and East Garner that they that the frontage cannot be used only for residential uses.

You're just saying the same thing a different way. It could sit vacant. Say again. It could sit vacant. This this condition does not require them to actually construct anything there. It just says it's prohibiting them from solely doing residential. These 10 acres will be reserved for non-residential or vertical mixed use. I'm still why why is that not getting us there? Right. Why is that not getting us to your to your goal?

Well, I think any condition they could leave something like I mean there's there's all the conditions you can dance around there and you could leave a hole here and hole there. Miss Jones is just clarifying what it actually they could do, but with the investment that's looked at here that they probably won't do. But she's just telling us, she's giving us the the uh apartment on Highway 7 behind the Napa scenario. Mhm. She's saying this could happen based off what's written, but that could happen in several conditions. Right. Right.

It's probably unlikely that the development would proceed that way where they would build all the residential behind it without it. But but this condition three as it's written now it says that a minimum of 10 acres in aggregate will be reserved for non-residential or at least for mixed use. So it there there will be no all residential buildings there. You are correct sir. It's already saying there will be no all residential buildings in this 10 acres. I'm I'm still confused why we're trying to get more. If that's the intent, if that's what council wants, the condition already does that.

If if council wants a minimum requirement of vertical mixed use, I would suggest putting in a square footage rather than one building.

Could be a very tiny building. This may not be what the development team wants, but that would be a a stronger condition. I thought what I was hearing from council, they didn't want to see any all residential in that area. I heard Mr. Matthew say that. I thought I heard Mr. Singleton say he wants in this area that described here. There will be no all residential buildings. And that's what this says. Or am I misreading or mis misstating? I'm not an attorney. Uh you are absolutely correct, sir. You could not do residential only uses in the 10 acres that's been reserved.

Yeah. There will be no building in there. There would be no building in there that's all residential. It's all apartments. And so what what are we missing?

So where we are is we're making progress on the condition. What we're now Miss Jones pointed in this is sort of what is the dimensionality of this condition? What is the height limitation or minimum? What is the square footage minimum? If there's more than one, it could be a square footage in multiple buildings. I think that's where we're at right now because again, you're not going to put, you said 10 acres of vertical mixed use out there. It'd be amazing, but that's not this project. Um, so I think that's where we're we're not stuck. Um, but I think now we're sort of confined to what your vision is and what works with your plan. And so the feedback now from you all needs to be this is what that looks like. This is what ver a vertical mixeduse commitment in those 10 acres looks like.

And we have I mean I have to that's where we are which is now we have definition of vertical. We have the definition but now we need to know what is that what does that look like? What does that square footage? What is what does the commitment look like? That is a a form-based commitment. I think that goes back to some work council did a couple years ago where we looked at projects and what these conditions manifested themselves into once they started coming out of the ground, right?

And the conditions need to match a form. And so now we're at the point of what is the what does this forum look like? and goes back to the gateway 540 project that had different pods and different flex and industrial uses that had specific square footages for different types of structure which is still a tier one uh but it was different. So I think that's where we are now is right what is a what is a vertical mixeduse commitment in this 10 acres look like for you that works for you? We examined different scenarios and concluded that we were not able to make any minimum. Please try again. Excuse me. Excuse me. Repeat that.

That we were not able to make any minimum square footage commitments. Um for the site apologies. And could could you go back to your definition of vertical mix? Could you pull pull that up for us to look at condition? It's not even condition. Okay. Yes. So the the so the definition that will apply to to this project throughout

is the term vertical mixed use is defined as a development type that integrates multiple distinct complimentary uses such as food and beverage retail office medical recreation and entertainment hospitality and residential and residential within a single multi-story structure. That that's that's what we want. We want vertical mixed use that includes uh living and these uh these complimentary uses. Right. Correct.

That's that's what we want. And we want it multi-story. And so every building in your development that is not residential only will be vertical mixed use. And in these 10 acres, it's going to be vertical mixed use or commercial. There will be no residential only in your 10 acres. Yes, sir. So what what am I missing? Well, the the only thing that is then sort of different too is in in one of the conditions there's a a minimum height for apartments at four stories, right? And so and so what we don't have in this vertical mixed use is a similar type of height minimum. So

and and you wouldn't want to put a minimum height on it or or or a maximum height on it. So, for instance, uh you'll find a twostory mixeduse building next to a three or fourstory mixeduse building, and if you'd put a restriction on it saying, "Well, everyone has to be three stories minimum or four stories minimum," the other one would never have gotten built.

And you look around any of these places in North Hills or Fenton, it's not like they all start at a certain minimum height. So again adding that is a constraint imposed by government on private development that is not an organic way for the site to actually be developed. That is not a condition that um would actually produce for the better. What we put here is a condition that says we're going to have you know it could be a hotel that has a restaurant on the ground floor. Can you imagine that off Rock Quarry Road right at the interchange? Or it could be a an office building that has retail on the ground floor, a coffee shop on the ground floor, or it could be an apartment that has restaurants and retail on the ground level. We want it to be defined as vertical mixed use as opposed to what we thought Mr. Dinger's original concern was with horizontally separated uh uses in a mixeduse area. And and this precludes that this and your 10 acre precludes the residential only.

