Knightdale Town Council Work Session

Mhm.

Mhm.

Second.

Thank you, Mayor Dad. Council, so this is the public hearing portion of the budget recommendation for the upcoming fiscal year, which will be fiscal year FY 26-27. So, technically, it will begin on July 1 of 26 and it will expire on June 30 of 2027. So, we're going to go through the budget. A lot of the slides will be very similar to what we looked at when we had the budget presentation on mid-March at your last council meeting. Staff has received no comments. I have not talked to any of you about the budget in really other than at high levels. Um, so we're going to continue to move forward with the recommendation as is. Happy to pivot and amend wherever the council feels it may be necessary. But, couple quick slides here at a high level looking at the budget overview. As we talked about before, the local government budget and fiscal control act really governs how local governments in state of North Carolina can use their money. Um and the most important step in this is the adoption of a balanced budget every year. So, if we look at the key calendar steps and where we are, we are now at the public hearing stage. Um and what happens tonight is we have a public hearing and under state law it is open to anybody that would like to speak to the budget recommendation. This after the public hearing closes tonight, the budget will have to be uh available for continued public inspection for at least 10 days before it may be adopted. And I will recommend that you consider adopting it at your next meeting on June the 17th later this month. So, if we look at the operating budget itself, um the the most important question that I think a citizen can ask of its elected officials, of its senior administration, is how you going to spend my tax dollar,

right? The taxes are very very precious and how are you going to use that in the upcoming fiscal year in a way that would reflect the values and their expectations. So, what we looked at before is the bulk of the tax dollar, 44 cents, will be going to police and fire. We will see 14 cents on every tax dollar go to public works. 7 cents going to recreation. 10 cents going to debt service. And all of the other services combined, which we collectively refer to as the support services coming in at 25 cents of every tax dollar. So, what you see here is not only aligned with our values, it's statistically uh consistent with what we have seen over the last decade in the allocation of our tax dollars. If we look at the property tax recommendation, no change from the recommendation that I presented to you in our last budget meeting. I am not recommending a change to the current property tax rate of 44 cents per $100 of assessed valuation. Um Um we need to to stay here in this in this space for a little bit longer. I would recommend another year or so before we continue before we entertain conversations around tax increases. But as you are aware, there are a lot of challenges facing our economy and facing local governments. The cost of goods and services continues to remain very high. Personnel resources are very very precious in this space, no more so than in the greater Triangle region. A lot of competition for talent, and we continue to be an extraordinarily high-growth community. So if we remain at 44 cents on the 44 cents for our tax rate at a current assessed valuation north of $5 billion, that would generate a property tax levy of 22.2 million. If we look at our neighbors around us in kind of understanding how they are navigating these difficult waters, you see a little over half of the communities in Wake County staying consistent with with their tax rates, but we are seeing some movement. We are seeing some significant movement in some of the communities trying to stay ahead of the challenges of

operating a local government in this economy. We are comfortably I think where we need to be. If we look at the operating budget itself, the most important thing to remember here is simply this is that it must be balanced. That is one of the very unique things about North Carolina. This budget must be balanced on the state of adoption as well as when we close out the fiscal year. It is one of the reasons we have such strong fiscal controls in North Carolina. Key stats on this slide that we talked about last time are we're seeing a total budget now of about $50.4 million. That represents almost an 11% increase over the previous fiscal year alone. Um we are continuing to see large budgetary increases, which is reflective of growth and valuation around us continuing to be very very high. If we look at the general fund revenues, what we're seeing overall is about a 9.8% 9.86% change in the general fund, moving from about 40.5 million in the current fiscal year, looking at 44. roughly 5 million next year. You know, the the the numbers move a little bit percent change. I don't see any significant changes there that aren't captured in in a lot of times some budget design, like we talked about at the budget uh work or the budget work session that we had. Permits and fees is an interesting number to me. That's going up significantly, which is also another key indicator that we are seeing tremendous growth and interest around us. You know, property taxes as a percent of our total revenues, we're in a pretty good place. We're not overly dependent on the property tax uh levy, but it is it is the bulk of where our money comes from. Uh current year, we're a little over 50%. Going to remain there, forecasted in the upcoming fiscal year at about 50% of total revenues will be coming from uh the tax levy itself. If we take a look at where we're going to invest this money in in operations, the expenditures are are fairly consistent. If we look at if we look at this slide overall, we see some fairly

consistent things here. If you look at where the expenditures, the significant increases are likely going to be associated with people, um as well as operational investments. But once again, we're seeing that 9.8% 9.86% increase on the expenditure side, which is exactly reflective of what the revenue side expenditure looked like. If we peek behind that curtain a little bit more and we wanted to look expenditures by classification, of the 44.5 million, about 24.5 24.45 million is invested in people. Those are the personnel costs. We've got an additional north of 9 million dollars in the operations themselves. We still lean heavily on on professional services. Um that will represent about 2.87 million dollars in the upcoming year. Our capital outlay continues to grow. There'll be significant investments there, and that debt service number is starting to become more of a reality for us. It is reflective of the investments we have made in facilities primarily around us and the fire apparatus. And the transfers out number we talked about was much lower this year because we were going to forego the debt forecasting model for 1 year to make sure we we were comfortably where we needed to be to afford avoid a property tax increase recommendation. Another way of looking at it on a pie chart, very consistent with what we have seen historically over the last decade. About half of every dollar goes to police and fire, uh public works representing a large chunk after that, and you can kind of see where the rest of the departments kind of come in there. What we see here is consistently consistency, we see stability, we see values alignment, we see a lot of good things in this space um when we see this graph every year. If we're going to look at the budget highlights themselves, these are the things that we talked about before. We see 10 new positions recommended in the upcoming year. That represents about a 5 and 1/2% uh workforce growth that is necessary um extraordinarily necessary

with the the population influx we see. We're going to recommend the reclassification of four existing positions. We see uh benefits increases that are are important for us to note. We will continue to fund COLA, making sure that our salaries stay uh they just stay valid with the current market rate with goods and services continuing to go up. Cost of living continues to go up consistently. Um we are going to pay for performance merit, recommending up to a 4% max for the high-achieving employees. We see the retirement contributions continuing to be significant expenditures that local governments are required to face. While our health care costs did increase 7.4% we were able to account for that in the budget design. So, the employee only will be benefits will be provided at no cost. That is reflected in a $750 to $780 per month increase. The 10 positions that we recommended are primarily seated in the fire department. These are positions that had been heavily forecast before this fiscal year. They represent the investment in the last company of firefighters. We are currently awaiting the arrival of two large pieces of fire apparatus, another engine and a tiller ladder truck. These firefighters will be necessary to make sure that both of those apparatus are operational and fully staffed. We've got an HR, an admin assistant and HR, another maintenance worker in public works. We will welcome our first on staff IT manager since before my tenure in the admin department and we will continue to grow our finance department by bringing in an accounting specialist in the upcoming year. If we look at where we're putting a lot of our big dollars, the major capital, those capital project ordinances that kind of flow from year to year but are important to really stop and take a look at because they represent how we're really shaping our community. We have the law enforcement center which

is currently under construction. The law enforcement side of that building will be done in the next month and then you will have the fire admin suite rounding out construction sometime in the cold weather months late this year early calendar year 27. You've got continuing improvements on the Boulevard, Old Knight Road. We are in the process of purchasing the Loft building which houses our finance and HR departments as I mentioned earlier. We are awaiting the arrival in the next couple of months of the fire engine and the tiller ladder truck. We've got the Hodge Road Park property as a current project now. That property has now been secured. We have the replacement of fire station number two being a very important strategic priority here that we have funded in the upcoming budget. Exterior improvements to station number three. We have money available and recommended for property acquisition for what will be fire station number five. And then we have the Whitewater's extension, the railroad bridge design there for the grade separated crossing. And then we have additional money recommended for Smithfield and First Avenue sidewalks in the design and right away acquisition portion of those projects. So a lot of money being spent in major capital in doing really really good things to ensure that our community is safe and the investments are being made where our citizens expect them to. If we look at the CIP program, those projects of $10,000 or more typically trying to be funded within the upcoming fiscal year itself. We've got 2.1 million recommended here. Of the notable things that I I think are are are worth mentioning, a continued investment in public art. We have a Boulevard study for for We have a Knightdale Boulevard study coming up. We will continue to make investments in the affordable housing trust fund. We will make vehicle additions in both police and fire. We have a dump truck coming with a plow and a spreader for public works as well as an articulating loader. We will construct a Centennial clock which will

