 Good evening, we'd like to call the Durham City Council meeting to order at 7.07 p.m. Monday, Tuesday, September the 3rd. I certainly want to welcome all of you that are here with us this evening. We just take a moment for a silent meditation, please. Thank you. We'd ask if Councilman Brown would lead us in the pledge. This evening we have two recognitions that we'd like to make in terms of proclamations. We'd like to recognize Ms. Evelyn Scott, the Office of Youth for Introductory Comments to our Durham Use Commission induction, Evelyn. Thank you, Mayor Bell and elected officials. I just want to say we, along, I, Evelyn Scott along with my colleague Anthony Mitchell are really appreciative of this opportunity to work with your children this school year. Thank you all for your support, especially as we continue to keep funding in the budget for this initiative, the Durham Youth Commission. We are really excited about our year, students, you all look excited, right? And again, we just appreciate, we just appreciate the fact that the city recognizes that youth are vital and that they're valuable to our communities. And we just ask that you continue to pray for us throughout the year, but also make sure that when budget season comes around, any youth initiatives that we work really hard to keep those in the budget. Thank you so much. It's time. I'm not going to call them out individually, but we will come down. Okay. So I'm not really good with all their names and I did not bring my list, but the mayor wants them called individually, so we're going to come forward. Come on. Oh, they're going to introduce themselves. So I'll go ahead and stand. My name is Shantija Johnson and I go to Middle College High School. Good evening. My name is Zary Best. I'm a sophomore at the Josephine Dobbs Clement Relay College at Central University. My name is Julie Nguyen and I'm a student at Jordan High School. I'm Lindsay Molina and I'm a sophomore at Durham Academy. Hey, I'm Christine Worcester and I go to Hillside New Tech High School and I'm a sophomore. Hi, I'm Naja Robinson. I'm a freshman at Hillside New Tech. Good evening everybody. My name is Victoria Jackson and I attend Josephine Dobbs Clement Early College High School at Central's campus and I am a senior. Hello everyone. I'm Charlize Cia Walton. I'm a senior and I attend Riverside High School. Hi, my name is Andrew Spencer and I attend Jordan. I'm a sophomore. Hi, my name is Zoe Eichin. I'm a senior at Jordan High School. Hi, I'm Rachel Jefferyon and I am a sophomore at Jordan High School. Hi, I'm Matthew Blivin. I'm a senior at Jordan High School. Hi, I'm Jeff Sledo and I'm a junior at Voyager Academy. Hi, I'm Tashana O'Byrton and I'm a sophomore at City of Medicine Academy. My name is Justin Ly and I'm a senior at Jordan High School. My name is Keith Beasley and I'm a junior at Hillside High School. My name is Slater Daniels and I am a senior at Durham Academy. We certainly want to thank all of you for taking the time and I, as I tell other young people, we all have choices in life that we can make and we all have 24 hours a day like everyone else has and how you make those choices and how you use us 24 hours can make a difference but we're pleased that you chose to be a part of this youth commission and we listen so I mean we do everything you say but we do listen so if you have thoughts and you have ideas about how we might do things differently in this community we certainly are open to those and certainly hope you bring them forth. So, Evelyn, thanks again. Are you still taking pictures? At this time we'll have City Clerk Ann Gray come and recite the oath of office. If you raise your right hand and repeat after me. I do hereby solemnly affirm that I will support and maintain the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution and Laws of North Carolina not inconsistent therewith and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge the duties of my office as a member of the Durham Youth Commission. Congratulations. Next I'd like to ask Ms. Fran Ferrell who's a Regent, General Davey, Chapter Daughter of the American Revolution that she would join me. How you doing? Good to see you. Thank you. This proclamation speaks to the fact that it is the privilege and duty of the American people to commemorate the 226th anniversary of the drafting of the Constitution of the United States of America with appropriate ceremonies and activities. Whereas Public Law 915 guarantees the issuing of a proclamation each year by the President of the United States of America designating September the 17th through the 23rd as Constitution Week. Now therefore I, William V. Bilbell, Mayor of the City of Durham, North Carolina do hereby proclaim September the 17th through the 23rd 2013 as Constitution Week in Durham in order to all citizens to study the United States Constitution and reflect on the privilege of being an American with all the rights and responsibilities which that privilege involves. With my hand, Corporate City of Durham, North Carolina, this is the third day of September 2013. I would like to present this to Ms. Ferrell for any comments that she may have. Thank you so much. I did want to take a minute and have some comments. I urge you to read the Constitution but I want to remind you that the Constitution was only one part of the package. The Constitution along with the Bill of Rights which are the first ten amendments plus 17 more amendments create the law of land. And just a little fun fact that I thought you may like to know. In the 226 years since the Constitution was formed, only 27 amendments have passed. However, 11,000 have been presented and tried to get through. So, 27 amendments. Read those along with your Constitution. And you will see the updated information. And thank you so much. Enjoy Constitution Week. Fly your flag. Let me announce that we concluded early this evening the performance evaluations of the city manager, the city clerk, and city attorney. And that was one of the reasons we were a bit late getting started. And in the deliberations, the council agreed to grant a 2% entries to the city clerk and salary, effective July 1st. 2% entries for the city attorney, effective July 1st of this year. And an 8.1% entries for the city manager, effective July 1st, 2013 of this year. Now, I'll entertain a motion to that effect. Second. It's been probably moved to the second. Madam clerk, will you open the vote? You close the vote? It passes, 6 to 0. Thank you. Let me ask whether there are any comments by members of the council. Recognize the mayor pro-ten? I had the opportunity a couple of Saturdays ago to attend. District meeting of the Eastern Stars organization. And during that meeting they gave tribute to a woman by the name of Mrs. Nellie Rooster. And the reason they did it was because of all the good work that she has done throughout Durham and surrounding communities helping everybody with everything, people who had been burned, whose homes have been burned out. All kinds of things. Giving monetary donations to folk in need. And so I just wanted to express to her that we are still honoring her tonight for all the great things that she's done in the Durham community. And I hope that we will try to emulate that kind of behavior as well. So congratulations to Ms. Rooster. She's now in hospice. But she did make it to the celebration a couple of Saturdays ago. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you. I'm here pro-ten for sharing that information. Are there other comments by members of the council? If not, we're proceed with the agenda. The priority item is about a city manager. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Good evening, everyone. On tonight's agenda there are three items related to the DOE web development agenda items number 23, 24, and 27. And as a priority item this evening would ask that you consider item 27, which is the consolidated annexation item for the DOE web project before you consider items 23 and 24. It's just a legal sequence issue that we need to take care of. Thank you. You've heard the city manager's prior items. It's been proper to move a second. Madam Clerk, will you open the vote? Close the vote. It passes 60, 0. Likewise, city attorney for any prior items. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. No priority items. Likewise, city clerk. Yes, Mr. Mayor, members of the council. Item number 22 on your agenda. Zoning map change for Kent corner two. Due to the withdrawal of signatures, the protest petition has been ruled invalid. Entertain a motion on the city clerk's prior item. It's been proper to move a second. Madam Clerk, will you open the vote? Close the vote. It passes 60. Move to the consent agenda. Consent agenda items that can be approved if they single vote. If a council member or a member of the audience chooses to pull one of the consent agenda items, we will pull it and discuss it later in the meeting. And again, I'll just read the heading of each consent agenda item. Item one is approval of city council minutes. Item two is equal business opportunity program advisory committee appointment. Item three is the Durham bicycle and pedestrian advisory commission appointments. Item four is an item that can be located on the general business agenda. Item five is the Durham historic preservation commission appointments. Item six is street acceptances. Item nine is FY 2013, 2014, CIP budget amendment request for CIP ordinance number 14464. Item 10 is contract extension for American National Community Service Inc. for mortgage loan servicing. Item 11 is city counting radio system service agreement renewal with Motorola Inc. Item 12 is acceptance of grants from the Carolina Panthers Charities and the National Recreation and Parks Association. Item 13 is the city code revision regarding infrastructure acceptance. Item 14 is interlocal cooperation agreement between the county of Durham and the city of Durham regarding construction of pavement in Maine, Queen and Dillard Street. Item 15 is city code revision regarding reimbursement of cost for infrastructure. And item 17 through 27 items that can be located on the general business agenda as public hearings. I will entertain a motion on the consent agenda items. So moved. It's proper to move to second. Madam clerk, we open the vote. We close the vote. It pants the six to zero. Move to the general business agenda. Item four, Durham City County Appearance Commission Appointment. Yes, Mr. Mayor, you all have the ballots. We'll mark the ballots at the appropriate time. Thank you. We move to the general business agenda for public hearings. Assessment and improvements. Item 17, confirmation of assessment roll for Watermane on Edcote Road. Good evening, Mayor Bell. Mayor Pro Tem, Paul McFadden, members of council on Nathan McHenry, Public Works Engineering Services. Item 17 is to conduct a public hearing and receive comments on the confirmation of the assessment roll for Watermane improvement on Edcote Road. Staff is recommending that the confirmation of the assessment roll is presented. It's the public hearing item. The staff has made the report. I would ask first of the questions by members of the council on the staff report on this item. Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak on this item? This being a public hearing. Let the director reflect on the one in the public asked to speak on this item. I'll declare the public hearing to be closed as a matter of fact for the council. It's been proper to move to second. Adam Clarke, you opened the vote. Did you open it? Okay, close the vote. Pass the six to zero. Item 18, confirmation of assessment roll for Watermane on Ardmore Drive. Again, Nathan McHenry, Public Works Engineering Services. Item 18 is to conduct a public hearing and receive comments on the confirmation of the assessment roll for Watermane improvement on Ardmore Drive. Staff is recommending the confirmation of the assessment roll as presented. We've heard the staff report on questions by members of the council. Hearing none, again, this is a public hearing. Is anyone in the public who would like to speak on this item? Let the director reflect on the one in the public asked to speak on this item. I declare the public hearing to be closed as a matter of fact for the council. It's been proper to move to second. Adam Clarke, you opened the vote. Close the vote. It passes six to zero. Item 20, a mini assessment roll for Sewell Main on Andrew Avenue and Cortez Drive. Confirmation of assessment roll for Watermane in the Valley Spring Road area. Item 19, sorry about that. Again, Nathan McHenry, Public Works Engineering Services. Item 19 is to conduct the public hearing and receive comments on the confirmation of assessment rolls for Watermane improvements that have been constructed in the Valley Spring Road area. John Foster, R&K Real Estate Group, have objected their assessments for the Watermane construction. Hasses bell Browning for one of her properties located at 4723 Rose Road. Staff is recommending the council confirm the Valley Springs Road area assessment rolls except for the Forester, R&K Real Estate and Browning properties and continue to public hearing for these assessments. Without further advertising, and we refer these assessments to the October 21st, 2013 council meeting for further consideration. This is a public hearing. You've heard the staff report on this item, would ask other comments, questions, by members of the council. Likewise, anyone in the public want to speak on this item? For the recommendation of the staff, entertain a motion on that. Some property movement, second. Madam Clerk, will you open the vote? Close the vote. You pass the sixth to zero. Item 20 is the many assessment roll for sewer main on Andrew Avenue and Cortez Drive. Item 20 is many assessment roll which has been continued from a previous public hearing for the confirmation of the sewer main assessment for the improvements that were constructed on Andrew Avenue and Cortez Drive. This item finds that the William Coakley and Janet Tyndall heirs properties as well as the R-Texey and Painter heirs properties known as zero Cortez Drive, a lot B have not benefited from this improvement at this time. Staff recommends relief until tap on of these properties with a feature frontage charge to be due and payable at the prevailing rate should these properties connect in accordance with city policy. In addition, this item finds that the R-Texey and Painter heirs property at 1,007 Cortez Drive has benefited from this improvement. Staff recommends confirmation of this assessment the amount of $2,373.50. And you've heard the staff report on those items their recommendations, I would ask is any comments by the council in the comments by members of the public? The director reflected no one in the public asked to comment on this item. I'll declare it public and be closed as a matter of fact for the council. It's been a proper movement. Second Madam Clerk, will you open the vote? Close the vote. You pass the six to zero. Move to item 21. Conference of planning amendment for Kent Corner A-12-0-0-0-0-17. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Erin Kane with the planning department. The case before you, Kent Corner, A-1-2-0-0-1-7. The applicant Chapel Hill Street Development, LLC is proposing to amend the future land use map to change the future land use designation from medium density residential, six to 12 dwelling units and acre to commercial. The site is approximately 1.3 acres in this located north of Jackson Street, south of West Chapel Hill Street, east of Kent Street and west of Carroll Street. Staff has determined that the request meets the four criteria for plan amendments and is recommending approval of the request. Planning Commission recommended approval at its July 9th, 2013 meeting on A-12-0 vote. I'll be happy to answer any questions that you may have. Again, this is a public hearing matter. I will declare the public hearing to be open. I would ask first whether comments by members of the council on this item has been public hearing matter. No comments from the council. We have one person that is signed up to speak on this item. The public hearing, Barry Yeoman. Is Barry here? Again, this is a public hearing. I have one person to sign up because anyone else wants to speak on this item, item 21. If not, Barry, you have three minutes. I'll take one of those three. Mr. Mayor, members of council, this is the most exciting thing that has happened on West Chapel Hill Street in the 25 years I've been here. When self-help completes this project, we will have created affordable housing, jobs, retail, and hopefully even street life on West Chapel Hill Street, I would highly urge you to say yes. Thank you. Anyone else ask to speak on this item? Let the record click and no one else has to speak. I would declare the public hearing to be closed in matters of public counsel. Move the item. Sorry. The improper move in a second. Madam Clerk, will you open the vote? Close the vote. Passes, six to zero. Moved to item 22, zoning map change. Kent Corner, two, Z-13-00-007. Good evening, Mr. Mayor, members of council, Pat Young with the planning department. First, I'll quickly certify for the record that all public hearing items before you tonight have been advertised in accordance with the provisions of law and we have affidavits to that effect on file with the planning department. KC-13-00-07 is the companion zoning case to the plan amendment case you heard just a moment ago. It's a request to change the zoning designation of approximately 2.7 acres of property located in the corner of Kent Street and West Chapel Hill Street from Commercial Enfield or CI and Residential Urban 5-2 to Commercial General with a Development Plan and Commercial Enfield with a Development Plan. The request proposes 50,000 square feet of non-residential development. There's also a number of commitments associated with the Development Plan associated with this case, including provisions for transit facilities, increased buffers, including two masonry wall segments and two wood fence segments, lighting and signage standards above the ordinance requirements, maximum height commitments, limitations on allowable uses and commitments regarding the placement of dumpsters. Staff determines that this proposal is consistent with the comprehensive plan and other adopted policies and ordinances and the Planning Commission recommended approval at their July meeting by a vote of 12-0. I'll be happy to take any questions. Again, this is a public hearing item and I would ask the questions, comments by members of the council. Great project, Mr. Mayor, I'm excited about it. Any other comments by members of the council? Okay, I guess that's it. I just wanna recognize Councilman Brown. Thank you, the self-help for stepping forward. This is an area that has needed some assistance from both the public and the private sectors and this will be a real bone to the neighborhood. And we look forward to seeing the finished project. Thank you. Any other comments? If not, as I said, this is a public hearing. We have persons that have signed up to speak on this item. I wanna make sure that everyone has an opportunity to speak or wishes to speak and try to do it with some equitable fashion. I have two persons that have signed up to speak in opposition, David Anthony and Hilary Kanee. Is there anyone else that wants to speak in opposition? I'm not gonna call you yet, but I wanna find out who else wants to speak in opposition to this. Likewise, I have seven people that signed up to speak in support, Tucker Bartlett, Elisa Johnson, Larissa Orrachevsky, Jeff Durham, this minute, Nick Johnson, Frank Stasio, and Selena Mack. Is there anyone else that wants to speak in support of this project whose name I have not called? Well, let's do it this way then. We've got about 14 minutes for each side, two minutes for each of the persons that I call to speak in support and seven minutes each for the persons that signed up to speak in opposition. I'll hear from the persons that support first and I'll call the name, Tucker Bartlett, Elisa Johnson, Larissa Orrachevsky, Jeff Durham, and Larissa, you pronounce your name when you get up here, and Jeff Durham, Nick Johnson, Frank Stasio, and Selena Mack, and that or two minutes each. Okay, good evening, my name is Tucker Bartlett and I work at Self Help and live in Moorhead Hill at 705 Cobb Street. The first thing, Mr. Mayor, I wanted to do was to go over some minor changes that have been made since the planning staff report was sent out to you. Dan, you'll pass these items out to the council members they can read. Based on our final review of the plans in your agenda packet by the Kent Corner Task Force, we've made a few semantic edits. These changes have already been vetted by the planning department, but we would like to state them on the record tonight. The first involves text commitment number six is listed on the sheet DP zero in your packet. We've increased the minimum distance of light poles from residential property lines to 50 feet. We also added the words exceeding five feet in height in the description of light pole locations in both the second and third sentences. The second involves design commitment number one D on that same page. We have added the words and be located within the middle third of the facade at the end of the second sentence. The third involves adding an area of the site adjacent to the Anthony property to the no dumpster zone shown on the sheet DP two. And finally, the fourth is a clarification on the development plan notes on that same sheet to remove the words no and shall be prohibited from the list of prohibited uses in CGD and CID districts as they could be interpreted as double negative. I'd be happy to answer any specific questions about these, but all they are extremely minor edits. With my remaining time, I just wanted to talk for a brief minute about the community driven process that has resulted in this plan. As you know, self-help has worked in this community for about 10 years and in partners with groups like Habitat for Humanity and Durham Community Land Trust has developed 125 units of affordable housing. That quickly led us to focus on the neighborhood commercial district and a series of charrettes and plans over a 10 year period. We've since participated on specifically the Kent Corner project on 40 face-to-face meetings with area residents and we've heard from over 200 people in this process. I wanna just take the last little bit of time I have to thank the members of the community who spent numerous hours, including the Kent Corner task force who now are supporting this project. This project is a better project today because of your involvement. Thank you. You're welcome, Elisa Johnson. Good evening, Mr. Mayor, council members. My name is Elisa Johnson. I'm a Birch Avenue resident and the current chair of the Quality of Life Project. Thank you for giving me an opportunity to speak. It has been said before, but it needs to be said again, that for over 20 years, the neighborhoods of Birch Avenue, the West End, Lion Park and the West Chapel Hill Street's Merchant Association, QOL and scores of other people have committed themselves to the economic revitalization of West Chapel Hill Street. Self-Help's Kent Corner project is a wonderful first step. The proposed commercial space will bring new goods and services to the surrounding neighborhoods, invite new customers to our ready-established businesses, and provide, among other things, an open space for community gatherings. In addition, Self-Help has a strong reputation in our neighborhoods, having developed a number of affordable houses and then an integral part of the creation of the Polly Murray Place and Maplewood Senior Apartments. QOL is proud to stand with the many individuals, neighborhood associations, and groups that have endorsed this project and the zoning proposal. At this point, I'd like to encourage everyone who came here tonight and supported this project to stand. Thank you very much. Larissa or Seth, and I'm gonna ask you to pronounce your name, please. Oriskevich. Yeah. But most people just call me Larissa. All right, Larissa. I'm here as a representative of the Kent Corner Task Force and we had started meeting back in January because even though we have been living there for many, many decades, a lot of us did not aware of these changes that were about to happen and we pressed for a development plan in conjunction with this rezoning because we wanted to be assured that we would safeguard the community or West Chapel Hill community in the way that had been envisioned in the many years of QOL's work to make it neighborhood friendly. We are thankful and appreciative of the fact that self-help worked with us diligently to meet and to discuss and to accommodate the requests that we made. Of course we didn't get everything we wanted, but that's politics. And we're happy to say that we are in support of this project. Also, self-help has reassured us with a letter that they will make provisions and be a friendly neighbor to upcoming and new businesses in the area by making parking available on West Chapel Hill Street for the continued development. Thank you very much. Welcome. Jeff Durham. Good evening, Mr. Mayor, members of the City Council. My name is Jeff Durham. I'm with Downtown Durham Inc. I'm new with the organization. Been there for about six weeks now. I appreciate your time this evening. I've had a chance to meet with a number of you and I look forward to having the opportunity to meet with some of you that haven't had a chance to speak with personally just yet. I'm here this evening representing Downtown Durham Inc. And I wanted to let you all know that the group did have a chance at their monthly board meeting in August to review and discuss the project at Kent Corner. The group unanimously decided to endorse the project. The board believes that a main contributor to a thriving Downtown is a strong and revitalized surrounding communities. We believe that self-helps Kent Corner project will serve to further strengthen one of the city's emerging communities. It's located less than a mile away from the Downtown and Kent Corner project would be a catalyst for other improvements in this important corridor that serves as a gateway for both our Downtown as well as Duke University. The DDI Board of Directors considers Kent Corner to be a very important project in the continuing transformation of our Downtown. And we respectfully request that you all support that this evening. I thank you. You're welcome. Nick Johnson. Good evening Council Mayor. Thank you for allowing me to speak before you this evening. My name is Nick Johnson. I'm a resident of the Birch Avenue neighborhood and I own a business on West Chapel Hill Street called the Cookery. I wanna, I mean, you have heard many, many reasons and it is very obvious to everyone here that the community around this project is extremely excited and very supportive of it. I'd like to take a moment to thank specifically Self Help for doing the outreach that they have done. They have done a spectacular job in encouraging engagement in the community in requesting feedback and then responding responsibly to it. So thank you very much. I think I speak for all the neighborhood and I'm here also as co-chair of the West Chapel Hill Street Merchants Alliance and I speak for them in saying we are very excited to have them as a partner and excited to see you support this project and in its process from here till we have beautiful new buildings there. Thank you very much. Welcome, Frank Stasio. Mr. Mayor, Madam Mayor Potem, other members of the council. My name is Frank Stasio. I live at 4805 American Drive and I am Vice President of the Durham Central Market Board of Directors. And on behalf of that board and our 1,300 member owners, I wanna tell you how pleased we are to be part of this economic development package that promises to transform the West Chapel Hill Corridor and contribute to the growing prosperity of the city of Durham. Our board is here this evening and I'd like them to stand. We've worked very hard to help bring our part of this project to fruition. Thank you. The Durham Central Market is a 10,000 square foot natural food grocery store owned by the customers who live in our community. Our board is committed to local hiring and local sourcing of our products. In choosing the Durham Central Market as a retail anchor for the Kent Corner development, self-help has shown its commitment to generating the highest return for the local neighborhood and for the city of Durham. Every thousand dollars spent at our store will generate more than $1,600 in economic activity. And that, by the way, is $239 more than a conventional retailer. We are a co-op. On average, co-ops employ nine people per million dollars in sales and that compares with five and a half for conventional retailers. In addition to generating economic activity, our board is already exploring creative ways to ensure affordability for low wealth families so that everybody can enjoy the health benefits of locally produced whole natural foods. I strongly urge you to approve the Kent Corner project and I thank you for your consideration. Thank you. Selina Mack. Good evening Mayor Bell and members of the council. My name is Selina Mack. I'm the executive director of Durham Community Land Trustees and I'm here tonight to say that DCLT is also excited about this Kent Corner project. And as such, I am bringing you a board resolution that reads as follows. It says, whereas Durham Community Land Trustees is a community-based nonprofit organization with a mission to develop permanently affordable housing for low and moderate income families and to promote revitalization of targeted communities. And whereas the location of the proposed Kent Corner project is within Durham Community Land Trustees, primary development target area of Durham's western neighborhoods, therefore be it resolved that the board of directors of Durham Community Land Trustees is in support of the proposed Kent Corner project as requested