Yeah. And you're right. You go to Fenton, it's not all 10 stories. It's not all three stories plus. Some of it's one, some of it's two, then it jumps to four and eight. Yeah. It's it's the nature of mixed use. And how to define this without a detailed master plan that's going to be in place for the next 10 years is impractical. the market changes. But I would also say this is only 10 acres of an 82 acre site,

which is a tremendously significant amount of land to commit to uh commercial and vertical mix uses in this area of not only Garner but Wake County. It's a huge it's a huge amount of land. I mean, if you can put it in comparison, North Hills, the original North Hills right in Midtown Raleigh is 17 acres. So, we're talking about 10 acres off Rock Quarry Road in Garner. It's a it's a huge commitment of land.

I'm very familiar with North Hills, and if you want to build some 20s story buildings off of 540 out there, please go right ahead. The tax revenue would be amazing. And I think that's the part that it comes down to is how are we maximizing the tax footprint of this property? And you mentioned mixed use. You got a a hotel with mixed use on the bottom. You got apartments, but none of those are one or twotory. You don't have twotory hotels or twotory apartments would not be the form that you would put over in a mixeduse vertical project. Those numbers definitely don't track to do twotory threetory mixed use with the commercial on the bottom. I see it all over town in Wake Forest, Nightdale, Raleigh that Yes, I see that in Kerry.

So that is that is a product that is built on the major artery. Sure. So how do we get how do we where are we now? Where what are you willing to I guess again what are you what form are you willing to commit a a where we are

I thought the conversation had come back to saying that the conditions as written were satisfying the garner plans vision that this would not be 80 acres of residential that we had reserved and committed a minimum of 10 acres for commercial and vertical mixed uses or vertical excuses. Either way you slice it, 10 acres will not be residential only as the conditions are written now, right? And there will be areas in in your plan that will be residential only as we've talked about. Yeah, Mr. Matthews.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. You know, we can kick this thing around all night. Um, and I would hope you guys will pull your motion. Let's talk about this thing realist. Let's talk common sense here. This is a business decision by this group. 10 acres in wet county. Hell, go and price that out and see how that comes back to you. What are you going to build in 10 or 15 years out there? Unless you got a crystal ball, you can realize what's coming was not what's not going to be there. It might be all commercial. It might be a hotel when that five. Who knows? And who are we to sit here and tell them what exactly they got to put on that 10 acres? Cuz realistically, they don't know. that can say here's and here's what we're wanting to do but times change uh you know uh things happen and I go back to the old Walmart out there it's setting empty right now um because that's what they did but you know the environment is going to change different things changes economics is going to change people moving out here is going to change and nobody up on this board can predict that if you are you're you're a very good person I can't predict I don't think nobody else here. We can sit here and make assumptions, but assumptions can be in millions of dollars that you're never going to recoup and nobody's ever going to move into. And there's a lot of empty buildings in Wake County that people were thinking about it. I know the distributors, Mr. Barry out here. He was going to build that big complex. All of a sudden, everything changed. Nobody wanted those offices no more. If he had built them, they've been sitting there empty right now. And uh it it is what it is. You know, this thing has been written up. We have talked about it. They've done everything we have asked of them and at the last minute want to nickel and dime them. It's not realistic. Let's give this group an opportunity to deliver what they say they're going to deliver and make a good project out there because not only is their project again, you go back to the sword they're going to bring in. That's

going to impact a lot of other things. And we're going to beat it to death of the height of one building on 10 acres. Ladies and gentlemen, we we're better than this. let's move on this project and move forward and let them deliver on what they've committed to doing. They've done everything we have asked them and they come back here and put our staff on on in a hot spot again in a hot spot again when this should have been voted on two hours ago and moved on and we should have been home by now. But if we're going to nickel and dime it, I don't blame these guys are doing what they want to do. But we better wake up. It's a big big investment we're talking about here long-term years out and we can't project what's going to go in out there. That's why it's a tier one. Here's what in a perfect world here's what they want to do and they've said that's what we're going to do. You know, we could be at war two years from now and nothing could be happen. Who knows? Who knows? So, I suggest we pull that motion off. Let's approve this thing and let them move on. We didn't deliver on what they said they're going to do. I have no reason to think they'll do anything less. And uh if if they do, they'll come back before us again and we'll remember those things. But let's move forward on this project. Do something for Garner for change instead of nickel and dime it what this building is going to look like and that building is going to look like cuz nobody knows what the future's going to bring. In a perfect world, they've got it plotted in. They've done everything they said they're going to do. They got the financial backing. They're going above and beyond bringing sewer out. Everything. Who knows what that's going to do on all that acreage. A big company can come in offering hundreds of jobs or what? Who knows? But now, no sewer. Guess what? That ain't going to happen. So, I implore all you guys. Let's rethink this thing and let's give these guys an opportunity to deliver on what they come in here and they've got commitments and they're ready to move on it. And we're holding them back over

