Planning & Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting

Hey, hey, hey. Good evening. Recordings recording in progress. My name is Mary Ske and I would like to welcome you to the December 15th meeting of the Greensboro Planning and Zoning Meeting. Um, if the other commissioners would introduce themselves, starting at my right, please. Stu Nichols, Keith Peterson,

Katherine Maggot, War Downing, Erica Glass, Paul Gilmore, Senior, Ted Oliver, and we have one commissioner online and we need a mic on. Betty, Betty Turner. Very good. Thank you. Thank you.

Okay. Please note that this meeting is being conducted in person and online. And if anyone participating online needs help with Zoom, please email Luke Carter lucas.carter greensboro-N.gov. Members of this commission are appointed by the city council and we serve without pay. The commission reviews all original zoning and annexation cases and reszoning requests for the city of Greensboro and each commissioner normally visits each site prior to this meeting. The procedure used for all of our public hearings are as follows. The planning staff will present background information and make their recommendation. The applicant will then be given an opportunity to present a short summary on how he or she communicated with the neighborhood and why the request is reasonable. Other persons in favor of the request may speak for a total of 10 minutes and this time is shared with the applicant. Speakers opposed to the request will share 10 minutes of speaking speaking time. Um then those in favor of the request will share five minutes of rebuttal time and those in opposition to the request will then have five minutes of their rebuttal time. Um we've got uh some modifications and other issues tonight on nonzoning related items and that will be three minutes of speaking time on those. At the end of the speaking time we will close the public hearing. Any commission member may ask questions once a presenter has completed their presentation and all commissioners are required to vote unless they have a conflict of interest. In an effort to run the meeting more

efficiently, the commission may reorganize the meeting agenda. cases in which there is no opposition um either expressed to the planning department or in which no speakers have signed up to speak in opposition and which c commissioners don't feel necessitates an indepth discussion. Those items will be moved to the top of the agenda. Staff will provide a shortened presentation for those expedited cases and applicants, if desired, will have two minutes uh to address the commission to provide any additional information they want the commission to know. Expedited cases will then follow the procedures outlined previously. When speaking here tonight, please direct all questions and comments to the planning and zoning commission, not to the staff. The commission can confer with staff to comment on any questions that are asked. When a case is called that you're interested in, please come to the podium and state your name and address for the record. If you are participating online, please find and use the raise hand function under the reaction button. You will be called upon to speak in the order in which the hands were raised. All approved or denied cases receiving six or more votes will constitute final action unless an appeal is submitted in writing to the planning department and an appeal fee is paid within 10 days. All cases receiving a majority of favorable votes but less than six will be subject to a public hearing by the city council. All cases involving an annexation are also subject to final approval by the city council. Participants in the Zoom meeting will be able to view the meeting and speak when they're called upon. This meeting is being recorded and televised on Greensboro Televis television

network. And in addition, the telecast is being closed captioned for the hearing impaired and that will necessitate a break at 7:30 when we need to give the closed captioning person a break. Now, we need to hear from our attorney regarding any additional items we need to consider.

Thank you, Chair Ske. Uh good evening everyone. Um tonight the planning and zoning commission will hear a number of reasonzoning applications. What will we'll consider a number of reasonzoning applications. Um when the commission considers these resoning applications, its determinations are based on the land uses that are allowed under the zoning district put forth in the application um and any conditions that have been proposed by the applicant. Now, uh, land use impacts on public infrastructure are relevant in reszoning matters, but it's important to know that the commission is not here to decide and determine all details of a development. That's a process that involves staff input and evaluation that goes beyond the scope of the commission's work. If a resoning would generate a certain amount of traffic flow, the commissioners will have been provided a summary traffic impact study. Meanwhile, many site specific development features such as the means of storm water management are evaluated through the technical review committee rather than here in this forum. Uh lastly, concerns that are not related to land use are not germanine to the commission's consideration applications. For example, general has concerns about crime rates who may own or use the property. If there are questions about matters here this evening, those can be referred to the planning department or city technical staff as appropriate. Thank you. Thank you for that insight. Um, in looking over the agenda and looking at the folks that have signed up to speak, uh, it appears that we have a number of expedited cases. Um, I'm going to read those case numbers and addresses. So, if you are here to speak in opposition to any of these cases that I'm going to read out, um, please let us know so we can put you on the regular agenda. Otherwise, these cases will be expedited. That's Z25-12-00001,

which is 2204, 2206, and 2214 Spring Garden Street, followed by Z2512 3 which is 2011 South Holden Road and 2012 Cedar Fort Drive. Then we have a portion of 1169 Pleasant Ridge Road. That's Z2512004. That's an annexation and a resoning. Then we have Z2512006 which is a portion of 5440 and all of four 5446 Stream Road. We have an annexation. No, excuse me. Yeah, we have a annexation and a reszoning for 4452 McConnell Road. We have an annexation and a zoning for 3005, 3015, and 3025 Glass Road. Um this is for the city of Greensboro Z2512012 which is 600 Bighgam Road. And then we have some text amendments and some modifications and a street closure. None of those um are being opposed. So, what I read out, those cases are going to be expedited unless there's someone that wants to speak against any of those cases that I read out. If not, we will proceed with the expedited agenda, which will start out with the uh spring garden 2204.

Uh, Madame Chair, can we get the approval of the Yes, we do. I'm sorry. I'm moving right along. We have minutes from the November 17th meeting. Well, acknowledge of absences. Um, and uh, please note that Betty Turner is participating online as you saw earlier. Then we have minutes from the November 17th, 2025 meeting. Do I hear a motion on those? Commissioner Keith P. I make a motion we approve November 17th meeting minutes. Steel second. All right, we have a motion and a second to approve the minutes. All in favor signify by saying I. I opposed. Do we have any withdrawals or continuences?

We do not.

Very good. Now we will proceed to uh 2204 to 2206 and 2214 Spring Garden Street. This is a resoning request from CDRM26 conditional district residential multifamily 26 to CDCN conditional district commercial neighborhood for the properties identified as 2204 to 2206 and 2214 Spring Garden Street generally described as west of North Spring Garden Street and north of west of north that doesn't make any sense. Um,

it's north of Spring Garden Street. North of Spring Garden Street and west of South Elum Avenue, 1.3 acres. Thank you, Chair SK.

This is the zoning map of the area shown that the subject properties contain approximately 1.3 acres and are located north of Spring Garden Street and west of South Avenue. As I stated, this is a resoning request from CDRM26 conditional district residential multifamily 26 to CDCN conditional district commercial neighborhood. North of the request is zone R5 residential single family 5 and RM18 residential multifamily 18. East of the request is zone RM18 and south of the request is zone RM18 in PUB planning and development. West the request is zone RM18. The aerial map shows the subject properties currently contain undeveloped land. North the request contains single family dwellings. East of the request contains single and multif family dwellings. South and west the request contain multif family dwellings. These are the conditions that were proposed by the applicant and advertised associated with the request. And in recommending approval of the request, staff know that the GSO 2040 comprehensive plan's future built format currently designates these properties as urban central within an urban mixeduse corridor. And the comprehensive plan shows the properties as being within the Lindley Park neighborhood plan. The Lindley Park neighborhood plan designates these properties as single family and multifamily on its future land use map. The proposed resoning request supports the GSO 240 comprehensive plans filling in our framework goal to maintain inventory and market key underutilized sites and structures to private industry and developers. And staff noted that the proposed CDC and zoning district condition limits the uses to urban farms, retail sales and service without drive-thru facilities except for the sales except for stores selling tobacco and related products, cultural and community uses, parks in open area and office and personal and professional services. draft the facilities and

answer questions. Can I ask one question? What is an urban farm? Does that include animals, chickens, pigs? Yeah. So, it could include certain livestock for the ordinance. It also could be the production growth and produ growth and sales of um crops on the property as well. Any other questions? Thank you, Mr. Nelson. Is the applicant here and would they like to make any comments?

Good evening, chair and count uh council members, commissioners. I do have a presentation. I've asked staff not to pull it up. Of course, we can go through it if you have any questions. Name and name and address, please. I apologize. Ledra Matthews. Uh, office address 101 South Triion Street, Charlotte, North Carolina. I'm here on behalf of Tom Harold, my colleague, and on behalf of the applicant, of course. Okay.

So, again, I do have a presentation prepared. Um, but want to be respectful respectful of your time and the rocket docket. I'll just say that this resoning will allow for infill development of an otherwise vacant lot on a multi uh multi-use corridor. Um again, this is an urban farm. Under the UDO, maybe livestock is allowed, but um the applicant use is more intended to be akin to like a nursery. And I don't know if you all know, but I learned something um interesting about this area while doing uh my research. And that's that Mr. Lindley himself, whom the neighborhood was named after, actually owned and operated several nurseries. So, this is like a tip of the hat to Mr. Lindley. Um the applicant, Miss Carrie Little, uh and owner of the LLC. She lives in the neighborhood. This is as local neighborhood business as you can get. She's worked with the um neighborhood association in this area, collaborated with them very closely on the application. Um it has been recommended to be approved by staff and also by that neighborhood association and we ask that you approve the request today. And again, we're available for any questions.

Any questions of Miss Matthews? Yes. So it was changed from an RM26 because no retail sales are allowed on that. Maybe I should ask staff why this designation was is that correct? Your yes the RM26 district does not allow retail sales. Correct. Okay. Okay. And then so then the N does allow does doesn't uh talk about any kind of housing like single family uh town homes or anything like that. And they're not that's Originally it was going to be correct. Previously it was reszoned with the intention of developing residential. This request is to change it to limited scale retail activities.

Perfect. Perfect. Thank you. Just needed that clarity. Thank you. Any other questions? Thank you, Miss Matthews. Thank you all for your time.

There's 48 seconds left. Anyone would like to speak? If not, we will close the public hearing without objection. Um, discussion motions.

Madam Chair, I'd like to make a motion for agenda item number Z2520001 for 2204-2206 and 2214 Spring Garden Street. The Greensboro Planning and Zoning Commission believes that his action to recommend approval of the resoning request for the property at 2204-2206 and 2214 Spring Garden Street from CDRM26 conditional district residential multifamily 26 to CD CN conditional district commercial neighborhood to be consistent with the adopted GSO 2040 comprehensive plan and considers this this action taken to be reasonable and in the public interest for the following reasons. Number one, the request is consistent with the comprehensive plans future built form map and future land use map. Number two, the proposed CDCN zoning district as condition permits uses that fits the context of the surrounding areas and limits negative impact on adjacent properties. Number three, the request is reasonable due to the size, physical conditions, and other attributes of the area. It will benefit the property owner and surrounding community and approval is in public interest.

Steu Nichols second. We have a motion and a second to approve. All in favor, please signify by sign saying I and raise your right hand, please. I thank you. That constitutes and did we get a vote? How how will we handle Betty? Do we just you have to vote separately? I think just ask her Miss Turner sports. I think she did actually vote yes. Miss Turner, are you in agreement? Yes. Yes.

Thank you. So, we have a unanimous approval on this and this approval constitutes a final action unless an appeal is submitted in writing to the planning department and the appeal fee is paid within 10 days. Anyone may file such an appeal and all such appeals will be subject to a public hearing at the Tuesday, January 20th, 2026 city council meeting and all adjoining property owners will be notified of any such appeal. Next case is 2011 South Holden Road and 2012 Cedar Fort. This is item Z25-12-00003. This is a resoning request from RM18 residential multif family to CDC CM conditional district commercial medium for the properties identified as 2011 South Holden Road and 2012 Cedar Fork Drive generally described as east of South Holden Road and south of Isler Street 1.31 acres. Thank you.

