Durham council approves Preserve at Infinity rezoning over environmental and traffic objections

Durham — Durham City Council voted 4–3 on April 6 to rezone roughly 18 acres at 401 and 301 Infinity Road from single‑family RS‑20 to plan development residential (PDR 6.185) with an office/institutional component, clearing the way for up to 90 multifamily units and 5,000 square feet of nonresidential space.

The project, titled the Preserve at Infinity, drew a divided response from residents and volunteer advisory groups who warned that the forested property contains an Eno River tributary with steep slopes, regular flooding and high ecological value. “What it needs is permanent protection,” said Steve Conn of the Durham Open Space and Trails Commission, who noted the stream reach is rated excellent in the Eno watershed plan.

The applicant, a local property owner represented by Mary Farmer of Parker Poe, said the plan preserves the most sensitive areas, commits 50% of open space to those environmentally constrained areas, increases tree cover from 20% to 25% and offers a permanent conservation easement for the floodplain and recreation corridor. The owner, Sunonny Rathi, told council the family business will complete horizontal site work and use local contractors.

Residents repeatedly raised traffic and flooding concerns at the Infinity/Roxboro intersection, noting the state Department of Transportation (NCDOT) project that would address the intersection is not currently funded. “Traffic there is atrocious,” one nearby resident said. The developer’s traffic consultant said the new project would add roughly 1.5% of current intersection traffic; the council and applicant also said the site will be required to install storm‑water controls that meet city and state standards.

During council questioning, the applicant increased several commitments: the percentage of income‑restricted units rose from 5% to 8% (80% AMI, reserved for two‑bedroom units for 30 years), the requirement for native trees on the office/institutional parcel was increased to 100%, and the applicant agreed to a more stringent storm‑water requirement that post‑development peak flow at the culvert under Infinity Road not exceed predevelopment peak flow for the 100‑year storm event. The applicant also raised the per‑student donation to Durham Public Schools from the originally proposed $600 per student to $1,000 per student.

Opponents argued the textual development plan limits spatial clarity — the Environmental Affairs Board had warned that relying on text rather than a graphic plan makes it harder to assess how grading, steep slopes and stream buffers will be managed — and said the proffered mitigation was insufficient for a site already experiencing flood damage during recent storms.

Council members split along those lines. Supporters said the proposal is consistent with the city’s comprehensive plan (the site lies within a transit opportunity area) and added proffers meaningfully strengthen environmental protections and affordable housing commitments. Dissenting members said the location, constrained parcel shape and unresolved regional traffic projects made the timing and density inappropriate.

The council ultimately approved the rezoning by a 4–3 margin; Council Members Baker, Burrus and Cook recorded the no votes. Council action included an ordinance amendment and an associated consistency statement required by North Carolina General Statutes.

The project will return to staff for site‑plan review and required storm‑water permits; the developer and staff said the final rehabilitation and site agreements will be reviewed by council and required city approvals will be documented before conveyance or vertical construction begins.