Planning & Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting

happening in town and take a closer look at the businesses that are growing here. It's Gate City Insider every week on [Music] GTN. What are you waiting for? Your future awaits at Guilford Technical Community College. Make amazing happen. [Music] [Laughter] [Music] [Applause] [Music] [Music] [Applause]

[Music] not expedite it. I want to [Music] Okay. Where's the [Music] interpreter?

[Music] Let's [Music] do something. [Music] Heat. Heat. [Music] Am I in the air now, Mike? Heat. Heat.

[Music] like this. of the castle. [Music]

Recording in progress. [Music] [Music]

[Music] [Music] Good evening everyone. Welcome to the May 19th, 2025 Greensboro Planning and Zoning Meeting. My name is Katherine Magged and I am the chair of the commission. If the other commissioners

would introduce themselves starting from the right, Waray Downey, Sandra O' Conor, Mary, Erica Glass, Paul Gilmer, Senior, Steu Nichols, and online, Mr. Peterson, are you online? He is okay. Thank you. Yes, I'm here. Thank you. Members of the commission are appointed by the city council and serve without pay. The commission reviews all original zoning and reszoning requests for the city of Greensboro. Each commissioner normally visits each site prior to this meeting. All commissioners are required to vote unless they have a conflict of interest. This meeting is being conducted in person and online and is being recorded and televised on the Greensboro Television Network G&T and the telecast is being closed captioned for the hearing impaired. If anybody participating online needs help with Zoom during this meeting, please email Luke Carter at lucas.carter greensboro-N.gov. The procedure used at this public meeting is as follows. Planning staff presents background information and makes a recommendation. The applicant will 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, there's 15 minutes shared with the applicant to speak. Speakers opposed to the request share 10 minutes of speaking time. Those in favor of the request will share five minutes of

rebuttal time. Those in opposition to the request will share five minutes of rebuttal time. Speakers for nonzoning related items, and we have one of those today, a ste a street closure, will be granted three minutes each. Any commission member may ask questions once the presenter has completed their presentation. When speaking here tonight, please direct all questions and comments to the zoning commission. The chair or commissioner or commissioners will ask the staff to comment on questions. When a case is called that you are interested in, people wishing to speak in person will need to come to the podium. People wishing to speak online will need to use the raised hand function on the reaction button. Look for it now. Participants in the Zoom meeting will be able to view the meeting and speak when they are called upon. When you are called upon to speak, please state your name and address for the record. In an effort to run the meeting more efficiently, the planning and zoning commission may reorganize the meeting agenda. Cases in which no opposition has been expressed to the planning department and in which the commission does not feel necessitates a discussion will be moved to the top of the agenda and will become the expedited agenda. Staff will provide a shortened presentation for these expedited cases and the applicant will have up to two minutes to address the commission if they so desire to provide additional information they want the commission to know. All approved ordinances or denied cases receiving six or more favorable votes will constitute a final action unless an appeal is submitted in writing to the planning department and the appeal fee paid within 10 days. All

ordinances receiving a majority of favorable votes but less than six will be subject to a public hearing by the city council. Okay, Chair Maggot, if I may. Sorry, I didn't want to interrupt you in the course of the comment. Something I heard early on um and I may have just misheard, but just for clarity sake, the applicant and those in support of the application, they initially get a a 10-minute period to speak, right? I wasn't sure if I heard 10 or Yes, that's what I said. Yes, ma'am. Just wanted to make sure. Just wanted to make sure. No, I thought that's I said 10. Anyhow, it is 10 minutes. Thank you. Okay. So, um, now I would like to acknowledge the absence of Miss Turner. Um, we need to vote on that. The absence. Do we need to vote on that? Uh, no. Okay. Sorry. Approval of the minutes. I will entertain a motion to approve the April 21st minutes. So moved. Second. Thank you. Um, all those in favor signify by saying I and raise your hand. I Anyone Oh, wait. Online, Mr. Peterson. Online, Mr. Peterson. Yes. Yeah. Thank you. All those opposed. Seeing none, that passes eight to zero. Now, we need to have some insights from our s city attorney, Mr. Duchamp. Thank you, Chair Maggot, and good evening, everyone. Uh, much of the planning and zoning commission's work this evening will relate to the consideration of reszoning applications. I'd like to remind everyone in attendance that when the commission considers these applications, its determinations are based upon the land uses that are

allowed under the zoning district that's been put forth by the applicant. um as well as any conditions that have been proposed by the applicant. Um land use impacts on public infrastructure are relevant in resoning matters, but it's important to know that the commission is not here to determine all details of a development. That process involves staff input and evaluation that goes beyond the scope of the commission's work here this evening. If a resoning uh would generate a certain amount of traffic flow, the commissioners will have been provided with a traffic impact study, a summary traffic impact study. Uh meanwhile, many sight specific development features such as the particular means of management of storm water are evaluated through the technical review committee rather than in this forum. Uh lastly, concerns that are not related to land use are not gerine to the commission's consideration of reasonzoning applications. For example, generalized concerns about crime rates and questions of who may live or own or use a subject property are not for the commission's consideration. If there are questions about matters that are not addressed this evening, uh those may be referred to the planning department or technical staff as appropriate. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Kirkman. Do we have any continuences? Uh yes, we do have one request to continue an item this evening. It's case Z-25-05002 for 3707 Houston Road. Uh the applicant is ill and unable to attend this evening and communicated earlier with city staff and asked that item be moved to the June 16th planning and zoning commission agenda. Thank you. Do we need to vote on that? You would. Yes. So I'd like to take a vote. All those in favor signify by saying I and raise your arm. I I. And Mr. Peterson I those

opposed that passes 8 to zero. Okay. Now, it's my understanding that we have two cases in opposition tonight. Would the street closure be included at this point? It is a public hearing, so you can certainly group it in with the rest of the cases for terms of expediting or not. Okay. Or we could do it after the opposition. Correct. Okay. So, I'm going to expedite the two cases and leave the streak closure because um we have a Spanishspeaking person who's helping out this evening, an interpreter. Um so, the expedited cases are Z25-05-001 1199 Pleasant Ridge Road. It's a off office annexation original and reszoning and Z25-05-00003 2308 Fleming Road. It's an L reszoning. Is there anyone in the uh chamber that uh would like to speak about the other cases that we have here tonight? Just want to make certain. And andor online. Thank you. Um let's see if not we will place these items in the expedited agenda and proceed with the expedited