This is the zoning map of the subject property showing that it contains approximately 1.31 acres and is located east of South Holden Road and south of Islo Street. Uh the surrounding uh zoning is RM18 to the north and the east, CDCM and CDCM to the south and office CDCM and RM8 to the west. This is the aerial map of the subject property showing that it currently contains multif family dwellings. There are multif family dwellings to the north and norththeast. Um there's a single family dwelling to the east and unveloped land. And there is a special events facility to the south and a social service facility and unveloped land to the west. This is the condition that was proposed by the applicant and advertised. And in recommending approval of this request, staff notes that the GSO 2040 comprehensive plan designates this site as urban general on the future form map and residential on the future land use map. The proposed resoning request supports the GSO 2040 comprehensive plans growing economic competitiveness big idea to build a prosperous resilient economy that creates equitable opportunities to succeed and the filling in our framework big idea to arrange our land uses for where we live, work, attend school, shop, and enjoy our free time to create a more vibrant and livable Greensboro. The proposed CDCM zoning district limits uses uh to all uses permitted in the and zoning district except all cemeteries, bus and rail terminals, eating and drinking establishments with drive-through facilities, dry cleaning, pickup, drop off, and drive-through facilities or with drive-through facilities, taxi dispatch terminals, retail sales and

service with drive-through facilities, and convenience stores with fuel pumps. And with that, I can answer any questions that you have.

Any questions of Mr. Carter? Thank you. Is the applicant here? and would they like to make any comments? I got a wave of we're we're good. Okay, with that we will close the public hearing. Uh discussion motion Erica Glass. Um the Greensboro planning The zoning commission believes that its action to recommend the zoning request for the property at 2011 South Holden Road and 2012 Cedar Fork Drive from RM18 residential multifamily 18 to CBC M conditional district commercial medium to be consistent with the adopted GSO 2040 comprehensive plan and considers the action taken to be reasonable and in the public interest for the following reasons. The request is consistent with the comprehensive plan's future built format and future land use map, the proposed CDCM zoning district as condition permits uses that fit the context the surrounding area and limits negative impacts on adjacent properties. The request is reasonable due to the size, physical conditions, and other attributes of the area will benefit the property owner and surrounding community and approval is in the public interest.

Commissioner Gilma second. We have a motion and a second to approve the request. All in favor, please signify by saying I and raise your hand. I. Miss Turner. I.

Thank you. That's unanimous. Nine to zero. Uh that constitutes final action unless an appeal is submitted in writing to the planning department and the appeal fee is paid within 10 days. Anyone may file such an appeal. All such appeals will be subject to a public hearing at the Tuesday, January 20th, 2026 city council meeting and all adjoining property owners will be notified of any such appeal. Next expedited a case involves an annexation and a reszoning. This is PL 2547 and Z212004. It's an annexation and original zoning request from county agricultural to city R3 residential single family 3 for the property identified as a portion of 1169 Pleasant Ridge Road generally described as west of Pleasant Ridge Road and north of West Market Street is4 acres. Miss Harrison,

thank you Chase Ske. This is a zoning map and it shows that the subject property contains approximately 0.4 acres and is located west of Pleasant Ridge Road and north of West Market Street. This is an annexation and original zoning request from County AG agricultural to city R3 residential single family 3. North and south of the request are zoned county a or agricultural and city R3. East of the request is zone city R3 and city CDLI conditional district light industrial. West of the request is zone county act. This is the aerial map and it shows the subject property currently contains a single family dwelling. North, south, and west of request contain single family dwellings. East of the request contain single family dwellings and undeveloped land. There's no condition associated with this request and In um recommending approval, staff states that the GSO 2040 comprehensive plan designate this site as urban general on the future built for map and as residential on the future land use map. The proposed original zoning request supports both the comprehensive plans creating place creating great places goal to expand Greensboro citywide network of unique neighborhoods offering residents of all walks of life a variety of quality housing choices and the filling in of our framework big idea to arrange our

land uses for where we live, work, attend school, shop and enjoy our free time to create a more vibrant Bon Liverable Greensboro. The proposed R3 zoning district is primarily intended to accommodate low density single family detach residential development of up to three dwelling units per acre. The request permits uses that are present on adjacent tracks and I can answer any question that you may have.

Any questions? Okay, seeing none, is the applicant here and would they like to make some comments? And you're fine. Then we will close the public hearing and open the uh for questions or motions from the commission. I'd like to make a motion to annex PLP25-47, a portion of Pleasant Ridge Road, 1169 Pleasant. We need a second for the annexation.

Second, Ste Nichols. Okay, we have a motion and a second to approve the annexation. All in favor of the annexation, please signify by saying I and raise your hand. I I That was Miss Turner. Thank you. Okay, that is a favorable recommendation on the annexation. Um I'd like to make a motion, but we need to move on to the other one.

Okay. So, all right. Great. So, um, item Z25-12-00004, the Greensboro Planning and Zoning Commission believes that its action to recommend the approval of the original zoning request for a property at a portion of 1169 Pleasant Ridge Road from County AG agricultural to city R3 residential single family 3 to be consistent with the adopted GSO 2040 comprehensive plan and considers the action taken to be reasonable and in the public interest for the following reasons. One, the request is consistent with the comprehensive plan's future build format and future land use map. Two, the proposed city R3 zoning district permits uses that fits the context of the surrounding area and limits negative impact on the adjacent properties. The request is reasonable due to the size and physical conditions and other attributes of the area. It will benefit the property owner and surrounding community and approval is in the public interest.

Stu Nichols. I second. We have a motion and a second to approve the request for the resoning. All those in favor signify by saying I and raising your hand. I thank you Nichols. Uh that Turner, I'm sorry. Um that constitutes a favorable recommendation and is subject to a public hearing at the Tuesday, January 2nd, 2026 city council meeting. The next expedited case is Z D-25-12-

I'm sorry to interrupt real quick the what you just said about the council meeting. I believe you said the January 2nd meeting. It should be the January 20th council meeting just to be clear. That's what it says right here. And I might have read to make sure everybody knew. Okay. Yeah, it's the January 20th.

The second people are still recovering from New Year's Eve. So now we move to the next case. This is the next expedited case is Z25-12-00006 and it's a resoning request from BP Business Park to CDLI Conditional District Light Industrial for the properties identified as a portion of 5440 and all of 5446 Milstream Road generally described as south of Milstream Road and north of Mount Hope Church Road 82.37 acres. Harrison.

Thank you, Chair Sch. This is the zoning map for the subject properties and it shows that they are approximately 82.37 acres and located south of Milstream Road and north of Mount Mount Hope Church Road. This is a resoning request from BP business park to CDLI conditional district light industrial. North of the request is zone county AG agricultural and city BP business park. East of the request is zone CDLI conditional district light industrial and BP business park. South of the requested zone, county agricultural, west of the requested zone, city BP, business park and city CDM, which is conditional district commercial medium. The aerial map shows that the subject property currently contains an office and outdoor storage. North of the request contains Interstate 40 and an office use. East of the request contains an office use and undeveloped land. South of the request contains single family dwellings. West of the request contains an office use and undeveloped land. These are the conditions associated with the request.

And in support um supporting approval, staff states that the GSO 2040 comprehensive plans future built for map designates the subject properties as urban general and as commercial on the future land use map. The proposed resoning request supports the GSO 2040 comprehensive plans filling in our framework goal to maintain inventory and Market key underutilized sites and structures to private industry and developers and the economic competitiveness big idea to increase and preserve the inventory of developer sites developer sites compatible with corporate and industrial uses. The proposed CDLI zoning district allows a variety of warehouse industrial distribution and office uses that are generally consistent with the surrounding uses on adjacent uh or nearby properties excluding cemeteries, shooting ranges, funeral homes and crematoriums, recycling processing centers and land clearing and inert debris landfills minor as a temporary and I can answer any question that you may have.

I'm just a little bit confused on one point. It says a portion of 5440. And when you look at the page with all of the people's addresses and so forth, that page 5040 is the whole section. So, I just don't know which portion we're bringing in. You see 5446 as a So the portion that we're bringing in is is what is shaded here and this is already um zone CDLI this portion. So this is not part of the request. So um okay so the image that we're seeing in our book here is not the um exact shape of the actual u one it's the&t road becomes the side of it and the bottom of it is the mount hope church that's the portion

so to help the 5440 the larger parcel is all of that BP section except for that one building in the north uh east corner and then the CDLI. All of that's one parcel, but portions of it have already been resone to CDLI. So, they're actually asking to resone the rest of the parcel now to CDLI. Okay. So, is it the is it the uh pointy part on the on the uh south side east souththeast area that we're talking about or is it the bigger portion because I thought we did this once before this location.

Well, right. So, the the CDLI on this map is the other portion of 5440 Milream and that was previously reszoned. So um so um okay because the images are different the shape of the images that we're seeing here where it's BP is different than what's showing up on this page where it's and so I'm just asking is it that part or is it the pointy part

the the last map that you have in there that is that's the map that shows how we determine what the um 750 foot distribution buffer is for our notices and we have to send it from the entire property um for notices and so it is showing it is showing all of it on that map and you're you're right that is slightly different from the zoning map because the zoning map is only showing the portion of that property that is currently BP is requested to be reszoned. The other portion of the property that's not part of this request is already CDLI.

I got you. I got you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for that clarity. Thank you. Any other questions? Is the applicant here to speak to the case? Good evening. Amanda Hodier in 804 Green Valley Road, Sweet 200 in Greensboro. And I'll just quickly uh speak to the question that Miss Maggot asked uh because you're right, we have sort of been here before. And I'm here tonight on behalf of the property owner and applicant CCC Development Partners LLC. So, as um staff has mentioned, this is a request to reszone the balance of the property. So, looking at this map here, as your report and your information says, it's two properties. A portion of 5440 Milstream. That's that larger piece that is a portion of what of the bigger parcel and then 5446, which is the smaller carved out piece there in the middle. And so, how we got here is because in 2022, we did separate cases to create the purple that you see here. Case number one up in the upper corner uh to the right hand side. We did that in October 2022. And then the number two that you see is a portion of 5440 that we did in November of 2022. So today's requests indicated by the red stars are the balance of 5440 and then that interior 5446 which was carved out of 5440 along the way which actually is the reason we're doing this resoning so

that we don't have to keep carving out interior parcels and can maintain an efficient more campus and holistically designed uh type of center. And I'll be happy to answer any other questions. Any other comments to be made? If not, we will close the public hearing and open it for discussion or motions regarding the case. Madam Chair, I'll let me make a motion for agenda item number Z2512006. All right. The Greensboro Planning and Zoning Commission believes that is action to recommend approval of the reszoning request for the property at 5440 and 5446 Milream Road. I don't have it in front of me, so I'm just winging this. Um, yes. We're going to pull up here on the screen.

Thank you. There we go. Oh, there we go. Um, wow. And it went away. There we go.

Okay. The pro the Greensboro Planning and Zoning Commission believed there action to recommend approval of the reszoning request for the property at a portion of 5440 and all of 5446 Milstream Road from BP business park to CDLI conditional district light industrial to be consistent with the adopted GSO 2040 comprehensive plan and considers the action taken to be reasonable and in the public interest for the following reasons. Number one, the request is consistent with the comprehensive plan's future built for map and future land use map. The proposed CDLI zoning district as conditioned permits uses that fit the context of the surrounding area and limits negative impact on adjacent properties. Number three, the request is reasonable due to the size, physical conditions, and other attributes of the area. It will benefit the property owner and surrounding community and approval is in the public interest.

Commissioner to give a second. We have a motion and a second uh for approval. All in favor, please signify by saying I and raising your hand. I

thank you, Miss Turner. That constitutes a unanimous um final recommendation. This is a final action unless it is submitted in writing to the planning department and the appeal fee is paid within 10 days. Anyone may file such an appeal. All such appeals will be subject to a public hearing at the Tuesday, January 20th, 2026 city council meeting. And all adjoining property owners will be notified of any such appeal. Moving on to the rest of our expedited agenda. Next uh is uh an annexation and a reasonzoning. Annexation PL25-49 and resoning 251210. This is an annexation and original zoning request from county AG agricultural to city PI public and institutional for the property identified as 4452 McConnell Road and a portion of the McConnell Road rightway generally described as west of McConnell Road and north of Cass Road 7.33 acres. Miss Harrison. Thank you, Chair Schmes. This is the zoning map showing the subject property contains 7.33 acres. The subject property is located west of McConnell Road and north of KC Road. This is an annexation and original zoning request from County AD to CDPI public and institutional. North and east of the request is zone county A and PUD planned unit development.

