 Good evening. We'd like to call the Durham City Council meeting toward it. 7 o'clock PM, certainly want to welcome all of you here with us this evening. If we could take a moment of solid meditation, please. Thank you. As Councilor Brown, if he would lead us in the pledge. The state is America. And to the republic, the republic stands, one nation, another God, indivisible. Madam Clerk, would you call the roll, please? Present. Mayor Pro Tem Cole McFadden. Council Member Brown. Council Member Cattady. Council Member Davis. Council Member Moffitt. And Council Member Shull. We have one proclamation that we'd like to present this evening. National Disability Employment Awareness Month proclamation. I presented to Jason Jones, who's the Assistant Director of the Durham Parks and Recreation and Mars Clemens, Chairman of the Mayor's Committee on Person with Disabilities. Debra Giles, the Director of Equal Opportunity Equity Assurance. The proclamation reads, whereas the month of October has been designated by the United States Congress as National Disability Employment Awareness Month, whereas 2015 is the seventh year of this designation, whereas the 2015 theme is, my disability is one part of who I am, whereas Americans with Disabilities Acts of 1990 and Washington Law Against Discrimination promote independence, empowerment, and quality of life, whereas workplaces, welcoming of the talent of all people, including people with disabilities, are a critical part of our efforts to build an inclusive community and strong economy, whereas we consistently work to break down barriers and work together to ensure that people with disabilities can participate fully in the workplace in all aspects of community life, whereas we must continue to work for a community where all individuals are respected, for who they are celebrated for their abilities and encouraged to realize their full potential to achieve their dreams, whereas the City of Durham celebrates national disability employment awareness month through numerous events, including disabled, elabeled, and an employee recognition program hosted by the Mayor's Committee for Persons with Disabilities to all employees who hire persons with disabilities. Now, therefore, I, William V. Vildell, Mayor of the City of Durham, North Carolina, do hereby proclaim October 2015 as National Disability Employment Awareness Month, and Durham and hereby urge all to take special note of this observance by joining together and reaffirming our determination to achieve a society that will force independence, justice, and dignity for all. What is my hand, Corporate City of Durham, North Carolina, this is the 21st day of September, 2015. You want to present this to Jason and put in comments that you might have. I sure do. Thank you. Well, thank you, Mayor Vell and City Council for this proclamation. I'd like to recognize several of our key partners, and as I call your names, just stand up if you're in the audience. The Mayor's Committee on Disabilities, the Equal Opportunity Equity Assurance Department, the Office of Economic and Workforce Development, the Goodwill Community Foundation, the Disabled to Label Planning Committee, and North Carolina Central University's Office of Student Disability Services. I'd also like to recognize a part of DPR's Special Programs Inclusion and Mature Adults Team, Sarah Hogan, Recreation Manager, Joel Smith, the Recreation Supervisor, and Abby Walls, Recreation Assistant Supervisor. I'd also like to recognize Marge Clemens as a member of our Recreation Advisory Committee. To celebrate this month, we invite each of you to join us for a Disabled to Label to be held on Saturday, October 3rd from 11 a.m. to 2 p.m. at the Holton Career and Resource Center. Moving forward, our department is working on a new strategic plan. Within that plan, we're working on a new mission statement, and our current working version includes connecting our whole community. This year's theme of my disability is one part of who I am, means to me, one part of a whole person, a whole person that we're proud to serve and work alongside within Parks and Recreation, within the Parks and Recreation part of our whole community. Thank you. Comments by members of the council. If not, I recognize, many of you may know that the council has been, and the administration has been, very involved in working to bring affordable housing units to this community. And when we speak about affordable housing, we speak about houses that are affordable to families that are below the area median income. And towards that end, we've worked on several projects, probably the one that's most recent is the one we're gonna recognize this evening. It's a home ownership program over in the south side. And the success of the city's neighborhood revitalization efforts in the south side has shown there's a demand for home ownership in this very historic neighborhood. The experience of attracting buyers for phase one of the ownership component of the south side project showed a very strong interest by many families in Durham wanting to buy a home of their own, but also showed many households were not positioned to meet Lenders underwriting requirements at initial application. In other words, they were not what we call mortgage ready. And the city is determined to get in front of phase two home ownership development by launching a marketing initiative that will focus on helping households be pre-qualified to qualify for mortgage when the next houses in the ownership neighborhood begin to be built in late 2016. Now the neighborhood that I'm speaking about, as I said, is over on south side. And if any of you have an opportunity to ride over on south street in that area, you'll see a transformation that's taking place. And part of the transformation is the home ownership piece where I think all the homes there have been either bought or accounted for and we're going into phase two. And we want to make sure that we reach as many persons as possible, at least to get the message out that there's an opportunity to become a home in this area. And towards that effort, we're trying to prepare a strategy that will be supported by individualized housing counseling for families with income capacity and desire to own a home through the Department of Community Development at no cost to these families. What you're gonna see in a couple of minutes is that Time Warner Cable provides for TV commercials and video and mobile impressions online. The person we've seen on HGTV, own network, TWC News, 14 BET and Durham Television Network. And we would all like to thank the volunteers, the data majors from NCCU and the Department Director who are very instrumental in making the video that you're about to see. So I guess what I should say now is roll the video. Home ownership, it may be closer than you think. Are you ready? You may be eligible to take advantage of home ownership programs through the city of Durham. If you have a moderate household income, you may be eligible to purchase a new home in the downtown neighborhood of Southside. Homes will begin to be available this summer of 2016. Now is the time to get your finances in shape. Housing counselors are standing by to go over details and help you understand the process of buying your own home. Contact the Department of Community Development and take your first steps to home ownership. But let me acknowledge the volunteer theater department students from NCCU. Chase Rivers here, is Chase here? Stand up if you don't mind. Jonathan Abel, is Jonathan present? Great. And the chair of the NCCU Theater Department, Dr. Asabi Stephanie Howard. Well, we certainly appreciate the time that you've taken to help develop this video. I think it's gonna be very helpful as we move into phase two and I would encourage all of you to tell friends or families or anyone that has an interest in becoming a home owner in the Southside area. Please contact the Community Development Department. I guess that's the first place to start. I don't have a telephone number right off. Is Reginald Johnson here? What is the telephone number? There are Reginald Johnson's here. Who's the director of Community Development Department? Thank you, Mayor. Reginald Johnson, Department of Community Development. Director, the number is 919-560-4570. Okay, let's move to any comments that members of the council may have. And I didn't hear any comments. So I recognize the city manager. I'm sorry, Edwin. Okay. I recognize the city manager for our items. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Good evening, everyone. No priority items. Likewise, I recognize the city attorney. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. No priority items. And likewise, the city clerk. Yes, Mr. Mayor, members of the city council, we have with us this evening Barry Burch, senior who was recently appointed to the citizens advisory committee. He's here to be sworn in before the city council. Barry Burch, senior. I, Barry Burch, senior. Do hereby solemnly swear. Do hereby solemnly swear. That I will support and maintain the constitution of the United States. That I will support and maintain the constitution of the United States. And the constitution in laws of North Carolina. And the constitution in laws of North Carolina. Not inconsistent therewith. Not inconsistent therewith. And that I will faithfully and impartially. And there I will faithfully and impartially. Discharge the duties of my office. Discharge the duties of my office. As a member of the citizens advisory committee. As a member of the citizen advisory committee. So help me God. to help me God. Agenda is, you know, the agenda consists of a consent agenda, which may be approved with a single motion and a vote by the council unless an item is removed by someone in the audience or you can remember the council. And at that point, we'll discuss it later in the program. I read the headings of each one of the consent agenda items. Item one is approval of city council minutes. Item two is inventory audit 2015, June 2015. Item three is the street renaming Richway Road SN150002 and SN150003. Item four is the first amendment to the parking lease arrangement agreement by and between the city of Durham and American Campus, LLC for the North Park and Garage. Item six is professional engineering services for the Homeland Avenue Stream relocation project. Item seven is professional engineering services for the Aiken Heavy New Stream relocation project. Item eight is professional engineering services for replacement at various department of water management facilities. Item nine is disparity study follow-up report. Item 10 is the contract for insurance broker services. Item 11 is the contract for false alarm reduction program services. Item 12 is land lease between the city of Durham and frontier communications of the Carolinas, LLC. Item 13 is proposed combination of property located in 1914 East Cornwallis Road partial ID 155777. In 1916 East Cornwallis Road partial ID 155776 for the Martin Luther King Junior Sanitary Sewer Outfall relocation project. Item 14 is proposed conveyance of various property interests in the North Carolina Department of Transportation for the Austin Avenue widening project. Item 15 is proposed conveyance of city-owned property in the North Carolina Department of Transportation for the Austin Avenue widening project. Item 16 is the contract for open data platform. Item 20 through 26 items that can be found on the general business agenda is public hearings. I would entertain a motion to approve the consent agenda. It's been properly moving second. Madam Clerk, we open the vote. We close the vote. It passes seven to zero. We move to the general business agenda for public hearings. Item 20 is consolidated annexation 729, Clausen Drive, BDG 1500003. Good evening, Mr. Mayor, members of Council. Pat Young with the Planning Department. This request represents the consolidated annexation item for property located at 729 Clausen Road, which includes initial zoning, annexation, and approval of utility extension agreement. Staff recommends initial zoning of this case of RS, Residential Suburban 20. Also in the FJB, Falls of the News, to Jordan Lake, B, Watershed. This recommendation was unanimously recommended by the Planning Commission at their meeting of April 14, 2015. Public Works and Water Management Departments perform the required utility impact analysis and determine that the existing city of Durham's sanitary sewer and water mains in this area have capacity for the proposed development. Budget Management Services Department coordinated a fiscal impact analysis which determined that annexation of this property would be revenue-positive following annexation. Staff recommends approval. I'll be happy to take any questions. You've heard the staff report. This is the public hearing. I would ask all the comments first by members of the Council with regards to the staff report. If not, I would ask is that anyone in the audience who wants to speak on this item, I do have one person that has signed up to speak. I think it's Mitch Barron. Is it before you begin? Is anyone else who wants to speak on this item? If not, you have three minutes. Mayor Bell and council members just asked for your favorable vote on this. I have requested this annexation so that I can tie into the city water line that's actually already existing on this lot and just hoping the annexation goes through and appreciate your support. Thank you. Thank you. Are there any other questions, comments? Anyone else who wants to speak? If not, let the record reflect and no one else asked to speak. I'll declare public hearing be closed as a matter of fact before the council. Is that correct? Recognize council member Moffitt. I need to raise the question. I understand that the applicant wants to tie into city water and sewer and I'm all in support of that. But I do want to ask if annex, I want to at least force for a moment to examine whether or not in this particular case, understand our policy to be that if you want to tie into the sewer and water, you must present an application for voluntary annexation. In this particular case, I'm thinking about emergency services and the fact that this will be one lot in a large area of county and whether or not annexation makes sense. I'm all in favor of extending water and sewer. And I don't know if there's anybody that can even speak. Okay, good, thanks. Staff can address that, council member Moffitt. That's something we've discussed internally and there's a follow up piece of information, maybe helpful. Thank you, Mr. Manager, council member Moffitt and council members. We certainly appreciate the concern and we as the manager alluded to, he raised that concern with us during preparation the staff report and what we advise the manager and what we'll tell you now is that there's a pending annexation application for property immediately to the north along Dular Drive that would make this proposed annexation directly contiguous with the city. And then there's several other properties that we believe over time will become annexed and make this part of a contiguous stretch of city area. Now that may not happen immediately, but like I said, the adjacent annexation is pending and will be before you within the next several months. I appreciate Don asking that. I was wondering about that myself except that my question was how confident are you? I saw that in the memo, I think December is the date for these proposed annexations and we're feeling comfortable about that. Yes, sir, councilman Schultz. So the annexations are effective four times a year. The next annexation date would be December 30th after the coming one. And so yes, I'm confident that the adjacent properties will come before you prior to December 30th and be able to be effective by then. So by January 1st, you'll have adjacent and contiguous city property to the east. I just want to note the sewer is actually county sewer that's already existing. Is that right? That's correct. It's city water, county sewer in this location. Thank you. Any further questions, comments? If not, the public hearing has been closed. As a matter of fact for the council, we've got it's been moved in a second. Madam Clerk, will you open the vote? You close the vote. It passes seven is zero. Next item is item 21, consolidated annexation. The Harris. I'm sorry. Consistency statement. Thank you. Rockin' move, second Madam Clerk, we open the vote. You close the vote. It passes seven is zero. Thank you. We moved item 21, consolidated annexation. Harris Beverage, BDG 150009. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of council, Pat Young again with the planning department. First, let me certify for the record that the previous case and all subsequent cases have been advertised in accordance with requirements of law. Their affidavits to that effect on file with the planning department. This case, item 21, Hovind Group 4 has submitted a consolidated annexation item for approximately 21.5 acres of land at 1035 Junction Road. And this item before you includes initial zoning, annexation, and approval of utility extension agreement. The subject site is currently vacant. If approved, the applicant intends to construct the warehouse on the annex portion of the property. Staff is recommending initial zoning of IL or industrial light and FJB watershed. This is an exact translation of the current zoning in Durham County and at the request of the applicant. And it is consistent with the comprehensive plan. Public Works and Water Management have performed the required utility extension, excuse me, utility impact analysis and have determined that the existing city sewer and water capacity at this location is adequate for the proposed development and budget management services performed a fiscal impact analysis determining that if approved, the proposed annexation will be revenue positive following annexation. Staff recommends approval. I'll be happy to take any questions. Recognize Councilman Schuhl? There are no Planning Commission comments. Mr. Young, is that true? Mr. Schuhl, this