Let me read the case. Good. Perfect. Okay. Item PL25-18 and Z25-05-00001. an annexation original zoning and reszoning request from county AG agricultural to city CDCM conditional district commercial medium to city O office for the properties identified as 1199 Pleasant Ridge Road 1801 and 1805 Crude Road generally described as north of Pleasant Ridge Road and west of Crude Road 3.15 acres. and Miss Harrison. Thank you, Chair Maggot. This is a map, the zoning map of the subject property and it contains approximately 3.15 acres and are located north of Pleasant Ridge Road and west of Crude Cud Road. This is an annexation original zoning and reszoning request from county agricultural and city CDCM conditional district commercial medium to city O office. North of the request is zone county agricultural. East and west of the request are zone county agricultural and city R3 residential single family 3. South of the request is zone city R3 residential single family 3 and CDRM26 conditional district residential multif family 26. This is a aerial map of the subject

properties and it cont it currently contains single a single family dwelling. North and east of the request contains single family dwellings. South of the request contains a single family dwelling and multif family dwellings. West of the request contains single family dwellings and undeveloped land. And in providing recommendations, staff states that the GSO 2040 comprehensive plan designate this site as urban general on the future built for map. The comprehensive plan's future land use map designate this property as within the western area plan. The western area plan designate this property as residential. The proposed original zoning and reasonzoning request support both the comprehensive plans prioritizing sustainability big idea to promote environmental stewardship, social equity and a resilient economy and filling in our framework strategy to invest in building and maintaining quality accessible public recreational centers, libraries, neighborhood park facilities. and other services to sustain livable neighborhoods. The proposed ozoning district permits permits uses that are compatible with the existing uses in the surrounding area. The request reflects changes in land use patterns and additional public infrastructure since the adoption of the western area plan. And I can answer any question that you have. Thank you, Miss Harrison. Does the commission have any questions? Okay, seeing none, would the

applicant like to make any comment? You have up to two minutes to speak. Okay, seeing none, I will entertain a motion here. We have an annexation as well as a resoning. the MTO portion um will be reszoned and the county to city will be is an original zoning. So we will have an annexation and a zoning request. Uh Mary, wait let me let me close the public hearing. I'm sorry. Yeah, Miss Gins and the annexation will be for the uh 1801 and 1805 coup road. Is that correct? Yes. Then I I move that we annex 1801 and 1805 CE road into the city. Stu Nichols seconded. Thank you, Mrs. Skings and Mr. Nichols. I now we will take a vote. All those in favor signify by saying I and raise your hand. I I have a need to obeis about that. And Mr. um Peterson online I thank you opposed that passes 8 to zero. Now we need a motion. I'll make a motion again. ary schemes um for 1109 Pleasant Ridge Road, 1801 and 1805 Coup Road. um reszoning from uh county A and city CD CM to city O office 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 form map and future land use map. The proposed city o zoning office zoning as conditioned permits uses that fit the context of the surrounding area and limits negative impacts on the adjacent properties. 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 Gilma seconds. Thank you, Mrs. Gingles and Mr. um Gilbert. Um now let's see uh we will need to uh vote on this. I will I um all those in favor please signify by saying I raise your hand. I and on line online Mr. Peterson I. Anyone opposed that passes 8 to zero. This constitutes a favorable recommendation and is subject to a public hearing on Tuesday June 1725 city council meeting. Thank you, Miss Harrison. The next item on the expedited Thank you, Mr. Carter. Item Z25-05- Z003, a resoning request from CDCN, conditional district commercial neighborhood to

CDCL, conditional district commercial low for the property identified as 2308 Fleming Road, generally described as north of Fleming Road and west of Inman Road, 1.91 acres. Thank you, Chair Maggie. This is the zoning map showing the property contains approximately 1.91 acres and is currently zoned CDCN and is requested to be reszoned to CDCL for uh conditional district commercial load. North and west of the request are zoned R3. East of the request is zoned conditional district office and conditional district commercial load. South of the request is zoned commercial medium and conditional district commercial medium. This is the aerial map of the subject property which contains a single family dwelling. Uh to the north and west of the subject property are single family dwellings. East of the request contains undeveloped land and a convenience store with fuel pumps. And south of the request con contains uh veterinary services, a daycare center and a shopping center. This is the condition that was proposed by the applicant. And in recommending approval of this request, staff notes that the GSO 2040 comprehensive plans future built form currently designates the subject property as urban general. The GSO 2040 comprehensive plans future built format also designates the subject property as being within a neighborhood scaled activity center and an urban mixeduse corridor. The GSO 2040 comprehensive plans future land use map currently designates a portion of the subject property as residential and another portion as commercial. The proposed resoning request supports the comprehensive plan's growing economic competitiveness big idea to build a prosperous resilient economy that creates equitable opportunities to

succeed and the filling in our framework goal to arrange land uses for more vibrant and livable Greensboro. The proposed conditional district commercial low zoning district as conditioned would allow all uses permitted in the CL zoning district except eating and drinking establishments. The proposed resoning would facilitate development of an underutilized commercial site and the proposed uses are compatible with existing uses on adjacent tracks. With that, I can answer any questions that you have. Thank you, Mr. Carter. Does the commissioner have any questions? Okay, seeing none, would the applicant like to make any comments? You have up to two minutes. Well, we didn't seem to have any questions. Okay. So, seeing seeing Okay. Thank you. So, seeing none, without further objection, we will close the public hearing. I will entertain a motion. U Madam Chair, I'll make a motion. Thank you. Uh the Greensboro Planning and Zoning Commission believes that its action to recommend approval of the reszoning request of the property at 2308 Fleming Road from CDCN conditional district commercial neighborhood to CDCL conditional district commercial low to be consistent with the adopted Greensboro 2040 comprehensive plan and considers the action taken to be reasonable and in the public interest for for the following reasons. The request is consistent with the comprehensive plans future built form map and future land use map. The proposed CDCL zoning district as conditioned permits uses that fit the context of the surrounding area and limits negative impacts on the adjacent properties. 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. Thank you. Could do I have a second? Second. Worship Downing. Thank you, Miss Okconor and Mr. Downing. We will now take a vote. All those in favor signify by saying I raising your arm. I Mr. Peterson online. I. Any opposed? That passes eight to zero. This approval constitutes a final action unless an appeal is submitted in writing to the planning department and the appeal fee paid within 10 days. Anyone may file such appeal. All such appeals will be subject to a public hearing at the Tuesday, June 17th, 2025 city council meeting. All adjoining property owners will be notified of any such appeals. And I'd like to just say at this point, um, the Pleasant Garden, uh, Pleasant Ridge Road is a fire station and we always need more fire stations. So, thank you so much for that. I meant to say something before. Uh, now we will go on to the um regular agenda. And before you speak, Miss Harrison, thank you. Um, we will have some Spanish inter uh language interpretation and translation occurring with this case, just to let you know. Thank you, Miss Harrison. Miss Beag, can you go ahead and read the Oh, I'm sorry. Item