by the Chapel Hill Street Development, LLC. This board resolution was authorized by the board of directors of Durham Community Land Trustees on July 8th, 2013. And I'll leave a copy with the clerk. Thank you. You're welcome. That concludes all the persons that signed up to speak in support of this item. Now I see three people standing up. David Anthony and Hilary, I say three people. Are you support and supporter? Okay. Could you give me your name? And I'm gonna reduce time now to five minutes each for the speakers. First recognize David Anthony. City Council members, I just wanna thank you all for your involvement in this process. It's kind of been long and you've been patient reading our emails and meeting with us. So you greatly appreciate that. Today I'm really speaking for myself. I was a member of the Kent Corner Task Force and I'm satisfied that we have come to an agreement here which supports the development now. But I would like to make a couple of comments that is personal and I'll keep it real short. One thing I wanna say is that this is probably one of the most rewarding things that I've been involved with in my life and I would encourage anyone who ever felt so motivated to get involved in opportunities like this. There were some conflicts between business and neighborhood that needed to be resolved and it was long and very difficult at times but it was really, really rewarding and like I said is probably one of the best things that I've ever been involved with. I would like to say that again we're in support of this but my personal hopes were a bit higher for what I felt would be maybe a more incorporating vision for the neighborhood. I feel that the things that we came up with were sufficient to protect the neighborhood and the Kent Corner Task Force was satisfied therefore I was satisfied. Appreciate your help. Thank you so much. You're welcome. Hillary, iconic. Good evening. I wanted to say thank you to council and planning. I've been a resident of the West End Moorhead Hills neighborhood for over 33 years and what I'd like to thank you all for is the fact that there was a provision in the process that allowed us to negotiate that being the development plan and I've heard that the development plan may possibly go away or the provision to allow for open dialogue and public input may be reduced but to be honest with you we all walked away from this as winners and I'm hoping that you continue to integrate this development plan and process and keep it in place. So thank you all. You're welcome. Just come forth and state your name and address please. My name is Mr. Marshall Williams and the reason I'm against it is because we had two areas where the project was being built that they're destroying. Used to be a community center where as you can still to read and write and learn to do interview things for themselves but now it's being destroyed and at the bottom here where I stay on Estee Street that also used to be an afternoon program for the children that came and studied but now they made it out of something else. But you said you had a prosperous and whatever you said you had but what are you doing for our students? What you gonna do since those systems were downcast and one of the meetings I was at on the West End I was informed they had a cost of approximately 25,000 dollars to fix that designated area on Chapel Hill Street. But somehow the fund was never raised and my biggest concern is whether our students that stand that area what activities where can they go besides way across town and other facilities that have areas that they don't have to go there for the studies that the afternoon students wants to do and the people in their communities. So that's why most of them that's my main concern against it. You're tearing down a resident that represent the community and not enhancing it for the community. And plus I went to a meeting and I've just found out in the last meeting there will be something for entrepreneurship and I wasn't aware until the last meeting that most people there with me in the West End meeting they wasn't aware except for three people that I see here, two of them that I see here they was aware of it. And so like I said my main concern is what you gonna do about the students that stay in the neighborhood who had the afternoon school program that they could go to the study and learn now that it has taken away from them. And I thank you very much. Welcome, we're gonna have some comments but let me ask is anyone else that wants to speak either for or against and two persons who spoke ahead down for you had positive statements. Anyone else wants to speak on this before I close the public hearing? If not let the record reflect no one else has to speak. I will close the public hearing in the matters back before the council and recognize the mayor protein. Could someone clarify what the gentleman was talking about for us, please? The gentleman was referring to- Just state your name again. I'm sorry. My name is Micah Cordsmire I work for self help and I live on Bedford Avenue. The gentleman was referring to the former West End Community Center on Kent Street that community center closed down due to lack of funds last spring, spring 2012 and we subsequently purchased the property from them. So you have not used the facility since last year? Is that what you're saying? The students haven't used the facility since last year. That's correct not for this purpose. We've made it temporarily available to a nonprofit that was just starting up but it hasn't been used by the community center since then. Have you thought about incorporating some sort of space to help students if that is the desire of community? Is that possible? Who can speak to that? Michael Palmer with self help. What I would add to that is that the West End Community Center they went out of business prior to seeking to acquire the facility and it was a funding issue at the time. However, two blocks down the street you do have the Lion Park Recreational Center which has after-school programming and programming for children. So essentially that's about two blocks away. Two blocks, it's a little more. I used to walk, I used to walk that area going to elementary school. But it's not, it's more than two blocks. It's more than two blocks but it's, well, I was in New York last week and I was able to show it's a few blocks. You're right, it's a few blocks. It's a few blocks. It's a few blocks. I ask again, is there any, could there be any provision for some space for the students, right, where they are? I don't think that there's sort of physical indoor space that can be created as part of the project, although we'd be open to ideas about after-hours use and that sort of thing. There is open community space that was created, that is being created and committed in the development plan, which was a request to the community and many of the planning efforts for West Chapel Hill Street that there'd be outdoor open space on the street and that is being created for the public. Tom just reminded me of the Emily Kaye Center, which is in close proximity. So perhaps someone could help move that program there if it's all possible. What do you think? The QOL folks? The QOL, yeah. Okay, could we depend on someone to initiate that? Michael will be ideal. Well, we can't offer any guarantees because at the point, I'm not quite sure, all of the programs that are offered at Lion Park, but we'll certainly be a part of making sure that people in the community know what is available and what is accessible and close to them. We'd like to do that. Michael, please help make this happen. Thank you very much. Juanita McNeil Center, when they went out of business, they did refer children to other programs, but we can follow up to see if there is a demand in the area. Again, I'll put my old hat on, working with the West End community and see where we can route those children. Thank you, sir. I appreciate that. After that clarification, Mr. Mayor, I move that I move. This is a motion that's been made. Second, before we move the vote, I wanna recognize the seat of attorney for comment. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of council. I need to put on the record that councilman Moffett has been excused from voting on this item and the item before both items related to Kent Corners due to a conflict of interest. He and I have discussed this and I apologize for not bringing that up to you sooner. Okay, you recognize councilman Schultz. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor, I lived in this neighborhood on Birch Avenue for about five years, and I also was one of a group of people that owned what is now the Cookery. It was Salam Cultural Center. It's a lot nicer now, but many wonderful things happened at the Salam Cultural Center. And so to see this come to that neighborhood is, I think it's just tremendous. I think it'll be wonderful. And it's been, development that corner has been needed for a long time, and I'm very excited about it. I also wanna say, Mr. Mayor, that Professor Elisa Johnson, who spoke to us a couple of times tonight, is a professor of English at Meredith College. I gave her her first job here in Durham, out of college some 30 years ago, if you don't mind me saying so, Elisa. And it's great to hear her now as such an eloquent spokesperson. Well, I certainly appreciate the process that this has taken and I know it seemingly has taken a long time to get here. I'm just pleased to hear the two persons who signed up to speak as proponents to express their support of the project. I guess one of the good things about it, and I'm not being facetious when I say this, one of the good things that came out of this, and I thank Dave and Anthony for this, we got the bidding process up, so we got a higher price for that. We didn't anticipate it, but I said I thank him for that. I thanked him for it, seriously. Any other comments? If not, I'm gonna call the question. Adam Clerk, will you open the vote? Close the vote. It passes five to zero, and Council Member Moffitt is abstaining on this item. All right, thank you. We move to item 27 for the city manager's priority request. Good evening, Mr. Mayor, members of council. This is a consolidated annexation and initial zoning item using the name Dell Web 3. It involves voluntary annexation petition for approximately 18 acres submitted by Polti Homes for this site, Case BDG-1201. The Budget Management Services Department has performed a fiscal impact analysis on this project and has determined that it will have net revenues that exceed estimated expenditures to serve the area following annexation. Pursuant to state law, the city council is required to apply an initial zoning, a newly annexed property, so this also includes Case Z-1221A, which is the requested initial zoning to the designation of Role Residential for the subject property, which is the least intense zoning based on the development tier. Staff recommends approval based on consistency with adopted policies and ordinances, and we'll be happy to take any questions. This is a public hearing item. The public hearing is open. You've heard the staff report on a consolidated annexation item for Dell Web 3. I would ask of their comments by members of the council first. If not, we have one person that's signed up to speak, Ron Harvick. Thank you, Mayor. We have three minutes. Council, I'm here for any questions or answer any questions you may have. Thank you. If there are no questions that anyone else that wants to speak on this item, again, this is the public hearing. Let the record reflect that no one else asked to speak. I would regret the public hearing to be closed as a public hearing. I would ask of your comments by the foot council. It's been properly moved. The second Madam Clerk, will you open the vote? Close the vote. It passes, 6-0. We move back to item 23. Again, related to this item. Conference of Planned Amendment, Dell Web, Carolina Arborus A-12-0-0-0-11. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Erin Cain again with the planning department. The applicant Horvath Associates is requesting to amend approximately 14.3 acres of the future land use map from low-medium density residential, which allows a maximum of eight units per acre, to low-density residential, which allows a maximum of four units per acre. The site is in Southeastern Durham in the suburban tier, north of US Highway 70, west of Andrews Chapel Road, and south of Leesville Road. In reviewing the application, staff has determined that the request meets the four criteria for planned amendments and is recommending approval. The Planning Commission recommended approval 12-0 at its July 9th, 2013 meeting. I'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. Again, this is a public hearing item. The public hearing is open. Would I ask all their questions? My members of the council? Is there anyone in the public who wants to speak on this item? Again, we have Ron Horvath who has signed up to speak on this item. Any questions? Any questions? Thank you. I'd like to record reflect there were no questions of the applicant. Is anyone else who wants to speak on this item, and sign them in the public hearing? Let's record reflect, no one else asked to speak. I would declare the public hearing to be closed as a matter of fact for the council. It's been a property movement second. Madam Clerk, will you open the vote? Close the vote. It passes 6-0. Moved item 24, zoning map change, Dell Web, Carolina Arborus, Z-12-0-0-0-0-22. Good evening again, members of the council and Mr. Mayor Pat Young of the Planning Department. This is a companion zoning case to the previous Comprehensive Plan Amendment request that was, you just approved, case C-12-0-0-0-0-22. It includes 444.33 acres of property in the south side of Leesville Road, east of Doc Nichols Road, and north and west of Andrews Chapel Road. And the rezoning is from Role Residential or RR and PDR 3.7 to PDR 3.7. Essentially what this does is add approximately 18 acres of property to the previously 420 some odd acres that you all zoned for PDR 3.7 in June of 2012 under case C-11-0-0-0-0-2-6. It contains the same committed elements that were adopted in that case, which includes a maximum of 1,314 residential units, development of a north-south collector street and several offsite transportation improvements. Staff determines this request is consistent with the comprehensive plan and other adopted policies and ordinances. And the Planning Commission recommended approval at its July meeting by a vote of 12-0. Be happy to take any questions. Okay, and this is the public hearing matter. The public hearing is open. Comments by members of the council. Recognize the councilman, Shul. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I have a couple of questions. The, first of all, I have a question about some numbers in attachment 11, the Legacy Summary Development Plans in which it says this zoning case will expand the development to 491 acres. Elsewhere, I think that expansion is referred to as 447 acres. So I just wanted to make sure I understood that. Attachment 11, Legacy Summary Development Plans. I'll start that. The rezoning case before you tonight covers 444.33 acres. The reference you made was to an attachment provided by the applicants. I'll let Mr. Horvath speak to the basis of that number. Evening Mayor, Council, I will say probably it was a typo on our side. Okay. It is 440 sum acres that's listed. All right, thank you, Mr. Shul. No problem. Just wanted to make sure I was clear on that. On page three of the staff report concerning the fire station, does that mean that the developer has to provide land for a fire station near this development? I'm wondering who gets to choose the location and size of the piece of land for the station? We're actually probably 95% through that process. General Services and the fire department have worked with us and our client to secure which site or approve a site and our client has got an option to purchase and that's being set in motion to donate that to the city. Okay, thank you. That's already in process. Thank you. And that was in cooperation with the city to help select that. Thank you. On page six of the report concerning the commitment of the age restricted community and if the HOA goes out of business there'd be no way to enforce the age restriction commitment, there'd be nobody to find that kind of thing. I assume that that is a very remote possibility but I guess I would ask, is that a very remote possibility? In my opinion it is based upon the other Dellweb communities across the country, yes sir. All right. So we feel a lot of confidence, I guess I would ask Pat the same. We do, Mr. Schul, Dellweb's been very successful across the country including in the region. We think it's a remote possibility but we did wanna make sure it'd be fully disclosed the fact that it would be very difficult to enforce in the case of the HOA going inactive. Thank you. On page 12 and elsewhere refers to a greenway trail and or easement will be provided. How is it determined if it's an easement or a finished trail? Isn't this a big difference that is to say between an easement and a finished trail? What's the developer's plan here and if there is an easement granted only then how does the trail get built? This was also raised by concern from the, our BPAC memo from the chair, Scott Carter. A lot of the trails, Ron Horvath again, a lot of the trails within the community itself are being built and constructed by Polti or Dellweb. There are some of the trails on the peripheral of the site that will connect in the future. They do not wanna construct trails that don't connect to anything. They wanna keep it a safe movement within the development. When trails coming from Briar Creek or up from the south are connected or brought up, there are easements there to allow somebody, whether it be the city, Dellweb, or the future developer to the south to connect. So a lot of the internal trails are being constructed. Okay, so yeah, that's what I was trying to be clear about. So some of the trails, the internal trails you are constructing, but the ones that give the interconnectivity, that those are mainly easements? Mainly easements where they don't lead or tie to anything at the moment. We did not wanna construct dead-end facilities, much like dead-end roads. So again on that, the Durham Open Space and Trails Commission sent a memo that was attached here from November 2012 talking about the project including pedestrian and bicycle interconnectivity with developments to the north and south. Has that been accomplished or is that something that is to be accomplished? It's to be accomplished. Again those connection points, nothing exists north, south, east or west of this right now. We're in an island, so we're doing the internal connections along the streams and greenways as well as connection to the roads for the bicycles and pedestrians. On the peripheral where those stream beds or the stream buffers and roads go to other sites, those dead-end connections are not being developed that the easements are being put in place. In the memo from the BPAC, Mr. Carter also asked that the north, south collector street be a complete street with striped bicycle lanes. Is that gonna be done? We are complying with the city requirements. It does allow bike traffic. Okay. Striping. Is that a, will that be a complete street? Yeah. Pat, do you know? Bill Judge with Transportation. Yes, the developer has agreed on the previous site plans and has already constructed a portion with striped bicycle lanes. Great, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. That was my question. Thank you, Mr. Horvath. Well, thank you, Councilman Schuhl. Are there other questions on this item? Before we, well, I'll take, entertain the motion on item. Recognize Councilman Moffitt. I thought I closed up again. Point of way, by the way. We, we, Diane, Councilmember Katadi and I were speaking, I'm trying to recall, but we think we have a right to council questions and that's where we are right now. Staff presentation, council questions, but no public hearing yet. It's not closed, Mr. Mayor. It's not closed. Thank you. Well, let me do it this way. Let me make sure the public hearing is open. Let me ask anyone else who wants to speak on this item. Let the record reflect no one else has to speak. I'll declare the public meeting to be closed and I appreciate your bringing that to my attention. And I'll go ahead and make my remarks now before we vote on it. I guess we get a lot of developments, a lot of plans that are brought before us in terms of planning and things that are going to happen, but I've been sort of intrigued with this development because it's new to our community by comparison to a lot of the developments we've had. And, Ron, could you remind us as to how many units is planned for this? 1,314, I think we're right at 1,300 now with what we have on paper. Site plans have been submitted for about 2 thirds of it, 750, and if you remember, there's several parcels that are still under a moratorium that we can't submit a site plan on quite yet, but phase one has been constructed. The infrastructure is in place and it is for 220 some odd units and the regional pump station for basin 25 has been constructed. And you had, I don't know if it was a ribbon cutting, an open house or what have you, but a few weeks ago, where people came out to look at. We had an open house, I wasn't invited to it, but that's a personal dig at my client. No, there was an open house expecting about 1,000 people to the general public to introduce the Dell Web, Carolina Arbor's to them, and over 2,500 people ended up showing up, mass chaos. Well, I just thought that was impressive to see those type of numbers for a project that's being proposed. And I'm sure the signature name Dell Web had quite a bit to do with, but the fact of it's here in Durham and we look forward to its eventual opening, but I just thought it was very impressive that maybe you have that many people come out to look at something that's being planned and proposed for the community. Thank you, Mayor. One little advertisement, if you go out to Carolina Arbor's, you'll see a cell center. Do not think that's the clubhouse. That is the clubhouse of most typical residential units this size. That is gonna, it's a temporary condition that's gonna be removed. We're currently getting approvals on a clubhouse that is 38,000 square feet, both indoor and outdoor pools, indoor running area, track above it, fitness center. It's a complete package. It's not your typical residential development. Well, thank you. I just thought it was impressive to me and I just wanted to share that in a public way with what's been proposed. I wanna thank the council and the staff. They have both of you have worked extremely hard on getting us to this point today and I wanna thank you personally. Okay, I didn't take the motion on item. Second. It's been a proper move. Second, Madam Clerk, will you open the vote? Close the vote. It passes six to zero. Okay, I'm gonna move, instead of going to item 25, I wanna move to item 26, Consolidated Annexation, item 2207, Page Road, Water Tower. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of the council, Pat Young again with the Planning Department. This is the Consolidated Annexation item related to the proposed City of Durham Water Tower at 2207 Page Road. It includes a voluntary annexation petition and an initial zoning to rural residential, which is the least intense zoning in the development tier that will allow the proposed use. Staff recommends the council approve the voluntary annexation and initial zoning, 2207 Page Road Water Tower and be happy to answer any questions. Thanks. Okay, and the public hearing, you've heard a staff report, the public hearing is open to ask first sort of questions by members of the council. If not, is there anyone in the public that would like to speak on this item even before or against? Not the record-flecting, no one in the public has to speak. I would declare the public hearing to be closed as a matter of fact before the council. Move the item. It's been a proper move. Second, Madam Clerk, will you open the vote? Close the vote. It passes six to zero. Thank you, we move to item 25, the last item on the agenda. Zoning map changed, Carolina Crossing 2, Z12000004. Thank you again for the last time tonight, Pat Young with the Planning Department. Zoning case 1200004 is Carolina Crossing 2. It's a request to change the zoning designation of a 5.033 acre parcel located at 5936 Farrington Road from its current zoning designation of RS20, a residential suburban 20, to office institutional with a development plan. And this property is in the suburban transit area. The request is consistent with the future land use, a designation of a comprehensive plan and other adopted policies and ordinances. There is a development plan associated with this case that includes commitments not limited to roadway improvements for the recommendation of the traffic impact analysis and the long range bicycle plan and a commitment to limitations of uses to two office buildings pursuant to the compact neighborhood tier development standards. Staff determines that this request is consistent with the comprehensive plan and other adopted policies and ordinances. At their July 9th, 2013 meeting, the Planning Commission recommended a denial by a vote of eight to four. I'll be happy to take any questions. Yeah, this is a public hearing item. The public hearing is open. I would ask other questions by members of the council, the staff report. Here and on, I have one, two, three, four persons that have signed up to speak. Well, let me back up. I have four persons that have signed up, three persons that have signed up to speak in support of this item. Is there anyone else that wants to speak in support of this item? Trying to get a sense of timing. If you don't mind, could you go to the clerk's office, clerk's desk and get a car, please? So I have four persons that have signed up to speak in support. I have two persons that have signed up to speak in, well, let me back up. I have Rosemary Kitchen. Is she present? Are you in support of, against? You're in support. So that makes five people sound. I only have one person that signed up to speak in opposition to this item. And that's Van Nosh, is that correct? Nor. Is there anyone else that wants to speak in opposition to this item? Yours is in opposition? Okay, let me redo my numbers then. Ms. Kitchen. You're in opposition to the, are you in opposition to this? No, I'm not. You're in support of it. Okay, well, I'll figure out how to do you. Well, let's do this. I'm gonna allow 15 minutes on each side for this item. And I'll call Ken Spaulding, Earl Llewellyn, Pastor Jack Hughes, and is the young lady at the desk four against? Against. Okay. Good evening, Mr. Mayor and members of the city council, my name is Ken Spaulding. I represent the applicant in this matter. The applicant is seeking to adhere to what the city council, the county commissioners, residents and planning staff have agreed would be the best land use for this location and this property, office institutional. Your planning staff has carefully and thoroughly reviewed this application and have found it to be totally consistent with all of your established and enacted policies. This rezoning will also allow for the public private opportunity wherein the developer will be contributing from the private sector, approximately $1 million for significant and substantial and quite frankly, much needed road improvements. Our tax base will be significantly enhanced due to the substantial contribution to Durham's tax base. This rezoning and its road improvements will complement the long range plans of the I-4054 corridor study by serving as a significant interim road improvement as the discussion continues as to the location of the proposed hub. This rezoning has been passed. It has been approved by the State Department of Transportation and our local DOT. In particular, this rezoning will provide for present and current improvements as the state continues to find appropriations to fund necessary road improvements across all 100 counties of this state. In conclusion, we feel that this rezoning will provide the city of Durham significant current benefits that will be felt in so many ways for many, many years to come. We respectfully seek and request approval of this rezoning as per your present policies, your regulations and established Durham City County Land Use Comprehensive Plan. Thank you, and we would hope that you would listen now to Earl Llewellyn who will speak primarily on the road improvements which I think are of concern and interest to the residents of this community. Good evening, I'm Earl Llewellyn, traffic engineer with Kimley Horne & Associates located at 200 North Mangum Street here in Durham. I prepared the TIA for this project which has since been reviewed by NCDOT and City of Durham Transportation staff. We all know that this area is congested during peak hours. I'm not gonna stand up here and tell you anything different than that. What I would like to do though is begin putting in perspective the impact of this site. This site traffic will add only 2.7% increase in the traffic on NC54. In addition to that 2.7% increase, the traffic study includes 6% background traffic growth. So inherently our improvements not only address our site traffic but other growth as well. The staff report confirms that all current levels of service will be maintained in critical areas and all intersections will be operating at level service D or better at build out. Which in itself is good but I would submit that there are other important benefits that aren't necessarily evident in doing a simple before and after comparison of level of service. I'll talk a little bit more about that in a moment here. The NC54 corridor study was conducted to determine long range transportation improvements and develop a phasing plan for those improvements. The most critical of those improvements is the grade separation of 54 with Farrington