Durham City Council Feb. 16, 2026: Durham Youth Violence, Leigh Village, Creekside Rezoning Decisions

The Durham City Council grapples with a surge in youth shootings, then spends hours debating the Leigh Village Center rezoning before approving it 5–2 amid disputes over traffic, affordability, and infrastructure. Council also weighs oversight of the city’s immigration legal assistance program and advances a major housing project between Miami Boulevard and Angier Avenue. 28mins

Was this helpful?

Original Meeting

Monday, February 16th, 2026
13242.0
Durham City Council Feb 16, 2026
Full Meeting on YouTube
Video Notes

Welcome to the City Council Meeting for February 16, 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
  • Mayor Williams delivered an emotional statement about recent shootings of youth, criticizing mere commentary and urging community members to bring concrete solutions and support to address ongoing violence.
  • A resident activist questioned the city’s immigration legal assistance program, requesting transparency about its budget, who was being served, and how diversity and legal status concerns were being addressed.
  • A speaker supported city-funded immigration legal representation as a due process issue and urged leaders to create an open, transparent RFP process so a range of attorneys could provide these services.
  • Planning staff presented a voluntary annexation and zoning change request for 10 parcels totaling about 82 acres for a project called Leigh Village Center, proposing to rezone the area from low-density residential to compact suburban mixed-use districts to allow a mix of residential and non-residential development.
  • The applicant outlined new commitments for the Leigh Village Center project, including minimum ground-floor commercial space in mixed-use buildings, a conditional dedication of at least two acres of parkland, coordination with transit agencies to support future bus service and walkable density, and per-student contributions to Durham Public Schools.
  • Shannon Gaylord urged Council to delay the Leigh Village Center approval, arguing that the current design would remove a wooded buffer, worsen traffic and safety on already congested roads, and undermine the livability of existing neighborhoods.
  • Ryan Stewart urged Council to reject the Leigh Village Center proposal, arguing that its large scale of housing and commercial space would generate excessive peak-hour traffic based on trip generation estimates.
  • A speaker criticized the Leigh Village Center developers for failing to secure key parcels for road connections and for seeking taxpayer-subsidized infrastructure, and faulted city planning for allowing the project to advance in its current form.
  • Laura McCall warned that approving the Leigh Village project without binding, clearly defined infrastructure commitments would shift risk to the public and urged Council to ensure growth was tied to infrastructure, environmental protections, and long-term community stability.
  • Patrick Byker reminded Council that the Planning Commission had already heard similar arguments and had voted by a wide margin to recommend approval of the Leigh Village Center project.
  • Council Member Nate Baker asked staff to clarify whether illustrative road extensions in the Leigh Village plan could cut through existing properties, and staff explained that any such future roads would follow long-range transportation alignments and require a standard right-of-way acquisition process.
  • Planning staff explained that the developer could only build roads within its property unless it secured additional right-of-way, while Parks staff outlined the high costs of an accessible playground, and Council Member Baker emphasized that a publicly owned park would be a major amenity that could enhance property values in a master-planned community.
  • Planning staff clarified that the developer would be responsible for building required road mitigations and obtaining needed right-of-way, explained that the city no longer has extraterritorial jurisdiction or practical authority for forced annexation, and noted that while the city can condemn property for its own projects, it typically does not do so on behalf of private developers.
  • Council Member Matt Kopac requested a deeper affordability mix for the project’s apartments, asking to shift the 9% commitment to 6% at 60% AMI and 3% at 80% AMI, and the applicant agreed to the change.
  • Council Member Carl Rist asked about the project’s build-out timeline, and Patrick Byker estimated it would take at least 10 years and more likely 15 to 20 years to complete.
  • Patrick Byker and Council Member Rist debated affordability periods for for-sale townhomes, with Biker arguing shorter deed restrictions better supported generational wealth while indicating willingness to extend to 30 years if Council considered it necessary, despite personally opposing the change.