Z25-04-005, a reasonzoning request for R3 residential single family 3 to Li Light Industrial for the property identified as 1419 Glendale Drive, generally described as south of Glendale Drive and east of South Holden Road, 2.66 acres. Miss Harrison. Thank you, Chair Maggot. This is a zoning map of the subject property and it is approximately 2.66 acres and is located south of Glendale Drive and east of South Holden Road. This is a resoning request from R3 residential single family 3 to Li Light Industrial. North of the request is R3 residential single family 3 and LI light industrial. East and south of the request are zoned R3 residential single family 3. West of the request is zone LI light industrial. This is a a map and it shows that the property is undeveloped land. North of the request contains a religious assembly use retail and manufacturing facility. East of the request contains a single family dwelling. South of the request contains a single family dwelling and undeveloped land. West of the request contains undeveloped land. This image shows a subject property as seen from Glendale Drive. This image shows a manufacturing

facility located northwest of the request on Phoenix Drive, zoned LI. This image shows a religious assembly located northeast of request on Glendale Drive, zoned R3. This image shows a single family dwelling located east of the request on Glendale Drive, zone R3. This image shows a single family dwelling located south of the request on South Holden Road, zoned R3. This image shows undeveloped land located west of the request on South Holden Road zoned LI. This view is facing west on Glendale Drive. The subject property is on the left. This view is facing east on Glendale Drive. The subject property is on the right. And in recommending approval, staff states that the GSO 2040 comprehensive plan currently designates Okay. The excuse me in um the staff recommended denial of the request and states that the GSO 2040 comprehensive plan currently designates the properties the property as planned industrial on the future built form map and industrial on the future land use map. The proposed resoning request does not support a comprehensive plans filling in our framework big idea to arrange land uses for where we live, work, attend schools, shop, and enjoy our free time

to create a more vibrant and livable Greensboro. The request does not support the creating great places strategy to protect and enhance the unique character of every every neighborhood. The proposed LIi zoning district would permit limited manufacturing, wholesaling, warehousing, research and development and related commercial service activities. These uses are potentially incompatible with existing uses on adjacent tracks. Notwithstanding the future built for home form and the future land use designations, the proposed resoning is not of a similar scale, intensity or offsite impact as as the existing nearby uses and I can answer any question. Thank you. Okay. So, does the commission have any questions at this point? Yes, madam chair. Just wondering is there well looking for the summary of communications. Is there in our We'll ask the applicant that good. Thank you for bringing that up. That's important. Are you finished? Yes. So now if the applicant would come forward, you have up to 10 minutes. Please give your name and address. Come come to the podium, please. English. Okay. Okay. Good evening everybody. My name is Ra Pansiano and uh I'm currently rent a lot on your address. your address, please. Excuse

you. Will you give us your address next? Thank you. Oh, it's 1419 Greenale Drive. Thank you. And uh currently I'm renting the lot in the the property. I'm a landscaper and uh and the use for the lot right now is used to, you know, my my equipment, trailers, I have a container used to store, you know, pine needles and stuff. Excuse me. Could you move the microphone a little closer to him so we we we capture all of this? Thank you. I'm hearing like every other word. Okay. I'm going to start over again just to make sure. Thank you. Uh my name is Raul Poniano and I'm currently rent a lot at uh 19 1419 Glindel Drive, Greensboro. I'm a landscaper and I use a lot at uh 1419 Glindel Drive to park my equipment such as trucks, landscape trailers, and storage container. This property is currently zoned residential for me to be allowed to park my vehicle storage containers. Uh the city of King requires the property to be resone to commercial. Uh they address possible neighbor concerns. I will stay the there will be no traffic increase. I do not plan to make any major changes to the property. I will keep the property clean and organized. I wish to have uh maintain a good relations with all the neighbors and if my request is approved by the planning and resing commissions of the city of Greensboro, I will install a private fence. I kindly request uh if we approve the support of my request for resing of 419 Lindo Drive, Greensboro and the city of Prince Planning and Resoning Commission approve my request. respectively.

Is there anyone else here wishing to speak in favor of this? Okay. I believe Mr. Downey may have had a question for the We're going to get to that right away. Okay. So, you still have eight minutes to speak. All right. So, Mr. Downing, you have a question. Yes, Madam Chair. Just checking to see is there any communication to the neighborhood that you may have or was there a neighborhood meeting of any sort? I've been uh the ones I've been talk uh checking with the ones around that when the close neighbor I tal to him about you know and uh he said that we've been keeping the lot cleaner that the previous you know people used to live there and that's you know I just been keeping everything like you know I haven't met like all the neighbors the close closer ones but we you know so so just checking to see was any type of communication sent from from your perspective to inform for them what you plan to do. But thank you. All right. Thank you. So, a public hearing was not held. I mean, a a a public meeting was not held. I just send the letters, you know. You sent the the letter out to the um locations. Did you have any telephone calls from anyone in response to the letter? Uh, nobody has called anything. Mr. Nichols, how has how how will your use of the property change once you get this change in the zoning designation? Yeah. Uh well, you know, the the purpose just uh because I just you have to speak closer to the mic because we're not

hearing you very well. like the purpose I just want to you know be able to uh pretty much storage my uh equipment uh down the road if uh whatever you know is just from the regulation from the city I would like to build nothing just a small you know uh storage building or something but nothing out of you know the mayor or anything like that. So you'd like to build a storage building? Is that what I'm hearing? And I couldn't understand the other part. Well, because right now there is no like any building at all, you know. So I will if I if I'm allowed to, you just kind of in the future to do something just so I can lock my things because I have some a couple raings already. I just want to have something to be able to lock, you know, my stuff there. He wants to lock his lock. Can you speak into the mic? Thank you. He wishes to lock his equipment. Put something to lock the equipment. So that's that that you'll be using it for that purpose for storing your equipment. Okay. Thank you. I have another question. So and maybe this is a question for staff, but is the current use of the parcel um in conflict with the current zoning? Yes. Yes. So the he's currently under enforcement action. Uh we had a complaint originally investigated that the current zoning on the property is for single family residential and this would not be allowed. So this would be a means to resolve that if the commission voted to approve. All right. So then then your outreach to the people that live around it like 1411 and 1409

and 1413. How how what was their response to to what you are trying to do here? you know, uh, you know, from the one that I I talked to the one the one that lives close to the lot and I told him my situation, explain and everything and he said, you know, he was glad that we were there because I mean, the lot was kept in in good shape, you know, clean and everything. And I totally not mind, you know, to uh maintain or help the people close by or whatever, you know, but uh I haven't met all all of the neighbors closer, but the one that I had the time that I talked to them, they they decide, you know, just do whatever or go ahead and do whatever I have to do. Thank you. Are you the owner of the property? Oh, I'm renting the you're renting it presently. Okay. Any other questions from the commission? Um, so any So, thank you very much. Thank you so much. Um, next any those wishing to speak in opposition as a group, you have a total of 10 minutes to speak. Please come forward and give your name and address. Good evening, commissioners. Crystal Black, 1120 Highstone Drive. Um, I'm here to speak. Um, we have Miss Rodriguez in the audience. She is at 1409 Glendale. she did not receive a letter um nor any communication with