something minute over a building on 10 acres. Sorry, I don't buy into that. I'm I'm a bis businessman. I know they are too. And money is money and time is time. So you can agree with me or not. But I'm I'm just telling you I've got a lot of age on me. I've seen things come and go. And uh there's a lot of well wish that man I wish we'd have done that. Wish we'd have done that. And Garner is going to be a place where people want to come and develop and do things or we're going to get a reputation real quick. Garner's closed for business. So make up your mind what you want to do. But you better think long and hard about it because we got a perfect scenario right here, right now. And everybody ain't going to agree with me. I'll never talk Mr. Dillinger into that. I understand that. I respect that. He's got a right to vote. But I say we vote on this thing and um move it forward and if it goes down, it goes down. But you better think long and hard before you vote no. And I'm just telling you, it'll it'll come back. You'll regret it one day. I've seen it come and go too many times. Thank you.

We we we've had excellent conversation. Mr. Singleton had his hand up over here. We'll just walk right.

You just said in your description, I don't know if you caught what you said, but you said our goal on this 10 acres was to have a site that was reserved for non-residential and vertical mix uses. That's that's used and in the word and just every again I told you I had no trouble and a minimum of a vertical of a minimum of one vertical mixuse build. I'm fine with that. That's do it. Have it in two weeks and let's go. I'm ready. I don't doing the heights and square footage. I understand what the attorney's saying. It could be two story. It's two story. The goal the goal on here it could be two story. There's nothing on here saying that this could be that. That's hard to that's hard to that's hard to dictate. You know, if we took as much time going through this as we did some other projects that got approved here, we'd be a whole lot better off. Uh and I'm not saying anything negative y'all because y'all went the extra step beyond some of our other development projects that got approved. So, I'm complimenting you is what I'm saying the work that you went through. Um, but I I look I fine. If Mr. Trezenberg is satisfied with that condition, I'm fine. Do it in March 3rd. You've heard of kind of what to go to your property owners and let's go because um only difference between the condition they signed and that is it just is a minimum of one vertical mixuse building versus you know or it could be 10 of them based on this condition and that's just saying one. So

the the uh hang on just a second. Yes, sir. So I'm sorry. Go ahead. I want to make sure you're okay. Yes, sir. And I just want to make sure I understand what you're saying. You think it still needed some adjusted words to meet your satisfaction? Right. Yeah. Just like what we talked about about 10 minutes ago and the Mr. Treesburg agree with the language and that's fine. I know where Attorney Jones is heading, but I don't think we can get quite that specific with the tier one. I'm Write it up. Y'all get it together and take it to your property and then we'll bring it back on March the 3rd and hopefully it'll just boom. Okay. Let's get Mr. Stalin. But you had your hand. No, go ahead, sir. Or you wanted him to go? Yeah.

Okay. I was just going to make the comment that uh if we go to extraordinary efforts to go to the property owners and suggest the condition as you said at least one vertical mixeduse building and Mr. Dillinger still votes against it. it will have been much ado uh a huge task for us to do to get the same result that we would have if a vote were to happen on the conditions as is. Um that's my only comment on that and I've seen I've seen that before happen in other cases where people go to extraordinary efforts and still receive a negative vote even after going to all that trouble. So I I just say what Mr. Mayor Gupton was saying before. We already have the conditions in place as is. Um and that's all I was going to say

on it. Mr. Stal,

um I just wanted to respond to um one of our our council members comments. Um I think this motion caused us to have this discussion. I think this has been a pretty good discussion along the lines of trying to get clarity around a project that they are spending millions of dollars. This is a a massive project. I actually like this project a lot. I think we're all trying to get to a similar place in which we can find common ground on how we move this forward. So, I think this discussion is healthy. I think everybody has approached this in a pretty respectful manner with each other. And I think at this point in time, we're just trying to figure out what's the path forward because we have council members who have slight concerns, but I think we're still trying to tweak those to make sure that we can get there. But like I will I will reiterate, this is amazing project. I want us to get there.

Thank you. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Dinger. Back to you.

Yeah, I just echo what Mr. Stalling said. I don't think we're we're not here and here. We're here and here. Right. That's where we are. And I don't think I think you're I think that we as a council when we're activated on something that we all want to see succeed will move quickly and expeditiously to make sure it succeeds. That that's how we operate. I don't think there's a scenario where everyone in this room puts forth in herculean effort to make this work and come back and we just like, you know, we changed our mind. We all like the project. We're not arguing about the scope and scale and the potential of it. We're also trying to set a certain expectation in Garner for the type of development we want to see come out of the ground because we see it happening all around the county and you know we do think long and hard um about these things a lot for years been thinking long and hard about them. Um, so I think where we are with the motion is the mo, you know, still the third. I don't think we're going to get the exact language tonight, but we will have it within days. I think staff has worked very hard to get, you know, they're they're they're taking notes and chatting and figuring out where we need to tighten this thing up and and we'll get back here. If everybody does their role on a timeline, everyone succeeds. Um, but I think it is a it is a level of scrutiny that is incumbent upon us as council members who represent the town and the residents to negotiate with you in good faith and look at the best interest of the town and not just your best interest. That's why we set up here and I want every business in the entire country to know that we will work with anybody who comes and goes through the process and works hard as you all have shaped your project and other applicants have to get to that end point. Um so I