South of the request is zone county A. West of the request are zone county A. This is the aerial map and it shows that the subject property is currently undeveloped and north of the request contains single family and multif family dwellings. East of the request contains single family dwellings. South and west of the request contains single family dwelling and agricultural uses. There's no condition associated with this request and in recommending approval staff states that the comprehensive plans future built form map currently designate this property as exurban and as residential on the future land use map. If annexed, the future built form designation will be changed to urban general. The proposed original zoning and resoning request support both the comprehensive plans filling in our framework strategy to invest in building and maintaining quality accessible public recreation centers, libraries, neighborhood park facilities and other services to sustain livable neighborhoods. and the filling in off of a framework big idea to arrange our land uses for where we live, work, attend school, shop, and enjoy our free time to create a more vibrant and livable green sporum. The proposed BI zoning district is intended to accommodate mid and larges size public quasi public and

institutional uses which have a substantial land use impact or traffic generation potential. The PI zoning district also permits governmental uses such as fire stations that are complimementaryary to uses existing in the surrounding areas. And I can answer any question that you may have. Any questions of Miss Harrison? So, this is City of Greensburg doing this and it this little section um is being brought in um for what purpose? I'm just trying to understand. Let Mr. Goss fire department, the applicant is going to speak to this that question.

Thank you. Good evening. Uh Alex Goss at Greensboro Fire Department uh 1514 North Church Street. Uh currently we are in the process of purchasing properties throughout inside our water sewer boundary uh for future growth. As the city develops, we'll have the property there ready to build a station to be determined. It may be 20 30 years or maybe five years before it actually gets built. But uh that is our plan now with this property and the next property that we have on agenda and we're still trying to acquire at least three more properties for the future. Thank you. That helps. Thanks so much.

Any other questions? Is there anyone else who would uh like to speak to this case? You have a minute and a half. Seeing none, we will close the public hearing and move to discussion andor motion from the commission. I'll make a motion item Z25-12-0. This is annexation. Oh, sorry. An annexation first for PL25-49. um 4452 McConnell Road and a portion of the rideway.

Commissioner G. We have a motion in a second to approve the annexation. Um all in favor, please signify by saying I and raise your hand. I I

thank you. Um the item is Z25-12-010. The Greensboro Planning and Zoning Commission believes that its action to recommend approval of the original zoning request for the property at 4452 McConnell Road and a portion of the McConnell Road right ofway from county AG agricultural to city PI public and institutional to be consistent with the adopted GSO 2040 comprehensive plan and considers the actions taken to be reasonable and in the public interest for the following reasons. One, the request is consistent with the comprehensive plans future build format and future land use map. Two, the proposed city PI zoning district permits uses that fit the context of the surrounding area and limits negative impacts on the adjacent properties. Three, the request is reasonable due to the size, physical conditions, and other attributes of the area. It will benefit the property owner and surrounding community, and approval is in the public interest. Ste Nichols second.

We have a motion and a second to approve the requested resoning. All in favor, please signify by saying I and raising your hand. I I.

Thank you. Uh this constitutes a favorable recommendation and is subject to a public hearing at the Tuesday, January 20th, 2026 city council meeting. Next case, second verse. This is also an annexation um 2550 and then a resoning for Z2512-011. is an annexation and original zoning request from county AG agricultural to city PI public and institutional for the property identified as 3005 3015 and 3025 Glass Road generally described as east of Glass Road and south of Alamance Church Road 10.49 acres.

Thank you chair schemes. So um this is the zoning map for the subject properties and it shows that it contain 10.49 acres. The subject properties are located east of Glass Road and south of Alamman's Church Road. This is an annexation and original zoning request from county a to city public and institutional. North, east, south and west of the request are zone county a. This is the aerial map for the subject properties and it shows that it contain a single family dwelling and undeveloped land. North of the request contains a single family dwelling and undeveloped land. East of the request contains undeveloped land. South and west of the request contains single family dwellings. There are no condition associated with the request and in recommended approval. The GS the staff states that the GSO20 comprehensive plan currently designates the property X urban on the future built form map and as residential on the future land use map. If annexed, the feature built form designation will be changed to urban general. The proposed original zoning request supports both the comprehensive plans filling in our framework strategy to invest in building and maintaining quality accessible public recreation centers, libraries, neighborhood park facilities, and other services to sustain livable neighborhoods. And the filling in of our framework big idea to arrange our land uses for where we live, work, attend

school, shop, and enjoy free time to create a more vibrant and livable Greensboro. The proposed PI zoning district is intended to accommodate mid and largesize public, quasi public, and institutional uses which have a substantial land use impact on or traffic generation potential. The PI zoning district also permits governmental uses such as fire stations that are complmentary to uses existing in the surrounding areas. And I can answer any questions. It's like the cases just before. Any questions of Miss Harrison?

Seeing none, Mr. Gosset, would you like to speak to this? It's the same as the second as this previous case. Okay. Any other comments to be made? If not, we'll close the public hearing and um open the floor for discussions. And we need two motions on this. One for annexation and one for resetting.

Sue Nichols. move that uh with regard to PLP 2550 that that property located at 3005 315 and 3025 Glass Road be annexed. Second. We have a motion and a second to approve the annexation. All in favor, please say I and raise your hand. Turner. Mr. Carter, is she on? M. Turner, will you please turn your mic on?

Yes. I thank you. Uh that uh is approved. Can we have a motion now on the resoning?

With regard to item Z25-12- 11. The Greensboro Planning and Zoning Commission believes that its action to recommend approval of the original zoning request for the property at 3005, 35, and 3005 Glass Road from County AG, which is agricultural to city PI public and institutional to be consistent with the adopted GSO 2040 comprehensive plan and considers the action to taken to be reasonable and in the public interest for the following reasons. The request is consistent with the comprehensive plans future built form map and future land use map. The proposed city PI zoning district permits uses that fit the context of the surrounding area and limits negative on adjacent properties. And finally, the request is reasonable due to the size, physical conditions, and other attributes of the area. will benefit the surrounding the property owner and surrounding community and approval is in the public interest.

Second, Miss. We have a motion and a second to approve the reasoning. All in favor, please signify by saying I and raising your hand. I I

thank you. Um this constitutes a favorable recommendation and to a public hearing at the Tuesday, January 20th, 2026 city council meeting. Next case is Z 251212. This is a reasoning request from R3 residential single family 3 to CD RM18 conditional district residential multifamily 18 for the property identified as 600 Brigham Road generally described as east of Brigham Road and west of North Carolina Highway 68 a total of 2.86 acres Mr. This is the zoning map of the subject property showing that it contains approximately 2.86 acres. Um the zoning request is to reszone the property from R3 to conditional district RM18. U to the north of the request is CDRM18 and plan unit development uh containing uh undeveloped land and multif family dwellings. North of the request, the CDRM8 is supposed to be developed in conjunction with the PUD to the north. Um to the east and the south are NC68 and the um the NC68 Cornerstone Drive junction zone BP. To the uh west is CDLI with industrial uses and CDRM18 which is under construction. This is the condition that was proposed by the applicant and advertised uh for the request and in recommending approval of this request. Staff notes that the GSO 2040 comprehensive plan designates this site as urban general on the future built form map. The uh future land use map designates the property as being within the western area plan. The western area

plan designates the property as employment area. The recommendations for uh the western area plan uh have um recommendations envisioned under the under the plan uh have not been realized and do not match the recent uh development trends in the surrounding area. Uh the proposed resoning request support the GSO 2040 comprehensive plans creating great places goal to expand Greensboro citywide network of unique neighborhoods offering residents of all walks of life a variety of quality housing choices. The proposed CDRM18 zoning district as conditioned would allow residential uses that are compatible with existing uses in the surrounding area. With that, I can answer any questions that you have.

Any questions, Mr. Carter? Seeing none, u would the applicant like two minutes? That means no. Correct. Okay. Seeing seeing no needed comments, we will close the public hearing and open it up for discussion. All right. Uh the Madam Chair, make a um motion for agenda item number Z2512012. Yes. The Greensboro Planning and Zoning Commission believes that it action to recommend approval of the zoning request for the property at yes 600 Bringham Road from R3 residential single family 3 to CDRM18 conditional district residential multifamily 18 to be consistent with the adopted GSO 2040 comprehensive plan and considers the action taken to be reasonable and in the public interest for the following reasons. Number one, the request is consistent with the comprehensive plan's future built form map and future land use map include the proposed CDRM18 zoning district as condition permits uses that fit the context of the surrounding area and limits negative impacts on adjacent properties. Number three, the request is reasonable due to the size, physical conditions, and other attributes of the area. It will benefit the property owner and surrounding community and approval is in the public interests. Commissioner G.

Great. We have a motion and a second to approve the reszoning for 600 Brigham Road. All in favor, please signify by saying I and raising your hand. I I

thank you, Miss Turner. This constitutes uh a final action. Unless an appeal is submitted in writing to the planning department and the appeal fee is paid within 10 days, anyone may file such an appeal. All such appeals will be subject to a public hearing at the Tuesday, January 20th, 2026 city council meeting. All adjoining property owners will be notified of any such appeal. Now, we will move back to the beginning of our agenda to hear the cases that have opposition. This first case will be 2402 uh Liberty Road. This is item Z-25-12-00005. It's a resoning request from R5 residential single family 5 to CDRM18 conditional district residential multifamily 18 for the property identified as 2402 Liberty Road generally described as west of Liberty Road and south of Elements Court a total of.24 acres Mr. Nelson.

Thank you Chair Skins. As you stated the subject property is approximately 0.24 acres and is located west of Liberty Road in south of Alamance Court. The request is to go from R5 single family residential 5 to CDRM18. Conditional district residential multifamily 18 north and east the request are zone CM commercial medium. South and west the request are zone R5 single family 5. The arrow map subject property is currently undeveloped land. North of the request contains a contractor's office. East of the request contains a religious assembly use and commercial parking. South the request contains single family dwellings. West the request contains old US Highway 421 route of way. This image shows the subject property as seen from Liberty Road. This image shows the contractor's office on Liberty Road located north of request zone CM. This image shows a religious assembly use located east of the request on Alamance's Court zone CM. This image shows commercial parking located east of the request zone CM. This image shows a single example of the single family dwellings located south of request on Liberty Road zone R5. And this image shows old US Highway 421 right away zone R5. This view is facing north on Liberty Road. So the property here is on the left and this view is facing south on Liberty Road. So the property's on the right. This is the condition proposed by the applicant and that was advertised associated with the request. In recommending approval of the request, staff know that the GSO 2040 comprehensive plans future build format designates subject property as urban general and as commercial on the future land use map. The proposed doning request supports both the comprehensive plans creating great places goal to expand Greensboro's citywide network of unique neighborhoods offering residents

of all walks of life a variety of quality housing choices and the filling in our framework big idea to arrange our land uses for where we live, work, attend school, shop, and enjoy our free time to create a more vibrant Liverpool Greensboro. The proposed CDRM8 zoning district would allow residential uses that are compatible with the surrounding area with an appropriate proposed residential density. Care should be taken with respect to building orientation, building materials, building height, and visual buffers to ensure an appropriate transition to the lower density residential uses on adjacent properties. Happy to answer any questions. Any questions of Mr. Nelson?

So, how finding is this where it says a duplex. So is that that's part of So is that so the condition runs with the property. So it doesn't matter who the owner is on there. And so if approved, it would allow any of the uses listed in that condition. So if they wanted to go beyond a duplex, they'd be violating that that agreement, right? Okay. Yeah. You're asking if they want to do like multif family larger four, they can't do it, right? They're just limited to two units basically any of those configurations. Thank you.

And and just for clarification, um in our documentation, it talked about RM18 being a total could be 4.32 homes, but my understanding is that the width of this lot is going to limit it to a twin home or a duplex. It would more than it would be an attached product of prob of of no more than two. Is that correct? Right. Based on a general density count, you could get to that higher number, but based on the lot configuration, you're really only limited to two units maximum. It's limited by the width of the lot. Correct.

And and that's why they had to go to the CDRM18 again because of the width of the lot. the the any the R5 the R3 would require more frontage than is on this lot. Is that correct? Well, there's two things. There's that question, but then also an R our S single family district wouldn't allow for a twin home or a duplex use. So, this is a right expanding the types of uses as well. Okay, any other questions?

So, the RM8 um shows for single family traditional home and twin homes. Um where's the is it duplex on this as well? It's in the zoning condition doesn't say it on the dimensional requirement page. Okay, that's why I was questioning it. Well, let's get that straight.