with this um particular um about this particular case. Um so I'm here to speak about the um proper use of this particular property. It was reported by complaints from residents in the neighborhood that reached out to the Southeast Greensboro Coalition to see if we could take action. So I filed the complaint, took pictures, and sent it into Planning and Zoning as a reaction to that. um a reasonzoning was was um submitted. It's not the proper use for the property. Across the street, there is a monk temple. Nemed immediately next door to this property is residential. Um and if you I don't know if any of you had a chance to visit the community, but there's been a lot of revitalization. There's also been some multif family housing that has been reszoned to that big lot that's kind of in the back of it. So this is a um and if and on Holden Road there's a shopping center where K&W is and so this area is kind of now being uplifted in a way that the community is appreciating. Um the homes that are older homes in that area are being remodeled and um it's just not the proper use. So this property sits in front of residential areas. When you move down, if you look at the map that she showed, there's some buffer area that has been given to the one industrial property that's across the street from that lot. So, you don't even see that um industry there. And the access to that industry is actually down the road. So, the building may be there, but they're accessing it from closer to Holden Road. And there was a buffer created in front of that lot to protect those residential um comm community that residential community. Um there's a tractor trailer on it. There's a home living trailer on it. There are broke down cars on it. The fence that has been

put on it is put with with uh wood 4x4 panels, but nothing really stable like post implanted. Um the reason that the community was concerned was by the blight that the property all of a sudden became. And so uh we submitted the request and so I'm here to oppose that because I think that if we're going to zone responsibly this particular zoning um it just doesn't fit what they are moving forward in that community with. There's a lot of land that stretches from there to Summer School. Um, we met with a developer already who is planning to put some housing out there and I think that that's probably going to be the best use. We know what the plan is for Greensboro. And so to put industry there, we have industry. There's actually industry there that's not even being used. Um, buildings that have kind of, you know, been there for years, but they're still trying to rent and lease those pieces out. But this particular thing, I don't see landscaping. I'll say that. I don't see landscaping. I do see a place where somebody wants to bring a whole bunch of stuff and keep on a property. As far as keeping it secure, even the fence that was put up really doesn't secure the lot. So, I just wanted to kind of come and speak to those residents. There are some language barriers and um and just speak to to support them. But I will say that the people that I spoke to in that immediate area um have not received a letter of any notification or had a conversation with this particular client or the owner of the property about any change of use. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much. The applicant, you have a question for the question. Oh, okay. Yes, ma'am.

Not really sure. So, I thought personally because if if you kind of um there's a I can't remember the name of the church, but they bought a large piece of property over there to do housing and multif family housing. So, I didn't know if that was going to curve around and that property may have had something to do with that because you're only talking about one or two houses. Miss Rodriguez is one house and then there's another house that's that's there, but the rest of that lot that's um that it it there's future development that's supposed to happen. So, I just assumed that maybe it was going to be connected to the future development and then all of a sudden we see it's just storage of stuff. Nothing really that looks like landscaping. Um unless it's in this truck trailer, but it's a blight. and um our um the the monk community across the the street, they are really serious about keeping their property up and keeping it beautiful and I'm sure that they would like to see the same thing reciprocated from across the street. Thank you. I just want to add, Miss M. Black, that I spoke with the um Vietnamese temple, the uh Chua Kuan AM, and they had no opposition to this. None whatsoever. Just to let you know that. Okay. I did not reach out to appreciate all your privates, you know, their privacy. But I do have Miss Rodriguez and she is actually a next door on the same side of that street. And just to reiterate, she did not receive notification. Um, I just think that changing the zoning for somebody who's renting the property also is it it's in question, too. Okay. Thank you so much. Thank you. Have a good one. Chair Megan, I have a question. Yes. Um, and maybe this is a question

for the staff as well. Um, but is it true or is it not true that this current industrial zoning is surrounded by light industrial zoning? So, if you there's a lot that I guess is zoned um on the corner of Holden and Glendale. My daughter is 29 years old. I can tell you it's been empty at least 29 years. So, but so it's zoned that but it has not been um used for anything. Um if you look across the street on the side where the the temple is I can speak to that directly. I can speak to that directly. Go ahead. Let me just speak to that you know. Um so next to it across the street from it is uh Weaver Cook a business that's closed Turner Asphalt St. jumps packing and at the corner Timco Air Systems. That's what reaches South Holden. So across the street it's all in industrial. Uh ne right of the property is land with trees. Would it be helpful? I'm trying to pull up. Yes. Thank you. This good what you mean for Okay. So great. So, starting from the the lot we're talking about, across across the street from it, there's Weaver Cook business, Turner Asphalt, St. John's Pack Packing, and at the corner, Timco Air Systems of South Holden. When you next to the property, there's land with trees and then a vacant lot as you spoke about. Um, this is a little perplexing to me. this um because first of all it

falls under the planned industrial district you know and it has next to it um a lot of businesses um I have one one question for the staff you know this is a rental I didn't know that so he is renting it from the owner can they bring a code a case like this forward if they're renting. I mean, if if the owner has authorized them to to to be here in that capacity, then yes, there can applicant come back. No legal issue there. You may have a question of the Can we finish with as a matter of policy whether you you would be inclined to grant it, but Okay. So, I think Mr. Nichols had a question. Yeah. Do you have another question? Okay. At least twice you've referenced the fact that um the applicant is a landscape company, but you don't see landscaping. But if I drive by a cement factory, I don't see cement. Or a shoe factory, I don't see shoes. Or a beer brewery, I don't see beer. So my question to you is, what are we to take from your repeated uh assertion that we don't see landscaping? I drove by there. I saw equipment that would be used for landscaping. So, can you elaborate on that? So, there are also inoperable cars on the lot. Uh there is a live-in trailer on the lot and then there's a tractor trailer on the lot. Um you know, the lot is a blight and if you're going to reszone it, at least reszone it with conditions on it. um the owner not being here or does I would ask staff do they even have confirmation that the owner actually that's the question I just asked actually approved the reasonzoning. Yeah. But what I will say

is the the closest building to this lot is residential. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Um, so can we have the applicant come back because I'd like to know whether the owner is in support of this case. I confirm with our staff that yes, the owner did say it was okay to move forward on his behalf. Okay. So, I'm sorry. Can I ask a question now? So, we I'm assuming we had an oral conversation with the owner who authorized a renter to put forth an application for a zoning request. We didn't ask for any written. We actually have written documentation. Anytime that a owner is authorizing somebody else to speak on their behalf, we have a third party authorization. So that's in the application materials. It wouldn't be in your packet necessarily, but we did get the owner to say yes, this person is able to move forward with this request in writing. So, even notwithstanding the owner's I guess um verification that he wants or she wants this to happen, we can still accept an application from a renter for a change in zoning. Yes, that's that's actually fairly common. We've got requests where the property owners authorizing other parties to represent them in the in the request. I mean, obviously most of the time it's an attorney or somebody else, but we have had cases where it's been somebody else that's the user of the property right then and then is speaking on behalf of the owner as long as the owners indicate to us they're okay for that person to proceed, which in this case they did. Thank you. Any other questions from the commissioners at this point? Okay. Um the applicant, could you just state your name and address into the record that the uh owner is in agree, you know, in agreement to this case?

