Durham OKs ‘Preserve at Infinity’ despite neighbors’ traffic, flooding alarms
.png "A rezoning request for Durham’s Infinity Road will transform 15.8 acres into a residential neighborhood with up to 90 multi-family homes.")
AI-generated summary reviewed by our newsroom.
- Durham Council OKs Preserve at Infinity rezoning allowing 90 homes, commercial space.
- Council OKs rezoning despite 6–5 Planning Commission rejection and resident opposition.
- Vote splits 4–3 with Mayor Leo Williams and three council members for, three against.
The Durham City Council voted 4–3 Monday night to approve the rezoning for the Preserve at Infinity, a planned mixed-use development along Infinity Road that drew warnings about flooding, traffic and the pace of growth in northern Durham.
The decision greenlights a 15.8-acre project at 301 and 401 Infinity Road, clearing the way for up to 90 new homes and commercial space.
But the approval came despite a January 6-5 vote by the Durham Planning Commission recommending denial and neighbors’ fears the project will exacerbate existing environmental and traffic problems.
Mayor Leo Williams and council members Javiera Caballero, Matt Kopac and Carl Rist voted yes.
Council members Nate Baker, Shanetta Burris and Chelsea Cook voted no.
The Preserve at Infinity commitments
The developer, represented by Raleigh based law firm Parker Poe, committed to:
- Up to 90 multi-family units — 8% of the units will be designated affordable
- 5,000 square feet of commercial space
- A utility extension agreement with local business SunHausRealty LLC to connect city water and sewer
- A FEMA floodplain area dedicated to a land trust or government group for permanent conservation
- 100% native tree plantings
Traffic and flooding worries
For many residents living near the Eno River, the development threatens what drew them to the area. Infinity Road runs near North Roxboro Road and the Eno Valley area. The area has a mix of homes, new construction and rural land.
Brittany Westfall, who recently moved to Infinity Road, called the neighborhood a sanctuary from the urban “craziness” of Roxboro Road.
“There’s a lot of wildlife,” she told the council. “There’s regularly deer crossing the road, so tearing out a lot of these trees over here and creating a lot more traffic, putting retail over here just feels very out of place.”
Minetta Hood and Samantha Boyd, who live in the River Forest neighborhood, warned of more traffic backups at the neighborhood exit.
“Sometimes there’s a lot of traffic but with this project, it’s going to be even worse just trying to get out to go to work, or go anywhere,” Hood said.
Boyd also warned of increased flooding with more traffic and homes, especially after the impacts of Tropical Storm Chantal last summer.
“I just learned that we had neighbors’ children ... rescued in a boat. Can you promise us safety? Can you promise us everything will work out?” Boyd asked.
Infrastructure and educational strain
The debate also centered on Durham’s lagging infrastructure. The N.C. Department of Transportation has repeatedly delayed improvements to the intersection of North Roxboro and Infinity Road, neighbors said.
Mary Ann Canton Barker said over 1,000 new units are already in progress in the immediate area, putting an unsustainable burden on existing roads.
“There are no plans to improve that intersection at this time, which it dreadfully needs,” she said. “It would be irresponsible to move forward with this plan.”
Public school funding emerged as a final sticking point. The main schools in the area are Eno Valley Elementary, George Carrington Middle, and Northern High. Two charter schools are also nearby.
Initially, the developer offered a commitment of $15,000 to Durham Public Schools, an amount that residents calculated as $600 per new student.
“I think that’s too low when we talk about public goods,” said Pablo Friedmann, highlighting the strain on schools already nearing 100% capacity.
In a move to sway the City Council, the developer increased the school donation to $1,000 per student.
The final narrow vote
The City Council was split on the matter.
Rist expressed optimism, noting that modern stormwater requirements might improve the site’s current unmanaged runoff.
“The project leads across the street ... to the Mountains-to-Sea Trail, which is a state treasure,” he added, praising the walkability features.
However, Baker remained unmoved, arguing that the project did not meet the high bar required to justify clearing a forest.
“I am willing to vote for density on forested land ... but I stick to my guns on cases like this. We need to grow well and sustainably and equitably. I don’t think that this one gets us there,” he said.
Burris focused on the lack of truly affordable housing, noting that seven units priced for people at 80% of the area median income did little to address the city’s deeper equity needs.
Ultimately, the pro-development faction, led by Williams and Caballero, carried the vote.
They argued that because the site was already within city limits, the developer could build “by right” without the rigorous environmental and affordable housing proffers secured through this rezoning.
Williams added that the city needs property-tax revenue to bridge its shortfalls .
“The only way we can pay for [improvements] is through property tax or sales tax ... whenever we’re leaning that way and we have an option for [housing], I am mostly going to support it,” he said.
This story was originally published April 7, 2026 at 7:59 AM.