think we're in a good position. I'm very positive that we will get in a to a place that is satisfactory to everyone. Um, and we'll just go through the process and we'll make it work. And in two weeks, you'll be like, "Wow, that was amazing. It's a better project," which we've had multiple applicants say to us standing right there for this process. You ended up with a better product. And so, I'm I'm happy with where we are. Um, I'll let I'll pass on Mr. Vance if he has any questions. Um, comments. Uh, we're we're talking about specifically condition three, correct? Yes sir. That's what we're looking for. Say again. We're talking specifically about condition three

and we're talking about the language for condition three and we are looking at and and at least equal one whatever. Okay. So the that's the language that we are asking to be placed into this particular condition uh so that hopefully to have a favorable outcome when it comes back before us. I guess the question becomes uh can we make that happen within the time that's provided? Going back to the timeline piece is is is that even something that you want to entertain or or or what?

I mean, we're we're we're jammed in in the sense of what our timeline is. So, we would prefer to have a vote tonight. We'd prefer to have a favorable vote tonight. What What do you say on that? I think will you say but in the interest of time we will propose and at least one road. Yeah. In in the interest of time we will propose that this condition number three says a minimum of 10 acres in aggregate of the site will be reserved for non-residential and at least one vertical mixeduse building. Okay. Uses satisfying this condition shall be located within 400 ft of rockar and easter roads.

Yeah. Those are the words that we're talking about. Mr. Stalin, you had another observation. Just clarifying what we've been talking about. Yes, sir.

Okay. And uh and and what you're asking is, is there a reasonable probability that a majority of council members will vote yes for this in two weeks if you have those words in here and your property owners have signed off on it? And and I Mr. Matthews clearly is for it. I think Mr. Singleton is saying if it has these words, he he's good with it. I'm not putting words in anybody's mouth, not promising, but you clearly to be expeditious, we need to give you a measurable goal that will be accomplished in the two weeks. And that measurable goal is the words that you just said and are a part of the record. And I'm not going to put anybody else on the spot unless somebody wants to volunteer.

I mean, I'm going just ask the um planning director of Mr. Trezenberg um with that condition and if they're what type of And then I shared a question with you too. Is there if there's a general agreement on that then is there some um minimum form expectation because again to the observation that it could be a one small building with uh to our term pointed out could be one small building with one residential unit above it and that would fall under the existing definition. So I guess we're we're we're close. I think it's sort of uh how do we get some form minimums without over

I'll I'll take a shot answer. Hang on. Hang on. I think you're asking Mr. Tra. Yeah, I mean I'm asking and if he needs to ask him you can but I think again there's a visualization of a vertical mixed use but at the same time not something so ownorous that it's not going to fit ultimately into their development plan. So based on what we were reading in that other slide, at a min at a minimum, it would be have to be at least two stories and have at least two of those uses that were listed, two separate and distinct uses.

So that's based off previous conditions, excuse me, conditions that already exist as a as as vertical mixed use was defined. Okay, we we'd be happy to add language to that to say a at least one vertical mixeduse building having a minimum height of two stories with a minimum number of two uses from this list to be as clear about it as as possible

because I mean they can build a twotory vertical mix she's building now there's nothing we're not going to here and tell them they got to build a 10story vertical mixeduse building that's not going to be in the condition. So that they could be two could be 10. U so I had no trouble with that where you know that clarifies that it'll be what it will be just stated two uses one two vertical that's fine. I had no trouble with that

because again we we you know it pass we can't tell them how many stories any vertical mixeduse building is going to be. Well, and that goes to what Mayor Gupton had said. We have a finite amount of land. We've committed 10 acres for these non-residential and or vertical mixed uses rather than a square footage because we could always just say, "Oh, yeah. You see that uh one acre over there? We're going to build a 10-story building that's going to be however many feet." And it just wouldn't make any sense. you couldn't enforce it, which is why we haven't one of the reasons why we haven't included it. Uh, and we think that what you just described of clarifying minimum height of two acres or two minimum height of two stories, minimum two uses from this list. I that's something that uh I think could make sense

if that'll get us across the goal line. That might be what we have to do. And that that's kind of the feeling I'm get from council if that's what it takes. But but I think it is reasonable for you to say what our measurable goal is two weeks from now to have the words that that you've already said as part of this and that there would be a high probability. Nobody's signing in blood, but that that three council members will will vote for this. that you're not doing this just for another exercise to get it kicked down the road for two more weeks or four more weeks. So, I think it's realistic for you to say, "Tell me the words you want in here when I come back in two weeks." And and I think we've agreed on those words,

more or less. I I'm happy to repeat it again. A minimum of 10 acres in aggregate of the site will be reserved for non-residential and at least one vertical mixeduse building having a minimum height of two stories and containing at least two distinct uses from the following list. Food uh and beverage, retail, medical, office, residential, hospitality. You think that covers what our definition was? Vertical mixed uses that we had in the preamble here.