did not go to Planning Commission because it's a direct translation from county zoning and there's a standing policy from about 10 years ago from the Planning Commission that allows them to automatically endorse direct translational zoning. I saw the resolution but I wasn't sure how that was connected but I appreciate that, I understand, thank you. Any other comments, questions about a council? Again, this is a public hearing. I have one person that's sounded to speak. I wanna know if it's anyone else that wants to speak on this item that's being a public hearing matter. If not, recognize Patrick Biker for three minutes. Good evening, Mayor Bell, Mayor Pro Tem Cole McFadden, members of the City Council. My name's Patrick Biker. I live at 2614 Stuart Drive. I'm an attorney with Morningstar Law Group. I'm here tonight representing Harris Beverage's in regards to this annexation. Jay Harris, the president of Harris Beverage's, regrets they couldn't be here. He's out of town on a business trip. Just for the record, I wanna thank all the city departments who have helped us with this project. We look forward to having a new headquarters and warehouse facility developed out in East Durham by middle of next year. I'd be happy to answer any questions that council may have, and we respectfully ask for your support. Thank you. You've heard the developers representative. Do you have any questions, comments? If not, no one else in the public wanted to speak on this item, let the record reflect that. Public hearing is closed, matter of fact, before the council. Second. The property movement is second. Madam Clerk, we open the vote. We close the vote. It passes seven. Move to item 22, consolidated annexation. I'm sorry, the consistency statement, yeah. We had a motion on the second. Yeah, that's it. Okay, we open the vote. We close the vote. Seven is, Eber. All right, move to item 22, consolidated annexation, Montessori School of Raleigh, BDG 14-0-0-0-1-1. Good evening again, Mr. Mayor, members of council, Pat Young with the Planning Department. This item is a consolidated annexation item submitted by Montessori School of Raleigh, involves two parcels of land on Andrews Chapel Road, totaling approximately 39.7 acres. And this item includes initial zoning, annexation and approval of the utility extension agreement. At this site, there's an existing educational facility approved in 2011. No expansion to the present use is proposed at this time. Staff recommends an initial zoning of rural residential, which is consistent with the city council policy designating the least intense zoning district based on the development tier, also consistent with the existing zoning on the site. Public Works and Water Management have performed the required utility impact analysis and have determined that there's existing capacity in the water and sewer systems at this location and budget management services perform the required fiscal impact analysis, determining that this project would be revenue negative based on the fact that there's an educational exemption from sales and property tax on this property unless it was redeveloped. Staff recommends approval of the item and I'll be happy to take any questions. Again, it's the public hearing. You've heard the staff report. I would ask all their questions by members of the council. If not, is there anyone in the public that wants to speak on this item? Is it for or against? Let the record reflect that no one in the public asks to speak on this item. I would declare the public being to be closed as a matter of respect for the council. Recognize Councilor Schuyl. My comment is they need to change the name of this school, the Montessori School of Durham. They're totally in Durham and they could be improving their image. Any other comments? If not, Madam Clerk, will you open the vote? We need a motion. Second. Will you open the vote? Close the vote. It passes seven as zero. Thank you for improperly moving second, Madam Clerk, will you open the vote? And close the vote. It passes seven as zero. Thank you. The next item is item 23. Consolidated Annexation AmeriCo, BDG 15000001. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of council, Pat Young again with the planning department. AmeriCo Real Estate Company is requesting consolidated annexation item for five parcels of land totaling approximately 6.01 acres at 2470 West US Highway 70. And this includes initial zoning, annexation, and utility extension agreement. The applicant intends to expand and upgrade an existing U-Haul rental business at this site. Staff recommends initial zoning of commercial general CG and residential suburban 20. This is an exact translation of the existing counting zoning and is consistent with the comprehensive plan designation of this site as commercial. The proposed development has been reviewed by public works and water management for utility impact analysis and determined that there are sufficient capacity for water service at the site. Sewer service is actually provided by Durham County at this location. Budget management services performed fiscal impact analysis which determines that the revenue from this project will be positive following annexation. Staff recommends approval and I'll be happy to take any questions. Again, this is a public hearing. The public hearing is open. Would answer the questions by members of the council of the staff report. Is there anyone in the audience that wants to speak on this item either for or against? Let the record reflect and no one in the audience wanted to speak on this item. I'll declare the public hearing to be closed as a matter of fact for council. Yeah, I didn't. Second. The property moved to second. Madam clerk, will you open the vote? Close the vote. It passes seven to zero. Come on. Who's going to move the consistency statement? Oh, it's been property moved to second. Madam clerk, will you open the vote? Close the vote. It passes seven to zero. Thank you. Item 24, zoning map change. Southwest Durham at 15501, Z1400030. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of council, Pat Young again with the planning department. This request is a request by the Arden Group to change the zoning map designation of approximately 12.45 acres of property at 3301 Southwest Durham Drive, which is at the intersection of US 15501 and Southwest Durham Drive Southeast Quadrant from its current zoning map designation of residential suburban 20 or RS 20 to commercial general with a development plan or CGD. This request is consistent with the future land use map designation for the property, which is commercial. The proposal before you includes a number of commitments, which exceed minimum ordnance standards, including provision of a shared use bicycle pedestrian trail and a bus shelter and pullout, along with a number of other transportation related improvements which are detailed in the staff report for this item. As I believe you're aware, there were significant changes made to the staff report late on Friday that were pursuant to a correspondence received by from the North Carolina Department of Transportation on that same date on Friday afternoon, September 18th. That's referenced as attachment 22 in the revised staff report. Based on the correspondence from NCDOT, staff was able to determine compliance with a number of transportation related policies of the comprehensive plan and UDO as identified in your staff report. The planning commission do not have that information at the time of their hearing on August 11th. They recommended approval by a vote of eight to six. And staff finds this request is consistent with all adopted plans, policies and ordinances. And I'll be happy to take any questions. Thank you. The questions by members of the council, this is a public hearing, the public hearing is open. If not, we have one, two, three, we have four persons that have signed up to speak. If you haven't signed the card, is anyone else that wants to speak that has not signed the card? And I might indicate that all four indicated want to speak in support of this item. So is anyone that wants to add their support? Is anyone wants to speak in opposition to it? Okay, so we'll go with the four people that have signed up to speak and each one has three minutes. As a call, your name can come to the podium to the right, Patrick Beiker, John Davenport, Tony Fisher, and Michael Waldron in that order. Good evening, Mayor Bell, Mayor Pro Tem Cole McFadden, members of the city council. My name is Patrick Beiker. I still live at 2614 Stewart Drive. And I'm an attorney in Durham and Morningstar Law Group. I'm here tonight representing University Ford. We are requesting your approval of this zoning map change on 15501 at Southwest Durham Drive. Our team that is here tonight includes John Davenport, our traffic engineer, Dan Jewel, our landscape architect, and Tony Fisher, the president of University Ford. At the outset, I think it is vitally important for the council to address a threshold issue, which is does the city council wish for University