  • Council Member Chelsea Cook stated they would vote no and not engage with the project’s merits, arguing that a traffic impact analysis was required by statute before the proposal came to Council.
  • Council Member Shanetta Burris explained she could not support the Leigh Village project due to unresolved concerns about infrastructure capacity, the traffic corridor, and the timing of the traffic impact study, despite appreciating the developer’s proffers and focus on generational wealth.
  • Council Member Matt Kopac acknowledged serious traffic and quality-of-life concerns with the Leigh Village project but also highlighted its benefits, including added housing and affordability, walkability, mixed-use design, transit access, childcare, green building, enhanced buffers, and stronger stormwater and environmental commitments.
  • Council Member Nate Baker highlighted the project’s elevated commitments to green building, affordable apartments and townhomes, constructed greenways, and high-quality design standards, and stated an intention to vote in favor of the rezoning.
  • Mayor Williams expressed support for keeping the original affordability proffer rather than extending it to 30 years and then invited a motion to annex Leigh Village Center into the city and authorize a utility extension agreement with the developer.
  • Council approved the Leigh Village Center annexation and utility extension agreement on a 5–2 vote, with Shanetta Burris and Chelsea Cook voting no.
  • Andy Lester presented a zoning map change request for 12 parcels between Miami Boulevard and Angier Avenue to rezone 75.5 acres to Planned Development Residential, allowing up to 630 residential units and 9,500 square feet of non-residential space without drive-throughs or gas sales.
  • Laura Holloman described an increased commitment for the project to dedicate at least two acres of open space with frontage on Angier Avenue to the city, specifying that if the city did not accept it, the area would still serve as publicly accessible urban space.
  • Laura Holloman detailed new commitments for the Miami Boulevard–Angier Avenue rezoning, including a $50,000 donation to the Durham Parks Foundation if the city accepted a dedicated park, construction of a bus pullout with shelter and a 10-foot shared-use path, apartment and townhome affordability set-asides, and emphasized that the proposal aligned with city plans and had a positive Planning Commission recommendation.
  • Fanxing Li voiced strong support for the Creekside mixed-use rezoning, arguing that its moderately priced homes would create real ownership opportunities for working families and essential community workers who are being priced out of Durham.
  • A speaker urged Council to vote against the project, pointing to severe existing rush hour congestion on nearby highways and roads as a reason to reject additional development.
  • Steve George responded to traffic concerns by explaining that, while the project would not fix all existing congestion, the improvements identified in the traffic impact report—including new connections, turn lanes, and a signal—were expected to improve overall traffic flow in the area.
  • A Council member and Steve George negotiated an affordability adjustment, agreeing to reserve 3% of units at 80% AMI and an additional 2% at 100% AMI for a total 5% income-restricted set-aside.
  • Council Member Shanetta Burris thanked the developer for affordability commitments, noted a desire for even more affordable units, and joked about not pressing further given the generosity already shown.
  • Council Member Rist noted that fair market rents had recently decreased as more housing was built, while Council Member Burris responded that renters still faced high added fees that could offset lower base rents and stressed the importance of considering lived experience alongside data.
  • Mayor Williams emphasized that growth and density would extend beyond downtown into other commercial-residential areas and highlighted ongoing and needed development in historically underinvested neighborhoods such as East Durham.
  • Andy Lester and Steve George reviewed updated proffers for a rezoning case, including rear-loaded townhome requirements, at least two acres dedicated to Parks and Recreation with a $100,000 donation to the Durham Parks Foundation, minimum duplex and commercial space, a 2% AMI affordability commitment with a 30-year term, placement of remaining open space in environmentally sensitive areas, added tree coverage, and pedestrian connectivity improvements.
  • Mayor Williams called for a motion to authorize the City Manager to enter into a utility extension agreement with Angier Investment LLC, which Council moved, seconded, and approved unanimously.
Your Governments
Your governments list is empty.
Manage Your List
More from this government
Durham Budget Retreat - Feb. 13, 2026: Living Wage and Housing
Feb 13, 2026
Durham City Council 2/2/26: RV Rules, Kerley Annexation and Police Tech Exit
Feb 2, 2026
Police Surveillance Debate, Water Rules, and Digital Equity
Jan 22, 2026
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