be the capstone investment for our Centennial celebration next year. We've got comprehensive equipment replacement in there that that's not worth really breaking out any deeper than this, but there is investment in equipment replacements across departments. We will make another level of investment in Harper Park with the expansion of the parking lot and the resurfacing of the tennis courts. And then we have a specific Vision Zero project where we will make improvements to the bus stop at McKnight. So, good balance here, once again, being consistent with your strategic priorities. If we look at our enterprise and our CFA CIP restricted funds, if you look at the stormwater fund, we're going to invest about 1.6 million dollars. High-level things that we will accomplish there, we need to rehab the lower pond and Idle Station. We have two infrastructure projects that are currently higher on our list, Popular Street and Flower Street, that we anticipate moving forward on in the upcoming fiscal year. We will adopt our first stormwater master plan. We've got a wash station investment for the shop that is worth noting there as well. And then on the general fund restricted side, we've got $622,000 recommended for local street maintenance and repaving, the pass-through funds that come down through the gasoline tax, very consistent with with where those investments have been made historically. So, question that I always try to ask and answer for folks is that's a lot of stuff, right? And I And I don't really expect folks to understand necessarily the dynamics of local government budget. I think they have two questions. The dollars that we give you, how will you spend them? And if you had to explain to me in layman terms, everyday language, why should we trust you as the manager, trust Mayor Day as the mayor, this council, and this senior leadership staff? Why is this a good budget? So, for me, I always try to break it out in a way that just says it at a high level. If you look at what the ICMA and the National League of Cities say about what constitutes a good

budget, you're going to see themes in the language. But one of the things you always see are strategic community goals, long-range strategic planning. We get into this place where the budget shouldn't be a surprise. The budget should be thoughtful, and it should be based on continuing discourse about what the needs of these local government agencies are. So, if we look at Knightdale, as we are very proud of and and we've done a lot of work in this space over the last decade, is we try to lead our community based on the values of the citizens that we serve. Of all the great values that circle in this community, there are five that consistently resonate to the top. That we will be a safe community, that we will be connected and inclusive, that we will be sustainable, that we will be active and healthy, and that the men and women who work in this organization will be excellent. They will be reflective of the investment that the citizens make in our livelihood and our well-being. So, if we look at the budget, how does it make their lives better? These are the things that I think are important to note and the things that I would encourage all of us to lean into. There's a continued commitment to service delivery here that has been exemplary. All of the critical operational needs are met across all areas of service. This is a fiscally responsible budget. We are good stewards of the tax resources under our charge. I'm not recommending a tax increase this year. We can continue to do more with what we have. This supports staff growth. Um we are continuing to expand staff, not recklessly, but at a rate where it meets the growing needs of this community. It has significant resources in here for employee recruitment and retention. The cola investment, the merit investment being the most obvious most obvious examples of that. We need to make sure that we take care of our folks and that they want to stay here. Um and a big way to do that is the financial investments we make in them. Commitment to being a safe community, public safety. The law enforcement center will be completed. We will acquire land for fire station number two in the upcoming year. We will continue

to invest in the station on Clifton Road to make it be reflective of the facilities that we're constructing. We have police fleet commitments as well as the large pieces of apparatus for the fire department. And then we have Vision Zero investments there that will support the philosophy and that commitment as a strategic goal. If we look at quality of life investments, we will celebrate the 100-year anniversary of this community. Um a lot of good things have happened in that time, but we will come together in that space of connectivity and inclusivity and celebrate all the things that make Knightdale a great town. We're going to make continued improvements in Harper Park, which has been wildly successful for us and one of our most popular amenities. We have a plan for a future community center and a park on that property where investments will be made in the upcoming year. We have a new passive park that will begin to take more shape over the next year with Hodge Road on Hodge Road. We've got expanded recreational opportunities. Through the our partnership with the United Arts Council and other programming offerings that we have here, we continue to grow but grow that space. And we have an admirable level of special events and expanded public art opportunities for our citizens. If I looked at what is a commitment to the economy look like here, we will continue to support the Commercial Alliance. I recommend that you reinstate the grants and aid program. That money is in there for that. We will continue to support business workshops and networking, business outreach and communication. We have business resource assistance now where we can help provide access to what grants look like and support businesses if they want to apply for those that are not grants for the town of Knightdale. And we everything we're doing in that space really does support our town-wide economic goals. If we look at what the commitment to inclusivity and accessibility looks like, there are massive investments being made in our pedestrian infrastructure through the exactions of the development community and the areas in which we are making improvements. We have emphasis on our future transportation priorities in this

budget. We're going to expand our investments in ants duplicated. I don't really care for the way I did that, but continued investment in pedestrian as well. We've got things in here that celebrate our diversity through our cultural events, and we have an affordable housing trust fund that continues to be funded and an important part of who we are. And if we look at commitment to environmental stewardship, stormwater maintenance program is in here, which is the backbone of what that enterprise fund really is, investments in our stormwater infrastructure, and then the master plan itself. So, if I was to look at this and I was to sit down and have a conversation with any stakeholder in our community, I, as the manager, would be extraordinarily proud of the things that we do and have continued to do for a prolonged period in Knightdale. So, I'm here to answer any questions you have, and after that, we are to open it up to receive public comment from anybody that may be here that would like to offer public comment. After that, my recommendation to you would be this, that you close the public hearing, you direct the town clerk to place this budget recommendation on your June 17th, 2026 meeting agenda for consideration of adoption per general statute 159-12. I'm trying to pace it, not go too fast, but what questions can I answer for you?

Any questions or comments?

So, this is, as always, a great budget. It is very comprehensive. It's taken into account so many of the initiatives that we as a council have really placed emphasis towards, particularly through our strategic planning our retreat. So, you guys have done amazing work on it, as always, and thank you for the commitment to this and the deliverables that it will bring. How are we positioning, you know, when we look at the landscape currently, like with the increase in fuel costs and things like that, knowing what that looks like in terms

that we aren't making much in increase in our sort of public safety budgets, uh do we have that sort of cushion already baked in um as we don't know what this may look like and that affords us some some range in motion.

We put in very robust expenditure estimations for fuel as the best way I could answer that.

Yeah.

Making assumptions, worst-case scenarios, I think would be the best way to to describe that. The last thing I want to do as a manager, the last thing that Dustin Suzanne or Antoine want to do in their roles is being a position where we have to walk in here and say, "Oops, we need to back up and we need to really be repositioned." They're very aggressive estimations. So, the goal My expectation is simply this is it's better to over budget and under spend than under budget and over spend. So, we build that in. That is under Antoine's charge and that is an area of pretty significant conversation cuz it's a big driver.

That's that's fair. Otherwise, we end up having to go to the bicycle patrols. Uh You know, in talking with uh Chris Barker in his farewell, uh Emerald Isle has a um a budget of I mean, they're it's 10 cent and I think they're going up to 10 and 1/2 cent. So, if you guys could get us down to that cent, that would be great. And they're getting new fire apparatus as well.

They do. Man, if I could just have some of the valuation that our beach front properties have. Uh Other questions? Observations?

I just have one quick question. I'm I'm figuring the the grants and aid program is going to be a uh very popular program. Uh I guess the question is what what does that look like for for the public?

Right. So, what it'll be is really two steps in the process. One is to give you a dollar amount to work with. So, in the budget, I've recommended $25,000. This is a space that we haven't been in for a while. What we will do at an administration level is bring you a

program, a recommended program. So, it gives you two touch points. One is the dollar amount. Does it feel right? Do you want to do it? Do you not want to do it? Do you want to go up or down on the dollar amount? And then on the programming side, what we will do is we will give you a recommendation if it's what you choose to fund in the budget that is statutorily compliant. So, this is what the application process looks like. This is what election would look like. And more importantly, this is what reporting on this public dollars would look like coming back our way. So, I guess the best way to answer your question is if we went into it and it was wildly popular, then you'd have to make a budget decision in the upcoming fiscal year. Do we want to hold pat with where we are or do we want to kind of grow that investment? But my thoughts are simply this is to recommend a safe dollar amount for this year to give you an outline program that you can feel confident is legal and in the spirit of what the state statutes recommend. And then I'm probably going to whisper that let's try to keep it aligned with what what the values of the community are that way we're kind of maintaining that symmetry.

