Good evening.

Good evening and welcome to the August nineteenth, twenty twenty five meeting of the Greensboro City Council.

We are in the Katie Dorset Council Chamber.

Let the record reflect that all council members are in attendance.

We will begin tonight's meeting with a moment of silence.

And also we lost another great advocate in Maggie Jeffers.

She passed away about a week ago.

Um in a in a better fashion than we are right this minute.

She um she served the cities of Greensboro and High Point for many years, I think twelve years at the legislature.

She was an educator for thirty years, and she won Educator of the Year for the state of North Carolina.

So we have we really have lost two great states people over the last ten days, and I hope that we'll keep their families and friends in our thoughts.

If you must make or receive a phone call, kindly do so outside the chambers in the lobby.

If you signed up to speak online, please let the courier know that you are in attendance.

Speakers may address specific consent or business agenda items with up to three minutes allocated for their remarks.

For zoning matters, there is a 15-minute presentation, both for and above and against the development, and a five-minute rebuttal period for each side.

Speakers cannot relinquish their time to others, and the speaker order is determined by the presiding officer.

Depending on the number of speakers, council may adjust the time allotted for each person.

Handouts must be given to the courier for distribution to council.

All speakers are expected to adhere to the rules of decorum.

Any inappropriate or disruptive behavior will result in immediate removal from the meeting.

Removal result will result in a three-month suspension from in-person participation.

A second violation following the initial suspension will result in a six-month suspension.

A third violation or any instance involving physical altercations will lead to a 12-month suspension and may also result in criminal charges.

Zoom participants shall not speak until until they are called upon.

By statute, all members must vote on all items unless there is a direct financial interest, or if they serve on a board of a nonprofit receiving funding from the city on an item on tonight's agenda.

All votes will be moved and seconded, and the presiding officer will announce the vote total.

We do have a consent agenda for items G1 through G34, which are a grouping of agenda items that are voted on with one single vote to expedite what is believed to be routine and non-controversial items.

Any council member may withdraw an item from the consent agenda due to a conflict of interest or for the purpose of voting no.

Items removed from the consent agenda for discussion will be placed on the next business meeting agenda.

This meeting does include closed captioning.

Depending on the overall length of tonight's meeting, we may take a short recess around 7.30.

And all of 3751 McConnell Road, 35.68 acres, Mary Bell Tuttle, and others, and item H2, a public hearing for an ordinance for original rezoning for portions of 3725 and 3739 and 3751 McConnell Road, Amanda Hodiearn for Mary Bell Tuttle, Neil C.

Tuttle, and others, and item H3, which is a public hearing for an ordinance for original zoning for a portion of the McConnell Road right-of-way for the City of Greensboro.

Do we have a motion?

Motion to um postpone H1, H2, and H3.

Second.

Without further advertising.

Seconded by Mrs.

Hightower.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Opposed?

That passes 9 to 0.

We have no presentation ceremonial or presentation items this evening.

We will move to our consent agenda.

We do have a speaker who would like to speak on a number of these items.

G 17, G20, G33, and G 34.

Hold on.

Sharon, did you have one?

No.

I'm trying to write them now.

32.

17, 20, 33, and 34.

33 and 34.

Do I have a motion for the minus those four items?

Yes.

Um I'm sorry.

Wait a minute.

There is one.

That's the one we were talking about.

Do you say five seven?

G five.

Well, it was actually five, six, seven, and eight.

Sharon, which items?

Okay.

All right.

Mrs.

Thurmond, would you change your okay?

Five, six, seven, eight, seventeen, twenty, thirty-three, and thirty-four.

So we have a motion by Mrs.

Thurm, a second by Jamila.

Um council, please vote.

And that passes nine to zero.

Thank you.

Um G5 is a resolution to approve a contract in the amount of four hundred and ninety-four thousand one hundred dollars with Blue Arbor Inc.

for temporary labor services.

Um, did you want to vote no on that?

Or yeah.

Well, if we're going to do it for discussion, then we move it to the next agenda.

Is it a quick question?

I know.

Well, it's kind of an in-depth question that has some parameters.

Um, and I think so our Mr.

Holson and I wanted to probably hear this.

Should have really been on a business agenda, so we could have heard about some of this proposed.

I know two of the items relate to field operation, two of them relate to parts and rent.

Um, I I think one of the primary questions is um the wages that are referenced.

Um I know it's a couple different departments.

I'll have to ask the staff.