Yeah. Uh you know, can he send me the uh sorry name and address first? Uh from the owner. Your name is My name is Raul Rahul Poniano and uh I'm renting the the lot on 1419 Glindel. Thank you. And now could you tell us your conversation with the owner in regard to the case? Yeah, he um I know him for years, you know, and uh I used to be a house [Music] there. You can film her going into the property. I'm sorry. Sorry. Is there somebody online trying to speak? Because if we can just wait a second and have the commission get their question answered. Mr. Peterson had his microphone unmuted. So, Mr. Peterson, if you have a question, um, hold it for just a minute and we will call on you in just a second. Thank you. Please explain to us the conversation with the owner. Thank you. Uh, yeah, I know I spoke to him. Like I said, I know uh Mr. leave for for years. And uh I know he used to have a you know used to be a house there. The house called on fire and and uh he said uh after he called me because I always kept asking me about you know I live in Ashro but usually I work in all the time and know I uh he knew my situation and when he called me he said hey the lot is available if we still want to rent it. And we start you know uh we talk and everything. The first thing when uh you know the city went there uh and they said you know because when they see that like the trailer park spark there and everything they say you have to you know you you cannot have this equipment over here

because this property has to be resol and I want to talk to Mr. again and he gave me authorization, you know, a few other papers that we need that we need and everything and he said, you know, you go ahead and do uh so we we got all the paperwork with his authorization. Thank you for the clarity there. Thank you so much. Chair Maggot, if I may, I apologize. Were we still in the midst of the opposition period? I just want to make sure we're not losing track of sort of where we are in the process there. Yes. appreciate the yes tabs wanted to make nature. Yes, Mr. Gains and and Mr. Peterson may question as well. Okay, Mr. Gaines, as I when I drove by the property and and I looked at the property, it appears there is a small travel trailer on the property. It is What's that being used for? That's that's uh used to in there. That's just like a old camper, but you know, I use it because I kept some of my equipment in my trucks and somebody already broke in and installed some stuff. So I I used a little uh camper just for keep my small tools that's okay. Okay. So we have Could we put up the time that's left for opposition? Is it six minutes? Does anyone want to speak in opposition? Okay. Now it's time for the rebuttal. You have five minutes. Does Mr. Peterson have a question? First of all, Mr. Peterson, would you like to? No. Okay. Thank you. All right. Now, we're in the rebuttal period. You have five minutes to rebuttal, to speak against, or whatever you want to say. And maybe you could let the interpreter help us a little because we're having difficulty understanding. Dr. I'm sorry

about that. But uh anyways about the concerns from people you know about the the fans and everything I will build what you know when it needs to be done in the right way. I will put like a privacy fence you know I don't want to have things visible from the road or anything you know the main thing is I don't want to cause any issues with the neighbors like no traffic issues. I want to keep everything organized you know clean and organized and also have a good relations with the surrounding neighbors as well. Okay. Okay. But that is not a a condition on his application, right? We don't have any condition about that. No. All right. Mr. Downey, I was about to ask the same thing. Are you implying that you would like conditions now or I was going to say this is a straight zoning application. The commission would consider all all uses, all scales of uses, etc. with this. That's not can't talk about conditions at this point. Okay. Thank you um for your rebuttal. Um is there anyone in opposition that would like to make a rebuttal? You have five minutes. Hi, good evening. Uh, my name's Ail Rodriguez Rubio. I live on 1409 Glendel Drive. So, just three houses down from where their property is. Um, just as the previous lady said, um, I I really don't have confidence that this is going to be something that's actually going to be beneficial for our street. Um, like she mentioned, like a lot of us are working on remodeling our houses, you know, making sure they're

maintained. The house across the street is also in the process of remodeling remodeling it, too. And so, I think that the way that it looks right now does not look very promising. Um, I I don't have any confidence that it's going to make our street look any better. Um, we myself and my husband as owners, we do believe that like eventually we do want the street to or even off of Holden, right, to have more businesses and those sorts of things, but on that side, not on our side. Um, so that's that's kind of where my thought process is. Thank you so much. Okay. Um there's three minutes and 50 seconds. So if you would like to speak in opposition, I just wanted to um reiterate that um Miss Rodriguez did not receive a letter. Um and and there was not a community meeting to get feedback. I hear that um the the um interest of adding conditions, you know, if maybe if you had had a conversation with the community first, you would have kind of known what what their feedback would have been and been able to make some of those provisions before we got here. So, I don't know. Um, it I do live in the community, but I also hear from Miss Rodriguez and and the ones who have put money into their homes in that area and have hoped for some viability in that area and this property. Um, again, it was a code complaint. Um, and it was for blight and for just things piling up. And so, I don't have the confidence either, but I don't know. um if a recommendation

can be to continue it and maybe they can have a conversation with the community about um looking at it again with the owner because essentially the owner is the one who I think should be um having the conversation about commitments but um I don't have confidence either in the way what I see from the street and I would like to also say that there is this this industry that you did discuss uh in the purple has a significant ificant buffer area that sits in front of this residential um as Miss Ke said used to be home that was there and that's why that buffer was put there so that they're making a mixeduse but at that point it was residential that buffer was put there to protect the residential community to the right. No one is arguing if you all had a a a um zoning for the corner of Randleman and Glendale, it wouldn't be an argument because that makes sense. But to start creeping into the residential area, especially when we're trying to look at housing in that big land area, I just don't think we need to start reszoning for industrial. So that Thank you. Thank you for your comments. I just want to make certain, Mr. Kirkman, that I'm correct at this. you know, the um the TRC site plan would review the buffer that she's talking about that's not required in the app this application that we're looking at. Yeah, I mean obviously depends on what actually gets developed on the property as what buffers would be. Um there are outdoor screening requirements that talk about screening from residential and from public streets uh with an outdoor storage area. If you've got uh different types of uses, depends on what uses you have would be different types of buffers either from the street or from property lines, but all that would be worked out as part of site plan review. Thank you.

And then that this particular um case does not this application doesn't allow for condition to be added. Correct. Right. This this request before you this evening is a straight zoning application. So you would consider all uses, all scale of uses uh allow within light industrial with this application. And if he wanted to change it, he would have to resubmit correct and and pull this application. Is that correct? Uh Chair Maggie, yeah, just to build build off what Mr. Kirkman said, um state statutes sort of put resonings into two buckets of a just traditional resoning without conditions and a conditional resoning. and you can't sort of switch tracks from one to the other uh mid-process. So, yes, you're right. Thank you. Okay. At this point, I'd like to close the public hearing. Okay. So, we're going to close the public hearing. Is there any more discussion that is needed by the commissioners? Yes, Madam Chair. I I'm just looking at this. Um, and in our entire booklet, of course, we have staff suggestions and analysis. And in our analysis, I mean, this is not compatible with the existing comprehensive plan, nor is it consistent with the development trend. We talked about the trend. People are, you know, redoing their neighborhood or their homes and areas of that nature. It is and the lack of community outreach is also a major concern as well. Even though one may have one-on-one communication, uh that one-on-one communication will have perhaps led to some type of intrinsic condition even though it's not on paper. Very concerned. I would not be supporting this initiative or this particular moving forward. So that's what I want to share on my end. Thank you, Mr. Downing. Any anyone else? Yes, Miss Okconor. Um following what Mr.