On this page, the dimensional requirement page, it says single family, traditional home, and twin homes. And then it has the frontage, the side, the rear, and so forth, but okay. I don't have the page in front of before that. Yeah. Well, then that's dimensional. That's the setbacks and other things specific for that. Obviously, the rest of that the uses are in the first part of that section on there, but I think it's probably good to hear from the applicant and other folks at this point unless there's no other questions for staff. Okay, first we need to hear from the applicant if they are here to tell us about the case and what they intend to do.

Yes, I am here. Good evening, city council commission members. It's online. All right. They're online. Can you can you turn your volume up, sir? We can't quite hear you. And and we name need a name and address, please. Mr. McDow, this is Luke Carter with the planning department. I've ask you to turn on your video as well if if you have that option.

Yes, we can see you and hear you.

So, um, good evening, council member. My name is Derek. Um, I appreciate this opportunity to be before you this meeting. I want to thank you for your time, your continued service to Greenville. I am the property owner and the opportunity for the property located at 2402 Ly Road and I'm here to request approval of resoning from R5 residential to conditional district RM18. Um, the purpose for this request is to allow a small scale residential own development in a manner that is predictable, limited, and consistent with the city policy rather than pursuing a byite zoning approach. I intentionally selected a conditional district so that the city and the surrounding residents have a clear understanding of what is being enforced protection against further future changes. The proposed development consists of 20 homes units designed to resemble and function like traditional single family home. This is not an apartment complex, not student housing. Uh not a high distance development. The scale layout and the appearance are residential in nature and are intended to blend into this neighborhood rather than alter it character. The project is designed to provide modest long-term housing while maintaining a neighborhood oriented appearance. I chose a conditional district zone application because it provides the city with greater oversight and control than a standard by right zoning district. The approved conditionally restricts the property to the proposed res and prevent

any future increase in in another public process or city council approval keep you guys involved. So it will never uh this ensures that the development cannot evolve into evolve into anything other than what's being presented tonight. In short, approach emphasizes accountability and transparency. This request is consistent with the GSO240 comprehensive plan which encourages a range of housing options in locations that are already served by infrastructure and roadway access. The subject property is appropriate for residential development because it utilizes existing streets, utilities and public services rather than extending development into undeveloped areas. I propose the project greater long-term planning objectives while maintaining compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood. I understand that some nearby residents may have related to history, traffic or neighborhood character. Those concerns are valid and deserve to be acknowledged. This proposal was intentionally designed to address some concerns. The twin home format limits density. It maintains a resale. It generates significantly less traffic than apartments are. Additionally, conditional zoning provide legal limitations on further development and no construction can occur without site plan. This ensures contin oversight related to access water management and safety standards.

All infrastructure requirements including utility, traffic access, storm water management must meet city standards prior to any construction. Approval of does not authorize development. The assembly establishes the framework under which development may be reviewed and approved in the future. This ensures responsible growth that remains coordinated with city resources. The project represents responsible infield development. It adds housing in the appropriate location make of existing infrastructure. It does so with the enforceable limit that protect both city and surrounding residents. By utilizing conditional zoning, the city retains long-term control. Residents gain certainty and growth occurs in a measured and thoughtful manner. In closing, this request presents represents a balanced approach to growth. It aligns with the adopted city council to respect the surrounding resident community and provide forceful limitation through conditional zoning. For these reasons, I respectfully request your approval for request and thank you for your time and consideration. I'm happy to answer any questions.

Any questions? Pardon? Was there a community meeting? Could you talk to us about community outreach, please? Yes, we did have a uh we put together a Zoom. We sent out flyers to all the I think 39 residents in the area. Um we did have a Zoom meeting and it was recorded. I submitted that to I think Mr. Luke Carter it was. Um, and that was done on the 11th of December.

How many people were on the Zoom? Looks like three uh people um didn't really turn out unfortunately. Uh we did have one person who was an email that negative thought today was a different day than we had to meet. Hi, my name is I did want to clarify um the people that were on the room with myself and Derek and

you you are and your address is Hi, my name is Sheila Kas. I'm work alongside Derek to help him with his project. I'm his project manager. I just wanted to clarify about the Zoom attendance attendees. And Miss Cole, what's your address for the record? Um 212 North Spring Street. That's in Greensboro, right? No. Um I'm in Winston. You want my address, correct? Correct. Yeah. So, it's 212 North Green in Greensboro.

212 North Green Street. Winston Salem. Winston Salem. Okay. Thank you. Yes. Ma'am, you're welcome. Now, I just wanted to clarify that the people that were on the meeting was myself, um Derek, and Wanita. And but we all working are working with Derek. There was one lady, her name is Cindy. She did send an email asking um to send a Zoom link, but once she realized the date and the time, she said she she sent an email saying she couldn't make it. Other than that, we haven't heard from anyone else.

So, hey, this is more shade. So, um, hello. We appreciate you all applying. So, I see the notes that we have here. It says, "No members of the public were present and no public comments were received." This was on Thursday, December the 11th, when the meeting was held. I guess my only inquiry is when was the notification sent out to the neighbors regarding this meeting? Now, of course, the city does such, but I'm talking about regarding the applicant. Can you share with

um we sent out we sent it out on Saturday the um one second Saturday. Saturday the 6th. Thank you for the information. Um, okay. Included a link as well as information very detailed property picture of the home and exactly what we're trying to regard that particular address.

What did you say? I'm sorry. We could not understand. And I think you need to speak further away from your microphone or closer. One or the other. Try further away. Can't hear you. You hear me now? Yeah. All right. So, uh, we sent out a flyer that consists of a picture of the home as well as a description of what it is we were trying to do in regards to the property. I did I think we submitted that to Mr. Carter. And commission members, you have that in your packet as part of the communication summary that last.

Did you have any calls besides the meeting? Were there any calls from the from your um outreach notices that you sent out? I did put my personal information there. So, no one knows. No one reach out to me at all. The reason why we're questioning it is because there's a petition here with 29 names on it in the neighborhood.

No one reached out to us. The only person that reached out to us was And if you'd like, I can forward you guys that email. I'm not sure how they have a petition without asking us any questions because people listed on this petition live on both sides of Liberty Road. They're all around this location. There's about um maybe maybe four locations out of the whole road that haven't signed on to this. So that's what why I'm questioning the Cindy that did get in touch with you. What was her last name? Excuse me. Um just so that

Commissioner Glass, I apologize. I think I see you. This is Erica Glass. What petition are you referring to? Because I don't think any of us have that. It was emailed. It was emailed to us. Gotcha. That one? Yes. So, is there a way to verify the the signatures on the petition? Because how can they have so many signatures without reaching out to any of us?

Commissioner Maggot, if I may just jump in momentarily before you say anything further. Um, a I don't think we would have the opportunity to verify signatures on the spot. Of course, right. Um, you know, we do have an encouragement of neighborhood communications in our ordinance, but we don't have anything stronger than that. I just want to remind the commission of that. And of course I believe there is there are members of opposition the folks in opposition who are present who we may want to hear from. Thank you. Okay. Yes. And um the her last name is spelled D I T R I C H Ditch. And I'm sorry. And her first name is Cynthia.

Yeah, that's the same name on the petition. So you did speak with her? No, we didn't speak with her. She sent an email asking for the Zoom link. We sent it to her and then she said never mind. She couldn't join. Okay. Thank you for your clarity. Appreciate it. Thank you. In a situation like this, what do we do now next? We have to finish the public hearing first. Okay. Are there any other comments? You've got four minutes and 20 seconds left. Is there anyone else that wants to speak in favor of the request or give us any other information you might have?

This particular project is to support the community property values in regard to housing. increasing it realize I actually um we're not trying to hurt the community in any A two or duplex twin twin home will actually add value and help with the shortage that is in Greenville. Okay, seeing none, um, and I see no other requests to speak in favor, uh, we'll now move to anyone who wants to speak in opposition. And you'll have 10 minutes total. My name is Philip Callaway. I live at 2514 Liberty Road and uh I speak um for a group of people on Liberty Road that uh is in opposition of this reszoning. Um I I want to touch just just a little on the notification of the Zoom.

Uh it was got postmark on the 9th and uh we got it uh or one person I'm only I only know of one person that got it on Wednesday and there was some people that got it on Thursday. Thursday was the day of the Zoom call. Okay. A couple people Well, we all work. I mean the people work. This is not a retirement facility here. We have jobs so that the husband or wife works and there's multiple shifts that people work. So it's not like I I can find out something at six o'clock in the evening and I go and ask my boss if I can take off an hour at lunch to do a Zoom call. That's not the situation that we live in. Um there was a few people that tried to reach out. Uh um it was hard to make contact with them. Uh I do know of one that that uh did have some contact, but it as far as I'm concerned, as far as I've been told, nobody saw it. Okay. Uh the last time this applicant tried to change the zoning um having a a public meeting was uh a little farce. So um with that said, we did not get notified. uh the uh procedures to to get on the Zoom was not the easiest in the world. Uh you had to uh I think email then they emailed you back and then you you uh entered it on an app and then we just didn't have it just didn't work

for the few people that that had it. But like I said, uh we found out by one one uh resident on Wednesday evening about six o'clock that they received it through the mail and the other person that received it received it on Thursday. My question is is where did they mail 37 pieces of mail to? That's my I have a question on that. Okay. Okay. All right. All right. Let me back up. I appreciate y'all listening to us because we we in our opinion, we have a valid concern. Um, we did do a petition. Um, we did it uh started before his supposedly Zoom call was uh provided because we stand in opposition of any reasonzoning of our neighborhood. Our neighborhood is an old neighborhood. Um, it is uh over a hundred years old. Uh, one of the oldest houses in our neighborhood was built in, I think, 1916. So, we got people that are homeowners that have been living there for 47 years. It's not It's not a a real young neighborhood. It's established. The people that bought into our neighborhood, they bought into it because it was single family, because they wanted the buffer zone between our neighbors. In fact, quite a few people moved there out of condos and apartments because they did not want to be so close to people. So, the selling point for anybody that I've talked to has uh been uh we wanted some

space between us. Okay. We're in opposition of any zone changes. We we've lived happily with uh the zoning and and R5. Uh we we just we are okay. Uh the petition stands volumes. I mean you 20 29 people out of the whole neighborhood. There's only like five houses we was unable to get any uh contact with because of how they work and how they there's nobody home. Okay. Uh, I wish all 29 individuals that signed a petition was here, but they're not. But we do have a group of people that are here, and I want to ask them to stand. This is our neighborhood. Very diverse. I mean, just just I mean, you can't you can't diversify anymore. You know what I mean? Okay, y'all can sit down now. I mean, this this is our neighborhood. Okay. Um, our little neighborhood as we know, it began around 1916. Every home is a single family dwelling. Uh we bought our homes on this small piece of Liberty Road because it was and is a historically relevant single family residential community. We have, like I said, a very diverse group of people with the majority of the homes being owner occupied. Some owners have been here for over 40 years. person desiring to change our neighborhood,

in my opinion, does not live in our neighborhood. I never seen him in our neighborhood. Um, so but that's it. Uh the site that he is trying to uh reszone is located in a sharp blind curve. And I'm not talking 90 degree curve. I'm talking about one that actually comes around and goes down. Uh and it's uh part of Alamash Court, Alamance Court Road and uh Liberty Road. It is not on Alamance Church Road, which some someone said u in the past there there there's concerns we thought about bringing up safety concerns which is is valid in my opinion but the bottom line is if it was in the middle of the neighborhood we still don't want any reszoning we want to keep our single family zoning uh U that that is our request. Um the uh the 2040 comprehensive plan which everybody likes to use that uh in my opinion is better used in areas you can put more than two apartments in or town homes in. And uh that's just my opinion and and the general consensus of everybody else. It's just are we going to spot zone to get two families here, two families

here, one family here, one family here? Are we going to make it where it's quality housing instead of just spot zoning, spot housing? I made a joke the other day. I might as well go get me 20 pallet houses and put them out behind my garage. I mean, you know, that's that's uh and that was a joke. Okay. But but it goes against we don't want spot zoning. Uh we're concerned that the zoning one lot as a multif family will lead to the additional reszoning that would compromise and destabilize our single family street that has remained as such for well over a hundred years. It does not matter what the person wants to do or or wants to change the zoning. Like I said, he could do it in the middle. If he lived in the middle of the neighborhood, he'd be trying to do the same thing. We're against any reszoning of our our street. Bottom line. Um, but I noticed on some literature that the city sent out, which if if my neighbor hadn't got a copy, and photographed it and sent it to me by email or text, a lot of us wouldn't have never seen that. And that was the letter that the city sent out. Where did you send 37? I mean, where did you send 37 letters to? Well, I never got one, but the guy

across the street from me got one. How How did he get it? But five houses down, they didn't get it. Five houses down, they didn't get I mean, how do you I don't I don't know. That's a question. Okay, I can answer that for you, sir. Okay.