Road. Farrington Road will ultimately go over NC54. Once that is done, those turning movements at the existing intersection will be redirected through collector streets to the adjacent Falcon Bridge intersection where an interchange will be constructed. That along with completing the six line cross section on NC54, those costs total about $40 million. But there are currently no funds available for those elements of the corridor study. One thing that the corridor study does not do is recommend interim improvements during the time that we're seeking funding for that 40 million plus dollars. That's what this project offers. This exhibit simply shows in orange the proposed improvements that this project has committed to. Again, the new laneage is in orange. You'll notice, if you can see my cursor, this is Farrington Road in this exhibit. And within Farrington Road, we propose a concrete median which is shown in red. But this is sort of an overall view. What I would like to do is very quickly walk through the individual improvements. This zooms in on the NC54 Farrington Road intersection and I apologize for changing the orientation, but NC54 now runs east-west and this is Farrington Road here. The eastbound approach, we will be extending the current left turn lane from 175 feet of storage to 300 feet of storage. Also, currently today, there are three through lanes on eastbound 54. Unfortunately, the outside or southernmost lane is a shared through right turn lane. And the volume of right turns, while it's small turning on the Farrington Road, is just enough that people tend to avoid using that to go through the intersection. They don't wanna be slowed down by the right turning vehicles. So by constructing this new right turn lane, we not only gain the right turn capacity, but we help realize the full capacity of that through lane. Very similar situation on westbound I-40. And this, again, this is Farrington Road here, 54, and this is the terminus of the eastbound I-40 ramp. Here too, we have three through lanes, whoops, three through lanes, of which the northernmost one is a shared through right turn lane. The only difference in this circumstance is that there is a very, very heavy volume of right turns coming from 54 turning northbound on the Farrington Road. So no one really wants to get in that through lane because they are going to be held up by right turning vehicles. So essentially what you have is the capacity of two through lanes. So here again, adding the right turn lane not only gains you right turn capacity, but it allows you to realize more of the through movement capacity that's already there. One other thing that this does is help shorten queues between this very short distance between the Farrington Road stop bar and the existing ramp terminus of I-40. Let's quickly switch to Farrington Road, which runs north-south. This is 54, this is Cleora Drive and the project site is right here. You can see the existing church building. Currently today, during the heaviest parts of the peak, our traffic backs up on Farrington Road, sometimes through Cleora Drive. That's primarily a result of the heavy southbound left turns from Farrington on to 54 headed toward 40 and parts east. What we're proposing is dual left turns and then of course reconstructing the through lane and the right turn in addition to the west. You also notice what I mentioned before is that a median will be constructed from 54 up to Cleora Drive. What that does is restrict this drive and this drive to right turn movements only. That reduces friction, reduces conflicting movements in the area. When I was observing this intersection, I saw some really strange and dangerous maneuvers out of here. So I think this is gonna be a significant benefit. Serving the project itself would be a left turn lane headed northbound onto Cleora. This left turn extends from Cleora all the way down to 54. We don't need that much storage, but as a safety precaution, we've essentially made that a lane that goes all the way back to keep traffic from spilling back into the intersection. Could you go back to that slide? I think so. Yes. So the people coming out of Carolina crossing one, normally if they wanted to turn left, since that medium isn't in there, they could come all the way across and make a left turn. So now they've got to turn right and go down to Cleora and then turn left to come back. You're asking a very good question. Part of the project institutes cross access easements from these properties to the south through the proposed site up to Cleora Drive so that you don't have to make those circuitous movements. When I'm speaking about the people coming out of Carolina crossing the building on the right that normally when they came out, they wouldn't make a left turn to come back towards 54. Now it looks like they've got to go make a right turn, go down to Cleora to come back. Let's go to this map because they have two driveways over there. This is the one that's restricted to right turn movements only. The one to the north is right up here. That allows full movement access. That's a good question because also what we're doing in this area is because there was a left turn lane down here, which we're eliminating, we're moving that left turn lane to this drive to serve it better for this property you mentioned on the east side of Farrington Road. In addition, through this area, we're providing four foot bike lane through the widening which extends about a thousand feet. We're also proposing to add, where my cursor go, crosswalks and pedestrian signals at the 54 Farrington intersection. Of course, those will be subject to NCDOT approval and the design of those would be subject to their approval. So could you just say a little bit more about those pedestrian crosswalks and the signaling there? Are they gonna go, are they gonna be on both sides and go both directions? How's that gonna work? I think that's a question for NCDOT. One of the concerns that I would alert you to right now is I would suggest not putting a crosswalk on the east side of Farrington Road across 54. What that does is shorten this stacking distance, which is very critical between the I-40 ramp and Farrington Road. We could provide crosswalks on this side over here, on the west side, and across Farrington Road. I don't see any problem with that. Did that answer your question? Okay. Look, can you stand up, Richard? Sure. Tell me again about who owns the right-of-way for all the experiences you're speaking about. It's a little difficult to see, but let me try to outline that the existing right-of-way for City of Durham GIS extends through here, up this line, and all the way off the page. On this side, the point being it's a very wide right-of-way. That's about the closest pinch point that we have right there. So there is sufficient right-of-way to do these improvements. That means you don't have to purchase it as already there? It's correct. That goes for the improvements along Farrington as well as those along 54. Okay. That's Councilman Walker. Sorry to keep interrupting your presentation. That's fine. Do I understand that what you just said was that there's a proffer of a committed element regarding crosswalks and signals on Farrington and on NC 54 west of the intersection? I don't think there is a specific proffer written on the development plan, where it's filled. But that is something that we would look to include subject to DOT approval. As I mentioned before, there are some details that would have to be worked out. Am I stating correctly? So if I might point of information, there's not currently any proffer for pedestrian improvements on NC 54. So there would have to be one made tonight by the applicant and we'd have to ensure that it was enforceable and legal. The applicant shaking his head, he is willing to make that proffer. That's a nod. He's nodding his head. Yes, up and down. What is the proffer he's willing to make? To provide crosswalks and pedestrian signals at the intersection subject to NC DOT approval. Thank you, Mayor. I believe that there's currently sidewalk on three of the corners, but not necessarily the entire intersection. So how would you propose to tie into those to connect the crosswalk improvements to existing sidewalk and or fill in any gaps? I'm trying to look at the map and figure out which of those segments is missing. I think there may be some concern from DOT about extending sidewalk eastward into the interchange area. That again is something that we would have to work through the process with them. So I think perhaps to get to a point this evening, perhaps there could be some conversation with local transportation staff to come up with something that would be acceptable to all of us regarding supporting infrastructure and sidewalk stub outs and things like that. Certainly we would want to include pedestrian and handicap accessible ramps where they were appropriate so that, but by the same token, we don't want to lead people to where sidewalks are going to terminate and not be used in the future. I think that's your issue. Members of council, if I might consult it with transportation staff and if the applicant makes it clear that these improvements would be subject to DOT approval and specifications that would encompass things like appropriate termination points, handicap accessible ramps and other associated improvements. That is certainly what we're proposing, yes. And proffering. At the appropriate time, can you read that language into the record for us? And I would ask that the applicant specify the location of these improvements. I know you said something earlier, but again, we'd want to make sure we understand. I think we should say limited generally to the intersection of 54 Farrington Road. If we get down to specific locations, I don't want to mislead where they could be, but it will be in accordance with DOT policy. Could I? Not trying to avoid the question, I just want to don't, I don't want to over promise and under deliver. Did you finish? Since we've got this schematic here, can you speak to where the takeoff would be for the flyover on Farrington Road, 54, I know this has been proposed, but just what are we talking about? Bear with me one second while I find a slide that's perhaps better to look at that on. This is again reoriented, north is up in this area. The beginning point where Farrington Road would leave its existing grade is probably somewhere about 300 foot south of the intersection and it would tie back into grade somewhere 350 feet north of the intersection. You have any idea how high the flower would be at any point in time? My understanding is that to achieve standard clearance under the structure, that there has to be 16.5 feet of clearance on this type of route. So at the highest point at the intersection of 54 and Farrington it would be 16 plus feet, is that what you're saying? And then from that point, you would be able to achieve what is standard a six to seven percent grade off of that bridge back down to the existing grade. And the height of the buildings that you're proposing on your site of what, how are the buildings? I'm told that they're seven-story. I heard seven, I thought I saw seven-story, is that can I multiply seven times eight to get the total height of the building? What are we talking about? Maybe different for. I'm trying to understand, I know we're talking about 40 million dollars in years down the road before this happens, but I'm trying to get a sense as to how high the proposed buildings that you have on your site are gonna look relative to the flower that we've got over Farrington Road. My name is Phil Cuck with Earth Sync, sorry, Earth Centric Engineering. I apologize. The buildings that are proposed are seven-stories. If you assume roughly 12 feet per story, 12 to 13 feet per story, by the time that the roadway would be going down in front of our building, it's gonna look like a six and a half seven-story building above that roadway because the flyover, as it starts to come down, it'll actually be about halfway down that 16-foot height by the time it gets to the front of our building. And could you point out on that map where you're building the building? This is the existing church right here. Our building is actually placed, that the front building is placed roughly in that position right there. Does that help answer that question? Yeah, it gives me a better visual as to, if I'm sitting on the sixth floor, when am I looking at it? I'm looking at a flower that's coming down, I guess, almost at the end point. Just about, yeah. On the ground. Okay. A few other additional points, I think are noteworthy here. First, as a result of our choosing to develop under the compact neighborhood tier standards, the city's comprehensive plan will allow level of service E at the intersection of 54 and Farrington Road. Nevertheless, our improvements maintain level service D, which is the city's typical standard. Next, the site will likely intercept traffic that's already on the network, destined for other medical offices west of here, lessening the impact on NC 54 west of the site. Let me be clear, that kind of trip capture was not assumed in the traffic study. It was done that way to be conservative. And finally. Who is this a good point for? You're telling me it's a good point for people to live on 54 that are going west. They're not gonna see a lot of traffic because their client's gonna be stopping at your site. Is that what you're telling me? Certainly there are medical office uses a lot of them to the west, and it's understood that this complex would likely intercept a lot of that traffic before it goes farther west down NC 54. So it reduces the vehicle miles of travel is the best terminology I can think of. It short circuits their trip, makes it shorter. If they were going to a hospital and you say, well, you don't have to come to hospital now because we're moving you back into this building. I could understand that. But you're telling me that competition wise, you feel fairly certain that the market that's going to West Chapel Hill is not gonna be there because they're gonna be in your buildings. And therefore there's not a lot of traffic on that way. I may need to ask the applicant to speak to that more directly. I raise because you raise it. That's what I'm trying to understand. Right. And it's something that something we're seeing happen in the industry is medical offices, the supporting facilities are moving away from the hospital centers. They're trying to become more convenient to where the traffic is freeing up area in the hospital for more beds. The last point I wanted to make here simply is that there's a unique deeded access to Farrington Road from this property or actually the property to the south. And this goes back to the point I mentioned a minute ago. We'll be providing cross access easements to that property through the subject property up to Cleora Drive. As a result, the DOT will not be burdened with have to incur damages as a result of removing that deeded access. So I think that's an important point to keep in mind as well, which relates back to the importance of having cross access easements, which we are proposing. With that, let me summarize real quick. The site will add only 2.7% to the traffic on NC 54. We're proposing $1 million in improvements that accommodate more than just the site traffic for this project. These improvements will provide additional capacity. They will make more efficient use of existing capacity. And they will also help to reduce queues. It's important also to understand that there are no conflicts between the NC 54 quarter study and the improvements that we're making. We simply feel that until funds can be acquired to create that grade separation and do longer-term transportation improvements, interim solutions are needed here and that's what this project is proposing. Happy to address any other questions at the appropriate time. Councilman Schul. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I have a few questions. One is just on page 11 of the memo concerning the design commitments. I wasn't sure. The section on parking decks there is incomplete and it just leads me to ask someone in planning maybe whether or not there are other design commitments that are missing in this summary. If you look on page 11 of the staff memo, you'll see where it says parking decks and there's an incomplete sentence and then it's at the end of a section. Are there other design commitments that are not in there or is that just the end of a sentence is left off? You see where I'm talking about, Pat? From a quick look, Mr. Schul, it looks like, Commissioner, excuse me, Council Member Schul, it looks like there are missing words there. Face of the reduction of the development plan does have the detailed and complete commitment in regards to design commitments, one A through one D on the parking deck. I'll be happy to read those into the record if it's beneficial. I would leave that to somebody else that knows more about whether or not we need to do that, but just to be clear, yeah, so I'm interested in what those other design commitments are that I might be missing in that summary. Truthfully, I don't have what this summary was written off of, but I believe what's missing there is just the distance between those pilasters. And so there are no other design commitments that are, because that design commitment is sort of the end of this section. I was wondering if there any else missing. I believe that's correct. I believe that was the last part of that design commitment. That's exactly right. It says that they'll extend at least 12 inches down and to visually match the parapets all in the building and they will be located at least every three bays of openings. And there are no other then that would follow that. There is one, but I think it's incorporated into the summary in the staff report, which is that fabric canopies will be located at the entrance to all stairs to create distinctive architectural features. Okay, thank you. So how do the traffic improvements, I heard the Mr. Llewellyn say that the traffic commitments, traffic improvements are not in conflict with the 54 quarter study, which calls for the overpass at Farrington Road. And I was curious again, I'm more than curious, I was anxious to know from our staff, is there any reason in your mind that these improvements proposed by the developer would hinder our ability to make the changes called for in the 54 quarter study if and when money was available to make these changes? Is there anything, is there any way in which this isn't conflict with that study or is it indeed, does it comport with the future needs of that study? Bill, Judge, for transportation again, we're not aware of any way in which any of the proposed improvements by the applicant would conflict with the 54 study in any way hinder it. Thank you, Mr. Judge. And as I read this, Attachment 9, the letter from State DOT, it says that the proposed improvements by the developer consistent with the study degree to generate traffic impacts the quarter, and it seems to me that's also true in the, of our local DOT. In Attachment 9, pages two and three, the Department of Transportation letter from Michelle Gray outlined a raft of suggested improvements to maintain the current level of service, which is designated as poor. And to not let this intersection get further degraded, these are, I wonder what's worse than poor, you know, I guess maybe she could have called it horrendous or frightening or dreadful or something. It would be the next level of service down. But I wondered, Michelle Gray's letter outlines the suggested improvements, and I was wondering if the improvements that you outlined, have you adopted all of these suggested improvements that the DOT has suggested, and if not, which ones has developer not committed to? We've actually committed to all the improvements that have been recommended by NCDOT and the City of Durham, and now the additional proffer for the pedestrian signals. Thank you. And then this is a question for planning staff again. I know that the exact location of the Lee Village Transit Station near this location has not been, I would say, finally selected. I know it's moved around a lot. Assuming the selection of the transit route that does not bisect Metamon, but rather runs in front of Metamon, how far might these office buildings be located from the transit station? And can you give me a range of distance given what we know now about the probability of that location? Council Member Schill, we looked at that today and we have approximately 21-2200 linear feet, so less than a half a mile. 2200 linear feet. Thank you. And then the other, I'd say conflict that I see with the 54 study or potential conflict is that the study calls for this piece of land to be multifamily residential. And I'm interested in hearing from our staff any thoughts that you have about deviating from that recommendation. We haven't adopted that recommendation. Of course, that's not what the zoning is now, but I wondered if you have any thoughts to offer on that given the corner study. Sure, Erin Kane with the Planning Department. I worked as one of the staff members on that plan representing the Planning Department and the land use side of it. The land use model that's shown in the 54 corridor plan is meant as a guide, is meant as an illustrative example of how we should develop in a nodal fashion around the transit station and is very much consistent with how we've done things in downtown and in the Ninth Street area about the proposed stations that are going to happen there. It is not necessarily meant to take that illustrative drawing, place it on a parcel map of what is there now and necessarily say that is exactly where these lines should be. It was never intended to be that way and what it was intended to do was provide a guide so that when we do a small area compact neighborhood plan in the area, we would use that as a guide to be more specific about where exactly those lines should be drawn. So I wouldn't characterize it necessarily as a redesignation from sort of a multifamily residential to office, but rather that what we want to do is have the most intense development and the greatest mix of uses right around the station and then kind of a concentric rain model or it wouldn't be exactly concentric rains but that kind of model moving away from the station. And you feel that this fits in with that idea. This could certainly fit in with that idea, yes, where this would be some sort of, this would be I guess what they'd call a mixed use to around that area. Obviously it's not mixed use. Obviously it's not exactly what they call for in the 54 corridor plan, but it certainly can be once the rest of the area develops incorporated into the TOD design that we would place on the area. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I have one more question, which is, we've heard from neighbors from the Falcon Ridge community about concerns about coming out of their neighborhood, crossing lanes and that kind of thing. I was wondering if anybody from our staff would want to comment on that and whether or not this plan here changes that equation at all or and if so, is it changing for the worse or for the better? Am I, get you to clarify, were you talking vehicular or pedestrian or both? I was talking vehicular, yes, sir. Okay. No, I mean this proposed should not have any impact other than obviously there will be a slight increase in traffic on 54. More traffic could potentially lead to more delays but at the signalized intersections, they're all operating within our adopted level of service within the study area. Thank you very much. You're welcome. Recognize Councilman Brown. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'd like to address this to the, is it either Phil or your traffic person please? The, you state that this project would generate only a 2.7% increase in traffic along Highway 54. That's great. Does that also include Farrington Road or did you analyze that? That is only on NC 54. I didn't calculate what the specific increase would be on Farrington Road itself. I can tell you that the overall impact at that intersection of Farrington 54 is a 4% increase. Actually it's just shy of a 4% increase. My colleagues and I, I guess I know I did receive a memo from a town council member in Chapel Hill who lives in this neighborhood or in this area and I'll just quote you what he says as part of this memo that this zoning action would allow the applicant to generate about 40 times as much traffic as the current zoning allows. Is that what you found in your analysis as well? I've got confused here. I'll be honest, I think that maybe that comparison is a little misleading compared to a church on a weekday which a church generates very, very little traffic. So perhaps it could be 40 times. A church generates very little traffic on a weekday so perhaps our site does generate 40 times what it does today. Is that your question or am I misunderstanding? Maybe I didn't understand your response but I'm still confused. We're talking about two towers that will be used at least five days a week. I'm just curious the methodology that you used to come up with the 2.7% if you can briefly summarize that. Sure, basically what it does is use the ITE trip generation manual to determine the number of trips that would be generated by a medical office in the AM and PMP hours and it simply applies that as a percentage of the existing traffic volumes at the intersection. So it's... What was the total number of trips? The total number of trips generated by the site in the peak hour and both AM and PM is just shy of 300 trips. And that represents 4% of the traffic? At the intersection total, yes. Thank you. That helps us. Okay, thank you. The second issue concerns the $40 million and apparently that will really be needed to resolve the rather complicated traffic issues at this junction. And what you're telling us is that the state has on their plans that they will hopefully construct these improvements in the year 2022? Took a recent look at the TIP. Actually today, and what they're showing is that improvements, there is some funding, $1.6 million is allocated in 2014 in the draft TIP for a minor change, a connection between Farrington Road and I-40. That really doesn't address the great separation of Farrington Road. Those more longer reaching bigger ticket I-40 items that will really do some benefit to the intersection. They began, NCDOT would begin allocating funds in year 2020, I'll look at Bill to clarify I believe that's correct. But they in total, they would not have total funding to do the improvements until sometime beyond the TIP horizon, which is 2023. So then what you're suggesting to us is that this would be a good interim I don't know if we can use the word solution to this intersection because it's a tough one. It certainly is, but yes, I would agree with what you said. It would be certainly a good interim step in bridging the gap between today and when those far of the reaching improvements could be implemented. Any other council questions, comments? Okay, all right. Good evening ladies and gentlemen, good evening Mayor, Bill and council members. My name is Jason Hughes and I am the pastor of Farrington Road Baptist Church and also a chaplain in the United States Air Force Reserve. I wanna thank you for allowing me a brief opportunity to speak to this issue. As a representative of our church body, I'm here tonight to ask you to support this rezoning because it is vital for our community of faith. Our churches faced several challenges. One is a foundational problem in our structure that we cannot afford to fix and this opportunity to move forward with the development will offer us not only the ability to move away from a congested intersection, but also a new church facility from the purchase of our property which would be located three miles down Farrington Road and this would also lead to financial sustainability for our church. So while I think that the rezoning is clearly beneficial to our church, I think it's also beneficial to the county and right now where we're at is we have architectural plans, site plans already including church approval for a brand new church facility that would really change the trajectory of our church family. So we just ask that you would consider the future service of our church in this rezoning. Thank you. Are there any questions for me? Thank you. Okay, that concludes first as we were speaking and supported this item. Now turn to the opponents, Van Noor, Nash, Noor and Julia McMillan, okay. Thank you, Mayor. I did wanna speak in opposition. I know that the zoning commission voted against it and they noted that only two people were there in opposition and that was a reason to maybe approve it. And in our neighborhood, there's a lot of information's gone back and forth on the list service, probably the source of a lot of the emails you got. Much of it was about the concern about the traffic as we understand it that interchange and intersection are some of the busiest in North Carolina and adding 2% to the busiest sounds like a small number, but when we multiply 2% times the largest number in North Carolina, that's huge, especially if it's 4%. We didn't really know much about that. Rosemary, who I actually thought was gonna speak before me, noted that she stays abreast of a lot of the county information and let the neighborhood know about it. The zoning, I go by that road all the time and the little zoning sign was parallel to traffic. So I didn't really even notice it until after her email. So I think you'd probably get a lot more information if more folks were aware of it. But we did get quite a buzz and not everybody opposed. A lot of folks are for development and I am actually for development. I just like smart development and there's a number of developments that have been done by Durham County in that area that are in the city that are smart. I know there's some business straight across Interstate 40. Not much traffic going the other way on Interstate 40. Everything UNC