Are we getting there? I I still see a a CVS drug with two studio apartments on top of it. That's what I see. But that would meet the definition. Okay, we got Fenton head is that Fenton head is that it's not all that, but some of

it's it's it's it's um you know, it's helpful when the reading conditions on things to look at the absolute minimum of what this thing looks like. And if if council is satisfied with a CVS with two apartments above it as meeting the condition for having a development with vertical mixed use in it, then I guess that's what we're satisfied with. Uh, I think as we drive around Wake County, we see much more ambitious projects. I'm not saying I'm not wait one one at a time, sir. Please don't interrupt. Yeah, Mr. D, go ahead.

Yeah. As we as we drive around the county and I I was not trying to say your project's ambitious. It's super ambitious. We all know it is. We all know it's a big project and we appreciate it. Um, what the potential is. And I think if you were sitting in our seat, our seat our our fear is the is the bare minimum that we would get stuck with. Whereas you you're praying for the best. We're praying for the best, but we may get stuck with who knows we'll get stuck with. And so I think that's where our jobs are a little bit different. Right. Sure.

But we're all on the same team. So uh I think we can uh probably call the question, have a vote, work on the language. uh I think it's a little under ambitious but maybe there'll be some changes of mind on on that as well but I think to for the in this for the sake of time the motion's probably going to go forward with the March 3rd um the language will get drafted and if there's any other feedback from council it'll be had and then it'll be sent to you and I'm kind of eye and our attorney a little bit and our town manager on that timeline process piece.

I I have a question. Is there any way we can include the language that we have discussed tonight um in the motion um as we continue this to the next meeting? So, you are not able to impose this condition. The condition would have to be accepted in writing by the property owners.

What David Yeah. Their their homework is to get that sign off from the property owners so they can bring it back. Now, yes, go ahead. Do I have a clear understanding that if we make the change to condition number three as we just articulated that there would be a majority support for approval from council. Am I polling the council correctly on that? Not with any further language changes but with as I just described it. I don't know if legally we can sit here and commit to how we're going to vote on something based with the attorney, but I think you've all you've heard express our support of change the condition in that way. I don't think we can sit here and say yes, sir. I'm going to vote on that because I don't think that's legal. But we we are we favorably uh looking at the cons your consideration of changing the condition.

He's made that's the nice way to say it. I think Mr. Matthews already made his position clear. Does anybody want to nod their head or shake their head or look look out the window? I mean, I I do think you can give that indication. We can't effectuate an ordinance adoption of this without the signed written, you know, consent to the conditions. He he just tried to to get a read of which way are the individual council members leaning at this moment in time. I I guess I can ask the question a different way. Um, do we have um a consensus on council that we won't negotiate language after what we discussed?

Yeah, I think you're asking the same thing. Will we accept that if they come back with that or or we've heard two people say they're inclined to do that given what they hear today and you're just looking for people to kind of nod yes or or not no. Could could we get an indication from uh council member Vance and member Stallings what their position would be on that proposed change? I just asked a question. Would you repeat that? My question was,

is council committing to this language that we just discussed and nobody will attempt to negotiate language after what we discussed tonight. That's put quite well with the parameters that have been discussed on that condition. Uh, like I said, yeah, three I see three people nodding their head to that and and one who's not sure and that's okay. Oh, yeah. I'm I'm I'm still going to be opposed to it because I think it it could be better.

And I I'm staff I mean there's an indication that you know, you know, we can up our bare minimum, but it still may not be great. That's fine. The majority of council want to do it. Dory Council's going to do it. That's the way it rolls. This has been a great discussion and great points. I hope we can address them all with Mr. Stalin. Do you have another observation or this is a lot of work, isn't it? We do have a a motion and a second on the form. We've had a lot of discussion. I just won't forget we had supposed to vote on Mr. Dinger voted that we um continue this to the March meeting. So, we just need to remember we need to vote on that.

That was the motion by Mr. Dinger and it was seconded by Mr. Stalins to to continue this until March the 3rd. The rest of it was just discussion. So that's the motion before us. Okay. I'm seeing a lot of people nod their head in agreement with that. So I'm going to ask for a v a voice vote on that motion that we just described to continue this until our meeting on March 3rd. All in favor, please signify by saying I. I.