And I echo comments too about really great job from staff and from town manager's office um particularly sort of looking at the landscape, looking all around us, sort of you know, seeing what others are doing. I I guess for me the um and and we'll get there next year, but on the sustainability plan, I I was really hoping we could get going on that. Is is the thought that that would be a a pretty major expenditure with bringing in a consultant versus us trying to just peel off little bits here and there. Is there anything we could do this year at all in that regard?

So, answer to the first question is it was one of the casualties of the budget reduction. It got left on the cutting room floor, so to speak. It was estimated at a quarter of a million dollars. So, it was one of the larger expenditures that didn't get recommended for funding. So, we have had this conversation a lot and and and I think

what I want and what I want to find a way to do for you is you do need to adopt a sustainability plan at some level. Let's be clear. I think there is something that staff believes in, it's something that I support. What that actually looks like and what are the outcomes that you're looking to achieve? I think that's where an outside consultant comes in and helps us scale it right. But I do believe short of that, there's an opportunity to communicate all of the things we're already doing, right? To me and and I think Jason would support this if he was standing beside me, the greatest investments we make in being good stewards of the environment is in the development approvals that you approve regularly. That is where you're going to kind of really lay a solid foundation for the future. Now, I'm not suggesting bury your head in the sand and say that's enough. No, not at all. But for me, I think an initial step for me would be telling the story and articulating in a way that we do take this seriously. Maybe we just don't do as good a job of telling our citizens everything we're doing, but a plan is coming. But unfortunately, this year with the priorities, the strategic priorities as they lined up, that was one that feels financially like it's going to need to be in the upcoming or the next fiscal year.

And I and I know that was a that was a large expenditure and I and I do feel like it is something that to take very seriously and and get somebody that can really do it right. We've already You're right, we do a lot of good things. I know Councilman McDonald's already brought up a couple ideas and thoughts that I think we would all be very supportive of. And so, um um and years go by pretty quick, so but thank you for that explanation.

All right. Any additional? All right, no. Thank you, Mr. Summers. And thank you for these questions. Thank you for the comments as well. Um uh connecting the budget and all of the work that goes into it. And also, thank you for tying that into the strategic plan and what we have um So, now this is a public hearing item. So, we will open the floor. If there is

anyone here tonight who wishes to speak on this item, you may come forward at this time. All right. If not, then I will bring it back to council for any last questions, any last comments, or a motion to close.

If there are no further comments, I will make the motion to close the public hearing and direct the town clerk to place the FY 27 budget recommendations on the June 17, 2026 meeting agenda for consideration of adoption per General Statute 159-12.

Second. All in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed? Majority approves. Motion carries. So, now we'll move to our development services update.

Good evening, Mayor, members of the council. Uh tonight, I only have two quick things for you from my perspective then I'm going to turn over to Kevin and let him um give you a a good development update uh with some exciting new projects. So, the first thing I have to discuss tonight is um opportunity zones. Uh if you're not familiar with the opportunity opportunity zones, this was part of a um part of the federal tax legislation reform and the first one was done in 2018. It's a 10-year program. It allows for investors to defer capital gains invested in opportunity zones uh for a certain time period. It also allows for reduction in the capital gains uh tax if the investments held for at least 5 years and then it actually allows for an elimination if it's a long-term hold. And so, as part of that initial program in 2018, we worked with Wake County Housing Revitalization and also with Wake County Economic Development. And there were two tracks in Knightdale at the time that qualified. You can see them in kind of the dash color, 2018 to 2028 eligible tracks.

And initially we thought we would see, you know, a whole lot of investment from these types of opportunity zone funds. And we thought it would be a way to really catalyze growth in these areas. As you can see from this map, neither of those areas qualify in the new program. So, maybe that is a good sign that it may have been an effective program, but we really didn't see all that much investment from the actual opportunity funds. We saw it helped to fund the Gardens project with the Raleigh Rescue Mission, and it also helped with financing of the Lassiter Knightdale Station residential. And so, there may be a few other projects which we're not aware of that were opportunity fund funded or not, like Village Gate and a couple of the build-to-rent communities. But we we do believe that, you know, at least there was some investment made using that qualifying those qualifying census tract. And so, right now on Friday the county manager's office is working on putting together a list of the new qualifying tracts in Wake County that they want to present to the Commerce Department. And ultimately the governor has to make a recommendation of what census tracts to recommend to the federal government to be included in the opportunity zone program. In this cycle, there are two tracks in Knightdale that do qualify and are eligible. One is what I'm going to call 54113. That is a pretty substantial tract along Knightdale Boulevard. It is a shared census tract, so a portion of that is in Raleigh's jurisdiction and a portion of that is in Knightdale's jurisdiction. But it does qualify. There are a lot of things that the Commerce Department's trying to prioritize with their recommendations, including business development and job creation, housing affordability, and strategic local revitalization. There's a lot of opportunity in that census tract for all those things to occur. It's home to Knightdale Gateway, some empty parcels where um uh developers have looked at for increased uh like industrial type development, as well as Legacy Oaks, Hinton Oaks, um several Merit, Knightdale Marketplace,

uh and Steeple Square Shopping Center. So, there are some areas in there that we would, you know, hope and could see this could really benefit potentially. The other tract, uh 54403, it has uh it's mostly in Wendell that tract, but the the portion that is in Knightdale is what we have identified in our comprehensive plan as our future innovation center um area, but there's a large sewer expansion that is necessary in order for that area to kind of be opened up for development. Um, being in an opportunity uh zone could help alleviate some of the cost with, you know, what it takes to extend that sewer, but it doesn't necessarily guarantee that that investment would be made into that tract. So, um what we're recommending to do is to work with the county uh manager's office and see um if we can uh nominate 541.13, kind of that big census tract, as kind of our top one, and if there's an opportunity for two, no pun intended, opportunity zones, we would um look to see if that other one would be eligible potentially as well. We know that the city of Raleigh will likely put forward quite a few of their census tracts that qualify there. I know that the town of Garner has some interest in one one or two of their qualifying tracts. Um, the town of Wendell is not going to necessarily take a proactive approach to nominate any, and a lot of the communities in the southwest part of the uh county don't have any qualifying tracts. So, we think there's an opportunity to get one, maybe both, if funded. Um and then the kind of these will be eligible as of January 1, 2027. And then the two tracks that are already eligible will remain eligible until the end of 2028. So that cuz that was a 10-year program. So um just wanted to kind of share that information with you. Uh ask any questions you may have. Um if it's uh tax advice, I'm probably not going to be that helpful on how to invest here, but um happy to help if I if I can. If there's any questions or thoughts.

Just quick question. So with these new

tracks, the eligibility will be 10 years for them as well?

I believe so, yeah.

Any downside to the opportunity zones or just a limited supply?

Um I think initially when we went forward in 2018, we were like, this is a win-win. Why wouldn't we do this? I think the downside that, you know, we could potentially see is uh especially with the first two tracks that were eligible, they were more rural tracks than this one. And so a lot of the original folks that kind of came out to us are the typical kind of institutional investors for uh LIHTC affordable housing development. And that area was really not the most appropriate place to build that. So there's a lot of conversations around, you know, trying to find the right appropriate place for housing affordability. Um I think one of the challenges with having, you know, potentially four tracks eligible, that's a lot of uh opportunity zone funding that could come into Knightdale at one time. And so um while that could be a benefit, that could also be kind of a negative thing of like a lot of investment at one time. And I think, you know, the concentration of affordable housing build-to-rent, these are long-term hold um investments. So it's not something where you build a um you subdivide land and sell tracts. You can't do that and still be eligible for the capital gains tax relief. So you're going to hold it for a long term. So you have potential for the the of, you know, a lot of multi-family, one product type, housing affordability not being scattered as we see. Um, and then, you know, we're already in a pretty high growth environment, and could it kind of light that up a little bit and increase the growth growth pressures that we already have. Um, but I think, you know, there's a lot of pros also, the redevelopment opportunities that exist there, the investment, increased investment, and then the potential for more of those mixed-use and employment centers. This kind of the opportunity zone fund mitigates a lot of the, you know, upfront risk where you see like the loss at North Station, we're really able to kind of realize our vision for more of a mixed-use product type, and then, you

know, things like the Gardens are able to take advantage of uh that for some financing.