Uh ACM McCray and Well, I know they want to move forward.

I have talked to staff too.

Right.

And so I but they cannot really clearly answer the question.

Um, and I apologize because as of you do to me, I'm doing to you today to ask kind of at the nth hour, uh, if you will.

Um, but I think some of the concern is to make sure that the wages are correct and what the admin fees are and what programs are being implemented through this.

We heard heard about a program that we might be getting done through this.

And so could and Griffin maybe I'd have to speak to that, and that may be more than what you well.

Can we push them to the next meeting?

Uh yes, uh I'll find you if we can.

We can push it.

And we could can we push to the first business meeting of the month?

Yeah, whatever the first meeting in September is.

Yeah, that's that's okay.

So that would be um we would move five, six, seven, and eight um to the next meeting without further advertising.

Yes, ma'am, would you like to make that motion?

Sure, I certainly I'll make that motion.

We move items G five, six, seven, and eight to the first meeting in September.

All in favor say aye.

Aye aye.

Opposed?

No.

That passes eight to one.

Um we have um Mr.

Hartman has signed up to speak on G17, which is a resolution authorizing agreement in the amount of 250,710 dollars with the NC Department of Transportation for fiscal year 2026, FTA section 5303 planning assistance grant.

Mr.

Hartzman, you have up to three minutes.

George Hartzman, Councilman, Councilmember Methaney, and very potentially Mayor Vaughn should recuse themselves from voting on this item.

A clear and undeniable appearance of impropriety exists threatening the integrity of this council's vote and the public's trust.

The city's code of ethics demands that we consider whether a reasonable person, aware of all the facts, would see a member's action as inappropriate.

It's obvious a reasonable person looking at the facts surrounding this item would be deeply concerned.

The resolution involves the North Carolina Department of Transportation, whose board member for our division includes Mike Fox.

Mr.

Fox is not a disinterested party.

He is a partner at Telegraph Duggins, a firm that has received significant payments from DGI, an organization that's council funds and overseas, and whose CEO is Councilman McThaney.

Public records reveal a pattern of taxpayer fund and meals of possibilities undercurrent and other establishments involving Mr.

McNey and Mike Fox.

These including a $500 meal at Machete, where logged as official DGI taxpayer pocket expenses in violation of the contract with the city, which the city has not enforced.

Public funds are filtered to cultivate a relationship with a powerful official who controls transportation money.

From if they need to vote on this, creates an unacceptable appearance of quid pro quo.

It says government actions are for sale to those with access, bought and paid for with staked dinners and open bard towns in violation of state laws.

The records contain massive gaps and require contractual disclosures and business purpose are vague or missing.

The names of who attended taxpayer funded events are often absence.

This lack of transparency is in itself a failure of accountability.

The latest audit from DGI released is a profound breach of trust by the city.

The Internal Audit Department produced little more than a summary obfuscation, deliberately concealing last year's spending, lacking the details makes it impossible to verify the necessity, legality, or efficiency of the funds spent.

And Mayor Vaughn, given your known history with DGI and the high likelihood of your presence at multiples of similar functions, you should probably recuse yourself as well.

Please do the right thing.

Please do the right thing.

Do we have a motion on G17?

So moved.

Moved by Mr.

Matheny, seconded by Mrs.

Hoffman.

Council, please vote.

They will allow us to be able to do some things in transportation.

Correct?

And road projects, yes.

Road projects, which are critically important that the community wants to see get done.

I just want a clarity.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And that passed 9 to 0.

Item G20 is a resolution increasing supplemental agreement number 11 in the amount of 448,612 with the North Carolina Department of Transportation for EL 5101 DJ DR Downtown Greenway Project.

Second.

Oh, I'm sorry.

Mr.

Hartzman signed up again.

But good.

Yep.

George Hartman.

While the Greenway is an important investment in our community's future, the way it's being funded and managed raises troubling questions that demand answers.

Downtown Greenway is positioned as a public private partnership between Action Greensboro and the City of Greensboro.

On the surface, that sounds like a model of civic cooperation.

However, when we examine the financial relationships more closely, a concerning pattern emerges.

One that suggests our taxpayer dollars may be flowing through a complex web of interconnected organizations and individuals.

DGI is a sponsor of the Greenway, funded with misappropriated taxpayer money, which makes no sense as the Greenway is already being funded by the city.