Any opposed by nay? Hearing none, that passes unanimously. And thank you for the dialogue. Thank you for the patience. This is extremely important. We we hope we can all reach a unanimous conclusion two weeks from now. Do some homework. Mr. Mayor, can we put them at the top of the agenda somehow? Uh so I don't have to wait like they did the last thing tonight. I'm sorry, Mr. Mr. Matthews. Would you say that again? Can for the agenda for that meeting, can they be up on the top side of it versus kind of the tail end of it? We will look at the agenda and see where we we can I just want to plant that seed. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, gentlemen. The dialogue.

Thank you. See you in two weeks. Okay. Okay. And that brings us to updates to council. Uh and several things here. I guess I'm just going to poll by the nod of the head or council members. Do you want a fivem minute break to stretch your legs? Let's rock and roll. What do you say? I didn't hear you. Uh would you would council members prefer to take a short five minute recess to stretch our legs so we can pay full attention to these updates and and other committee reports and manager reports or push on through? Just short break or push on through. Everybody looking at me? We can push on through.

Five minutes. Five minutes. Let's bet your legs. We come back in five minutes. I want you in five minutes. I think it is 5 minutes.

from recess for the final portion of our meeting tonight. And I wanted us to be fresh and attentive to hear uh updates to council committee reports and managers report. So with that, let's start with our committee reports from our council members for any committees they are on that have something to report. Let's start with Mr. Matthews. Uh just got an update today with uh far as the veterans committee and work with uh uh the u public works. Uh we're adding two more flag polls out there. They're going to be up before Veterans Day. I was informed uh to go along with the American flag. It will be a North Carolina flag and a um far as a PW flag. So that'll be up in time for Veterans Day. So I want to thank everybody involved. I Mr. pools in there and uh Forest Jones and all the gang, all your team there, madam manager.

So, we're excited about that. Excellent. Thank you, Mr. Singleton. Committee reports. We had a uh first meeting uh one of the transportation advisory committees. I met last week. That's Thursday. Uh it was the initial meeting. Had some a lot of feedback discussion with the uh consultants. That's just the first there'll be three meetings with that group. There'll be numerous meetings with staff with all council with stakeholders soldiers and so forth but that was the start of that process. Excellent. Thank you very much Mr. Stalin.

So yesterday I had the pleasure of attending our February parks and recreation advisory committee meeting. There was a lot of great discussion during that meeting. Some of the discussion was around possibly partnering with the public's arts committee to beautify park pedestrian bridges around town as well as possibly having one member of the parks and recreation committee serve as a ad hoc member on the public arts committee similar to how the um senior advisory senior citizens advisory committee has a represent a representative on the parks um committee. So it was a great meeting a lot of great conversation. Um also tomorrow is the February meeting for the youth council. They'll be learning from the planning about the planning department as I understand. So I'm definitely excited for them to hear about the great work that the planning department is doing as showcased tonight and to further their knowledge about town operations.

Excellent. Thanks for your enthusiasm with all those committee assignments. Mr. Dinger, uh, no reports. All right, Mr. B. No report. Wow, that's that's even better, too. Now, how about those manager reports? I bet we have some of those. Yes. Good evening, Mayor, members of council. Um, in light of the the time this evening, um, the next three reports, I've asked them to just go over the highlights with council, your written reports are provided as part of your agenda, and certainly if you have questions about anything provided in the written report, feel free to ask, but I just want to be mindful of time. So, our first report this evening is our development services update, and I'll ask assistant manager Hodgeges if he'd provide those highlights.

Thank you, Miss Miller. Um, as Miss Miller said, the report is in your packet. I would call attention to one uh accomplishment. The town has received a water quality planning grant that was led by the engineering department and that is going to allow for some sampling to be done in three of the tributaries that uh run to Swift Creek and set some benchmarkings that will allow us to um apply for future funding. So, there's more detail there um in your your um report. Um several of the other things are updates that you received recently, but we do produce this not only for council, but we produce it for our development community. So some of those are repeated. Um our quarterly development statistics are included. One thing I'll draw your attention to is we have started with this quarter to include the population estimate. Um each month our planning staff takes the number of cos and extrapolates the uh estimated number of people and that gets added to a month-over-month total. Since the last um census or American community survey, um the January 1 estimate is 45,671. You'll see that on each of our quarterly reports. And I will just remind you that that number will vary uh from published numbers because a lot of our numbers statistically have to be reported using the last official census or the last ACS. But this just gives you another planning tool to be mindful of. Also, we included our 2025 development statistics. Uh please take a look at those at some impressive numbers uh such as 3500 3500 total permits issued, 47,000 inspections completed in 2025. Um,00 complaints uh investigated and two almost 2,000 fire inspections. So kudos to all the members of the development services departments who participate in all of that work. If you have any questions, please let me know.

Thank you.

All right. Thank you, Mr. Hajes. Next under manager reports we have our economic development department update and we'll ask Mr. Groover. Hello mayor and town council. We ended the year strong supporting small business in downtown Garner with our um end of the year events. We had our food truck rodeo and garner night out. Paint all Maine was revived. Um, light up Maine. And then we also had our holiday block party and Christmas parade. We had over 13,000 people at our events in downtown in 2025 and over 177,000 visitors in downtown for the year. So, it was a great way to end the year. Um, 2026 has started strong. Our events are on the calendar. We have been printing material and distributing that throughout the town. And our launch garner program is going strong as well. We have 15 ladies in our cohort. It is our largest cohort to date and they are doing an awesome job. They should finish their classes in uh the middle of March.