And any other incentives if there are Google classes?

That's correct.

And plus, with the lottery, right? They have, you know, it's a competitive cycle, right? So, you can't have but so many within a proximity each other, but then, of course, that doesn't preclude private investment in terms of sort of low-income or workforce housing, but uh I still see it as a real positive in terms of that initial investment.

So, did you say it's possible for somebody to just buy and hold, or they have to actually do some some of the other

So, the

some investment.

My understanding of the way the tax credits work is you have to purchase the property, and then you have to reinvest 100% of what you paid for it back into the property to qualify. So, you can't just buy an asset and hold it and not make any investment into it and use opportunity zone funding and receive the benefits. You have to buy the property and make an initial investment in order to qualify.

And I I didn't know if they had to be done right away, or you know, as as it's sold would be a tax consequence, obviously.

Yeah, there's certain dates, at least in the the first uh opportunity zone tax legislation, there were certain dates. So, the date of the sale for the whatever you're using for the investment fund, there's a certain date that that had to be done by, and then certain date that you had to make the qualifying investment. So, it's all kind of tracked that 10 years to ensure that it is serving the purpose, which is, you know, revitalization of qualifying tracts.

Yeah, and well, one of the one of the things you mentioned sort of a challenge is that somebody could wait a while, for example, and sort of tie up a large tract. So, yeah, if we could tie this together with some of some incentives or something that we think about that could could really uh bring uh some things that we're really looking for, I think is uh is a win. I would I would try to I think you're

right to concentrate on more towards our town center or what we think, you know, is is closer to where uh we want it to be versus pushing so far out and and away. If we could get to that, that'd be great.

All right. Thank y'all. The next thing I have is our uh annexation agreement with Ral- Raleigh. Uh so, uh North Carolina general statutes allow for annexation agreements um to help uh for orderly growth planning. We've had a annexation agreement with Raleigh since 1994. The last uh one was uh adopted in October of 20 2006, and uh is due to expire in October of this year. Um if you look at the map on here, the current line and the proposed line are the same. They're one in the same, so there's no changes proposed here as far as our uh line of annexation with the city of Raleigh. Uh so, we the city of Raleigh actually heard this and approved it at their council meeting on May 19th. Um we at our last meeting set a public hearing for this to be at the June 17th meeting. And so, once we have our public hearing and action on it, it we can go ahead and um have both ordinances signed by the uh appropriate municipality, and then we record that with the register of deeds office, and then that's valid for another 20 years. So, 2046 uh will be the next renewal, and I'll see y'all then. Maybe I won't. But, that's uh just an update on that and that process. Happy to answer any questions, but um we're looking to kind of get this uh completed at the June meeting.

Would it be difficult to change?

I mean, we're a little late in the process, but we could certainly uh um have that conversation. We did look at uh if there were any opportunities, you know, to make smoother lines at certain parcels and things like that, but due to uh where current municipal limits are and ETJ, that it would take essentially an act of legislature to

reverse ETJ for us to be able to kind of move our lines. So, we uh determined it's probably in our best interest to just uh keep it where it is. That's all I have. I'll let Kevin come up and give the development update.

Thank you.

Thank you, Jason. Uh good evening, Mayor and Council. Um I'll take you through our development updates with some uh updates, new projects, and other things to share. Um so, first looking at the numbers like we do every month, uh I think what two numbers really jump out at me are the lots under construction. You go back to February, you can see we were at 2,500 lots under construction. We're up to now almost 3,700 lots under construction. So, those are projects that have moved into the initial construction phase, clearing and grading. That's Robertson Crossing, um Haven at Griffith Griffith Meadow, uh and The Collection are three examples of that. And so, that's just adding more and more inventory to our to our housing stock. And then, residences under construction, that's a pretty big big drop. I think I may have calculated the May number incorrectly, but either way, it's still a big drop. And that is not because we've had large multi-family projects receive a CO. That is just all single-family and townhomes receiving COs between May and June. We had a lot of new residents moving into their homes over the last month. And so, that's exciting to see. And then, going back to previous years again, back to 2022, you can see how the trends kind of go up and down, but fairly consistent overall. Moving into some actual plans that we wanted to share with you. We recently sent out

an update to Boulder Ridge. So, the property owner this time has reached out to us to try to get a plan together that is marketable for that site and creating something that's more consistent with the town's vision. Last year, the applicant at the time submitted a master plan. We reviewed it, and before the joint public hearing, the applicant chose to withdraw that plan. And so, this does show some updates. I think there are still improvements that could be made, including creating more vertically integrated mixed use, connectivity to adjacent parcels, expanding the scope. So, the property directly to the north, east, and west, those are all on the market now. So, being able to kind of bring those parcels under the same umbrella, expand out a little bit, and then also connect to the Mingo Creek neighborhood and provide connectivity to some of the neighborhoods that are recently approved further east on uh uh Old Faison Road would create more of a consistent uh project with our comprehensive plan. Um and then also this is within the River District. It's a trail-oriented uh development. And so, uh how can we bring the trail through the site as a main feature and build off of that instead of what you see now which you saw with the previous plan was the trail kind of running around the perimeter of the site. Um and we have some examples that we're happy to share of projects that have been able to achieve that uh a little bit better. Um so, we talked about the comprehensive plan and what that calls for. Uh happy to answer any questions about this, but again it's still very conceptual. Um they don't even have a developer at this time. Um and so, should this move forward, uh hopefully we'll be able to see some of the recommended improvements incorporated into it.

Uh so, when you say the property owner is what it is for property owner is a corporation?

Uh no. Uh single person. Yeah.

Are they working with any

They're working with McAdams, um who developed the master plan for the previous submission.

traditional pathway we normally see, but I was curious like what would be

Yeah. It is a little bit different, but um I will commend the property owner for you know, making that investment and uh taking those steps to hopefully get something that fits our vision, but also um can attract the types of developers that we're looking for.

I think just my first final takeaway is, you know, you got this. The park over there that's no longer a high-priority for Monarch Road, it's the neighborhood land. Um and so, they're definitely looking for the connection across the street right here at Hodge and Great Neck for the trail

Was Was any of this slated to connect into Mingo uh Creek subdivision?

No. Um there's an intervening parcel just to the north that is also zoned highway business um owned by the development firm City Platt. We've had a lot of conversations, but nothing officially submitted there. But, you know, if there's synergy there and that connection certainly can be made to some existing stubs in that area.

Well, I'm liking what I'm seeing so far as far as um you know, especially leaning in on the environmental side, uh some treatments around wetlands, and um underground SCM, something, you know, take up uh less space, maybe uh you know, if they could incorporate some pervious pavement, things of that nature. How Right now, it looks like the And again, I know it's a a sketch, but there there's the two parcels that are out on the corner at at Hodge. Um how much is that going to require to get full

frontage improvements along sort of that aspect? Would that require additional easements or right of way?

Potentially. Um the what right of way through there is is pretty large, but again, those two parcels are also on the market um right now, so the if they're able to incorporate those and create that connectivity, we did talk about um that with the the engineer when we sat down with him to review this about even if those parcels aren't included, creating a connected streetscape along Old Faison and Hodge Road to, you know, create something that's a little bit more um consistent would be something that we're looking for.

Um and uh with the previous proposal, did they get all the way to the street?

They did. Yes. Um if I recall correctly, it uh recommended a signal at Hodges Road and Bingle Bluff Boulevard. Um and uh that was pretty much it as far as the recommended improvements go. Um even with all of the bottleneck on Hodges Road at the bridge and the kind of physical constraints there.

So, they in their illustrations, they have some multi-story buildings. Are Are they thinking or proposing that as are they just sort of there?