Downing had to say, "I appreciate that the staff does not recommend this. I'm a little confused by the comment in the staff analysis that it is currently designated industrial on the comprehensive plans future land use map, but the staff is opposed to a reasonzoning request for industrial." So, I'm just confused. Sure, I'll be happy to address that. So obviously the designations are policy designations and the larger comprehensive plan. Um if you remember within the comprehensive plan we had that list of 10 questions that talk about things that we need to consider in determining whether or not a zoning is consistent with the comprehensive plan and that the questions get to compatibility consistency with either the existing pattern of lane use or some emerging pattern lane use that we're trying to encourage through the comprehensive plan. So, we wanted to try at least make it clear that while the general designation says it should transition to this use, we didn't feel like in this case that it actually fit the context and therefore we recommended denial. Thank you. That's just confusing to me. But, um, I also appreciate, as I think Mr. Downing already commented the support of the neighbors in the residential portion of Glendale and the concern for keeping that with the residential flavor. So I would be opposed going uh industrial on this particular plot anyway. I I would want to support the neighbors and keeping it residential in character. So I would be opposed to this as well. Thank you, Mr. Okconor. um the skins and I I've I've got to say that it's it's sitting got residential be behind it. It's got residential beside it. Uh and this is a straight zoning and that

bothers me more than anything else. Uh if you look at what can go in LA without conditions, um yeah, a micro brewery, an eating and drinking establishment, it starts intruding in the neighborhood. Um and as Miss Black pointed out, across the street that is industrial, they made a point of increasing buffers to protect the residential area. And there's no conditions in here to to protect the surrounding residential. So in its present format, I cannot support this request. Thank you, Mrs. Ke. Um, can we go down the Mr. Nichols? Yeah, I just want to say I found this particular application in the city's position a little bit confusing because as I look at it, it's a island of residential that wishes to be reszoned into the sea of light industrial. Uh, nevertheless, I will also oppose the application um largely due to deference to the staff's opinion because I believe you guys are professionals and you understand what you're doing better than I do perhaps. Um, I I am troubled also to echo Mr. Downing's remarks um about the outreach that was done. Um, and I also think that adding conditions to the use could be a solution to all of this. I also think very candidly to the applicant, Mr. Poniano, that um making his parcel look a little bit more appealing to the neighborhood would help significantly. So, I would suggest that um he be encouraged to uh reapply, submit conditions, clean up the appearance of his property, and maybe we'll see it

differently the next time around. Uh but for now, I will oppose it. Thank you, M. Thanks, Mr. Nichols. Mr. Kilmer. Yes, Madam Chairman. I uh although meeting with neighborhood is a recommendation it's not mandatory but I will not be supported as I don't think it fits in the character of neighborhood right now. Thank you. Thank you Miss Glass. I agree with what's been said. I don't have anything to add and and I would just say I don't I don't know if it's customary for us to have to go around and recite what our opinions will be but I'm not going to make this a habit. Didn't want to leave you out. And Mr. Peterson, do you have anything to say? Okay. All right. I I will entertain a motion. Thank you, Mr. Downey. the Greensboro planning and well, Madam Chair, I'm making a motion in regard to agenda item Z25004005. The Planning and Zoning Commission, the Greensboro Planning and Zoning Commission believes that is action to recommend denial, yes, of the resoning request for the property at 1419 Glendale Drive from R3 Residential Single Family 3 to LI Light Industrial to be inconsistent with the adopted GSO 2040 comprehensive plan and considers the action taken to be unreasonable and not in the public interest for the following reasons. Number one, the request is inconsistent with the comprehensive plans future uh comprehensive plans future built form map and future land use map. Number two, the proposed LI zoning district does not limit negative impacts on the adjacent properties nor does it permit uses that fit the context of the surrounding area. The request is not reasonable due to the

size, physical conditions, and other attributes of the area. It will be a detriment to the neighbors neighbors and surrounding community and denial is in the public interest. Commissioner Gilma seconds. Thank you, Mr. Downing and Mr. Gilbert. We will now vote all those in favor of the denial. Raise your hand and say I. I. Mr. Peterson, Mr. Sorry. Yes. Okay. Thank you. Any opposed? That passes 8 to zero. Um I zoning denial constitutes a final action unless an appeal is submitted in writing to the planning department and the appeal fee paid within 10 days. All zoning appeals will be subject to a public hearing at the Tuesday, June 17th, 2025 city council meeting. That was a difficult one. The next item, item Z25-05-00004, the resoning request from R5 residential single family 5 to a PUD planned unit development and consideration of the required unified development plan for the property identified as 169. 19 Raiken Road, generally described as north of Raiken

Road and west of Irwin Street, 3.09 acres. Oh, and Mr. um Nelson, thank you, Chair Megan. This is the zoning map of the area showing the subject property is approximately 3.09 acres is located north of Ranken Road and east of Irwin Street. This is a request a resoning request from R5 residential single family 5 to PUD plan unit development in consideration the associated unified development plan. North of the request is zone R5 residential single family 5. East of the request is zone R5 and R seven. South and west of the request are zone R5 and CM commercial medium. This is the aerial map of the of of the proximity showing that the subject property is currently undeveloped land. North of the request contains single and multif family dwellings. East of the request contains single family dwellings and undeveloped land. South and west of the request contains single family dwellings and southwest is a convenience store with fuel pumps. This image shows the subject property as seen from Ranken Road. And this image shows the subject property as seen from Irvin Street. This image shows multif family dwellings located north of the request on Summit Avenue zoned R5. This image shows a single family dwelling located northwest of the request on Summit Avenue zoned R5. This image shows a single family dwelling located east of the request on Irvin Street, zone R seven. This image shows undeveloped land located east of the request on street zone R5. This image shows an example of the single family dwellings located east of the request on Irvin Street, zone R5. This image shows a single family dwelling with a child daycare home use located south of the request on Ranken Road, zone R5. This image shows a single family

dwelling located south of the request on Ranken Road, zone R5. This image shows undeveloped land located south of the request on Ranken Road at the corner of Witchah Place, zone R5. And this image shows an example of the single family dwellings located south southwest of the request on Rank and Road zone R5. And this image shows a single family dwelling located west of the request on Summit Avenue zone R5. This view is facing west on Ranken Road. The subject property is on the right. And this view is facing east on Ranken Road. The subject property here is on the left. This view is facing south on Irwin Street. subject properties on the right and this view is facing north on Irwin Street property on the left. These are the conditions that were proposed by the applicant and advertiser of the request. And in recommending approval, uh staff noted that the GSO 2040 comprehensive plans future built form map designates the subject property as urban general and the future land use map designates the property as residential. The proposed reasoning request supports the 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 livable Greensboro. The proposed reser request also supports the comprehensive plans creating great places goal to provide a citywide network of unique neighborhoods that offer residents of all walks of life a variety of quality housing choices. and staff found that the proposed PUB zoning designation as condition would permit single and multif family residential uses at an overall gross density no greater than 19.42 dwelling units per acre. This request increases the variety of housing choices available in the area and provides an appropriate transition from the adjacent commercial uses to the single family residential neighborhood located in the northeast. The incentive property is also located near multif family residential zoning to the south and I'm