This Time is up right now um for the I mean uh for the opposition. Um so now we will go to five minutes of rebuttal for the applicant. If you'd like to respond to any comments that you have heard or add any additional information, you have five minutes. Either Miss Kolas or Mr. McDow. Uh Miss Kas, to be honest, we can hear you better. So you might be the one to to speak so that we can hear what's being said.

Okay. Thank you so much for for the time. And what's the young gentleman's name that was just speaking? Mr. Callaway.

Mr. Callaway. Thank you so much for your input. I just want to let you know that we got the information for the addresses directly from the city of addresses and we were able to apologize for that, but that was something that was out of our control. As far as it will be the same design, as you can see in the picture, that's how it would look. And it would blend in with the neighborhood. As far as you're concerned about the dangers, we wouldn't be putting the property in the beginning in the front of the area because they have to have a driveway. So, there will be some distance and it probably be in the middle of the property and not on the front. So, even if there's there will be an accident, I don't think it will actually hit the home. Um, as far as their concerns for not having any reasoning at all, what if somebody was to come and buy the property across the street that's already zoned out and build a defect there? Also, what if people decided to build ADUs in the back of their homes? That still would be two units on one lot. My desire is not to ruffle any feathers, but just to to get our perspective out there on the importance of the crisis that's going on in Greensboro right now. There's manufacturing companies coming in

trying to give jobs, but a lot of people there's not enough housing. Excuse me. So, um, Derek, is there anything else you'd like to add or anyone else? You all hear me a little bit better?

Yes. Just speak up real loud. um in regards to the gentleman's concerns in regards to the property um you know where the property's located right by the the uh the beginning point of living um it's it's commercial there you know you have Mr. parters show commercial building on adjacent to the property on both sides on the left and the right on the opposite side of the street. And so what we're not putting a commercial building there, we're putting residential home that will support a family unit, two family units to be there. Uh this is just to add more value as well as utilize the land that would be beneficial as Chris said for the housing crisis, the the shortage of homes in the area and again utilize the land in itself. And just for me to know I do own property on that street and I do visit that street a lot. Uh my son lives on that street. I'm there a lot with my son with me and my children. So um So just for you you all to know I do have familiarity with the neighborhood. I uh have ownership in the neighborhood and I do care about the neighborhood is one of the reasons why I want to add more value to the neighborhood.

You've got a minute and 28 seconds. Anything else you'd like to add during your rebuttal time?

Well, I would like to add in regards to I don't know how negative negatively impact the neighborhood. But I do understand our position and I think everybody's concerns are valid. I would like to hear more concerns that we can really kind of take our attention to and get a true understanding of what the true concern is. Um I really didn't I'm not I'm not going to say I didn't hear it but I really want to know what concerns are other than idea I guess if you will. So again this is not a commercial home res$50,000 value.

Correct. And the reason why um Mr. um Callaway uh might not have received information is that he is outside of the circle. His is outside of the circle of where the the letters are sent

out of the 750T radius that the city's required to send to. So that's why one end of the street got the notice and the other street didn't because you weren't cut right in the middle. It cut right in the middle of that street instead of allowing for the the entire street because there's only 13 homes on or 15 homes on the on each side of that street. So it kind of cut out 369 about nine of them. So

got a question for the applicant may assistant city manager. Um since there's uh so much opposition to this um reszoning in this area, would you consider going back and working with the community to try to have some consensus on um the best use for that property? We don't want to have dialogue with them. I think that's one thing we were hoping for to have a great turnout in regards to Zoom call. We didn't want to do it in the post because it just got clos their their concerns are primarily and know that, you know, we're not trying to bring extreme change to the community. We're not trying to buy homes, not buy homes and build any type of homes everywhere, but we all wanted to support the community. I love I love my community, you know, and I would love to be able to support that community anywhere I could. And I'm thinking about bringing homes and development to that area. It will definitely support me when it's time for change and grow. to be the change in order to have a dialogue with much respect to you. Uh we cannot understand what you said but Mr. Peterson was asking if you would prefer a continuence to have greater conversation and dialogue with the community.

Yes. My favorite. Okay. Yeah. Ter Well, I have a question. Um, and I'm not sure if this is directed to the applicant or to staff, but um there there is no new zoning required. if he were to build a primary home in an ADU, he would get his two his two um properties, his two units out of that and no zone no reasonzoning would be necessary. Is that right? Correct. He could do a principal single family residential dwelling and then also do an accessory dwelling unit if it met the requirements of the

and it would and the accessory dwelling unit would have to be 50% of the size of the principal unit. It could be up to 50% of the principal res. So I guess my question for the applicant is why not do that and and not have to have it continuous, not have to go through all this

because it wouldn't be it wouldn't be as excitingly pleasing because if we're build let's say for example we build a 2400 foot house, right? If if if the lot size couldn't could do that building that behind it, we think that it would actually be an issue because of um it would be an issue with the drive with the driveway. So, if we do it a a Duke, I mean, we can that is our second option, but we would prefer the twin home because it would be it would look nicer and it would flow with the community. This is Commissioner Eric Glass. I do apologize for interrupting the applicant's um presentation, but with all due respect, I think this is the applicant's application and our suggestions that they change significantly their plans would almost be overstepping our boundaries as a commission in terms of what is before us and what we shall consider. with all due respect, in addition to suggest that this individual um consider an option to continue when I think there's been some conversation that he's met the that the requirements have been met to provide notice. Although I understand the opposition, which everyone has a right to come to the meeting and voice their opinion, but if we're making certain applicants or an applicant follow rules that are not required, then how is that fair to the applicant? I understand we want to um encourage this applicant to do all we can to be persuasive to us, but at what point do we say we're walking that fine line in terms of overstepping our boundaries as

commissioners to encourage them to make number one changes to their application and request a continuence when they've met the requirements at least from my perspective and I'm asking this from our attorney.

Yes, ma'am. Commissioner Glass. Thank you. Um well so first I would say that uh you know if and when yall are to reach the merits of the application of course you want to root your decision in the reasonleness factors that are laid out in our in our motions right those are reflective of state statute on considerations for a reasonzoning um as far as the neighborhood communication piece goes which I think may be animating some of the questions around the avenue to take the possible continuence again our ordinance doesn't have more specific requirements that I could point to and and say this is your uh you know foothold to uh to to go one way or another on an application independent of those reasonleness factors. Right? That really needs to be what the decision is based on. It's for the board's purview to decide if they do think that there are reasons um that an application may want to be continued uh you know if an applicant has interest in doing so. Um but again communication is not um is not a specific requirement of our ordinance. Right. Then

just my last question in terms of the notification required by statute that is for individuals within 750 ft of the um the land that's in the that's the subject of the application. Am I correct there? So any any legal requirements laid out by statute or ordinance that are in relation to a notification area um would be in relation to the city's notification of the fact that the reszoning is going to happen um to to the surrounding area and and 750 ft. Yes, that is is um is what our requirements uh lay out. Okay. And that did happen in this case.

Yes, the city did make the required notice within that 750 foot. That's where the the 37 number comes from. That's the number of properties from uh county GIS within that 750 foot radius that we mail notice to. Thank you. Thank you for answering my question. I

I've got a question for summary of neighborhood communication. Is this a policy or is this law? We do have uh written into our ordinances something and I'm going to summarize and certainly if the zoning administrator uh you know thinks I may have uh if he may want to amend what I say I I'll certainly welcome that but um our ordinances do contemplate that whatever communication happens we want to get a summary of that. We need to get a summary of that communication. The ordinance doesn't go further in requiring the neighborhood communication. It's just basically whatever communication occurs summarize it for us.

Okay. something that I've been saying since I've been back. I I I just have some concerns we overstepping with this. Thank you.

So I would like to add Thank you, Commissioner Glass and Commissioner Gilmer. Um I think the door was open for the continuence just to allow for more communication and understanding so they there could be more collective buyin. Um, so that's why uh, Commissioner Peterson mentioned that with respect to Commissioner Glass, and I do understand we don't want to overstep. We want this to be a city where business can be done. And I'm looking at our city council member right there, um, Council Member Black, and this is her district. So, I mean, ultimately, we serve at the pleasure of the city and the citizens as well. So that door was opened and and this will be a final action. So I digress.

All right, let's let's get back on on track. We've got uh 22 seconds left. Miss Kas has raised her hand to speak online.

Yes. I thank you so much for um your your input and I just if we don't have to do a continuation and we can get the proper votes I would appreciate it because we really really want the best for the community and if you guys do not see any oppos any reason besides they just don't want a duplex there I think you guys should really think about your community and the people that need housing. Okay, thank you very much. Uh, now the opposition has five minutes of rebuttal time if they would like it. See, I knew his son I knew his son was living there. I knew he doesn't live there. Okay. All right. Uh we still stand the same. Uh he is uh trying to tell us what uh would be best for our neighborhood when he himself knows what he tried to uh do about eight or 10 years ago in our neighborhood about putting a drug rehab facility in our neighborhood. And uh so he he cannot tell me what our neighborhood needs. Um so he just uh I have I have I have uh I have no confidence in what he says because we went out and out lied to last time. And uh another thing we'd like to bring up uh is is You know, it's been mentioned it's been approved

uh in uh beautifification to the surrounding of the uh residential community. Uh if you change it from anything from R5 to the 18, you're taking away you're you're taken away from our community. You're taken away from uh what we bought into. So, uh, I just I can't I can't stress the fact that we do not want multiple housing in our community. Uh, because that's not what we bought into. I mean, we we like I said, we like our space. Now, um, like I said when I started this, I wanted to thank you for letting us have a voice. Um, I uh appreciate every everything. Uh again, thanks for the opportunity to let you know how deeply we object to any reasoning charges in our little community. It would um it would really be bad if it if it changed. Um talking about property taxes, it wouldn't raise anybody's property value but his his own. He wouldn't raise my property value. And then his whole thing is about him. So, um um I just I just I have I have a I have a um I have a uh

when he when he states that it would be that that house that was depict was put on the flyer, nobody out here knows that for sure. That's just a an idea of what they might want to build, what they would like to build. That is that isn't what's going to go on there. Uh I I just don't see why I change the neighborhood for one non-resident. Even though he owns the house, his son lives there, he bought into the neighborhood knowing it was single house, single family housing. So my thing is is is we stand as we are. We do not want any any changes in the uh zoning. We're we we're afraid if we start changing it, the other outside people that own property on our street will jump on board and then here we go again. So, u it's established over 100 years old and we are asking that you do not reszone uh any of our neighborhood. Any questions?

Any questions of Mr. Callaway? Yes. Are you familiar with the accessory dwelling policy that we have in Greensboro now? The accessory mean I can build my mother place out behind my house. Yes, sir.

Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. Oh, a single single house would be nice down there on his lot. That's what we we say if he wants to build, put a single house down there that stays within the zoning. No problem. We just don't think it it should be reszone. If you what I was trying to say, do you understand that uh you familiar with the policy that we passed I think back in January or something that you can build a house but also you can have accessory dwelling as uh in the back up to 50% so you could have two houses on the same lot. Yeah, I know that. All right. Thank you.

Yeah, two houses, not two more houses, you know. Any other question? Well, the clock has stopped for some reason, but um I would love to respond if I could. No, no, you cannot. We've already had the rebuttal from the applicant. We've got 44 seconds left for rebuttal from the opposition. Is there anything else you want to add, Mr. Callaway?