Uh so, the three red buildings on the bottom of the screen are identified as commercial buildings, but I don't think it's necessarily defined

or intended at this point to be multi-story buildings from what we could tell. Um they would primarily be uh single-story commercial buildings. Uh Buildings I and J, if I can see that correctly, uh kind of in the middle of the site that has some hatching on it would be um vertically integrated mixed-use buildings um with either ground-floor retail or live-work units. Um live-work units were proposed in that area previously as well. We'll continue uh talking about that and hopefully have some updates in the near future. Um, next wanted to bring some updates about Parkside at West Lake. So, the developer has approached us with um, some news about possibly accelerating the commercial development at the corner of Hodge or at Pool and Smithfield Road. Uh, so the image on the right is the master plan that was approved, um, showing multiple uh, commercial and retail and office buildings along Pool and Hodge or Pool and Smithfield Road. Can't get Hodge out of my mind. Um, and then the imagery on the left shows uh, what the proposed uh, village green that would be developed in the first phase of the overall Parkside at West Lake, um, some of the imagery there. Uh, and the surrounding the rest of that uh, commercial node there would be developed in later phases um, in 2030 and beyond. Uh, their current proposal would accelerate that and start development um, as soon as 2028. Uh, and this is the very conceptual plan that they've submitted to us at this point uh, with a grocer uh, there on the right side of the screen and then single story

retail buildings ring the parking lot with some of the public gathering areas between those buildings and the uh, rural preservation corridor along Smithfield Road. Um, this potentially may require an update to the master plan. Um, this does show a pretty significant reduction in overall non-residential square footage. Um, so previously the entire site had um, about 158,000 square feet of office, retail and multi-use um, uh, This site has just under 80,000 square feet. So, about half of what was originally proposed. Um that does not include some of the little smaller commercial spaces that are incorporated on the uh the west side of the project, also. Um so, the the grocer um has shown a lot of interest in that. And so, that's really kind of driving the timing on that. Um They haven't shared who the grocer is. Oh. Um that I am not sure of. I think there's a little bit of um reorganization. So, everything on kind of the south side of the screen here was all of the retail and office. The three The four buildings that are along Pool Road, those are multi-story buildings with either um office or residential above.

Um and what they're proposing now is just all kind of single-story retail. Um

Cuz like shooting the wrong But like what the whole point of the phasing plans and like that was to wait until it could support that level of the So.

Yeah.

I mean, I don't Just like every other resident in the area, I don't want to purchase more.

Okay. Thank you for that feedback. See. Um so next we'll move on to some sketch plans. These are some items that you've reviewed recently, but first want to start with the North Side Passion Project. We've talked a lot about this and we're hoping that they're moving towards a master plan submittal this summer, but they have run into some obstacles that would require site development allowances on the site. Some things we've talked about, some things we haven't. So first the right of way improvements along Maple and Second Avenue. Those add a significant cost to the project and if a master plan is submitted they are likely to request site development allowance to either forego those right of way improvements, look for a way to partner with the town on the cost of those improvements, or phase them in a way that they get done in the future with the quadplexes kind of coming first. The second site development allowance is regarding parking. So that adds parking spaces, parking

lots add pretty significant amount of cost to the project overall. But when you zoom out a little bit just to the north is the parking lot for the Knightdale Baptist Church and they have worked out an agreement where if this is approved, those residences would be able to park within that parking lot to help reduce some of the impervious surface on that site. Kind of another alternative is if the right of way is improved, that would add some on-street parking spaces in front of the site. Um a little bit closer. Uh and then finally, the mixed-use building standards we talked about this at our most recent meeting, um and they originally proposed vinyl siding. However, they have agreed to uh hardy plank siding on the buildings with some masonry as well. Um so, we've got them to kind of move in the right direction architecture, but wanted to hear if there's any feedback on uh primarily the right-of-way improvements and on-site parking. Or if additional information is needed from the applicant.

Do you have an estimate of the dollar amount cost right-of-way improvements?

Um the estimate that they provided us was about $200,000. Uh that is also something that we submitted to CAMPO for a uh a matching grant, uh but that didn't score well.

That whole area of town is just lacking a lot of infrastructure just in general, you know, curb and gutter, sidewalks, just everything. So, it's I mean, it would be nice to get some, but it's not going to complete everything either. So, it's

Right.

Um could almost see a another project that comes back later and sort of completes everything. Certainly at a minimum, don't make you know, we shouldn't have to go back and purchase right. Somebody shouldn't have to go back and get right-of-way. Um

Yeah, that they would, you know, if

that's approved, they would certainly dedicate the right-of-way, the ultimate uh right-of-way there, um so that it does become a little bit easier to do in the future.

So, I'm just kicking around another idea on that. So, you're you're talking about uh affordable housing or vulnerable housing for vulnerable populations. I'm assuming so.

Mhm.

If we start thinking about our affordable Knightdale housing fund or some other opportunities, I mean, there could be something there. I'm not saying it should be, but just something to think about. Also, I definitely like their thought process of using shared parking because at some point, I think downtown, we would all like to see less parking in general. Um, so

Yeah. And just north of the parking lot on Main Street is a bus stop. Um, two bus stops on either side of Main Street that would be within walking distance that could could could provide additional um modes of transportation.

I guess I wouldn't mind to see just a set of plans that sort sort of showed what they would be required to to do and just a for a little bit of clarity, you know, and then sort of the zoomed out because at some point it's just going to stub out to nothing for a while.

Thank you. Uh, the next item is something that we received from the federal level. Uh, the post office is considering some additions and site improvements um to that site. It's zoned NMX. Uh, they're proposing to add parking, lighting, make some pavement repairs, uh, and enhance and improve some of the landscaping on the site as well. Um I've mentioned that uh federal projects

are exempt from local zoning regulations. So, they they're proposing to add about uh I think 11 or 13 spaces on the front side of the site close to uh the the public right-of-way there. Um they would be able to do that without getting a variance. Um whereas any other use would be required to get a variance or put the parking in the side or rear. Um we're reviewing this for additional items uh for consistency with our corporate our UDO, um but they are not required to uh incorporate our comments. So, we're looking at areas where we can make some improvements, uh pedestrian connectivity, um right-of-way improvements if possible. Um again, things like lighting and making it just the site generally safer, more appealing. Landscaping, yeah. Yeah. Here you go. Um and then the last sketch plan that we have is Planet Fitness. So, they're proposing a 3,700 sq ft expansion. It's on the back side of the building. Um so, it would be impacting the loading bay in the back, but it does not cut off any circulation back there. Would make it Yes. Um and so, uh that would be a building permit that we also see submitted fairly soon. Construction is probably going to start by the end of summer on that. Uh moving on to the master plan projects, the first is the Riverview Commons uh master plan that was submitted. This was reviewed by the development review committee last month. Um and we talked about in the big

picture items that we've been talking about them with them since the beginning. Um river district theme, mixed-use development, reducing parking. They're way way over on the parking, uh exceeding our parking maximum by a lot. Um and then place-making, building design, kind of creating a really uh welcoming entry into Knightdale as people are getting off the future 540 as they're coming along uh Pool Road, which is getting some upgrades as part of the 540 uh connection there. Um they submitted a master plan that looked like this, and they resubmitted a master plan that still looked like this. Um they haven't made any changes, um and right now they are saying that the uh drive-thru uses and auto-dependent uses along the perimeter of the site are more of a conceptual uh phase of the project, and they're focused mainly on the grocer and the retail buildings in the center of the site. Um they were originally scheduled to go to a joint public hearing this month, uh but we have uh we're also working with NCDOT to finish their review of the TIA. That is still under review by DOT, um so that this will wait until we get an updated plan, and have that TIA reviewed. If there are any questions or any feedback, I'd be happy to take that.

Definitely would like to see more of the uh you know, the small area plan, the River District small area plan. Um the architectural renderings are not particularly exciting. It kind of just reminds me like it looks like a Food Lion. Um and I know in general we try to stay away from branded buildings. We actually already have, I think, this exact building in town. Um is was my first impression was this looks like Steeple Square. Um

kind of concerned about number of drive-thru very auto-dependent buildings. Um So, if we're kind of putting those on there as a concept, maybe we need to un-concept those.

Yeah, I definitely would lean in on that auto-dependent uses. It seems like there's opportunity for shared parking there. Um I think on their parking they probably looked at the It says bank, auto service, another building each and every single one and just maxed out the parking for each and every one and it the I'd almost rather see a strip, you know, with um shared parking, but but I I it doesn't feel like it's tying into what we want here in in this um this region of town and sort of what we we talked about for what we'd like to see for the river district. Um And it's you know, it's going to be right up the street from 540 interchange, so it just feels like there's a lot more that can be done there. It's going to be on a future bus route. There's just There's There's a lot more that we could do than just have another huge parking lot with a few buildings stuck in it.