Ford to remain at its current location for the next 20 or 25 years, or does the council wish for University Ford to relocate to this site on 15501? University Ford has been at its downtown location for over 40 years. In short, they were downtown before downtown was cool. Now, after more than 40 years, University Ford either must spend several million dollars to upgrade its current facility, or it has to relocate to this rezoning that's before you tonight. University Ford's strong preference is to relocate to this site on 15501, we respectfully submit that this relocation is in the city's best interest as well. University Ford's relocation will allow downtown Durham to continue its strong growth of bringing new jobs and new residents to our downtown core. Approval of this rezoning will stimulate a significant tax-based increase for the city far above the current six and a half million dollars of assessed value for University Ford. Of course, with every commercial rezoning come transportation concerns. We think that the overarching concern in this case is the dedication of right of way at this intersection to accommodate the improvement of 15501 to a freeway. On page 16 of the revised staff report, it states that 15501 has a capacity of 62,900 cars, and today it carries 46,000 cars. In other words, 15501 is operating at less than two thirds of its capacity. Given that traffic volumes on 15501 are significantly under capacity, I think it is safe to say it will not be upgraded to a freeway anytime soon, and it is probably at least 15 to 20 years out. I am confident that our team spearheaded by John Davenport has addressed the right of way issue correctly. Also, given the status of improvements to 15501 is unfunded, we researched any potential liability the city could have, and I share that research with the city attorney. I am not aware of any statutory or case law basis for the city to have liability for the future acquisition of right of way from University Ford. I close with that point about right of way because that's the key transportation issue before the council this evening. And now to discuss these right of way issues and related transportation issues in more detail, our next speaker is our traffic engineer, John Davenport. Thank you. Good evening, my name is John Davenport, president of John Davenport Engineering. Address is 305 West 4th Street, Winston, Salem, North Carolina. We have nine officers, including one here in the triangle. Our firm had the pleasure of working on the transportation piece of this project. And just give you a little bit about my background since the first time I've met many of you. I am a graduate of NC State, worked for the department of transportation for 10 years before I started this firm in 2002. I like to tell people I served a 10 year sentence with the department and got out with good behavior. So I know a lot of the people with the department and that's been very beneficial for our firm and it was in this case, working through the challenges that we had to work through to identify the right of way. We worked with staff, we worked with NC DOT and you have the results in your package that we were able to get the answers that everyone needed to make sure this project could go forward. And I'll be here to answer any other questions you have, but I'll see you the rest of my time for the other speakers. Thank you. The next speaker is Tony Fisher. Good evening, Mayor Bell and members of the city council. I'm going to be brief in my comments and I won't use my three minutes either. My name is Tony Fisher and I'm the president of university forward and university Kia. I've been working at university forward for 29 years. I even go to church downtown. So I've been downtown most every day for the last three decades. I'm proud of what's happening downtown and I think what you're considering tonight is not only important to university forward and university Kia. I think it's important to the future revitalization, continued revitalization of our city. Now in my opinion, the process and the pathway our team took to get to this vote tonight has been unreasonably long and unreasonably expensive. However, I think that they have answered every question and every concern that they've been confronted with and I think they've done it more than satisfactorily. Certainly this zoning will be good for our company. It'll be good for our employees. It'll be good for our customers. But again, this rezoning is good for Durham. And since I am so convinced that this is one of those classic win-win scenarios, I have no doubt that I'm doing the right thing when I ask you to vote for approval. Thank you. The next and final speaker is Michael Waldrop. I will try to be very brief. Michael Waldrop, 5324 McFarland Road. I am a neighbor of the future university forward. We support this. I wanted to convey that message. I view them if you have a long enough time horizon. I view this as a future block in the Patterson Place compact neighborhood as it evolves over time. So I wanted to indicate as I've done privately with some of you that we look very favorably upon this and with some of the initiatives that are underway with the city with compact neighborhood definition with the LRT EIS process that's underway, I think this will be a very valuable part of that future neighborhood in time. Not necessarily as a car dealership. I'm looking beyond that at a second generation redevelopment of the site. But if you have a long enough time horizon, this makes sense and we support it as their neighbors. So we urge you to vote yes on this. Anyone else that wants to speak on this item? It's been a public hearing. Let the record reflect that no one else has to speak. I'll bring them out of back before the council comments, recognize Councilman Contari, Councilman Marford in that order. Thank you, Mayor. I actually wanted to hear from transportation staff, but just initially I just wanted to say I appreciate the comments, but I will say that I'm looking at this as a land use rezoning and not about the merits of moving business from one location to another. I just think that we need to keep it in that context. Mr. Judd, can you talk just briefly about the realignment, I shouldn't say realignment, the elimination of the loop and what Durham DOT's feeling is about this given the long horizon of the improvements on 15501 or any other transportation concerns. I'll leave it at that. Yeah, Bill Judge with City Transportation. One of the attachments in your packet showed from the adopted corridor study, sort of cloverleaf interchange. Early on in the process, we met with the applicant because of the impacts and that it would essentially be almost taking their parcel and we discussed with them the process that they would need to go through in order to consider an alternative interchange and that it would have to basically have no impact on other property owners. They couldn't shift it to where other property owners would be negatively impacted and that would have to be something that would be deemed, I guess, viable or acceptable to NCDOT since this is two state roads and would likely be a future state TIP project. Even though there's, as they indicated, there are no right-of-way or corridor protection acts or anything. So a lot at Planning Commission, when this got before them, they still did not have NCDOT's concurrence that came in Friday at about lunchtime where NCDOT finally agreed to this alternative interchange that you saw in your packet today. So at this point, we don't really have any further comments about it. Okay, I guess my only other question was in the memo on page five of 18. I guess transportation staff noted that the applicant's revised concept eliminates access to 1551 at Mount Moriah Road. Can you comment on that? That I didn't understand that exactly. And under the functional design that they prepared, they're showing Mount Moriah being grade separated with a bridge over Mount Moriah to get from one side to the other. Our concern there was that a number of property owners have invested under the previous concept that had basically a service road configuration where the north and south side had right-in, right-out access. So knowing that there hadn't been any sort of public hearings or public vetting of that, we did have some concerns as to the potential impact to those property owners. And would you anticipate that when North Carolina DOT actually does finalize plans for the 15501 corridor that there wouldn't be public hearings? Yes, there would have to be a series of public hearings. And I guess I should point out that DOT would consider, I guess, any and all concepts as part of their environmental document. So even though they signed off on the applicant's alternative design, it doesn't necessarily mean that that'll be the one that gets constructed. Right. Thank you so much. So just back to my prior point about land use, again, what's before us is a rezoning from RS 20, so residential suburban to commercial general. And I do in fact think that makes sense. And I would also concur that I have concerns about density for a future light rail station. But as Mr. Waldrop noted, I think we should be looking long-term about possible second generation redevelopment of that site. Thanks. You recognize Councilman Moffitt? Recognize Councilman Shul? Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So I would like to ask our city attorney in terms of the Mr. Beiker talked earlier about the potential liability of the city given our UDO and the, you know, what's incorporated there. Do you agree with him that we would not have liability in this situation? I guess the current configuration is included in the metropolitan planning document and so forth. Thank you, Councilman Shul. And you know, if you ask me a question about whether or not we will or will not have liability, I'll never quite answer it the way that you want me to. But I will say this, we have spoken with the applicant and the applicant's attorneys. We are not concerned that you're taking any undue risk taking this particular action. We feel confident that it's within your jurisdiction and your authority to do so. And thank you. And so my next question is also related to transportation, Mr. Judge. So in your professional opinion or your best estimate, can you give us a range of when you think, when you look into your crystal ball, when we might see, how many years are we talking about before 15501? There's actual work on turning that into a limited access highway. Yes, well, there's been a series of interim improvements that have already been made in the number of years since that corridor study was developed, mainly the six-laning provided some interim capacity. In the current state transportation improvement program, they do have a project scheduled for doing some environmental work for the Garrett Road and Garrett Road interchange. So, I mean, it's subject to funding and availability, but it seems to be scoring well. So we would think that we're hoping that it won't be another 20 years, I guess, that we'll be closer to sooner than that, but it's certainly not anything that's currently funded either. Okay, but I think what you're saying is it's sort of being done gradually. It's being done piece by piece. Already, yeah. So what would be done at Garrett Road, would that contribute to this being a little, would that be some sort of limited access at Garrett Road at that point? Yes, the Garrett Road would also have a future interchange and as part of that study, we're hopeful that maybe DOT will go ahead and since there's really not that much distance that they'll maybe go ahead and do all the environmental work together all the way down the I-40, but at this point they have not started that work, so really can't give you any definitive answers. Okay, thank you. Okay, Mr. Mayor, I may have some comments in a minute, but those are my questions. Thank you. Well, let me ask, oh, there are other comments, the questions. I was about to move the item. Do you want to make your comments now, Steve? You want to make it out the different? I have to make it out the different. Okay, is there a motion on the sign? I would like to move the plant. Let me ask this, does the staff's recommendation change? It did, Councilman Colm McFadden, we, Councilwoman, excuse me, Colm McFadden, we previously were unable to determine compliance with a number of policies in the comprehensive plan that pertain to transportation improvements, but with NCDOT's letter from last Friday, we were able to determine compliance, so we now can bring you what's before you is consistent with the comprehensive plan, in our opinion. So I'd like to move the staff's recommendation. Second. It's been properly moved. And second, I recognize Councilman Shul. Mr. Mayor, I'm going to vote for this, but I do want to say I'm not totally comfortable with it, and I do want to say my reasons. Let's just say that the state DOT's Joey Hopkins letter is a weak endorsement. The concept appears to manage the forecast of traffic on seems to fit with the offered wide of way. It's the farthest thing from a full endorsement, and so I think that we have to be clear what we're doing here on that. And I understand the staff's continuing concerns about the SPUI concepts, the impacts, because there are these other, there are these other people who've already have developments out there, and what you described about the write-in, write-out expectations are something that I think are important. The reason that I feel comfortable with it, on the other hand, enough to vote for it, is that I think this is all very much in the future. This is there's no, that we don't know what the configuration will actually be here. The city's not at risk for it if there is another decision made. But I do think it's, you know, I do want to say for, and Mr. Waldrop's point about this being down the road, so to speak, you know, it may, you know, 20 years from now, this may be something very different. But I do think that for the landowner, that, you know, this is something that is out there, and you're doing this with full awareness of that, and I'm a little uncomfortable, but I'm gonna vote for it, and I just wanted to say my thoughts on that, Mr. Mayor, thank you. Well, I was gonna wait until after the vote, but I'll go ahead and make my comments. Now, I plan to vote for this item, and Patrick raised two questions. Patrick Weicker raised two questions when he began his comments. One was relative to the city attorney's position. I had asked the developers when they met with me that I wanted to have some assurance that the city would not assume any liability if we chose to move forward with this, and you've heard the developers' attorney, and you've heard our city attorney didn't quite say for sure, but I got the gist of what he was saying. He was in agreement with that. The other question that Patrick asked was were we ready for the University of Ford to move? I was ready for the University of Ford to move in 1994, when I was chairing the Board of County Commissioners, and we had a bond referendum, and we were gonna build the ballpark where University of Ford was. So I've been ready since 1994, so, and ask for your question, Patrick. So having said that, I'm gonna call the vote, Madam Clerk, will you open the vote? Will you close the vote? It passes 7-0. Thank you. Let's move to the next item. Oh, we need to consist of this statement. It's been a proper move in second, Madam Clerk. Will you open the vote? Close the vote. It passes 7-0. Thank you. We moved item 25, street closing, Beaman Street, street closing 15-0-0-0-4. Thank you again, Mr. Mayor, members of council, Pat Young with the Planning Department. This item, SC 15-0-0-0-0-4, Beaman Street closing is a request by Mike Tarrant on behalf of Steward Engineering to close 422 linear feet of Beaman Street, which is currently open right of way, reflects the entirety of Beaman Street. This right of way is bordered by property owned by the city of Durham and gets so many Baptist Church. If the request is approved, the right of way will be divided evenly among these adjoining property owners as reflected in the street closing plat with your item. The area adjacent to this right of way is bordered by a place of worship in vacant land proposed for development. If approved, the property owned by the city would be developed as part of the Southside Redevelopment Project with residential units. The request was reviewed by 19 city and county departments and utility service providers and no negative impacts were identified by these review agencies. Staff recommends approval. I won't be happy to take any questions. Thank you. This is the public hearing. The public hearing is open. The questions by members of the council of the staff report. If not, we had one person that wanted to speak, Mike Tarrant, and he said he wanted to speak in case of questions only, but come to the podium. Even your Mayor Bell, Madam Pro Tem, members of the city council, and Mike Tarrant with Steward, who resided 2205 Caroline Drive. As you mentioned, Mayor Bell, I'm here just to accept any questions. Should they arise? I don't have any comments on this matter, but would appreciate your support in the second phase of Southside. All right, thank you. Are there any questions of the representative? If not, any questions from members of the audience? Let Rick reflect that no one wanted to speak publicly on this item beyond the representative. I declare the public to be closed as a matter of fact before the council. It's been properly moved in second. Madam Clerk, we open the vote. We close the vote. It passes seven to zero. Okay, before I close out, let me ask, are there other items that the council has questions on or comments on? Oh, we have to do a consistent statement on this. Did we do that? No, we didn't ask you. Okay, yeah. Oh, I've got one more item. I'm trying to get out here before eight o'clock. Okay, sorry about that. 26, okay, economic development system. Mr. Mayor, I didn't know you were taking a skipping item, so that's fine. I don't know, but we need to deal with this one, right? Okay, economic development incentive agreement between Longfellow and the real estate partners, LLC and the City of Durham. I'll get evening, Mr. Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem, council members, staff and members of the public. I'm Kevin Dick, Director of the Office of Economic and Workforce Development. I appreciate the privilege this evening to present a proposed economic development incentive agreement between the City of Durham and Durham ID Phase One Developers, LLC. I'd also like to acknowledge the presence of a representative from Durham ID Phase One, Ms. Jessica Brock, and she may have comments for you before the item is closed. Jessica works for Longfellow Real Estate Partners, LLC, which is the parent company for Durham ID Phase One. Longfellow acquires and develops facilities in strategic locations, building long-term life science companies, excuse me, long-term life science companies, universities, medical centers, and research institutes. Four notable projects in Durham to date have been the Carmichael Building and Research Lab, as well as Royal Center and Exchange Place. Longfellow has also contributed $260,000 locally to education and workforce initiatives, namely to the Duke Talent Identification Program, Durham Technical Community College, and the Office of Economic and Workforce Development. And this has been a very significant contribution to our career pathway and Durham youth work efforts. And so we're greatly appreciative of what they've contributed. And their contributions have been focused on STEM industries. So they're really trying to connect young people and provide the resources for local agencies to connect young people to high-growth and highways jobs. The project would consist of $87 million of capital investment and completion of other deliverables by 2019, and should yield 7.6 million in incremental property taxes to the city over a 15-year period. The proposed incentive payment would be 5.25 million yielding a net revenue amount of over 2.3 over that 15-year period. New construction along Ward Street would create a strategically located infill development and enhance the Central Park District. And I do wanna bring up a few renderings, illustrate the project. The first rendering will illustrate the entire development what's under consideration this evening is just phase one. It's taking a bit longer to come up than expected. But the entire project is basically seen over a 15-acre site that has an Eastern terminus along Moores Street and a Western terminus at Duke Street. As I said earlier, as I said earlier, the Carmichael building has already been developed and that forms the Western terminus. And what is under consideration this evening would be the C1, C2 and P1. And I will zoom in on those a bit. And so basically in the center part of the screen would be the P1 would be a structured parking deck. C1 would be office and lab space as would C2 and these are both along Moores Street. And so to go into the remainder of the presentation, as I said earlier, $87 million in capital investment and completion of other deliverables by 2019. And so no performance payments or incentive payments would be paid until that is fully realized and that's very significant because it basically mitigates the risk that the city would have. Durham ID phase one tenants are anticipated to generate as many as 850 new permanent highways jobs with an additional 2,000 in future phases. The job mix would include scientific, technical and administrative as well as research and development positions. And an additional 783 positions are estimated in terms of temporary construction. In terms of policy issues, capital investment in the science and technology industry are very much in line with our economic development incentive policy as well as our joint economic development strategic plan. The project involves a strong collaboration with Duke University and Measurement Incorporated. It would create flexible environments, cutting edge lab space and mixed use opportunities. And as I said, it would also be consistent with policy. This project would make Durham more internationally competitive in recruiting life sciences companies. There are other areas that Durham is in competition with nationwide and internationally. And currently there are over 80 innovation districts in internationally. And so just as the business improvement district was improved a few years ago by council that would help embolden and strengthen downtown, we believe that this project would do something similar. And I use that specific reference because there were roughly 82 downtowns in the country that had business improvement districts in their roughly 80 innovation districts internationally. And Durham would be adding one. And as I mentioned earlier, there's strong consistency with the joint economic development strategic plan, specifically the provision about live, work, play clusters. And this particular phase would include the work part of it and future phases would include the live and play parts. The city incentive would be $5.25 million paid over 15 years. The county incentive is projected to be 2.5 million over five years. The remaining project capital would likely come from equity investment. As I said earlier, the incentives would be performance based, meaning that no incentives would be paid until after a certificate of occupancy is generated. And at no point during the incentive period would there be any negative cash flow. Condition precedence, there would be the inclusion of a workforce plan stipulating the use of the NC WORKS Career Center to recruit both, well to recruit temporary construction jobs. There would also be the inclusion of a Durham based business plan, promoting the use of Durham based contractors, including minority and women owned contractors and goals have been set relative to this item. There would also be the availability of a percentage of parking for public use on nights and weekends. There would be provision of a green space that would be accessible by the public. That would be known as Morris Green. And incentive payments would be subject to project deliveries, as I said earlier, and the verification of capital investment. Why is an incentive necessary? The 5.25 million in city investment is needed to make this project feasible in Durham because laboratory space development often requires greater investment than other commercial office development types. The project must rely on self-contained parking, requiring new structured parking construction, and market dynamics related to parking in downtown are in such a way that often incentives would be needed to get entire projects completed that rely upon the need for parking. A competitive market rate of return on investment is required to capitalize the project. And finally, the project would create desperately needed Class A office space downtown. Currently our vacancy rate is 6%. And anecdotally, we know that we are losing projects in downtown because of the lack of office space. This project would bring about new development, would also increase property tax revenue. It would attract high-tech laboratory and office tenants, creating highways, jobs, and growing industry sectors. The additional service industry workers would also be needed as highways, jobs increase so transitional job opportunities could be created for Durham residents as well. And the anticipated revenues for, would far exceed proposed maximum public investment. That concludes my presentation. Welcome any questions or comments at this time? Thank you. Let me ask the questions. Let me have Pro Tem, Councilman Brown, Councilman Schuhl, Councilman Cattadi in that order. Thanks Kevin, for all the work you've done. Who will monitor the MWBE, SDBE participation on the project? That would be monitored by the Office of Economic and Workforce Development. We would get quarterly reports from the development team. Is North Carolina Central University involved with this at all? I noticed a collaboration with Duke. Right, we have connected the developer with North Carolina Central. We actually were able to facilitate a tour of the Bright Center, and so much of the lab space that's in the Bright Center would mimic and therefore prepare a lot of students for possible opportunities. And there have been good discussions, I believe, with the university and with the developer about different ways that collaboration can take place in the future. Well, I'd like some more details about that. Some sort of commitment from the developer, if that's possible. That's Councilman Brown. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Kevin, you noted that this was the plan that you presented this evening was for phase one. Correct. Can you tell us a little bit about phase two or three? And would this be included under the umbrella? Would this be included? Yeah, would phase two and three also be included under what you outlined this evening? The proposed incentive is for phase one. Any considerations of future phases in terms of public involvement would need to be assessed by staff if they were brought to us and then further approved by Council. So this, I would say that, and I'm bringing up the rendering again of what may be phases, future phases. What we know according to the developer is that the second phase would likely be the C4 and C3 buildings. And so these would likely be office space and lab space as well. And then there would be residential uses and future phases. But phase two is likely to be C3 and C4 with phase three coming in future phases and the northern end of the development. Could you give us an estimate of the timeline involved here? The projected timeline thus far would be roughly a seven year development period for all of the phases. Jessica Brock from Longfellow is here to provide any more clarity or details related to that. But in our discussions with the developer to this point, we've been told that all phases should be completed in the seven to nine year timeframe. Okay, so what you're telling us then, and maybe Ms. Brock can educate us on this, but that we could be sitting here, not myself. But we could be, the Council could be here even three or four years hence and undergoing this yet another incentive plan There's been no determination to this point that Longfellow would present another proposed incentive or request for incentives to staff. So I can't say that is impossible, but I wouldn't say that it is imminent either. Then of course the Council could also reject that. That's correct. Okay, thank you. I should have indicated early on this is a public hearing. So all the comments have been made upon the public hearing. I recognize Councilman Schuhl. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Kevin, the open space on attachment eight exhibit DID rendering to open space. Right. How does that, I can't, I actually know that you've told us this before. I think when we first talked about this, maybe in closed session, but how does that relate to the buildings? Where are the buildings? It's hard for me to figure that out from the, putting the two renderings together. So phase one, the buildings would be along Morris Street. Yeah. Phase one, the open space, what's known as Morris Green would be within this blue square. Yeah. That essentially would be across the street and slightly to the, To the west. The west and north. Okay. So I see. Yeah. All right. So, okay. Now I get it. Okay. Thank you. Sure. I think that's my only question right now. Mr. Mayor, thank you. Recognize Councilwoman Cotati. Yeah. Kevin, I wanted to ask if you could detail what the 8.3 million in public infrastructure in the vicinity that's noted on page two of the memo. So generally speaking, there would be improvements along Fernway Avenue, sidewalk improvements, various infrastructure improvements. I believe some lighting elements, but Jessica, if you want to come forward and provide more detail. Hi, I'm Jessica Brock with Longfella. Some of the additional infrastructures, variants and power lines, widening the streets, adding bike lanes, increasing the size of the water retention system as necessary for the phase one. I think it's out on just 8.3 million dollars. Thank you. Mr. Mayor, I have comments later after the speakers. If you don't mind. Any other comments about members of the council? We only have two persons that have signed up to speak on this item. Victoria Peterson and Vince Taylor in that order. You each have three minutes. Okay, and somebody- The lights go off over there for the timer? No, mine's not. Anne. And how many minutes, Mr. Mayor? Three. Okay. Thank you. I would just like to just to talk to the council for a few minutes. I have not really spoken a lot on this issue to make sure that our young men in this community are being employed. And I know Ms. Giles, Ms. Deborah Giles, and I know she's been trying to do the best job she can to make sure that minority companies get employment. I think that there needs to be another level, Mr. Barnfield. I think the city really seriously needs to look at how are we making sure that our young men in this community, black, white, particularly our African American young men who have criminal records, but their criminal records were years ago and over the years they've gotten their sales, they have gotten their sales together and they need employment. And many times these companies, it sounds good what my friend is saying, but we really do not have anyone in place to make sure that our citizens, regardless if they have a company or not, or regardless if they are subcontracting their sales out, we need to put something in place, council members, to make sure that our citizens are being employed, particularly our young black men, Mr. Davis, and I call him Mr. Davis because numerous times he has an educational background and he worked in this system with our young men and women. He knows the importance of our young men and women getting employment. I think when the city gives a lot of our dollars out, even to this new police station, we need to put something in place, we need to hire somebody that can come back and give the city a report that we have hired 50 young men in this community for jobs on this site, not just North Carolina Central University, and I think that's great and I think that's good, but there's a huge population in this community that is not getting employment. And these are our young men and women who have criminal records and they are falling through the cracks, they get stressed out and they go out and they continue to commit crime. And Mr. Mayor, if we're going to sign off on this project, we've got to put something in place. The only way to do that is to really bring on hire one or two persons and their job would be every project that the city signs off on, they make sure that our dorm residents are first being employed, not folks coming in from California, from Texas, from 10 buck two. And Mr. Mayor, thank you very much for allowing me to speak, but please we've got to put something in place here to make sure that our local residents are being employed and thank you very much. You're welcome. Next is Vince Taylor. Good evening, Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem. City attorney, city manager and city council. Thank you all so much for your energy that you put into this first seat of the house. My name is Vince Taylor. I live at 2915 Forthby Heights, which I'm the president of the community, but I'm also an active member of PAC, PAC four. I have great concerns about this particular project and also as a small contractor, the owner of Taylor's construction company did a lot of work in the city of Durham. I would like to just also say that please, if there's any way possible, now come this evening with Olive Branch, let's find ways that, I have so many young men that calls me on a daily basis and say, Mr. Taylor, do you have a job for me? They are so passionate about it. And I know because I deal with these type of people. I just want to try to find ways that we can try to employ. I mean, just reaching that and try to get a little bit more out of our community. I'm also an active member of a school called CET. I teach and train young men and women, trades, all different types. And they also want to make transition into our communities by way of employment. Now I come this evening as a Reverend Olive Branch, please, let us try to find ways to employ some of the ones who've been disenfranchised. And I don't need a whole bunch of time to make that plea to y'all. And thank you all so much for your time. You're welcome. Council said you wanted to wait until you hear from the public. Let me ask, is anyone else in the public that wants to speak on this item has not had an opportunity to speak? If not, I recognize the members of the council. Councilwoman Catani. Thank you, mayor. I just had a few comments. I appreciate that since we saw this in June that you have made the commitment for parking availability on nights and weekends for 50% of the spaces. And I do think that this is a good project and a development. But as I said in June, I still believe that an incentive equivalent to 70% of future tax revenues is just too high. So for that reason, I'll be voting against it. Thank you. Thank you. Any other comments? Members of the council, recognize Councilman Schuyl. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I did want to point out and with appreciation to our city attorney's office and also to the Office of Economic and Workforce Development that this is our first incentive where we have some assurances by the company of appropriate treatment of contractors and lower tier subcontractors. And this is a good addition to, we know the recent situation at the residence in and we don't want to repeat of that. I don't know that this totally changes the possibility that there will be a repeat of that, but I do think that this is an advance and I appreciate that very much. And Kevin didn't know if you wanted to comment on it at all. Any thoughts on that? Okay. I would like you to comment on, again, about the employment plan because we have one. You've described it, but we've heard a couple of people here who want to hear more, I think. So could you describe in a little bit more detail what we do and how we do it? Certainly, Councilor Micheal. We have a Durham Workforce Plan that is part of the agreement. It's an attachment to the agreement. And what we do is connect the subcontractors to the NC Works Career Center system. We try to set up a pipeline of individuals that are completing training programs and door those who already have experience in the various construction fields that would be part of the development of this project. And basically what we do is connecting with opportunity. There were some statements made and comments about the need to guarantee that certain individuals get employed. And as much as we want to derive the maximum economic development benefits of this project, that would be possible. We can't guarantee that individuals get hired by law, but what we can do is connect people with the best opportunities. We can invite subcontractors, which we have done in the past to our recruitment events for recruitment events and graduation events for various training classes. That has been effective with various training programs that we've run out of NC Works. And we do the best job that we can in trying to connect people with opportunity. We can't guarantee hires and we can't walk into interviews with individuals that are interviewing for positions. The best we can do is prepare and connect with opportunity and then the process has to flow as it does. So for Mr. Taylor who works with a lot of young people who are seeking jobs in construction and the trades, how would you ask him to advise them in terms of connecting with this project? We keep Mr. Taylor and other construction companies like his and also Mr. Taylor does an outstanding job of volunteering at one of our local institutions. We would just keep them apprised of when we expect certain positions to be available. And we are also gonna stay in very close contact with the developer when they choose a general contractor. So that flow of communication can occur between the general contractor and their subs and our training programs. And we have a staff person assigned to make sure that flow of communication happens. Thank you very much. I guess Mr. Taylor you want to comment now? Yeah, I'm gonna make a comment, but if you have a little comment you wanna make? I have one. Go ahead and make it. Yeah, I think that I know that I almost hesitate to make this again because it haven't had much success with it, but I do wanna point out again, the county's extremely large benefit relative to ours, tax benefit as opposed to our, the size of the incentive that we're offering. And I hope that we will continue to be working on that, trying to get it down to where in my opinion it's more reasonable at least at the 50-50 level. I agree with Diane that this is a large incentive percentage and it's a close call. I am gonna vote for it, but I understand the point she's making, it's an important one. And we need to try to keep beating the percentages of these down as downtown becomes more popular. And so I hope y'all be working to that end. Thank you. I guess my comments, I support the project, I guess that's the start, but I really, we've heard this bit about minority employees, subcontractors, the work that the city's gonna do, why you walk with the people and all this stuff, but this stuff starts at the top. And I really would like to hear commitment from the developers in terms of what is your response to doing all that you can do to ensure that minority contractors have an opportunity to work on this project? It starts at the top. I mean, you guys are gonna often make the call who the general contractor is. I know you can tell people what you want and whether or not they wanna hear to it, that's the definition, then you've gotta come and make a decision. But I really would like to hear from Longfellow. What is your commitment to this? So Longfellow is committed to making sure that the jobs are filled by Durham residents. We have a contractual obligation that is in our development agreement, but we have not hired any general contractors or subs. In fact, we've interviewed several consultants in the area to actually help us with this, to help us identify who are a good minority or women-owned businesses that can be a part of our project. So if what you wanna hear from Longfellow, for me, is that we are committed to that, we're absolutely committed to that. And I think at the end of the project, we'll look back at it because we'll track it and we'll be proud of the results that we were able to deliver. And I just wanna thank the city council for considering this transformational project for downtown Durham. Thank you. Any other questions, comments, or recognize the mayor pro tem? Yeah, I mentioned working with North Carolina Central University and just wanted to know what your plans are. I'm sorry, and I didn't, I meant to address that when I came back up here, but I have had the pleasure of working with Dr. Sanders White already. She has come and toured the Carmichael and we have been in early discussions about how can Central be a part of this. I'll tell you that her plans are big plans, not plans that will be in the next six to 12 months, but how can, you know, what impact can Central have on an innovation district, whether it's within my 15 acres exactly, or if it's a part of greater downtown that this development then spurs. And your development and how you, I understand you're gonna be doing some collaboration with Duke, and that's why I raised the question about North Carolina Central, the other school in town. Okay. Are there any other comments? If not, the public hearing is closed in matters before the council. Anything to motion on item? I'd like to move the item. Second. It's been properly moved in second for the discussion here. None call to question. Madam Clerk, will you open the vote? And close the vote. It passes six to one with council. Makatate voting, no. Thank you. Let me ask, oh, there are other items to come before the council. I have one of the items that I'm gonna raise. Mr. Chairman, oh, excuse me. Recognize Councilor Schuyl. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor, I see we have a lot of officers and former officers here, and I don't know exactly why they're here, but I can guess. And so I want to say two things. One is, I know that the whole council is fully supportive of the department and is looking forward to moving forward with a great future for our department. And we appreciate everything that you do. We appreciate the work that you do on the street every day, every night, and we're glad you're here. The second thing I want to say is this to you all, my wife is out of town and I'm going out for pizza afterwards across the street. I won't invite all of you, but if some of you would like to come join me and talk about the concerns that you're here to make available, I will be there and you can join me in the pizza. I'm not buying. But Chief Peter, Chief Mahayetch, Mr. Wiggins, if any of you or a couple of others would like to come, I will be there and happy to listen. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Well, the last, look, I'm running the meeting. I'm running the meeting. Thank you, all right. The last point that I was gonna raise, we did have one person that signed up to speak. People have been sitting here all night and of course I was getting ready to go at eight o'clock, but we had another item. So I'm gonna call on Michael Evans for three minutes. If Michael Evans is still here. Thank you. Mayor Bail, Pro Tem Mayor, City Council. I'm Mike Evans. I'm the President of the Tournament of the Police. Approximately 500 members. We're gonna move on to the mic. And... Peterson, I have told you, I don't have many times, I'm running the meeting. I'm running the meeting. I'm running the meeting. I'm running the meeting. No, this is the last person that's gonna speak. Mr. Evans, we go ahead and, I'm gonna ask you to leave the audience. I'm gonna ask you to leave the audience. I've heard you, I've heard you. Mr. Evans, go ahead. We're here to show the support for Chief Lopez. We felt like he was done wrong. They was told that he, we were gonna get a new Chief because morale was low and that the crime rate went up. We did a little research. The crime rate is actually now, he's, we went back to 1994. The crime rate is the lowest with him of the last four Chiefs. He supports us and we felt if you would support the Chief and the Department the way he supports us, that we would not be having the problems right now. The times we're living in are bad. It's bad over the United States and I think it's time that the community and the police department work together. And that's all I wanted to say. Thank you. That concludes the meeting this evening. No further comments. The meetings are adjourned at 8.30 p.m. Thank you.