happy to answer any questions. Thank you. Um, any questions from the commissioners? I have a question mostly out of curiosity. I saw that the uh the screen flipped, but it was 19 some units per acre. Um, is there a guideline or is there a way that we determine the density for planned unit developments? Planned unit development doesn't have a specified density. That's just a reference point for the commission. Okay. Yeah, there there's no minimum or maximum within the Planet Development District. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Nelson. Um, if the applicant would come forward, you have up to 10 minutes. Please give us your name and address. Good evening, Madam Chair and members of the commission. My name is Joe Kupek. I'm with CDI Builders. I reside at uh 324 East Greenway Drive North here in Greensboro. And this is my business partner. Hi. Uh my name is Brian Hokart. I live at 401 Lingley Road, Greensboro, North Carolina. Um we are proposing to develop this land into um single family town homes, residential units. Um to kind of expand a little bit on your question about the number of units we do have here on the unified development plan up to 60. So um that would be basically the max that we would be able to go to. Um, and it would be obviously um determined by TRC review as well. We we did a uh outreach um meeting. We sent out letters to all the people that were on the uh list provided

by the city. Um there was about 125 letters that we sent out and we had three groups of people come. One was across the street at that um daycare center. They um they told us they were in favor of it. Um there was a man that came from Summit who also said he was in favor of it. Um and then there was a third group that came that had a question about the property that connects to Irwin Street as far as what we're going to do with that. So, but otherwise it went fairly well. Thank you. Um any questions from the uh commissioners? What was the answer to the question about our Yeah. Um I uh well we we we reviewed that in the sketch plan review with the city and um they thought that that land was well the best use for entrance and exit would be off ranking. So that would be what we're gearing towards and that's what we're kind of developing the plan for is to have exit and entrance off a ranking only. And that property when we did our initial plan putting units on the property we we just we didn't do anything with that property. It was just it's probably just going to stay like it is. U we might have to run again. This will be based on TRC review. Um, but we may use it for sewer outfall, but maybe not, you know, because we could also come down into ranking as well. So, but other than that, we don't really see any use for that property other than open space and green space. But again, I can't say that for sure until TRC review. Thank you. Um, thank you very much. You still have

eight minutes that you can speak in favor of this. Are there any other people here that would like to speak in favor of this request? Okay. If not, next, those wishing to speak in opposition, you have a total of 10 minutes. Chair Maggot, I'd just like to note for the record that um Commissioner Peterson has left the meeting. Thank you. Please state your name and address. Uh, hi. Ryan Storms, 361 Sharon Avenue, so I'm kind of like up off of here. Oh, sorry. My house is kind of like right over here. So, I'm not a contiguous property. Um, but I just wanted to represent for my community. Um, I actually reached out to Joe via email, but I didn't get a response back. I assume you kind of were busy and I I guess I also missed the neighborhood meeting, so I apologize. Um, so some of my main concerns actually first seeing the numbers you put up on there on the board, 19 uh units per acre. In the letter we got in the mail, I'm pretty sure it said five units per acre. Uh, I don't have the letter here with me today, but I I could be wrong. Uh, so that I guess that is my first concern. Um, because I don't think 60 town homes would be great for that area, but we'll see. Uh, so I guess since I have you here, Joe, um, and you can have your time later. Uh, my main question was, will the residents in the area get like a development plan and see what that would look like? Because that was what was in my email. Um, but since I have you here, uh, that's what I wanted to ask you. Uh, and then for the the city commission's office, I was wondering if we could put like, and this is a high ask, so I'm not expecting this at all from you or him, uh, but our community is very walkable. So, a lot of people walk on the rank and area right here, uh, because Jay's Grocery is, uh,

right up the street and a lot of people walk the neighborhood to go there or other places. Uh, so I was wondering if at all possible, would we be able to add a walkway since we have someone uh, redeveloping the area anyway? Uh, since it is a very walkable part of our neighborhood. Um, and then I guess my other question, which someone must have asked you at the meeting, Joe, was uh your expected use of this property, uh, because there is a family there, uh, that kind of use it right now as their own property. Um, I don't know them personally, but I I thought I'd ask for them. I think that's all my questions for now. Thank you. Um, would the applicant come back now? Uh, we'll have the rebuttal. Speaking of opposition, just to be clear. Yeah. Is there anyone else that wanted to speak in opposition? I think did I ask that? Okay. Anyone online? Okay. Now, we'll move to the rebuttal period. You have five minutes to rebut to speak. Thank you. Yeah. I just wanted to address about his email. I did respond to his email and I'm going to read it right now. I responded at uh he sent me it on um 58 and 105 p.m. and I responded at 58 at 4:04 p.m. And I said, "Hi, Ryan. The plans for that piece of land." Well, his his email I'll I'll read you his I guess. I live in the area of the proposed town homes and I was wondering um you I was wondering you if have any plans that you'll be able to share ahead of the meeting in a couple weeks. I mainly just want to know your plans for the piece that touches Irwin, but a layout would be nice to picture what it would look like. And then I responded, hi Ryan. The plans for that piece of land off of we are thinking will not be built on. We don't have a full site plan

done yet, but from what I have seen from our preliminary UDP plan is that we would use that space as just open green space or possibly to bring the new sewer line through to tie into the street at Irwin. I won't have the final answer for you until we get the site plan done and approved, but we don't feel like that space will be used for any buildings. Uh, also, we currently have the entrance and exit coming off of Rankin. Please reach out anytime for any other questions, and we hope to see you at the outreach on Monday at 6 p.m. So, I don't know if you got it or not, but I it was sent. Okay, that's all right. It happens to me all the time. Um, so yeah, that's as just I just want to respond and you know because I normally try to answer everybody's questions. Okay, you have three minutes and 27 seconds if there's anything else that you would like to add that comments that were made. Well, that would be part of the TRC review. Um, and and please, let's not speak back and forth from the audience. Okay. Um, yeah, you mentioned something about the sidewalk. Yes. Um, I'm pretty sure that when we do the entrance off a rank in that there will have to be a sidewalk there. Um, Mr. Kirkman, is that so? Actually, I'll lift Mr. Norton. Yes, sidewalk is a requirement of development. Yes. Thank you. Okay, with that said, we have five minutes of rebuttal time. is thank you very much. Will you like would you like to come up to the podium? Thank you. Ask another question. Uh so Ryan Storms 361 Sharon Avenue again. Uh I just had another question regarding uh traffic studies depending on how many units are being planned. Uh I know the city does that a lot. Do you know if traffic studies have Wait a minute. Wait a

minute. We're going to ask that directly to staff. Okay. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Kirkman. Actually, I'll take that. The Oh, Mr. The 60 town homes or the 60 Mr. Tip Typton, sorry. It's okay. The 60 units in the UDP would not be a high enough number to trigger a traffic study. It would not meet thresholds for a traffic study. So, one was not required. It would not require a traffic study. Okay. Thank you very much. All right. With that having been said, uh we will close the public hearing and we'll open it to any discussion from the commissioners. Seeing none, then I will entertain a motion and we are looking for a reszoning motion first. Chair, I'll make a motion. Thank you, Miss Okconor. The Greensboro Planning and Zoning Commission believes that its action to recommend approval of the resoning request for the property at 1619 Rank and Road from R5 residential single family 5 to PUD planned unit development to be consistent with the adopted Greensboro 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 form map and future land use map. The proposed PUD planned unit development as conditioned permits uses that fit the context of the surrounding area and limits negative impacts on the adjacent properties. 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. Thank you, Mr. Connor. A second, please.