Mhm. Well, and the the other thing, too, that I was going to chime in and say is that I feel like rather than getting a unique development proposal here in what we've decided is a unique part of town with our small area plan, we kind of got a copy and paste Food Lion shopping center. What what you know, I can almost see it. There's going to be a you know, a Chinese restaurant right there. There's going to be a CVS. There's you know, like it just you can see this copy and paste it all over uh most of the state of North Carolina and I don't think that's at all what we're looking for here. We're certainly looking for something more custom more high-end than this.

Kevin, question not just particularly to this. How much input or influence do you all have when it comes to the internal um movement and and traffic

designs of these projects. And the reason I was asking, like I'm looking at this design for where they have proposed landscape, right? Just random. But then I also think about like the Lowe's shopping center over here, right? The sightline when you get to the end of some of these um these actual uh parking corridors is absolutely terrible. Like you can't see because of the vegetation. You don't have that sight triangle. And by the time you're nosed out, you know, cars coming through at a decent little clip, it's, you know, it's precarious. And so, do you all have any influence into sight triangles and design executions with internal operations of these develop-

Yeah, certainly. Um I think our UDO does a good job of giving us the power to work with developers to create something that that is safe for motors and pedestrians. Um I think this project could benefit from a lot of pedestrian safety improvements internal to the parking lot. I think there's really one kind of sidewalk that runs through the middle of it. Uh but it leaves a lot of um uh pressure points and potential conflicts uh for pedestrians through there. Um we've seen examples of UDO requirements from across the state uh that kind of treat large commercial parking lots differently than a parking lot for a smaller site or a single non-residential use that emulates a uh or requires that kind of the main strip through there, the main entry is is designed for a uh local kind of main street standard. So, beefs it up a little bit, has buildings coming off of it, um and parking in the rear, things that we're trying to do here, um, that we steered those developers to to try to um, see some improvement here. Um, and, uh, I think to your point, um,

Counselor Evans, that there are, uh, certain techniques and methods. Uh, what comes to mind for me is crime prevention through environmental design, CPTED. It's this practice where you kind of look for those areas where either the physical or natural environment is creating unsafe situations. Um, and so one of the principles in CPTED is having landscaping, um, that is low and high and provides a gap in the middle so you can see people, uh, people can see you. Um, and so incorporating those sorts of things, uh, they're are are what we try to push developers towards.

If If we got to a point, I remember this conversation last time, I feel like if if we say, "Well, maybe there's just a few little tweaks on the grosser side of the road." What I understood was, "Well, it that's where they they're ready to go. They're truly are ready to go, but sort of the southern part we just don't quite have it all that figured out, but we want to put something on the plan so that we can sort of get get you all feeling good about it." Is there a way for for us to separate those out? I know that I think Jason said last time that we want to see something down there that gets approved as overall concept, but how is there a way to sort of separate those two that we can have confidence that they can come back later for approval on that other piece?

I certainly think so. Um, you look at Parkside at Westlake. Um, and that was considered a bubble plan. Um, we're talking now today about changing that a little bit and reducing some of the square footages in that area. Um, but they had additional elements within the rezoning, the design guidelines, um and the uses, limiting the uses, but providing enough uses that could attract retail and non-residential uses there, and create a sense of what the buildings

are going to look like at the end of the day. So, there's certainly certainly a possibility to do that. My concern with this is if they're saying all the outparcels are a bubble plan or conceptual, um and this gets approved as is, well, this is a site-specific development plan, and they could come in, even if they are conceptual in their words, they could come in with building permits for a gas station, a drive-through bank, and everything like that with a site-specific approved development plan. Um and, you know, until they make those changes, we certainly wouldn't be comfortable with moving a project forward that is so inconsistent with our regulations and our guidance.

As I laid out, the only way they could do it is subdivide the parcel and just say, "We're only looking at that." And not putting in any I mean, that's the only path forward, it sounds like, in the scenario I laid out.

That's yep, that's a possibility as well. That would still likely have to go through a rezoning. If they are just looking at the grocery store, depends on what the minimum square footage would be at that point. It is currently zoned highway business, so there are some non-residential uses that would be allowed, but certainly not to this scale. We will continue to work with them on that. Uh so, one project that is going to a joint public hearing in June on the 18th is the conversion of the house at 5845 Farmwell Road uh to an office. Um it's just under 0.6 acres and a 1,600 square foot house to the office conversion. They did see receive a number of variances at a Board of Adjustment meeting earlier this month, primarily for parking or

screening and landscaping um and right-of-way improvements on Farmwell Road. Um but again, this will be coming for a joint public hearing later this month and then a final decision as soon as August. Um and the next would be Overlook on Old Crew's. We discussed this just last week um and in the interim, the developer has made some proposed changes to the plan. Um first, that all homes would be would be pre-wired for EV chargers and the single-family homes would be out outfitted to facilitate uh the installation of solar panels. Um a professionally designed pollinator garden would be installed as well. Um townhome buildings on Old Crew's Road uh that back up to those so those are front-loaded facing into the site um with the backyards facing out to towards Old Crew's and a rural preservation corridor between the two. Uh but they would break those up so that uh townhome buildings have no more than four units on those front-loaded townhomes there. Um they have aligned a green space in the middle of the project. They had some connectivity through there, but they would continue that all the way through and create a what they're calling an overlook plaza with landscaping, hardscaping, uh public art and uh uh connect pedestrian connectivity throughout the site. They're also proposing a dedicated food truck area with off-street parking and uh power hookups in the blue there. Um and then we would work with them on getting the design of the retaining wall um that kind of separates the front of those rear-loaded homes from the rest of the area to create something that um is not just a steep wall in that area, but something that's

more appealing and maybe a little bit um better of a design there. Um so the applicant is hoping to bring this back uh on June 17th.

The the where would you think um we talked just briefly about additional parking. The homes that don't front onto a public street, you know, the the furthest south along that street. There would have to be some additional parking somewhere in there if they had guests or something.

Yeah, I'm going to see if this does work, right? Um so there would be opportunities kind of at the ends of the alleys here for some additional parking. Um potentially uh as you approach the the local street that runs through there. Um so there would be um I think a lot of opportunities for additional parking um and then some uh maybe around the uh food truck area, uh not just two spaces, but maybe some additional off-street parking spaces in that area.

Yeah, it just seems like there it needs to connect pretty like if you if you park in a blue box, for example, you know, you you could walk back basically to those units pretty pretty easily. Um because I'm I'm I'm they're you know, their address is going to Is that a You said that's a public alley? Is that

Yes, this is going to be a public alley. Um this alley is public. Uh and that is to serve uh utilities to all of the homes that are on either side of it. This alley is private. Uh and then this street street A and street B are public as well. They have on-street parking on street A.

Yeah. Um they had more um especially on this side, but we were concerned about uh circulation. Uh so they reduced that. We also wanted to create a more consistent streetscape um with Old Mill Burney Village to the west uh continuing through here and connecting hopefully one day to Breaux Village to the east. So they're trying to create something more consistent. All right. Um and so now moving on to construction drawing stage. Um First we wanted to share an update uh or some considerations that the developer Phase II Reserve is considering uh potentially changing some of the lot uh sizes uh for single-family townhomes. Um right now they have approval uh for single-family homes and townhomes. A developer builder Ashton Woods has um kind of emerged as a potential builder uh in this area. Uh and with their specific product and looking at the home sizes, they are um considering some requests to change some of the home sizes. So, what was approved with the PUD and master plan when it back in just over a month ago was a number of different lot sizes. So, townhome lots from 22 to 24 ft in width, um single-family rear-loaded homes from 26 ft, 32 ft, and 40 ft uh to provide a variety of housing types. Uh the 26-ft uh kind of row homes would be a really narrow and a new product introduced into Knightdale. Um However, they are requesting changes to um allow for just 40-ft wide

rear-loaded homes and 20 to 24-ft wide rear-loaded townhomes. And so, that would remove the 26- and 32-ft wide rear-loaded townhome lots. Um although, they have a number of different products that could fit on those lots uh to create some variety. Um and the lots could go up to as wide as 55 ft. Um this does result in some changes in the lot counts and density. So, you would lose three of the rear-loaded lots, um but gain six or seven townhome lots. Um so, that's a net increase in density. Potentially, would require an amendment to the previously approved plan uh from just over a month ago. Um There. So, happy to answer any questions, gather more information if needed. Um We're hoping to get some additional information, um but this does kind of move it away from some of the goals within the comprehensive plan, creating housing diversity, um as well as the affordable Knightdale plan. And something that I think set this project apart was having those different housing types spread throughout. I think they did a really good job of incorporating the different housing sizes and not just having a pod of townhomes here and single-family homes here. Um they had a lot of variety throughout there.