development, Chapel Hill, it's the place everybody wants to live and work in RTP. So every morning it's a jam. When I talked to the folks in my office about this who didn't know about this at all, they said they're gonna add more traffic to that intersection, which I think is probably the surprise response you get from just about anybody that travels through that road. I understand the Carolina Health Way and it makes a really good webpage and I understand their desire to develop more clinics and all the clinics they bought up and down 40 from the highway or from the hospital all the way to South Point. But the great part about that is if Carolina Crossing is part of the health way, you don't have to worry about it leaving the county. Just let it move right over Interstate 40 and some of the other land that doesn't have these traffic problems is really built for that. In fact, when I was looking at that and driving around it, I saw the zoning work on the Paladin apartments, I think, is what you approved at some point previously. In that document, you required them to consider the traffic of Carolina Crossing when they worked on those level service C intersections. And I think you ought to at least ask this group to consider the increased traffic from those studies in what's happening in this intersection. I think that they are working as hard as they can to stay below your 110% that's in your document. And I think some of the assumptions aren't quite right. If you add pedestrians, I think that changes your level of service because you have to wait for them to come across. We don't have any pedestrians there now. You take your life in your hand if you wanna go between the bus stop on one side of 54 to the other side. Right now, there's no way to do that. So if you do add that, it's gonna change the level of service and it's not gonna be in the positive direction. I'm for the crosswalk, but I'm for some reasonable solution and adding. As I recall, it was 125 average a day going into that site to 5,000 a sum, which is where you got that 40 number earlier. So that's 5,000 vehicles that don't make those turns right now in that intersection. The other thing that concerns me, if you come from 40 from the 15501 area going east and you get off on 54 there, there's a lot of people that do this turn. Everybody lives in Governor's Club. Everybody down in that southern part of the county make this turn where you jump, you weave as they call it in traffic over four lanes. We're gonna make that to the fifth lane now to make a left hand turn on Farrington Road. And if you drive through there, you'll note the crazy people cutting you off left and right. Now we're gonna have people also trying to weave the 5,000 a day, trying to weave the other way and get into this facility. The other thing that struck me about it is this dense development. They're using 70% of the land for the facility. And in the approval, it asks you to approve that they can be within 25 feet at the front, 25 feet on one side, 15 feet. So they're jamming this thing completely up and they wanna go 120 feet in the air. That's now, if they don't wanna go 120 feet in the air, maybe they could change that and drop it back down. Actually, I think a four story building there, something modest, something with access from your other Carolina crossing. I understand why they wanna do it from a business standpoint. I think Durham served much better if you place this whole development in an area where like development is already underway. That in fact, some of the health way has facilities across interstate 40 there. Not that that's what you guys get to choose, but it sure does look smart if you can work your approval or disapproval to make that sort of thing happen. I believe that's all I have. I really wanted to add to Rosemary has some suggestions. She's a kind hearted lady who just wants some considerations put in. But I know our neighborhood's very concerned about the level of service there now. Every time your level of service goes down, you're gonna pack up more and more cars that are spewing exhausts into our neighborhood, waiting to get in and out of there, plus the waste of energy. A great solution would be some other entrance to Chapel Hill. Right now, people that don't take this entrance, it's because it's so bad. They're willing to go up to 15501. The more we try and make it better, the more we're gonna induce traffic. We're just gonna end up with more traffic belching, their exhaust while they're waiting to get through what's probably the busiest interchange in North Carolina. And I did have one thing that was in response to the response about the overpass of Farrington over 54. When that goes in, the right lane that they're planning to construct to allow people to get into that facility will no longer be functioning. So then they're going to be taking people down to what is proposed as an overpass at Falcon Bridge Road and double in back, or maybe taking the way through it. If the way to get into that facility is ultimately going through the other facility, then maybe getting something more modest and allowing that to be what you, for access to it. But all sorts of considerations to maybe limit the impact on what is probably one of the busiest intersections in Durham. Thank you. Mr. Mayor. Councilor Brown. Thank you. I think we failed to get the, actually the name and his home address from the speaker. Could you see, oh, give that. I'm Van Noah 6406 Falcon Bridge Road. Right there, probably three quarters of a mile from this intersection. Also, Van, I want to give you an opportunity to take back a statement when you said that everyone in the area wants to live in Chapel Hill. Excuse me, sir? You made the statement, I'm paraphrasing now, but you said everyone in the area wants to live in Chapel Hill. And I certainly didn't say that. I said that everybody in Chapel Hill works in RTP and they want to make that transition is really my point. It wasn't about any preference. No, in fact, I live in Durham. I'm happy to be living in Durham. In fact, the taxes they pay in Chapel Hill were a big part of why I went to Durham. We'd like to think also quality of life. And I'm enjoying that as well. Thank you. All right, let's go to Ms. Rosemary. Good evening, Durham leaders. I'm the troublemaker from Falcon Bridge. I started all this. I am Rosemary Kitchen. I live at 6702 Glen Forest Drive in the Falcon Bridge neighborhood, Durham City, Durham County, and I am Durham-centric. I believe economic development is good for our city, even when that development is across the street from my neighborhood. I am not a nimby in this case. The property under discussion for rezoning is a prime prospect for very successful development, and I applaud the foresight of the people who are working on doing this. Because there are existing medical clinics nearby and adjoining properties, I believe this property should be developed for that purpose rather than for residential. I have two concerns, however. The first is aesthetic. Think of the Pickle Building in Durham. Then think of the profile of our neighborhood, the surrounding buildings, new and existing commercial, or one, two, and three story. Now we're thinking about two, seven story, many Pickle Buildings. I don't think that's gonna be aesthetically pleasing, and I would ask that the developers think hard about reconfiguring that while allowing adequate parking for the project. The other traffic, the other concern is the traffic, and I'm feeling much better about that than I did when I walked in the building tonight. I however am concerned about the TTA pedestrians, the bus pedestrians, and the people who might be using the bike path. Thank you for your consideration of my thoughts, and again, I apologize for all the emails from my neighborhood. Good night. Thank you. Julia McMillan? I think I'm considered opposed, but I believe I'm more concerned than anything. But first, as a person who hasn't had a civics lesson in about 40 years, I appreciate the chance to hear how thoughtfully you consider all the items on the agenda tonight. I'm sorry it's taken me so long to get to a Durham City Council meeting, but it makes me feel better as a Durham citizen of 30 some years to know that you take these things seriously because we certainly do. I think several people have raised some of the issues. I'm a very happy client of UNC HealthCare. I work over in that other adjacent town. A little my concern, and maybe it's because I grew up in Fayetteville, which never got this right. 54 is one of the gateways into Durham. It's people's first impression of Durham, whether they're coming in from the interstate or they're coming from Highway 54, they're coming from Farrington, and I always like to think of a gateway as being a pleasant experience at the moment, it's not. And where we are a little bit with 2.7 as an accretion on previous small percentages is an accumulation of a mess at that intersection. So I think you have a tough job of voting on things as they come up, they're in small increments, but the safety issues from my perspective and the traffic kind of crankiness issues of people during rush hour, sort of accretion of frustration as a consideration. So I think several people raise sort of inconsistencies in this, I don't know quite the purview of the planning commission, but it was distressing to me that they voted against this, and then it comes up to the city council. So maybe that's a nuance, I don't understand, but I trust commissions to put time and study on that. But this thing may proceed, I do think we're having a chance now to think as a city about a problem that's major funded improvement is something like 2022. I mean, this is a larger problem that we're voting on in small increments, and I suppose this will go forward, but it does concern me that this is a problem that we'll continue to build. We have folks cutting through our neighborhood already who understandably want to avoid the intersection, and that will grow, I mean, that's unavoidable. They have sense enough to find the shortcut, but I would like to encourage you to think about the long-term implications of this, and perhaps with the adjustments you've requested, this will work out fine, and I'm sure I'll find myself as a patient in one of those offices, as many of us will, but I think your thoughtfulness is important on this vote. Thank you. You're welcome. Is it anyone else that wants to speak on this item? Either for or against, before I close the public hearing and bring it back to the council for comments, and council may have other questions of the developer or persons that have raised questions. Let the director reflect no one else asked to speak on this item. I will declare the public hearing to be closed as a matter of fact before the council. I'd like to ask one question, and I got lost in the discussion, and it relates to councilman Ed Harrison's question about the asking for a profit or death signal system from the applicant. What do we hear on that? Do we get any kind of response to that at all? What I'd like to do, Mr. Mayor, is read into the record what I, the notes I took from the previous discussion and have the applicant confirm if it reflects their intent. What I wrote is the applicant would commit to pedestrian improvements on the west side of Farrington Road, terminating on the south side of NC 54, subject to compliance with all NC DOT and city department of transportation standards and specifications, and acceptance by North Carolina Department of Transportation. Does that mean we'll put a pedestrian signal system there if we can? What does that mean? How do I read that? It does. I'll have to have our transportation staff come in and give the details, but DOT requires a limited set of improvements that the city has additional requirements that essentially amenitize and improve the pedestrian experience. And we would ask that both of those be committed to to address those concerns. Again, that's voluntary at the applicants. But that's expressed as the, I think the intent of what council and the speakers have said and what you all said earlier. If it's not, that's why I would ask you to clarify. I think as long as what we're talking about is under the purview of crosswalks and pedestrian activated signals that we're finding if we're talking about far reaching down the corridor or extension of sidewalks outside the scope of this area, that's the only clarification I would want to for the protection of my client. But I think we're on the same page. That's hidden on me. What does that mean? What does that mean? I thought a record. Yeah. Again, it's, we want to make sure that the councils and the citizens concerns are addressed. It's limited to crosswalks and pedestrian activated signals. That's clear and we can enforce that certainly. That the intent of identifying city and state standards was to ensure the striping markings and ramps were to city and state standards. And we're certainly fine with that. I guess Rosemary apologized for all the emails we got, but they were helpful to me in trying to frame some questions and get a better understanding what the issues are from the neighborhood standpoint. I like to get a better sense as to how do we avoid all this cut through traffic? Tell me why you think it won't happen and why you think a system that you're proposing is going to minimize the traffic they're talking about. It's going to be cutting through the neighborhoods. Like the young lady said, people are going to find a shorter cut. Is there anything to that? I guess I would add two points. Number one, I'm not sure exactly what path of cut through traffic she was talking about. I think I would simply add that by making the improvements that we're proposing, we lessen the likelihood that people are going to want to try to find an alternate path because we are adding additional capacity and realizing existing capacity more efficiently with the improvements that we're making. Rosemary, do you want to speak to that please? Okay. And it is Rosemary Kitchen. In Falcon Bridge we have experienced people coming north on Farrington Road and cutting through our neighborhood to get up to 54 to avoid that, they'll come up Hunting Ridge Road to avoid having to turn left on 54. And what that does is it is a petition on the street that faces mine. We have all signed it. We're going to have traffic bumps put in there as soon as the city can afford to do that. So we've already seen increased traffic from that through our residential neighborhood, which now has a lot of young children in it. And that's one of the problems that Noah was talking about, or Van was talking about. Could you respond to that? Again, I think that providing, people choose to make cut through traffic because there is a faster perceived easier path. I think by making improvements at the 54, Farrington Intersection will help discourage that. I'm not going to stand here. Could you put that intersection up on a strain again? This one? I don't have one that goes all the way down to Falcon Bridge, which is farther to the