Durham Council Weighs Growth, Approves Sagebrook Townhomes

The Durham City Council hears a call to action on human trafficking prevention, recognizes a long-running youth resilience coalition, and wrestles with annexation and zoning along Highway 98 before narrowly approving the Sagebrook townhouse project amid sharp debate over sprawl, the environment, and housing affordability. 18mins

Housing Policy Planning & Zoning Public Safety & Police Social Services
Was this helpful?

Original Meeting

Monday, January 5th, 2026
10757.0
Durham City Council January 5, 2026
Full Meeting on YouTube
Video Notes

Welcome to the City Council Meeting for January 5, 2026.

Agenda: https://www.durhamnc.gov/AgendaCenter/City-Council-4

How to participate: https://www.durhamnc.gov/1345

Contact the City Council: https://www.durhamnc.gov/1323

NOTE: Comments left on this livestream will not be read or entered into the meeting record.

avatar
Wes Platt
Durham, NC
Neighborhood news guy for Southpoint Access in Durham.
View full bio
In This Video
  • A representative from SHIELD NC marked Human Trafficking Prevention Month by sharing key statistics about trafficking, emphasizing that most victims know their traffickers, and urging residents to get trained, recognize warning signs, and report concerns to law enforcement or the national hotline.
  • Mayor Williams proclaimed January 5, 2026 as the 25th anniversary of the Together for Resilient Youth Coalition, recognizing its public health work to prevent substance misuse, reduce overdoses, promote resilience, and provide prevention resources and training for Durham residents.
  • Wanda Boone of TRY reflected on the interconnectedness of substance use, chronic disease, and violence in Durham and stressed that effective solutions must be embraced, informed, and rooted in the community.
  • Aaron Cain reported a request from a property representative for a utility extension agreement, voluntary annexation, and initial zoning change for a 2.33-acre parcel on Wake Forest Highway as a noncontiguous expansion connected to an existing satellite area.
  • A representative for the property owner explained that the longtime owners sought Commercial General rezoning of their corner parcel to make it marketable for future retail as part of retirement and estate planning, noting there was no specific development proposed and that the Planning Commission had recommended approval on a 5–3 vote.
  • Resident Vicki King opposed the proposed zoning change, citing nearby residents and existing traffic congestion on Highway 98 and at the Kemp Road intersection as reasons to deny the request.
  • Pamela Andrews opposed the zoning request by citing long-standing safety concerns about Highway 98, the need for a new fire and EMS station, and potential environmental harm from clear-cutting, blasting, and sediment runoff into a nearby pond, tributary, and Lick Creek.
  • The City Council voted 5–2 to annex 5502 Wake Forest Highway into Durham, authorized the City Manager to enter into a utility extension agreement with the property owners, and recorded Council Members Baker and Burris as voting in opposition.
  • Staff introduced a noncontiguous annexation and initial zoning map change request for four parcels totaling 17.381 acres on Chadwick Place and Burton Road, proposing to rezone from residential rural and Residential Suburban-20 to Planned Development Residential 6.9 to allow up to 120 townhouse units.
  • Attorney Neil Ghosh, representing the Burton Road–Chadwick Place property owners, framed the Sagebrook townhouse proposal as an infill satellite annexation and highlighted commitments including reduced impervious surface and grading, phased development, a $60,000 contribution to Durham Public Schools, and 10 affordable units out of a potential 120 homes.
  • Attorney Neil Ghosh concluded the presentation by characterizing the Sagebrook townhouse proposal as a strong infill project with significant environmental, infrastructure, and affordable housing commitments.
  • Resident Penny Mays opposed the proposed townhouse development, arguing that its density would burden and alter the rural area, that it was not within walking distance of services, and that it represented urban sprawl.
  • Resident Becky Freeman opposed the Sagebrook Townhomes proposal by stressing that the site was environmentally sensitive, with two buffered streams where vehicle access would cross, 1.1 acres of wetlands, and four acres that would be impacted by the project.
  • Resident Wanda Allen opposed the Sagebrook townhouse proposal by noting that the Planning Commission had not recommended it, highlighting a sharp density mismatch with nearby single-family homes, the surrounding active agricultural uses, and traffic and emergency access concerns that they argued posed public safety risks.
  • Mr. Ghosh explained that site topography and the decision not to mass grade limited the ability to leave areas undisturbed but, after further discussion during a break, committed to a 30-foot buffer along the southern and northern property lines in the graphic development plan.
  • Council Member Chelsea Cook stated an intention to vote against the proposal, noting it had come to the Planning Commission multiple times with little change, had repeatedly failed to gain support, and still did not offer sufficient improvements after two years of reworking.
  • Mayor Leonardo Williams reflected on regional growth and housing costs, arguing that making the community less exclusive would help share the burden of new residents and concluding by expressing support for the project.
  • Council Member Cook rejected describing the Sagebrook townhouse proposal as infill, arguing it would create a satellite “doughnut hole” and conflict with comprehensive plan policies.
  • Staff member Aaron Cain clarified that the term “infill” was not formally defined in city standards outside specific infill regulations and was therefore subjective, adding that staff could not definitively classify the project as infill.
  • Council Member Carl Rist stated that the townhouse proposal met the threshold for approval and, while not perfect after years of debate, expressed support and appreciation for the work by staff and the applicant.
  • Council Member Matt Kopac - who voted no on the project while a member of the Planning Commission - described the Sagebrook townhouse case as a difficult balance of pros and cons but cited the affordable housing commitment, added 30‑foot buffers, existing city services, and consistency with the comprehensive plan in explaining a shift to supporting the project.
  • Mayor Williams emphasized that the council faced a fundamental choice between approving housing to broaden the tax base for services like transit and unarmed response or limiting growth and bearing rising costs alone, calling this the community’s financial reality.
  • The City Council voted 4–3 to annex the Sagebrook Townhouses into Durham and authorize a utility extension agreement with Capital City Homes, LLC, with Council Members Baker, Burris, and Cook voting in opposition.
Your Governments
Your governments list is empty.
Manage Your List
More from this government
Durham Honors DCABP; Trespass Debate, Downtown Plan Passes
Dec 15, 2025
Council Sets Decorum Rules, Debates Dark-Sky Lighting, Considers Future of 505 W. Chapel Hill
Dec 4, 2025
Farewells, New Oaths, And A Historic First
Dec 1, 2025
Durham City Council
Nearby governments
Durham Public Schools Board of Education
Durham County Board of Commissioners
Chapel Hill Town Council
Orange County Board of Commissioners
Hillsborough Board of Commissioners
Orange County Board of Education
Carrboro Town Council
Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools Board of Education
Wake County Public School System Board of Education
Wake County Board of Commissioners