So, I feel like we I think we recently said this in a public hearing that or at least in public um that you know, it seems like we've recently gotten a lot of developments approved and then when it comes time to actually go and build there's a lot of coming in and watering down what got

approved. Um and I don't like it.

Mr. So, what what specifically would change along the parcels to the east? Uh I know there was a lot of a lot of residents that came and spoke out of that neighborhood.

So, um I think there would be minimal changes to the parcels on the east. Um I think the closest would be this kind of pod of single-family rear-loaded homes uh that would see some change. The townhomes here uh those lot widths would change by 2 to 4 ft. Um but these homes would kind of create more of a consistent um 40-ft wide lots.

So, the the townhomes would have Like so, we're reducing the impervious density on the single-family homes.

Yes.

But adding in a couple more townhomes.

Yeah, I think it's three or four unit increase overall. Very small change in the density ratio, um, but a change nonetheless. And when you read the general statutes, um, that does require an amendment to the master plan. Yes. Yeah, so they're eliminating the 20 6 ft and 32 ft wide rear-loaded homes. So, it

would just be 40 ft wide rear-loaded. And then they're changing the townhome dimensions from 22 to 24 ft. They're eliminating the 22 ft wide townhome and they just have 20 or 24 ft wide townhomes. The end units would be 24 ft and the interior units would be 20 ft wide. And so, they're eliminating the 26 and 32 ft wide town rear-loaded single-family homes. Um, and just having that one uh, housing type. And we are seeing a lot of requests to reduce lot widths, um, from previously approved plans, but I think we're seeing a lot of front-loaded homes being requested to reduce that width. Um, not so much rear-loaded homes. Um, Yes.

And total, how many there's still what, four different house types here?

Uh yes, so there would be uh front-loaded single-family homes on 60-ft wide lots, rear-loaded uh single-family homes on 40-ft lots, and then rear-loaded townhomes on 20- or 24-ft wide lots. So, kind of reducing it down to three.

Why four?

Uh the 26-ft wide rear-loaded single-family home. Um so, that would be kind of

the row home or shotgun home, um like in more of a downtown urban setting. Those really narrow homes, there's some in downtown Raleigh, kind of also really popular in places like New Orleans.

So, so what is the net gain? Are we losing some of the package, and what's the net gain?

Uh three units.

Three units?

Yep, going from 184 to 187.

But we're losing some.

Single-family and townhomes.

Two different. But we're losing these different architectural styles.

Yes.

And then we can use the garages where taking out the middle out and the middle home in the back.

And then in between the two ends.

Yes, exactly.

And so, how about the townhomes? Are the townhomes in the back

Right.

or the townhomes in the front?

Um their thoughts are that they have a lot of variety on um the the architectural renderings that they have um and the ability to have more um choices and more finishes and more architectural um styles to choose from on kind of more uniform lots. So, um

And they haven't submitted construction drawings yet based on the originally approved master plan or potential changes, so um Right, they didn't have a builder. Mhm.

So, this is the best they can do. What do you Okay. I mean, cuz I'm fine with these you know, with the houses and even some changes, but not with any of the others and I don't know. I mean, like I would find a multiple builders So, I mean, I don't I don't really see any any needs to advocate changing what we have.

So, if I can offer you some advice.

So, please.

So, this is really the way we find it. Those are the numbers. Um staff works very, very hard with the developers to get a site plan that is consistent with your expectations. And it's a long process. And if it's something where we're walking in these chambers and you feel content with it and approve, then you should stick with the plan. Unless you feel compelled to meet the developer's request. You have no legal obligation to do so. Um could be dangerous if you consistently demonstrate that behavior to your group and only meet your expectations only to accept proposals But he's going to bless you as a developer. If you get one opportunity to develop

the property, make sure it meets your expectations.

Well, um I'm honestly not even sure how many lots are under construction. How many units are already

Man, we've got 3,500 under construction. Yeah.

Yeah, that many units All right. That is very helpful. Thank you. And I wanted to finish out with some legislative updates both from the state and kind of more affecting potentially affecting us. So there are three bills that we're tracking in the General Assembly now. HB 1056 would allow for a residential development in all commercial zoning districts by right. It would also prohibit parking minimum standards for both the number minimum number required and the minimum size and dimensions required for parking spaces. Which generally something we're trying to move away from. But it also includes a provision that would prohibit us from regulating the location of where parking can go. So think back to the post office. Right now any other use couldn't add parking in the front. And we want to bring the building front have parking in the side and rear. The way that I read this bill, we might not be able to do that if this is approved. I don't know the kind of support that this has, but we have seen a lot of legislation proposed over the last few years to accelerate housing, add more housing in

commercial zoning districts, reduce parking. So we'll continue to monitor that one. Senate Bill 999 would uh ex- would would us to expedite small scale residential plan review. Um when you read it, it kind of says we can't require it to go through certain processes like special use permits or conditional district rezonings, but it also says that this legislation is not intended to um supersede or skirt any uh zoning regulations. So, it doesn't really make sense to me, but I think the intent of it would be to uh encourage municipalities to speed up plan review, especially for smaller scale residential projects. Um I think we do a really good job of plan review time in Knightdale. Um so, maybe they're using us as kind of a a guiding post and would require all other communities to speed up to match um our output. Um and then SB 1069 is a bill that's been introduced a few times over the last few years that would allow for inclusionary zoning, which would uh give us the power to uh compel developers of residential, primarily kind of multi-family residential projects to include affordable housing units or other um things uh within it that would benefit the community as a whole um and not just kind of have certain limitations that we have now. Um again, that's something that has been introduced a lot and hasn't gotten far in the process, but I think it's gaining a little bit more momentum um each time it's introduced and a little bit more support. So, hopefully we'll see something move there. Yeah.

With the commercial and our residential and commercial zones on the surface it's not totally clear that I think any of those would be codes um

how are you applying that? Yeah. So, in our process here that would mean as long as they're following our UDO otherwise

Yes.

building on the

So if they wanted to add some apartments to the Iredell list they would still have to follow our UDO no problem there.

Exactly. Yep. Or if they wanted to build single family homes on the Bolder Ridge tract that's zoned highway business um they would have to be 80-ft wide lots um for front loaded homes so if they could do that but all of the rest of the zoning standards uh for that one would remain uh in effect. Uh something else uh to make you all aware of if you haven't taken a look the North Carolina chapter of the American Planning Association recently released um their housing choice needs and policies report. Um this was a started a statewide survey and case studies um that looked at ways to accelerate housing provide more housing choice and opportunities um and uh kind of looked at the needs some of the barriers uh and best practices to address housing challenges. The report states that North Carolina has um a 760,000 housing unit gap. Um so we need you know 3/4 of a of a million new homes across the state uh and the majority of those homes it says 54% of those homes should be affordable. Um and it has four main areas of focus looking for ways to collaborate updating land use regulations um looking for ways to speed streamline construction and development and then financing. Uh there are a number of things within

this report that Knightdale currently does. Um we have completed a housing needs assessment. We've invested in infrastructure across town to attract that growth. Uh we have started affordable housing trust fund and partnered with affordable housing authorities like Habitat for Humanity. We have our comprehensive plan and again our affordable housing plan. We recently adopted uh ordinance to allow for accessory dwelling units in any residentially zoned parcel. Um and we're working with developers as they create HOAs in Union Park. All of those single-family homes are allowed to have accessory dwelling units on them so that it's not prohibited in their HOA covenants. Um and then uh from a construction standpoint, we have made process changes to help speed it up. Uh we've minimized reviews where we can, although really depends on the engineer and their proficiency and ability to create plans that are more consistent. Um so not every project has to go through 12 cycles of construction drawing review. Um some areas where we could see more investment or more focus on in Knightdale would be land disposition and working with private partners to create more affordable housing options on town-owned land. Working with additional housing authorities, not just Habitat for Humanity, but other housing authorities like Raleigh Land Trust and DHIC. Um we can advocate for inclusionary zoning at the state level and we can do things to facilitate infill residential and promote more missing middle housing. That would include allowing for town homes, duplexes, triplexes

by right. Right now, those are all required conditional district rezonings. But, if there's a way to kind of right-size it, which I think there is, that could be something that we bring to you in a future work session as a potential text amendment to kind of accelerate some missing middle housing potentially. And then, to update infrastructure standards, we recently went through this to update our construction manual. But, if there are additional elements that we can look at, we will certainly do that as well. And so, happy to answer any questions on this report or some of the actions that we're taking or potentially bring forward some text amendments that might help to address some of these issues if you have any thoughts.