west. I will add this point though, not to make light of the cut through traffic, but in the future with the great separation of Farrington Road, there inherently is going to be more traffic at Falcon Bridge. That's what the NC54 quarter plan calls for. So while I think we can make some improvements that will help mitigate that for the short term, I think the long-term series of improvements is only going to create more traffic in that area by design because that's where the interchange will be. If we go to the aesthetics piece, tell me why we need a seven-story building. I know you would tell me this is a business case, but tell me anyway. The seven-story buildings actually work with the parking deck in order to kind of maximize how the building is functioning while minimizing the height of the overall parking deck. That's a lot of it. Basically what we're trying to do is actually balance the site out so that the parking deck actually functions properly for the two buildings that we're proposing. Additionally, the buildings are situated because we're using the compact neighborhood tier standards. The buildings are actually positioned against the roadway because that's a requirement of the compact neighborhood tier. And that allows for the parking rather than to be out toward the roadway to be interior to the site. And so the whole point was to get the buildings out to where they could be seen, visible, and have the parking actually hidden within the site itself. The other thing I'd like to add about that real quick too is because of the way the cross-access easements are working on the site, it actually allows for the other portion of the site that's directly behind us that has cross-access to us to actually utilize part of the parking deck as well. So that it actually helps to spread the parking facilities around a little better. Are there any other, I recognize Council Member Katari. I have several questions. Thank you, Mayor. I guess I'll direct this to transportation staff. Initially, I was thinking the neighborhood concern of cut-through traffic was regarding Celeste Circle and folks on the north side of 54. Falcon Bridge, of course, is on the south side. So traffic you're talking about is heading north from, say, Chatham County or very Southern Durham County turning left to go west into Chapel Hill. This project, of course, is on the north side of 54. So I don't know how this one is really gonna, this project would impact cut-through traffic in Falcon Bridge. So I just wanna, in terms of geography, I understand that it's a challenge. There's no question that the intersection is challenging and very dense. But so, Mark, could you possibly or someone from Transportation comment on the proposed Collector Street plan in Celeste Circle and then perhaps you all could talk about cut-through traffic on the north side of the, well, on your side of 54. As far as the Collector Street plan with the grade separation at Farrington and 54, there are a series on both the north and south side of 54 of roads to connect over to a Collector Street system over, I believe it's at Falcon Bridge Road that would provide sort of a north-south connection and then east-west over to it. So as part of that corridor study, there were recommendations to provide that connectivity between Farrington and Falcon Bridge. But that being a good 10 years out, can you comment on connectivity on the north side of 54? I'm Chris Howlett. I'm a developer. I just wanted to mention briefly, we have had a great relationship. We have developed property on three quadrants of this intersection and we have had a long-standing relationship with the folks at Falcon Bridge HOA. I believe Ron Johnson was the past president. Yeah, and so we've worked with them quite a bit but as you pointed out, I don't see the connection here of what they're talking about to our development and so I would agree with you. The traffic she's talking about isn't really affected by this development. To regard connectivity and cut through traffic onto the north side, I would have to reiterate what Bill Judge said. Both on the north and south side of 54, there are Collector Streets proposed that connect Farrington Road with Falcon Bridge and those will ultimately, when the interchange is built, see an increase in traffic. I would also agree that I don't see short-term until that occurs any need or ability to cut through on Cleora and Crescent Drive. Okay, thank you. I thought I had another question. Oh, of course. So if this project moves forward, can you talk at all about the construction timeline and safety concerns and how you will manage construction work in an intersection that is so heavily challenged now? That's another very good question. And if I can bring up another map. One of the good things about these improvements that we're proposing is that they all occur on the outside. We aren't proposing anything that requires widening because there is no median. In other words, you're working on the outside while traffic can be maintained through the corridor. You'll also notice that all the widening on Farrington Road is all on one side. I think I mentioned before that that's intentional so that we don't shorten this distance back here between Farrington and I-40. But I think maybe what you may be referring to is as far as phasing of improvements. The one commitment that I heard developer make is that typical developments would come in and do a phasing analysis with the first building. The applicant has committed to build all these improvements with first building. So disruption to the public would be minimized. I'll just comment that I live in Southwest Durham. I've traveled through this intersection quite frequently. My vet used to be in the property so I'm very familiar with how challenging it is. And I was originally completely opposed to this project. And so it was some surprise to myself that when I poured over the TIA and was walked through the traffic improvements that I actually think that this will be an improvement to the intersection. Definitely in the short term. And that I believe that the project actually handles as specified in the TIA that both the city department of transportation and the North Carolina State Department of Transportation concur on that you are handling the traffic that your project generates. So I was also concerned about pedestrian movement. We've heard complaints from TTA riders and getting on and off on opposite sides of 54. So I appreciate the additional commitment to do pedestrian crossing and related improvements. So I actually think that you're doing a good job to successfully manage the traffic. And at this point, hearing something else, I'll be supporting this project. Thanks. Thank you. I recognize Councilman Moffitt. Thank you. I want to start first of all by appreciating all the citizens who are here tonight. All the people who sent this email, people who are thinking about this and contributing your feedback. I have a question, Mr. Llewellyn. You mentioned something earlier that one of those things where I go, well, wait a minute, what did he just say? And the question I have has to do with the transportation, I'm sorry, I don't add that tip, transportation improvement plan. I thought I heard you say that they have $1.6 million in the plan for improving the connection between Farrington Road and I-40 in the next year? In the draft TIP, I would appreciate it if maybe either Mark or Wessler, someone in transportation could confirm this, but I looked this morning in the draft 2014 TIP, there's $1.6 million allocated to that slip ramp from Farrington Road to I-40, yes. Okay, and it'd be great if someone could tell me what a slip ramp is. Yes, that's correct. In the current draft TIP, there is a mobility fund project to essentially construct a slip ramp from northbound Farrington directly onto I-40. That's roughly $1.6 million. Any part of the larger project that was originally scheduled for 2022, I believe, in the staff report, anything after 2015 really is gonna be subject to the new state allocation formula that was passed this summer, so all those projects will have to go through that prioritization and with the MPO, so this could very well work out well for this corridor and they may get accelerated up, money may become available, or if those calculations don't work out, then it could slip the other way, but I think we would anticipate that it would at least be at least the current level if not perhaps even accelerate. And if I'm clear now, the slip ramp is on the, what I believe is the southeast corner of the intersection and would not be impacted by any of the road improvements that the applicant is recommending. Yes, which is another reason I guess why I think we would agree that the pedestrian crossing likely would need to be on the west side because of the slip ramp project. Okay, thanks. I did hear the citizen who said we should move the project across I-40. Unfortunately, that's not in the purview of what we can do. People bring us projects and if they need a zoning, then we can look at the use zones and see if they're appropriate, but it's up to developers and applicants to decide where projects occur if they're within what we think is appropriate. But I appreciate the idea. When I look at something like this, particularly something here, I'm looking at what's the impact on our citizens today and what's the impact on our citizens in 30 years. Today it's traffic and 30 years from now it's transit. And on traffic, we've heard people say, I've heard you say very loud and clear that the traffic here is frustrating, it's intense, it's difficult, but I've also heard that the improvements to this project will bring, will actually make that situation a better, at least in the short run, if not in the long run as well. And if they don't make it better in the long run, it won't make it worse. And so, like my colleague at this moment, I'm inclined to vote in pending any further information that might come forward and I'm inclined to support this project tonight. Thank you. Recognize Councilman Schuhl. Thanks, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Noah raised the question of whether or not a pedestrian crosswalk would reduce the level of service. And I was wondering if our traffic or transportation staff could comment on that. Yes, the crosswalk, because of the amount of time it's gonna have to provide for pedestrians to cross the length of 54 is gonna provide, is gonna reduce the level of service and provide some delays. But it would be required to provide pedestrian push buttons so that that delay only occurs when there are pedestrians there, so. Okay, thank you. Yeah, just a couple of comments. One thought I just wanted to present, Ms. Kitchin, is I think it might be more like Irwin Square than it is like the Pickle. So I live near Irwin Square, which I think is closer in height to the buildings that we're talking about here than is the University Tower building, I believe it's called. I live not far from that building and closer to it than I expect you will be to these buildings. And much to my surprise, it has been absolutely fine to have that tall building there. I think it's in a good place. And I think in many ways, these tall buildings will be in a good place. So I don't know if that gives you any comfort at all, but I do wanna tell you that that's my experience. And our neighborhood, like yours, experience is a lot of cutthroat as well. I will say that the traffic comps have helped on some streets, and so I hope you're able to get those. So I think this is a place that, it's just, this area is a problem. And that's not gonna change whether or not this development goes through or not. There's a lot of traffic on that road and there's too much traffic at that intersection. What I will say is I had gone into this process thinking that I would probably be in opposition to this development, but I, after studying the transportation improvement, spending a lot of time with the report, reading the 54-quarter study, I don't think that this in any way contradicts that study. I think that this actually, in terms of the traffic, I think that the, and our staff confirmed that I think that these improvements comport with that study. And I think that in many ways, this will be a support district for the transit that will eventually come. It's perhaps not quite as close as we might have wanted it to that station, but it's reasonably close. We talk about accessibility of jobs along that transit line, and God willing, and the creek don't rise, that transit line will eventually go out there and it will be a node for jobs for people and it will be accessible. So I plan to support this, and I wanna say one other thing, which is I really appreciate the work of our staff on this. I mean, you could hear from the comments of our staff, the seriousness with which they always take these things. Our planning staff and our transportation staff know this project in intimate detail and it's incredibly helpful to us. So I just wanted to thank you all, all the planners and transportation people here tonight. It's much appreciated. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Any other comments? Recognize Councilor Brown. Right, sorry. We all know and agree on one issue, and that is that the traffic at this intersection is horrendous, and what we also know is that that status quo will not change. Unless a project like this is approved that will enhance and embellish what is a problematic traffic area. So the question for me is, will this development improve the traffic situation at that intersection during the interim? Keeping in mind that the interim, ladies and gentlemen, may be more than by 2022, particularly if you follow and have cognizance of the North Carolina Department of Transportation and their budget priorities and the fact that money is becoming scarce. So it could be this improvement, it could be more than just a decade improvement. It could be a 15-year improvement or an 18-year improvement. I hope not, but that's the harsh reality we have to face. I would not be leaning towards supporting this project without the meaningful, I think, proffer that the developers offered tonight on the pedestrian right-of-way. And indeed, that was one of my major concerns that to spend more than a million dollars on traffic improvement, but to turn their back on pedestrian was something I could not support personally. So I am pleased that you took the actions that you did tonight and I will be supporting this project as well. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Any other comments, questions? If not, I'll take the motion on item. Some move. You know what the motion is. Some move to what? Support it. To support it. Okay. With the additional funds. Okay. Madam Clerk, can you open the vote? Close the vote. It passes, six is he wrong. Any other items come before the council tonight? Yes, Mr. Mayor. I recognize City Clerk. Yes, Lou W. Rose received four votes for the City County Appearance Commission. Thank you. Meetings adjourned at 9.38 p.m. Thank you.