Dabney Sanders, who serves as the downtown Greenway Project Manager for Ash and Greensboro, is married to Walker Sanders, the CEO of the Community Foundation of Greater Greensboro, which has received thousands of dollars from DGI and shows up multiple times in DGI expenditure records.

The Mike Fox issue aside.

What we're seeing is a system where a circular flow of public money that lacks transparency by taxpayer funded organizations are supporting projects that are then sponsored by many of the same entities that receive the taxpayer funds in the first place.

It's money going around and round through multiple nonprofits all receiving Greensboro tax, Greensboro taxpayer money.

With spending records being withheld from public scrutiny, there are no safeguards to prevent conflict of interests and more.

We cannot accept a process that appears to siphon taxpayer money through interconnected networks of organizations and individuals without proper oversight and transparency, with the city's manager on the board of DGI, who's enjoyed at least distributed gifts.

It seems to be normalized and permitted.

Why would spending records be restricted from public view?

The people of Greensboro work hard for their money, and they deserve to know that their tax dollars are being spent wisely, transparently, and in their best interest.

It's certainly not happening now.

Madam City Attorney, I do have a quick question.

I serve on the Downtown Greenway Oversight Board.

It is composed primarily of city staff and some of the different committee heads with the downtown Greenway.

Can I vote on this or should I sit this one out?

Madam Mayor, you can vote on this.

And in fact, if it'll save Mr.

Hartzmann some time, there's no conflict of interest if that's going to be his argument on all the items that he has asked to speak on.

And in absence of a financial direct interest, all members of council must vote.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, so we do have a motion by Mrs.

Thurman as seconded by Mayor Pro Tem.

That passes 9 to 0.

Item G33 is a budget adjustments approved by the budget officer 72925 through 81125.

Mr.

Hartzman.

George Hartman.

I respectfully request that appointed Councilman Hugh Holston recuse himself from voting on the neighborhood development budget adjustments.

Mr.

Holton serves as both a voting member of this council and as CEO of Greensboro Housing Coalition.

The budget adjustments transfer taxpayer monies to contributions to non-governmental agencies for rental assistance, home repair, and housing programs, precisely the types of initiatives that fall within his organization's mission.

Even if the housing coalition doesn't directly receive these specific funds, his advocacy role creates the appearance of self-dealing.

As CEO of the Housing Coalition, Mr.

Holson professionally advocates for housing funding, he cannot ethically vote on the same funding he lobbies for.

When an elected official votes on funding that could benefit his organization, those who are taxed for the money.

Those who are taxed for the money need to know whether the decisions serve the public interest or the personal interests of the people making the votes, who has yet to provide, actually, Mr.

Holson, the Housing Coalition's expenditure ledgers, especially considering what's been allowed elsewhere.

I urge Mr.

Holson, who recently accepted gifts from the City of Greensboro government contractors to attend the Wyndham Golf Tournament to voluntarily recuse himself from these votes and refund the gifts provided from Cone Health and Greensboro's Chamber of Commerce.

That being said, Mr.

Methaney has uh lobbied the water resources department uh using taxpayer funds in this capacity as DGI CEO.

Uh the same individual who lobbied the department with public money now seeks to vote on allocating taxpayer funds to this very same department.

We're being asked to trust the same people who've misappropriated money with a new now documented history of blatant misuse of taxpayer money.

It's been we have documentation at this point.

I call on Zach's fellow council members to request that Councilman McNaney recuse himself from any votes or discussions regarding this downtown Greenway project and related DGI funding matters.

Do we have a motion for 33 moved by Mrs.

Hoffman, seconded by Mayor Pro Chem?

Council, please vote.

Madam City Attorney.

Just to reiterate, you stated that there's no conflict of interest in any of the matters of the false allegations being laid out tonight.

No, sir.

Okay.

Thank you.

And Madam City Attorney.

Yes, sir.

Same question for me.

No, sir.

Thank you.

And that passes 920.

Our final item is G34 budget adjustments requiring council approval, 729-25 through August 11th, 25.

Mr.

Hartston.

George Harksman.

The items include money transfers for the downtown Greenway, as previously discussed.

Mr.

Methaney has lobbied the water resources department using taxpayer funds in his capacity as CEO of Downtown Greensboro Incorporated.

How can we expect impartial decision making when the same individuals who lobbied a department with public money now seeks to vote on allocating taxpayer funds to the very same department?

Those who spend our taxpayer are tax who spend our tax dollars should do so without personal or organizational bias.