Evening mayor and council. Appreciate the opportunity to uh give you a very quick lightning round update tonight. Uh I do want to take a moment of personal privilege to congratulate uh April on hitting her year anniversary today. So that's no small feat. So thank you April for staying with us and doing the great job that she's doing. I think everyone can definitely see the the impact um on downtown and everything that she's been working on. So definitely appreciate all her all her hard work. Um just want to hit on some of the highlights tonight. I know the information is your packet and you have it there in front of you. Um so the two most important things um as far as community promotion uh that we embarked on the last couple months was uh we partnered with our friends at the economic development partnership in North Carolina who came up with a creative uh marketing campaign due to some uh budget constraints uh at the year end. So instead of um purchasing large expensive billboard advertising space around the state, they created a mini billboard plan, mini billboard campaign um which they allowed uh partners around the state to utilize. So that mini billboard was in high demand. Uh we were lucky enough to get uh there was a long waiting list but since we have close proximity to downtown Raleigh, I was able to expedite that and um with the thanks of uh Bella and our communications team took some outstanding pictures of kind of just showcasing downtown Garner and highlighting the fact that North Carolina was the number one state for business. So we appreciated the partnership with that. And then in the continuing theme of partnership, uh we were happy to host the two newest project managers with the Wake County Economic Development Team. Um they came and and toured Garner and kind of showed them all of the the sights and sounds and the product that we have under construction. Um they're in very

important partners because they are uh on I consider them an extension of our team as we're working on attracting new businesses and and retaining businesses here in town. uh they're on the front lines of that with us. So, I was very appreciative to have essentially what was a full day of their time to give them the full tour of Garner and kind of educate them on everything that we have going on. And with that, I'll close and happy to answer any questions you may have. One quick question. I know at Wake County, the food and beverage tax is near and dear to uh some of us. Uh there's millions of dollars up there available and they're going through that process of diving that out. Uh I think in the past, at least when I was up there, uh we'd get all kinds of applications in for special projects that promoted tourism or that that that's a key focus of what they're looking at. And I don't know if the doors have been shut on that, but there's millions of dollars up there. uh and they're fixing either started or preparing to start looking at requests. Uh but what that's worth, we got a lot of talent here. We could use some of those millions of dollars if you want to go after them and u but they can tell you what specifically they're looking for. They do that every year and uh we sure contribute heavy to it. We need to get some of that back. So just I'll offer that up for you guys to think about.

And Mr. Matthews, um you're right. There is a great opportunity for partnership on some of the hospitality tax dollars for grants provided to municipalities in Wake County. Uh we did apply through this last cycle through the for the u Metobrook Park phase one project. Unfortunately, we were not selected for funding. I was told we were very close in terms of um being selected, but there were some other projects that were selected ahead of us. they encouraged us to apply with the same project in the next uh funding cycle which should probably be about a year or so. So, we're definitely keeping an eye on that those opportunities and looking for for ways to submit applications for those grant dollars.

Okay. Thank you. If there are not um any other questions by council members, Miss Wood, Mr. Groover, thank you so much for your time this evening. The final uh report this evening under manager reports is your February talk of the town and Mr. Hodgees. Oh, there's one more question. I'm sorry. Excuse me, Mr. Down. Sorry, I was I was a little late. Um, I have a question and or that may turn into a request. Um, is it possible maybe next quarter for us to have the GEDC a GEDC update and maybe have a board come and talk about work plan? I know we've done some work with them on small area studies and that kind of thing. So, is that possible maybe next quarter to kind of have kind of an update from on what's going on over there?

Yes, sir. Absolutely. In fact, um we expect to have um somewhat of at least a uh project update on the project that we're working on. So, a meaningful update by then. So, absolutely. Okay. And and and before then, actually. So, Okay. Great. Yeah. I won't have to wait till the next update. So, Okay. Okay. Cool. Thank you. Right. All right. And Mr. Hodgees, talk of the town.

Uh so, your talk of the town report has several updates on parks, recreation, cultural resources programming. We'll let you review those. We want to um thank the planning department for continuing with their chat with the planner program to get out in the community and explain the planning process um to members of the community. Um the police department's annual polar plunge is coming up at the end of the month. Um and so we're uh led by by um our police department and um several of us will be participating in that. And then also a reminder to council the essentials of municipal government. Um, some members of council and staff will be attending that on the 26th and 27th at the School of Government. Your statistics for the Garner Info app are also included on page two. Um, we're in the time of the year where we're we're dealing with streets and and some of those type of um of issues. And just as a reminder, these statistics do not include the proactive work that our team is out doing uh before they get reported by someone in the app. And if you have any questions, be glad to answer them.