No, you you know how you know how the neighborhood stands. We we plainly said what we uh would expect that you do. You know, you're going to do what you're going to do, but we would expect that you would take us in our consideration. 29 signatures. There only five houses we didn't get signatures from. one didn't want to sign and four was unable to find people at at the right time of day. We we went in at daylight, we went at night time. Um five of them did not and I I'd venture to say that three out of the five

Thank you, Mr. Callaway. Thank you. That finishes the presentation and the rebuttal. So, we will close the public hearing. We have no objections to that. So, it's now Commissioner Skins, if I may. Uh, well, go ahead. Sorry,

I didn't want to interrupt you. Um, I was just going to to layer a little bit of context after the all the comments were made. Um, as I mentioned before, of course, decisions need to be rooted in those reasonableness factors that are on your motion sheet. Those are your land use considerations under state law. Um, the one thing that did pop up in comments, of course, I want to always make sure the board understands, we we can't base a land use decision on who an applicant is, either favorably or disfavorably. Um, so again, just make sure any decision is rooted in your land use reasonleness factors. Thank you for those thoughts. I open it up for discussion and comments

or or a motion. Mr. Peterson here. Commissioner Keith Peterson. Item Z-25-12-00. Can I ask is there anyone who would like to make any comments before we proceed with the motion?

I would like to make a com Well, sir, I have a brief comment to make. Indeed, Walmart neighborhood market is in that area. Uh is adjacent is considered industrial in that sense. Um and the comment was made that zoning is you don't want any type of zoning. Well, zoning is going to be inevitable in so many cases. We respect the neighborhood. We respect you all as well. I also thoroughly want to say, you know, the communication factor did come into place, but it is not a land use factor. We just like communication with our neighbors, with the citizens. And then lastly, I would say I'm going to say something good here is that the schematic looks great. Uh I do think it is a great idea. However, um my support, I have no idea how I'm going to vote because I listen to all factors of this side of the story. But I will say thank you to the applicant for applying. We want to be a place where you can do business in the city of Greensboro. And um I just yield back to my colleagues.

Mr.

Thank you, Vice Chairman. I remember I think this case years ago and I think it was a brick house or something. I I remember what the gentleman was talking about, I think. U but when you have comments that say we don't want any reasonzoning in the community, we want to stay as the same. I think all communities in Greensboro sooner or later there will be some kind of zone and it'll be a little different in your neighborhood. So, at this particular time, uh I think the uh Africans made a good um presentation and I think it was fair and I understand the neighborhood too, but I would have to support this. Thank you. Because even if you postponeing anything, if the neighbors don't want any diff anything different, then you going come right back and have the same problem. So, I'll be supporting it. Thank you.

This is Commissioner Turner and I'm sorry I can't find the raised hand function, but may may I speak? Yes, absolutely.

Um I am I'm very much persuaded by what other kind of far and I will be supporting very adamantly against this. I just think that this is not the solution that we're looking for. I think going too far from where we need to be. So, I will be opposed on this. I'm going to make one comment and I did of course drive down there and went around on 421 back around on Alamance Church. Um, and to Mr. Wash's point, there's a neighborhood market. There's a heating and air conditioning next door. Um there's commercial across the street. Um and you're talking about residential butdding up against commercial. And what we've got here is a is a transition between the single family and the industrial and commercial. Um I'm not sure that that's let me let me rephrase that. Um I just think this is a good transition between the commercial and the industrial and the residential. It becomes a buffer if you will. And so I at this point I will be supporting the request.

I'll be supporting the request application as well. Um, and I just want to build on that slightly by saying that the um people in opposition um Mr. Callaway um said a couple of times, well, if this were in the middle of our neighborhood, um we would still be opposed, but it's not in the middle of to your point, Madam Chair, it's not in the middle of the neighborhood. It is right up against a commercial uh area that's zoned commercial. Um, you're I understand your feelings about the neighborhood. It's charming. The houses are historic and they're beautiful. I get all of that. But, um, Greensboro has a serious need to create more housing. And the other thing that I think is really critical here is we're talking about adding two families on a parcel which every parcel could already do irrespective of reszoning. So that part of it is a little difficult for me to it's it's difficult for me to understand why that reality that current um regulatory reality is triggering such a response. So, um, for those reasons, I will support, um, the applicant.

Okay, we need a motion. All right. Commissioner Keith Peterson, item Z-25-12- Z005. The Greensboro Planning and Zoning Commission believes that it action to recommend approval of the reszoning request for the property at 2402 Liberty Road from R5 residential single family- to CD-RM-18 conditional residential multifamily 18 to be consistent with the adopted GSO 2040 comprehensive plan and considers action taken to be reasonable and in the public interest for the following reasons. The request is consistent with the comprehensive plan future built form map and future land use map. The proposed CD-RM-18 zoning district as condition permits uses that fit the context of the surrounding area and limits negative impacts on adjacent properties. The request is reasonable due to the size physical condition and other attributes of the area and it will benefit the property owner surrounding community and approval is in the public's interest.

Commissioner Gilma seconds. We have a motion and a second for approval on this case. All those in favor of the motion signify by saying I and raise your hand. I I Okay.

I believe we have a vote of 8 to one for approval. Uh this constitutes a final action unless an appeal is submitted in writing the planning department and the appeal fee is paid within 10 days. Anyone may file such an appeal. All such appeals will be subject to a public hearing at the Tuesday, January 20th, 2026 city council meeting and all adjoining property owners will be notified of any such appeal. And to clarify, that's that 750 range. So, not everybody on the street will get a notice. All right, it is 7:35. Uh we need to take a break for our closed captioning person. Uh, we'll be back in uh 20 minutes.

Recording stopped. My name is Janita Chase

and I am Hassan Pittz and together we have been working underneath the moniker of SM for many years as interdisciplinary multimedia artists, sound, video, and everything else.

And we look forward to inviting you into the Grow Residency from November 6th until December 15th. Well, we're trying to um do an immersive videobased uh installation um that we hope will um connect largely with movement and remix a little bit of archival footage from the Greensboro History Museum and contemporary everyday Greensboro footage that we've been collecting for the last several months.

I think there's that that duality of being able to like replicate reality, but then also be able to like play, manipulate, create with the lens, through the lens. Uh that's always been particularly interesting.

You can find us online at signaltoise.com and we are Signaltoise on Instagram as well. 70 years ago, on this very day, on this very spot, history was made. We gather here to honor the Greensboro 6, courageous African-American men who with a few swings of a golf club changed the course of civil rights in America because I went back and looked at what it was like in 1955. There throughout the South, segregation had its grips. There were whites only signs on restaurants, theaters, and even at public golf courses like this. It was a time when Althia Gibson, uh, a famous African-American woman athlete, was winning her role on the professional tennis circuit. Jackie Robinson had already integrated baseball, but there was a lot of push back. And then there was African-American golfer Charlie Cifford who was trying to get on the PGA tour and play, but the PGA barred him because they had a clause that no African-Americans can compete in a PGA sanctioned event. So it was a much

different time. It was a time when a lot of people did not want to see blacks on this golf course. This golf course was whites only. And so a lot has changed in that time. But it was it was a tough time 70 years ago. And just to think what my father and the five others that stood with him, they were brave because what they did and the result of what they did not only got them jail time and felony trespassing charges filed against them, but they had death threats. They had to worry about their employer keeping them on the job after finding out what they did. So the consequences were really serious from what their actions were, but they were determined to play for change and that's what they did. Today we expect uh I will say a few words in honor of the Greensboro 6 tell the people who gather here a little bit about the story. Then we will have six golfers tee off in a ceremonial first hole shot here to recognize the Greensboro six, the bravery that they showed and how their actions help to transform this course into a place where people of all colors can play. And so each of these T-shots will represent each of the Greensboro six and their drives for freedom. Five, four, three, two, one.

with flavors like cumin, sweet potato, hibiscus. These are not your typical frozen dessert flavors you'll find in every supermarket, but you will find them here. The idea was born thousands of miles away, but the product is made right here in Greensboro. All right, Chef Net, where did the idea for Elica Treats come from?

It's from this desire to tell my story and build a community and create a community around me. Culinary really is not really my strength. I think that's more because of my background. Um, having a mom who's an amazing cook. So, I grew up having everything that's really flavorful and also my dad was a foodie even before foodie was a thing. Predominately my flavors are Middle Eastern and Indian inspired flavors. I do have a very diverse multicultural taste palette myself that I have some incorporation of few flavors that's representation of communities that I connect with or I belong to as in like right now I'm a North Carolinian. So I have Carolina Peach Sonker which is a peachbased non-dairy flavor. It has pancake bits in it and it's me recreating sker from Siri County. The flavors are all cardamom infused. That's what Elica means. Elica is cardamom in my mother tongue which is mallayalam which is a language spoken in Kerala. That's the my my parents home state in India. This is where I store all our ingredients. Um because we actually try to source fresh produce from local sources itself local suppliers. So hence our farmers. So, I purchase them when they're in season and, you know, stock them as much as possible. We have to be really creative with how much we package into a complete finished packaging and how much we actually store it uh for later cuz there's also as a wholesale business, you have to be prepared for, you know, recurring orders. And uh the only way to do that is to have something in stock rather than producing when you get the order, which is really highly expensive when you are a consumer package good business. I mean we don't

have a designated kitchen space where we have access to it anytime and every time as we please. I mean that this is very easy access but still you know we're renting it by the hour. So we you have to factor those things in. These are our 3 oz cups. So Sulmani sorbet which is black tea with cardamom and lemon. It's literally a drink. It's a piping hot tea that we serve typically after a huge meal. And it's very prominent in the Muslim community itself, regardless which part of the Muslim community around the world. It's a Muslim culture to have black tea after a hu big feast to serve that to your guest. And so, you know, I just I executed that tea as a sorbet. So, this freezer started my journey here really. And this is where we store now all of our 3 oz cups and some of our gift packaging. I did uh launch Greensboro. That's an accelerator program by the chamber here in Greensboro. And at the end of the program uh they granted me this freezer upon my request, you know, to assist me with my uh distribution. I do love actually the fact that this business really challenges me in so many different ways that it's always continuous problem solving which I've always been good at and that's something that actually keeps me interested. So Kulfi is our bestseller that's considered traditional Indian ice cream. That's actually milk based with saffron, cardamom and pistachio. And Kulfi is literally the emperor of frozen desserts. Hands down. Like so that's the only flavor that I did not create. But all the other flavors that we have are all my own creations. It's worth experiencing because traditional method of making ice cream is not really how I really execute my flavor. So when I say I have plantain

ice cream, I mean plantain is literally the base of the ice flavor. It's not me just adding chunks of plantain or flavor of plantain. You can find the sweet treats at local restaurants and some specialty stores. also online at elicatreats.com.

Heat. Heat.

Heat. Heat.

recording in progress. Back to order, please.

All right. The next item on our agenda um is uh highway 68 307 309 and 309 Y and we've just been informed that uh there's been some conversation between the U opposition and the applicant and the opposition has u withdrawn. So we are going to move this to an expedited process. Um, so this is item Z2512007. It's a reasoning request from R3 residential single family 3 and CM commercial medium to CD CM conditional district commercial medium for the properties identified as 307 309 and 309 Y North Carolina Highway 68 South 610 614 and 616 Hickory Ridge Drive generally described as east of North Carolina Highway 68 South and west of Hickory Ridge 5.73 acres. Mr. Carter,

thank you. This is the zoning map of the subject property showing that it is currently um split zoned subject properties split zone R3 and commercial medium and the reasoning request is to take it to conditional district commercial medium. To the north of the request are uh those properties are zones CM and R3 and that's undeveloped land and a single family dwelling. To the east of the request is CDLI and that is a contractor's office and undeveloped land. To the south of the request is shopping center zones CDCM and to the west of the request is a fairly wide portion of NC68 zone CM and R3. Um across 68 is LI and R3 with um a overnight accommodations in LI and single family dwellings in R3. These are the conditions that were proposed by the applicant and advertised with the in the notice. And in recommending approval of this request, staff notes that the comprehensive plans future built format currently designates the majority of the properties as planned industrial campus and a small portion is urban general. A small portion of the property is also within a district scale activity center. Future land use map designates the majority of the properties as industrial and a small portion as commercial. The proposed reasoning request supports the GSO 2040 comprehensive plans filling in our framework big idea to arrange our land uses for where we live, work, attend school, shop, and enjoy our free time to create a more vibrant andable Greensboro and the growing economic competitiveness big idea to build a prosperous resilient economy that creates equitable opportunities to succeed. The proposed CDCM zoning

district as condition would limit permitted uses to office uses, overnight accommodations, and professional services without drive-through facilities. The proposed uses are compatible with the general character of the area and its continued development. With that, I can answer any questions that you have. Any questions of Mr. Carter? Okay. Would the applicant like two minutes to elaborate on the request?