Mary SK second. Thank you, Miss SK. Now, we will take a vote. All those in favor, please signify by saying I and raise your arm. I I uh Mr. Peterson is no longer with us. Any opposed? That passes seven to zero. Okay. Um, now we will need a UDP motion as well. Mary SK, make a motion to approve the UDP as submitted with 1619 Rank and Road. Sandra Okconor, I'll second the motion. Thank you, Miss Kees. Miss Okconor. And now we will take a vote. All those in favor signify by saying I raise your arm. I All those opposed. That passes seven to zero. This approval constitutes a final action. Unless an appeal is submitted in writing to the planning department and the appeal fee paid within 10 days, anyone may file such appeal. All such appeals will be subject to a public hearing on Tuesday, June 17th, 2025 city council meeting. All adjoining property owners will be notified of any such appeal. And finally, item PL25-19, request to close a portion of Salem Street from its intersection with Boyd Street to its intersection with Steedman Street, approximately two 291 ft. Steedman Street from its intersection, Salem to its intersection with Arley Street, approximately 641 ft. and a portion of Arley Street from the eastern property lines of 428 Boyd Street and 500 Boyd Street to its intersection with Steedman Street

approximately 139 ft. Thank you, Mr. Carr. Thank you, Chair Maggie. Um to summarize all of what Miss Maggie just um just read, uh it is these portions of um Arley Street um that you see here. So, from its intersection with Steman over to the edge of this property line and then it would include all of Steman and then from uh and Salem Street from its intersection with said with Steedman over to its intersection with Boyd. Um so just so that you can visualize the the portion of the property or the portion of the road that is requested to be closed. Um the all of the properties that are adjacent to these sections of street are owned by uh the state of North Carolina. Um NCT uh is here to uh to request the the street closure request. Um and in recommending approval of the request, well, first there there are two things that um the planning and zoning commission must uh take into consideration and find in order to recommend approval of this um this request. The first is that um closing the street to vehicular traffic is not contrary to the public interest and two that no property owner in the vicinity is deprived of reasonable means of ingress and egress and as I said it's the same owner that owns owns all of it. Um the technical review committee recommended approval of the proposed street closure at their May 9th 2025 meeting with the following conditions. Uh the first is that the street closure is not final until a plat is recorded showing the area within the rightway being combined with adjacent properties. Uh and then the second is that the city shall retain a 20ft utility easement or 20 foot utility easements um for any public utility that that is uh located inside of that rightway. Um and the easement would be centered over the

existing utility lines until such time as the lines are no longer needed for public use. And uh with that I can answer any questions that you have. Does the commission have any questions? Seeing none, um would there any any applicant or anyone like to speak? You have up to 10 minutes. I'm sorry, three minutes. I'm sorry. I'll be really quick. Uh Jim Westland. I'm the director of parking and transportation services with North Carolina ent State University and I'm here to uh support on behalf of Chancellor James R. Martin the request this evening. I'm also joined by our assistant uh vice chancellor of facilities Bill Barlo. U so this this request is consistent with the ideals that are expressed in our 2023 2038 master plan for the campus. So, uh, we do own all the property around all of these streets and we are prepared to take them over and, uh, the two conditions that were cited in terms of the request, we're prepared to take those on as well. So, happy to answer any questions. Thank you. And would you just state your name and address? I cut your name, but I'm not certain I got the address. Yes. Uh, Jim West Morland, and our address is 1600 East Market Street. Thank you very much. Thank you. Okay, with that being said, um any questions from the commissioner? Okay, we will close the public hearing. Um and I will entertain a motion and the motion should include one part of it is parts of Arley and Salem and all of Steman Street as the um closure. Would someone please do that? Thank you. Okay. I'll make a motion to approve the closing of a portion of

Salem Street, Steedman Street, and a portion of Arley Street subject to um it being final uh once a plat is recorded showing the area within the ride ofway being combined with the adjacent properties and that the city shall retain a 20 foot utility easement centered over existing utility lines until such times as lines are no longer needed for public use. Commissioner Gil seconds. Thank you, Miss Kings and Mr. Gilmer. But it is all of Steman Street. Okay. Now we will take a vote. All those in favor signify by raising your arm and saying I. I. All those opposed. Seeing none, that passes 720 to zero. This constitutes a favorable recommendation and is subject to a public hearing at the Tuesday, June 17th, 2025 city council meeting. We have nothing for the commission in addition to the agenda this evening. Okay. And do we have any idea about um we closed the public hearing now. Thank you. Do we know about what we will have at the We're looking at about 14 for next. Yeah, I thought it was going to be big. Okay. Thank you very much. 14. No. All right. Thank you so much. Thank you, Mr. Nelson. 14. I guess we get dinner, don't we? All right. Thank you very much. I have a question. Yes, please. Procedurally, I'm just wondering if we went through an unusual circumstance this evening where we had a tenant rather than an owner and staff verified for us that that had been securely checked. I'm wondering should we be concerned or raise questions if someone says they're speaking on behalf

of someone else? Is there any obligation to have that verified? Uh, Chair Okconor, I know that um staff pointed out that they do uh ensure that there's an owner authorization form, but I could certainly speak with them. thinking about a neighbor saying, "I'm here on behalf of my other neighbor." From the standpoint that it is a legislative hearing and therefore a policy decision, it doesn't it doesn't raise concerns in the way that a quasi judicial hearing would. Um, I think you really just have to sort of judge for yourselves what the what the probative value of that of that information is, the truth of it, and how much weight you choose to give it. That's where I would leave it. Well, I guess it was just alarming to that was one of the first things that he said and the way he said it, it seemed as if there was a disconnect between the owner and himself. And I know we to me I there's a difference between an attorney standing up to represent a client where there's obviously a set in stone relationship versus some I'm not saying he was random because again he said he had that established connection but some random person from standing up to say I represent and I've seen it before but for some reason it just stood out to me at that point. Yes ma'am. Certainly understood, Commissioner Glass. And again, right, I think um you know, staff does obtain those owner authorization forms, which are pretty broad language accounting for a range of circumstances. Um but definitely understand. Thank you. Thank you everyone. Okay, we are adjourned. We are we are je [Music] [Applause] [Music]

[Music] Heat. Heat. [Music]