Thank you, Mr. Hodes. A final uh update and reminder for council is we are holding council's annual retreat at the end of this week on Thursday and Friday the 20th, 19th and 20th. Uh we will be holding the retreat retreat at White Deer Park in the nature center. So we're looking forward to being in that beautiful facility on what I what it looks like are going to be some very warm, beautiful days. So looking forward to that later on in the week. And those are all the uh reports for this evening. Happy to answer any questions that council may have. Yeah.

You mentioned the county funding and about applying again. Do those dollars if you're awarded, do they have parameters? You have to spend them within three years, two years, five, does it have a time limit or when you if you receive the funds, you have so many months or years to spend? I don't know that level of detail. I'd have to um find out from our parks and recck department. If you recall, we did receive some of the funding for the Jurgen Park project. So, I would have to go back and look at those requirements. Okay. I was just curious since you mentioned that. Okay. Excellent. And that brings us to attorney reports.

Um, thank you, Mr. Mayor. I just wanted to let you know that I provided you with additional retreat materials and hard copy, and you just got an email from me in the last few minutes with some even more additional uh materials that were prepared by our assistant town attorney, Diamond Spain. Excellent. Thank you. and brings us back to conclusion of council reports things other than the committee reports. Let's start with Mr. Bance. Any council reports? Nothing tonight. Mr. D.

Yeah, I've noticed in the past 6 months or maybe eight months, an increase in the number of accidents at Timber and Vandor Springs. Seems like every couple months there's a really bad accident over there. And I was wondering if we could get, you know, even just emailed out to council if there's been an uptick there. Um, I think maybe at least a couple of them have been people turning right on red and and getting t-boned because people are coming really fast. You're going north on Vandor and east on Timber. Um, just curious um if there's, you know, any uptick there or if it's just kind of an anomaly. Um the other is I want to just thank uh assistant manager pool and parks and wreck for facilitating the program partner meeting a couple weeks ago for baseball and softball. Um really facilitated a lot of great conversation about field usage and field space and just want to kind of communicate out of that that we we are well aware we have a shortage of this field space. Um and there were some but there were some good conversations on optimizing it. Um, but I still think it doesn't get us out of a potential bond of having a shortage of space and there was some potential solutions that we maybe can talk about during budget season um that might help some of that and our program partners. Um, but I just want to thank for assistant town manager for convening and and Maria for facilitating that conversation. Um and everyone it it was very constructive and people are willing to work together but there's still going to be a common issue of field space shortage um particularly with the park the middle school closing as well the field over there. So um we're looking for creative solutions and see what we can come up with. So this is yeah

well thank you. Yeah you talk about allocation of ball fields. I mentioned big deal earlier. That's the bigger deal. People take it seriously about their kids playing ball. Yeah. So my hats off to everybody in parks and wreck and everybody who is working on that very delicate and very important resource allocation. Mr. Stalins.

Uh so this is for the public. Early voting has started. Every street recreation center is a polling location and is here in Garner. Open Monday to Friday from 8 a.m. to 7:30 p.m. Monday through Friday. Saturday from 8:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. Sunday from 1:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. until February 28th. So, please make sure you go out and exercise your right to vote. No matter who you vote for, just make sure you go out and vote. And that's my report. Absolutely. Thanks for the reminder. It starts early and it's very important. Mr. Singleton,

I just want to mention again, thanks for the work we had from public safety, public works, you know, fire, police, and public works with the ice and snow. Um, that's a lot of extra time, a lot of uh uh extra time commitment. I mean, I know police are working their hourly shifts, but they're dealing with a whole different, you know, just we're not used to dealing with driving through ice and snow like like that normally. And also the time that public works put in. I know they work on getting people out, working long hours, and then they give them give them a break. So, I heard positive things from folks. I think I mentioned it maybe last meeting. A couple people said when are they going to do the side streets? I said whenever they get to them, the primary roads are the key. So, uh want to thank everybody again for the work because that takes a lot of time and effort and the command center and so forth. Uh thank goodness the ice storm was as bad as it could have been. Um, but anyway, it's uh people uh have responded positively what the town did. So, I just want to pass that along.

Thank you very much, Mr. Matthew. Yes, sir. Uh, dittos and what he just said and also appreciate from the town management of keeping us apprised of what's going on because I know it was a never changing by the hour and uh but uh the team did a great job and public works all the way on bound. So, uh, you didn't hear any bad news. So, just so thank you for what y'all did. Exactly. That all went well, way better than anticipated. Thanks for the great turnout by everybody involved. And that being said, that concludes our agenda. Our business has been taken care of, unless I've overlooked something. Uh, and if not, I will accept a motion to adjurnn. So, move.

There's a move. There's a motion by Mr. Stallins. Is there a second? Second. There's a couple of seconds coming down here from from the Vans Dell and your team. Uh all in favor of adjournment, please signify by saying I. I. Any opposed by nay.

Meeting adjourned. me. Hey. Hey.