Thank you, Madam Chair. Amanda Hood 804 Green Valley Road 200. Um, I think staff well covered it and the request is pretty straightforward, but I did just want to take a minute to thank you for your time, see if you did have any questions um about how we got here from not having been on the expedited agenda previously. And I also wanted to acknowledge uh the applicant representative of I'm here on behalf of the record property owners of course, but also on behalf of Mr. Canal Dave. Thank you, sir. He's traveled to be with us here tonight. He is a veteran of the hospitality industry, other properties here in Greensboro, and with this request seeks to be a repeat uh corporate citizen here in Greensboro. So, we certainly look forward uh to welcoming him um hopefully for another property here here in Greensboro and we're here for any questions. Thank you.

Thank you. Any questions of Miss Hyder? Very good. Without objection, we will then close the public hearing uh for discussion or a motion.

I'd like to make a motion. Item Z25-12-007. The Greensboro Planning and Zoning Commission believes that its actions to recommend approval of the reasonzoning request for the property at 307 309 309 Yy, North Carolina Highway 68 South, 610, 614, 616 Hickory Ridge Drive from R3 Residential Single Family 3 and CM Commercial Medium to CDCM Conditional District commercial medium to be consistent with the adopted GSO 2040 comprehensive plan and considers the action taken to be reasonable in the public interest for the following reasons. One, the request is consistent with the comprehensive plans future build form map and future land use map. to the proposed CDCM zoning district as condition permits uses that fit the context of the surrounding area and limits negative impacts on the adjacent properties. Three, the request is reasonable due to the size, physical conditions, and other attributes of the area. It will benefit the property owner and the surrounding community and approval is in the public interest.

Steu Nichols, I second. Great. We have a motion and a second to approve the request. All in favor, please signify by saying I and raise your hand. I

thank you. That passes on a 9 to zero vote. And this approval constitutes a final action. Unless an appeal is submitted writing to the planning department, the appeal fee is paid within 10 days. Anyone may file such an appeal. All such appeals will be subject to the public hearing at the Tuesday, January 20th, 2026 city council meeting and all adjoining property owners will be notified of any such appeal. Next case, um this will be this two items an annexation and a resoning uh annexation 2548 and resoning Z2009. This is an annexation. zoning and a reszoning request from county RS40 residential single family and city CD RM5 conditional district residential multif family 5 to city CDRM8 conditional district residential multifamily 8 for the property described as 3800 Lewon Road and 45 44 Jessup Grove Road generally described as east of Lewon Road and north of Jessup Grove Road total of 9.06 acres. Mr. Carter,

thank you. Chair SK, this is the zoning map of the subject property showing that a portion of the property is already inside of the city in zone CDRM5 and that is 3.08 acres of the total uh a portion of the property is currently in the county and zone county RS40 and the request is to annex that portion of the property and to consider zoning to city conditional district RM8. The RM8 would the conditions for the RM8 would cover all of the subject properties that you see here. Um the north of the property is zoned county RS40 and um and east of the property is also county RS40 and city R3. South of the request is city R3 and west of the request contains some city R3 and county RS40. This is the aerial map of the subject property showing that it is currently undeveloped. North of the request contains single family dwellings. East of the request is undeveloped land. Uh south of the request contains religious assembly use and single family dwellings. of the request contain single family dwellings and agricultural use. This is the subject property as seen from road. This image shows a single family dwelling located north of the request on road zoned county RS40. This image shows the undeveloped lands located east of the request on Melissa Road County RS4. This image shows the religious assembly use that's located on Jess Grove Road.

This is a single family dwelling south of the request zone city R3. This image shows undeveloped land located south and east of the request zone county RS4. And this is an example of a single family dwellings located south of the request city. This image shows a single family dwelling located southwest of the request on South Lew. This is the agricultural use that is located west of the request. There's a single family dwelling to the back of the property that you can see on the left hand side that is located west of the request. Road zone county RS40. This is an example of the single family dwellings located west of the request zone county RS4. This view is facing south on Lew Road. The subject property is on the left. This is facing north. The subject property is on the right. This is facing east on Jess Road. The subject property is on the left. This is west on Jess, the subject property is on the right. These are the conditions that were proposed by the applicant. And in recommending approval of this request, staff notes that the 2040 the GSO 240 comprehensive plan designates the site as urban general and exuration will be changed to urban general. The GSO 2040 future land use map designates this property as residential. The proposed original zoning request supports both the comprehensive plans creating great places goal to expand Greensboro citywide network of unique

neighborhoods offering residents of all walks of life a variety of quality housing choices and the building community connections goal to maintain stable attractive and healthy places to live and raise families. The CDRM8 uh zoning district as condition permit a mix of residential housing types at a maximum unit count of 65 dwellings. The proposed uses are similar to existing uses in the surrounding area. And with that, I can answer any questions that you have.

I just if you go further out Lewon on the left, there's some land being cleared. I couldn't tell what was going to go there. Is it apartments, town homes, single family homes? Do you know? And is that in the city or is that in the county? I don't think you had a picture of it. It's Just a little bit further.

Yeah, I think there was a recent resoning in the last couple years north of this request as well. You know what kind of housing what the zoning is? I can't right off the top of my head. I'm sorry.

We're remembering multif family, but our memories are not real good sometimes. Any other questions of Mr. Carter?

All right. Is the applicant here to present the case? Good evening, Madam Chair, members of the commission. Uh, my name is Mark Isacson. My address is 804 Green Valley Road. And, uh, I know the hours a little late, but I'll try to be brief, but I would like to address any questions that the commission may have. U so this property or part of this property as the staff indicated came before this commission and then council a little over a year ago. Okay. So you've seen the conditions essentially the upshot of that is no apartments here. This is limited to and the intent here is town homes. And by the way my client is here. Alex Hale is one of the individuals uh who is with the entity that owns the property has owned it for over a year. Uh we did put a limit of 65 dwelling units. The intent here is town homes but uh we're advised that we probably will not get right at that number. They'll be will come in a little bit lower than that. U get to some of the slides here. The, as you've seen, the property shaded in red is the property that was annexed and zoned a little over a year ago for town homes. The property in the back is vacant land still in the county. At the time that we uh presented this to this commission and the council last year, we were under the impression that

water and sewer were only available to the front part of the property to support uh town homes and that the remaining property would need to remaining left in the county and remaining for RS40 or that is about one house per acre. Since then, and as sometimes happens with property development, uh our engineers and the city engineering and and other staff have gotten together and determined that the rest of the property would support with water and sewer uh town homes. And so we're back to apply or present to you the application for town homes for the remaining property. Now of course this would mean annexing this property into the city and so you all will be making a recommendation on that. Um I included this to show you a little bigger context of the area. Of course, the properties outlined in red at the top are the subject properties. U the point here that I want hope the cons commission will consider is that there are several examples of multifamily town homes that are coexisting well with single family in this immediate area. And I think the reason for that is fairly straightforward. Uh to the east you'll see Prolific Park. You'll Creek Road, you'll see the CDPI parcels. That's a new medical uh center, medical facility that Atrium Wake Forest Baptist Health is developing. That will be a major healthcare facility for this area. U there are other facilities and uh institutional uses. You'll see south of

that the Carolyn Barber uh Carolyn Allen, excuse me, uh park and uh athletic complex. There are several educational institutions up and down Horseman Creek Road. We have a YMCA on Horseman Creek Road. So, the city and other organizations have invested heavily in this corridor. And what typically follows from that kind of investment in infrastructure is a different types of housing. And so here I think the example is fairly clear that we We have a number of mix of residential uses in this area that all utilize not only Horseman Creek Road which is a five lane median divided thoroughare but also the educational institutional and other facilities that have developed along this important corridor. Here's an illustrative sketch plan, of course, for illustrative purposes only. Uh that shows the layout, proposed layout of the town homes. The access is proposed to be just on Jessup Grove Road. No access proposed on Lewon Road. This has been for reviewed by the staff in a preliminary review of this sketch plan, and I understand no red flags were found. So, we're We're we're hoping to move forward subject to of course to resoning and annexation approval. I think the other important point uh is to consider is the amount of open space green space that's left remaining here. Uh the property sort of dips down toward the north. That's the lower topography and that's where the engineer has put the storm water retention device but has

left a fair amount of open and green space here. Of course, under our ordinance, there will be a type C buffer along that northern line because we adjoin or will adjoin single family zone property. Lastly, we did send out a letter to all the property owners within the radius per the city's uh notification list. We held a neighborhood meeting on Tuesday, December 2 at 5:30. Uh a handful, say six or seven folks, uh attended that meeting. Uh I think there were some general concerns expressed some questions went over the uh proposed development here and I think maybe a fair summary would be that we don't really like a lot more development in this area but we understand the city is growing and so of course anyone who has a concern is is certainly welcome to appear at this meeting or at the city council meeting next month when a final decision will be believe that's it there. So, uh in summary, I would uh commend to the commission the staff report which does a very thorough job of going through the uh principles and concepts of our comprehensive plan. I think uh as the staff indicates this project checks a lot of the boxes in that plan and is supportive of it. This is consistent with development in the area. The of residential uses that I outlined and the co the coexistence I would say of multif family that is town homes and single family and the other uh investments that have been made in this area. Uh secondly or thirdly there as you as as we all

know have been a lot of announcements about economic developments job creation in this area near the airport that's become a real hub obviously over the years now coming to fruition and people generally want to live near where they work and so to be able to get on Horseman Creek Road get to the airport area get to the outer loop and get in there very quickly uh is is a real plus And so housing typically follows those areas of investment. And uh of course we have a stated policy by our council to try to get to 10,000 units by 2030. This is a small uh dent in that number. But uh nevertheless an opportunity to sort of reinvent this property from where we landed about a year ago with just part of it for town home. Sometimes the engineering works out in your favor, sometimes it doesn't. Here it did. And that's why we're back to present this phase two to the commission. With that, happy to answer any questions that you all may have.

Any questions of Mr. Isacson? Do you know the answer to the question I asked Mr. Carter earlier? What's with that development a little bit further down road? Yeah, I happen to have been involved in that one. It is single family uh I think single family detached. I can't remember the density level, but it's in the city now, right? It is in the city. Okay. All right. Thanks. And just Yeah, just to follow up on that, the that development is CDR7. So, it was an it was a single family, seven units per acre request, but the conditions might have put a unit count, but it was CDR7.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Is there anyone else who would like to speak in favor of this case? There's a minute 45 seconds left. If not, we'll move to opposition. If the opposition would like to speak to the merits of this case is online, Sheila Blake is online. I'm waiting for her on mute.

Okay. She is not unmuted. We requested Miss Blake unmute and she's not unmuted yet.

So, we don't have a mis responding. And is that the only opposition that we have? Is Miss Blake online who's not there?

All righty then. Um then we will handle this as an expedited case also, but we've already done a five minutes. So we are now looking at discussions motions and on this one we will have a recommendation for annexation on the Lewon road and then the reszoning on and Jess I'd like to make a motion for the annexation of PLP2-48. Did we close the public hearing? Has the public hearing been closed?

No, we have not done that. So, we will close the public hearing and now we ready for a motion. All right. Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, I'd like to make an annexation motion for PLP25-48. Um, and the address is 3800 Louis Road and 4544 Jess Road. Second shade. We have a motion and a second to approve the annexation 2548. All in favor, please raise your hand. Signify by saying I. Turner.

Is Miss Turner still with us? Yes. She said yes. Did you heard? Very good. So that's approved. Now we go to

motion. Yes. I'd like to make a motion for Z25-12-009. The Greensboro Planning and Zoning Commission believes that its action to recommend approval of the original zoning request for the property at 3800 Lewon Road and 4544 Jessup Grove Road from County RS40 residential single family and city CDRM5 conditional district res. multif family to city CDRM8 conditional district residential multif family 8 to be consistent with the adopted GSO 2040 comprehensive plan and considers the action taken to be reasonable and in the public interest for the following reasons one the request is consistent with the comprehensive plan's future build format and future land use map to the proposed city CDRM8 zoning district as condition uses that fix the contents of the surrounding area and limits the negative impact on adjacent properties. Three, the request is reasonable due to the size, physical conditions, and other attributes of the area and it will benefit the property owner and the surrounding community and approval is in the public interest.

