Durham’s city council voted unanimously against a proposal that sought to bring around 1,000 new housing units to an area outside the city’s Urban Growth Boundary, following significant community opposition that included hundreds of petition signatures and “Say NO” signs posted near the site of the project, known as Moriah Ridge.
The proposal from Raleigh developer M/I Homes would have annexed 15 parcels totaling 168 acres between Erwin Road and Mount Moriah Road, the INDY previously reported. The development marked a test of Durham’s commitment to containing sprawl, coming just months after the city updated its comprehensive plan to focus on infill development within existing boundaries.
The vote was 5-0, with council members Chelsea Cook and DeDreana Freeman having excused absences. More than 20 residents spoke during the hour-long public comment period, all in opposition to the project.
Several commenters identified themselves as residents whose properties would become “donut holes”—county parcels completely surrounded by city land—if the development moved forward.
“I can’t be annexed into the city. I can’t afford it,” said Wanda Rhoden, adding that she’s lived in her home for over 50 years. “I can’t afford additional city taxes. I can’t afford to pay for city water. I’m on a fixed income.”
Kelly McGregor, another resident whose property would become a donut hole, said she was shocked to learn about the proposed development.
“We couldn’t have dreamed that this area, which is zoned for one dwelling per 2.5 acres, would be annexed into Durham city and be surrounded by development with 1,000 units,” McGregor said.
“We are not against development,” McGregor added, “but we are against poor practice, lack of sensitivity to community, plans pushed through on legislative technicalities, and developments that are contrary to Durham’s well-researched and comprehensive growth plan.”
Nil Ghosh, a lawyer with Morningstar Law Group who represented Moriah Ridge, said the proximity to New Hope Commons and other amenities makes the land appropriate for development because it borders urban landscape.
“These properties are not within Chapel Hill’s rural buffer, which basically means they’re in Chapel Hill’s UGB, they just use a different term,” Ghosh said. “And let’s face the facts, any area that’s a stone’s throw away from Walmart ought to be within the UGB.”
But council members cited Durham’s urban growth boundary as a key factor in their decision to deny the project’s annexation request.
“The comprehensive plan took almost five years to put together,” said council member Nate Baker. “The UGB was very thought-through. It exists. It’s there. We have a delineation. This [case] is pretty simple. It’s outside of that delineation.”
Baker added that he would welcome a collaborative process with Orange County to envision the area’s future development, but that such planning has not yet taken place.
Mayor Pro Tem Mark-Anthony Middleton drew an analogy to national territorial expansion in his remarks.
“When we devised the urban growth boundary, a case that dealt with the urban growth boundary did not result in a net growth of Durham,” Middleton said. “The calculus was, the county shrunk, the city footprint grew, but our map didn’t change. This case is a little different, because it’s almost like we’ve met our Greenland or our Canada. Does Durham as a whole get bigger? That’s a different discussion, because it wasn’t contemplated.”
While joining his colleagues in opposition, Middleton cautioned against premature celebration.
“Don’t think that this is over, and make the victory lap muted, because what we could have put our own hands on here, and contoured for us, may very well be dictated to us by other forces,” he said. “And it may be less desirable than what we could have gotten while it remained here before us tonight.”
Council member Carl Rist said that while the area’s proximity to future transit corridors could make it suitable for development eventually, he wasn’t ready to breach the recently established boundary.
“I can envision a day sometime in the future where we as a community decide to extend the urban growth boundary, but I’m not prepared to right now,” Rist said.
The Moriah Ridge development would have entailed up to 1,000 residential units including apartments, townhouses, and single-family homes, with 50 affordable housing units and up to 2,500 square feet of office space.
Support independent local journalism. Join the INDY Press Club to help us keep fearless watchdog reporting and essential arts and culture coverage viable in the Triangle.
Follow Reporter Justin Laidlaw on X or send an email to jlaidlaw@indyweek.com. Comment on this story at backtalk@indyweek.com.
Follow Staff Writer Lena Geller on X or send an email to lgeller@indyweek.com. Comment on this story at backtalk@indyweek.com