Well, I'm glad you're looking at this. It's great report and it's desperately needed. I think we are doing a good job. One thing I think about is is also trying to the the naturally occurring affordable housing. Is trying to maintain at least as long as we can some of that. Uh You know, we're we're but folks are buying and flipping and and raising rent prices as they are. Another one and this this I think this dovetails right into it is we do have in our jurisdiction some mobile home parks. And that's something I would I would love for us to to dig in a little bit. I think DOT does a great job when a new project comes through. You know, a lot of this is different. Some people are just straight out renting, but there are a lot of people that actually own those units and that's all they can afford. They're paying lot rent, but you know, when a new development comes along and says you have 180 days, whatever it takes. Carey I think ran into this and people literally have units there that they cannot move. They have thousands of dollars invested in it and that's their home and they can't move it. They have to go

I mean, it puts them on the street, I think, in some cases. So, I definitely would like for us to to look at that and just go ahead and put it out there for developer comes along and looks to purchase one of these properties that there's, you know, you need to try to figure out how to move some of these units or provide some money uh to people because it is different than just paying rent where you could just go literally go somewhere else and pay rent. So, I'd love for you to take a look at that one as well.

Sure. Kevin, I will say this, as a board member um for DHSC, we definitely would be interested in any public-private partnerships to expand that scope of affordable workforce housing. But, I also think that the, you know, presentation given earlier around the opportunity zones, as that's flushed out and we kind of see what those boundaries look like, then we can definitely engage further on the exploration around what that may entail, whether it's light tech or whether it is stand-alone single-family uh workforce housing. So, would be interested once we know that that is finalized, particularly in the opportunity zone space, but then also just that opening of public-private partnership um as you all see spaces and opportunities, uh I'd be more than happy to pass that forward to the development team for DHSC.

Okay. Thank you.

Believe me, I sat in a probably hearing for a I uh Anyway, much longer than this. Can you briefly tell us again, I know I've I've read it, but missing middle, just missing middle housing, where we're are we missing it or are we getting it and and sort of what is it and what might be there?

I think we're starting to get it a little bit more. We have a lot of townhomes approved and under construction and you know, uh occupied over the last few years. Uh but missing middle housing is more than just town homes, so that would be duplexes, triplexes, cottage courts. Um so Mallard Cove has those cottage court units incorporated within that. Um Linden Oaks

has a number of different housing options within that including duplexes. Um so there's a a large uh segment of housing between town homes and uh uh large single family homes um that we're getting some of but we're not getting everything right now. All right. Uh and so we'll work more to see what kind of opportunities we have there. Uh the last legislative update I have, it was a uh joint public hearing that's going to come to you later this month. The uh North Carolina Department of Public Safety has published some recommended updates to flood damage prevention ordinances. Um our current flood uh plane damage prevention ordinance is uh uh mirrors the previous recommended uh regulations from the state. Um and so they've made some additional recommendations that we're looking to incorporate including uh beefing up some of the elevation and flood proof uh proofing certificate requirements, providing a little bit more meat in our enforcement standards, um and then really uh prohibiting structural fill uh within flood plains. Um so you think back to kind of the discussion that we had with Harper Preserve and Rainier Lake Drive, um that has some structural fill with that street. Um that project is fully entitled. They have their flood plain development permit, but if that project were to come in tomorrow, uh, potentially they wouldn't be allowed. They would have to re-route that street there. Um, compliance with these regulations is required uh, for Knightdale residents and the town overall to participate in the National Flood Insurance Rate Program, Flood Insurance Program. Um,

and the community rating system. So, this provides subsidized flood insurance for properties whether they're in a flood zone or not. Um, the CRS is a voluntary incentive program that kind of goes above and beyond the minimum NFIP standards. Um, and it helps to reduce that uh, rate even more and it also provides more flood protection uh, than the minimum federal level. Um, so we're a member of the NFIP and the CRS. Um, and we're looking to make sure we stay consistent there. And then finally, uh, just looking at some projects overall. We've talked about some of these already, but uh, projects along Old Crew Road, Robertson Street are all moving forward. Everbrook Academy is the daycare that is um, proposed at the Haywood Glenn um, commercial outparcels at Old Knight and Hodge Road or Horton Road. Um, Union Park phase two and the Man in the Center are moving forward. Big O Court Vets, Mallard Cove and Parkside at West Lake, first three phases there. Harper Reserve was finally approved those construction drawings. I think they won the award for the most construction drawings submitted um, at uh, a baker's dozen there. Um, we've talked about the items that are going to be coming to you later this month and then uh, a trio of projects are moving forward for their final plats, Weldon uh, phases one and two. They're waiting on the pump station in that to be certified by the city of Raleigh and then that whole development will come online probably around the same time. Brio phase two, so this is the single-family homes on the west side of Brio south of the creek um, that DRB will be building in and then Old Milburnie Village, which has been renamed Brio as well. Uh, so that's on the north side of the creek, phases one and two. We reviewed that

plat and they are getting close to reporting that as well. I'd be glad to answer any questions about any of these projects or any others if there are any that we haven't gone over yet this evening. I have a question.

One question and it's probably more for Dustin and it came to mind when you said that about the lift station, I mean the pump station. Did we ever get finalization with our discussions with the city of Raleigh regarding our sewer capacity improvements on wasn't it wasn't it one of our lines that we were running into some issues downtown? So Yeah.

Uh, yeah, they uh, city of Raleigh worked with the developer to um, figure out a way to move some of that supply or the capacity to to make that project work. Wasn't it a force Weren't they force maining some of the northern flows off to allow some additional capacity? Wasn't that the outcome?

Right.

Yeah, so they they were able to move some flow from some existing uses to another line to allow that to work right now, but as far as them increasing the capacity of that outfall line, they have not I have not had any headway on that at this point. It would be something that they would have to include in the future though because obviously there's a lot of neighborhoods and a lot of flow coming down that uh uh is a cause for concern um there and they but they do know about it. So they're they're supposed to be looking at that as a plan, but we haven't heard anything since. Yeah, they they were able to So they were able to move it to a different um a different outfall uh with some force main work um on some other projects and relieve relieve the issue in that on

that line. Correct. Correct. Yeah. Yes, sir.

I guess since this is a work session we're all together, there was a email about the park stone development and Well, we're still talking about development services, aren't we? Um so um Anyway, there there was a they were talking about making a couple of changes and um so if they if if we consider those, does that that opens the whole case again, right? Because I know that there was I'm still a little I would have loved to seen another sidewalk on the other side of the little cut through that goes through the other shopping center and that if there'd be a way to get it at least a three-way stop or something in there for traffic calming, but those are a couple things that I think about that I'd love to see and that might be an opportunity to explore some of those again, but um anyway, that was sort of my comment and I don't know if you had any feedback on sort of what they're they're asking about.

Yes, so they would they're asking for a reduction overall density of the site, lower the number of units, and to lower the uh square footage of the non-residential ground floor retail on the site from what was previously approved, and that would require an amendment to the previously approved master plan. I think probably the fourth amendment to that project. Um but to this point we've seen some very very limited detail plans um and haven't reviewed anything that kind of gives us a sense of where they're going.

I'm sorry, LaTasha. I do have one. Um but it's it's short and quick. So, earlier I sent an email about the idea of a wildlife overlay district on our Munger Creek Trail and some ideas surrounding incorporating that into our stormwater master plan and possibly qualifying some for some grants off of that, and I just wanted to bring that up here in the public forum. I know we've kind of discussed it, and everybody seems to be sort of rowing the same direction, but kind of give hoping to give staff a direction to kind of explore that and maybe bring us back a recommendation just as long as we're all in agreement.

Support.

All right. Do you need any more direction to investigate that?

So, yeah. warehouse So, what second What? Okay. Are we going to Do we have sheets in front So, we