Commissioner. Okay, we have a motion and a second to approve the reszoning of road and all. In favor, please signify by saying I and raise your hands. I I thank you. Uh that it passes on a n vote and this is a constitutes a favorable recommendations and is subject to a public hearing at the Tuesday, January 20th, 2026 city council meeting. We're now going into the next item which is text amendment.

Yes. Good evening uh members of the commission. So this is a pretty straightforward text amendment coming before the commission this evening. Basically to help us continue to try to modernize the ordinance as uses develop and change over time. I think that's the bigger context here. Basically what it is is that uh we have a a category of uses medical dental related offices that is part of our medical facilities use group in the ordinance. Um in some discussions we've had uh these because of the way these offices tend to work. They also make sense to be part of our general office use group as well but they're not currently classified that way. So they're actually different categories of use at this point in time. I think that's partly is a a leftover of the medical uses being mostly associated with larger institutional medical facilities like hospital campuses and such, but realistically these offices often are in shopping centers or family buildings as well. So we feel it's appropriate that they should really be in both of those categories. So that they're available to be used in the process. So the requested text amendment before you this evening is based on that that we are going to add the medical dental and related offices to our general office use group. It will stay with the medical facilities use group as well. So there's not any no one's losing use rights. This will actually increase the potential for use rights for development in the city. And that's pretty much what we're asking for this evening questions.

Any questions for Mr. Carter or Mr. Mr. Carter? That's right. He I didn't want to put him on the Well, everyone The answer is no. So this is official amendment to the uh zoning ordinance. So I've got the statement of assist that we also need to do as part of that if there's anyone.

Sure. I'll make the motion for this LDO tax amendment medical office text amendment. So, the Greensboro Planning and Zoning Commission believes that it action to recommend approval of the text amendment request for the medical office text amendment to be consistent with the adopted GSO 2040 comprehensive plan and considers the action taken to be reasonable and in the public interest for the following reasons. Number one, the request is consistent with the with allowing development that supports the comprehensive plans future built for map and future land use map. Number two, the text amendment better supports the Greensboro City Council strategic goal of being an easy place to do business and also supports the goals of GSO 2040, the city's comprehensive plan in creating great places and filling in our framework. Number three, the request is reasonable due to the fact that the proposed amendments provide administrative clarity for medical office use. Yes, sir. Peterson.

Thank you. We have a motion and a second um to make a recommendation, a positive recommendation for this text amendment. All in favor, please raise your hand signify by saying I I. Thank you. This constitutes a favorable recommendation and is subject to a public hearing at the Tuesday, January 20th, 2026 city council meeting. Next item is the uh type three modification at Elmsley.

Thank you chair schemes. So uh this is a request for the planning and zoning commission to uh consider a type three modification of an existing zoning condition for property onell road. Uh the conditions that are on the property are shown here on the screen for you. Number three is the condition being considered this evening as far as the modification. Um, for context for those that may not be familiar with it, the modifications are um somewhat administrative technical options that are available in the ordinance where you effectively are trying to meet the intent of a condition, but for whatever reason can't quite meet the quite the letter of the law, if you will, or the exact um application of that particular condition, this will make sense here when I show you what's being requested. Um so basically the request coming before the commission tonight is to uh as you see in condition three there's a condition talks about a rot iron and black aluminum fence that's supposed to go around the perimeter of the subject property. The is requesting this modification to u adjust the location of portions of that fence basically to avoid a significant tree conservation area and not disturb that specific area. And there's also a ement on the property that they're trying to a And our ordinance actually talks about not having permanent structures in East. So it does meet some standards as well. So just to kind of help people understand um this is a subject property on Talon Road. It is a a multif family project. Um the outline in orange is if the condition is applied as earlier written that is where those feds would be required to go. The uh area that's shown in red is where the feds would go if this typeification is approved. And so I would note basically that the fence is still around the uh the multif family use the main activity of the property which is what the intent was with the

condition originally. But as you can see it would stay out of this significant tree conservation area thereby eliminating hopefully or at least reducing the chance for damaging trees in that space trying to put fence in. And then there's also this utility here on the west. So that's effectively bringing in the west. There's also that they're trying to afford as well. And so that's why they're asking for that request. Um basically the commission in thinking this through um this did go through our technical review committee for evaluation as well. Modification has one of three reasons why you can grant the modification that either being equal or better performance relative to what the standard of condition is being considered. if there is something where in conflict with other state or federal regulations or if there are some type of unique site conraint that makes it difficult or impossible in some cases to actually apply it as written. Um in this case did review it. They feel like this is an equal better again you're going to be able to um limit the potential for negative impacts to a tree conservation area and ensure that this fence does not interfere with utility ements that are on the property. So at this point I'll be happy to answer any questions or we can motion.

Oh, I'm sorry. One more thing. Uh, in proving the TRC, the TRC looked at it, they did ask for one condition. So, when you make the motion is with this condition from the TRC and this is a straight motion and is it final? Correct. Yes. And this is considered a technical matter before the commission. So, there's no public comments.

Any questions of Mr. Kirkman? All right. Um, we're looking for a motion. Yes. All right, we're getting punchy here. We only got one more case. Let's roll. Is there a motion? I'm sorry. Who's making the motion?

Commissioner Keith Peterson. I'll make a motion. PLP-25-52 type 3 modification. Second. You need to incorporate right the modification with the associate condition from the technical review committee with the additional proposed conditions of approval of technical review committee as shown on the proposed plan provide a gate of adequate size 12 ft to allow equipment to access the outlet barrier and this parad

second. All right, we have a motion uh to approve with the added TRC condition. All in favor, please signify by saying I and raise your hand. I I thanks. This constitutes a final action unless an appeal is submitted writing to the planning department and the appeal fee is paid within 10 days. Anyone may file such an appeal. All such appeals will be subject to a public hearing at the Tuesday, January 20th, 2026 council meeting and uh any adjoining property owners be notified of any such appeal. Now, last item uh is a street closure.

I'm trying to get to where

Okay. Okay, I think this map shows the what is happening with the street closure request a little better than some of the other ones that we have. Um, so as you see, we have a street closure request for a portion of Brass Eagle Loop from its intersection with Fleming Road to the uh approximately the top of Bank on the northwestern side of Brush Creek uh and a portion of Long Valley Road from its intersection with Brass Eagle Loop extending northward approximately 640 ft. Um, as you know, the or as you may remember the kind of on the inside of this curve here or this intersection was annexed and and reszoned several years ago um for residential development. In looking at that, the developer determined and and along with the city that it was unreasonable to develop um with the current road pattern and so they are proposing to to close these portions of of streets and redo the the road network in this area basically. Um so with that u the applicant and the city have agreed on certain portions of the rightway going to each. So what you see in blue would go to the the developer. What you see in orange would go back to the city of Greensboro. The city of Greensboro is the land owner of the property that is um south of Brass Eagle Loop uh and on

the east of Long Valley Road. Um so that is why city would would get um ownership of of that right away uh upon approval. There's also a portion there's a little triangle um on Fleming Road or right at Fleming Road and and Brass Eagle Loop um that is Mr. and Mrs. Nelson who own that property and since they have road frontage along it at that point they would get um a portion of that rightway to the center line. Um so you will notice that um certain aspects of the conditions incorporate those agreements. Um also with this um there there is a trail head on Long Valley Road that the city uh maintains and emergency services uses to access or for access for people who are on the trail and and make emergency services calls, 911 calls. And so you will notice condition number three uh as proposed by the technical review committee addresses continued access uh to that trail head. Um so not all of or not all of the adjacent property owners were um signitories on the street closure petition u but more than 51% were. So it is a valid petition. Um the street closure um the petition did not include the Nelson's. They were notified uh in accordance with general statutes. Um so in making a street closure request uh decision, you have to make two determinations. One, that closing the street to vehicular traffic is not contrary to public interest, and two, that no property owner in the vicinity is deprived of reasonable means of ingress and egress. The technical review committee recommended approval of the proposed street closure request at their December 5th, 2025 meeting with the following conditions. One, the street closure is not final

until a plat is recorded showing the areas within the rightway being combined with adjacent land owners um substantially in compliance with this map. And two, that uh Long Valley shall be extended to connect to Fleming Road subject to the Greensboro Department of Transportation approval. And you'll see that represented on this map as well. And then that number three, access from Fleming Road to the existing on Long Valley shall be maintained for emergency services. The developer shall dedicate an emergency services access easement to the city of Greensboro over the existing pavement of Brass Eagle Loop and along Valley Road sufficient for emergency services access to the trail head as generally shown on the attached map. With that, I can answer any questions that you have. is what's written on your staff report that the way that that is written that that that would be okay to read that and then add those these three conditions.

Okay. So, I would like to make a motion regarding the street closure PL 25-53 uh consideration of a street closure request for a portion of Brass Eagle Loop from its intersection with Fleming Road to its intersection with Long Valley Road and a portion of Long Valley Road from its intersection with Brass Eagle Loop extending northward approximately 650 ft. with three conditions. Number one, the street closure is not final until a plat is recorded showing the area within the right of way being combined with adjacent properties. Two, the long valley road shall be extended to connect to Fleming Road subject to Greensboro Department of Transportation approval. The access from Fleming Road to the existing trail head on Long Valley Road shall be maintained for emergency services. The developer shall dedicate an emergency service access easement to the city over the existing pavement of the Brass Eagle Loop and the Long Valley Road sufficient for emergency services access to the trail head as generally shown on the attached exhibit. We have now looked at and reviewed.

Can I second? We have a motion and a second on the road closure. One quick question. A road closure subject to appeals. Uh this is a recommendation only. It goes to city council for final. This is a recommendation that answers that question. So we have a motion and a second. Uh all in favor, please signify by saying I and raise your hands. I thank you. Um, this constitutes a favorable recommendation and is subject to a public hearing at the Tuesday, January 20th, 2026 city council meeting. Uh, any items from the planning department you would like to impart to us?

Uh, just want to remind the commission that our January meeting is going to be on a Wednesday, January the 21st. So, make sure you got that on your calendar. Uh, we do have a number of items on that agenda as well. So, um, thank you in advance for your time with that and happy holidays to everybody here and watching at home.

Madam Chair, Matt adds something as well. This is a point of appreciation. Um, I want to um, of course, we know we have new city council members. So, welcome to our new city council members and returning. I also want to take this time to thank um the thank the Dr. Goldie Wells for her impact and legacy. Uh she's retired from city council uh for spent more than a decade on city council collectively representing district 2. And I was I was appointed to this commission because of her. So I bid her many blessings and much appreciation for her leadership and service. And I look forward to working with uh Councilwoman Cece or Cecil Crawford as well. ideas and she was here earlier with council woman black. I also wish to impact uh highlight the impact of former council member uh Sharon High Totower and her work in district one whom I also work with and I bid her bountiful blessings as well. Looking forward to working with councilwoman Black as all of us were looking forward to working with the collective but I do want to give that appreciation. I was always taught to give honor to whom honor is due to whom honor is due. So, I do want to say thank you and to the city, to city council, to our commissioners, and to our new mayor as well. Uh, we're working together and I appreciate all of you.

I'd like to just add to that uh, city council woman Nancy Hoffman who has gone off District 4 after 14 years of service in the city. And I I think that there are a few people here that are here because she suggested that whoever was the council member who represented us should h should appoint us. So in addition to Sharon who we will miss and also Goldie and um we're looking forward to Adam Marshall doing replacing her in wonderful state and we've left out CC Crawford who is new and of course Mary Kier our new mayor. Who else do we leave out? Oh um Allen at large is that so we're looking forward to

I like to leave I like to leave on the laugh. Who idea was it on this type of elder? You may blame the United States government for that definition. That is where that comes from. And after tonight, every minute gets on the road. I would like to ask u so that everyone will know and be prepared the January agenda at this point. It is currently it is currently eight requests. Just eight. All right.

And thank thank you thank you chair skins for ending our year in such a in such a delightful way with with candy and Andrew with lovely cookies. Thank you so much, Mr. Nelson. Thank you. Do I hear a motion to adjourn? So moved. Very good. Thank y'all.