Taxpayer money was misappropriated to influence government departments, and now we're asked to trust those same people to make unbiased decisions about funding the same stuff.

It's absurd in aggregate.

Which is why DGI's contract with the city of Greensboro says an elected official isn't allowed to work for DGI.

And there's no accountability whatsoever.

Can that be explained by anyone?

The more successful Zach is as a lobbyist, the more constrained he should have been as an elected official.

The rest is of council and city management is complicit in allowing these events to happen.

Moved by Mrs.

Hoffman.

Seconded by Mrs.

Hightower.

Council, please vote.

And that passes 9 to 0.

We now move on to the public hearing portion of our agenda.

Items H1 and H3 have been continued to the September meeting.

We'll now take H4 and 5.

H4.

Is a public hearing for an ordinance annexing properties into the corporate limits located on Knox Road and Marley Road and portions of adjacent right of way, 56.4 acres, Michael S.

And item H5, a public hearing for an ordinance for original zoning for properties on Knox Road and Marley Drive.

Michael S.

Fox on behalf of Landport Investments LLC and Carroll Industrial Development U.S.

LLC.

Mr.

Kirkman?

Yes, good evening, Mayor Vaughn and members of City Council.

Again, the request this evening is for annexation and original zoning of properties on Knox Road and Marley Drive, as well as adjacent right-of-way on Interstate 8540 and Mill Stream Road.

The subject properties are going from County C Z I, which is conditional zoning light industrial and county agricultural AG to City C D L I, Conditional District Light Industrial and LI Light Industrial.

North of the Request is currently zoned County AG and County C Z L I.

East of the Quest is zoned County AG and also County C Z L I.

South of the request is zoned County AG, County RS40 residential single family.

County CP, Corporate Park, City BP Business Park, and City C D L I Conditional District Light Industrial.

And then West Request is in County AG and County RS40 residential single family.

The subject property in East Caroline contain a single family dwelling, agricultural land, and a portion of Interstate 8540 as well as Mill Stream Road Rights Way.

North and West request are single family dwellings, agricultural land and undeveloped land.

East request is undeveloped land.

South of Request are single family dwellings, offices, interstate 8540 and undeveloped land.

The property is currently designated primarily industrial on the future land use map with a small portion on the northern end as residential.

And then also again as industrial on the future built form map with a small portion designated urban general on the future built form map.

This is a conditional zoning, and this is the condition that was offered by the applicant and advertised as part of their request this evening.

The proposed city, CD LI, and LI Zoning Districts allow land uses that are compatible with the general character of the area.

Staff notes care should be taken with respect to building orientation materials height and visual buffers to ensure appropriate transitions to lower density residential uses on adjacent properties.

These items were heard by the Planning and Sending Commission at their July 21st meeting, and the commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of both or actually all three items.

There were two speakers in favor at that meeting and for an opposition.

I can answer any questions.

Okay.

Mr.

Fox.

No, two people scheduled in favor of this item.

Mr.

Hartman and Dion Brown after Mr.

Fox.

Good evening, Madam Mayor and members of the council.

My name is Mike Fox.

I'm an attorney with addresses at 400 Bellmead Street, suite 800 here in downtown Greensboro.

I'm here before you tonight representing Landport Investments LLC and Carroll Industrial Development LLC in this request.

I have with me tonight a number of the Carroll team, including Craig Carlock, Philip Williams, and Paul Smith.

I also have a number of experts here in case you have questions regarding any of the issue technical issues regarding this request with Davenport Engineering.

I have John Davenport and Dion Brown, and also have Adam Carroll, who is a civil engineer with the Timmins group.

If you have questions regarding the specifics of the site request.

As usual, the your staff has been great to work with in terms of working us through the process.

This was passed unanimously at the city zoning commission last month.

And this property was previously rezoned a couple of years ago in the county to the current industrial zoning.

So to sum this up, essentially all we're asking is annexation to the city under the exact same zoning.

It's currently industrial.

We're asking for industrial coming into the city.

One thing that I would highlight is it is somewhat of a down zoning in that when we went before the county we had uh requested a square footage of approximately 600,000 square feet.

Subsequently we revised that down to this request is around 370,000 square feet.

So it's a smaller project than it once was due to some of the stream constraints, etc.

That will also reduce the amount of traffic that is generated.

You can see the location there, and it does is consistent with the majority of the nearby existing land use and the comprehensive plan, the purple there being industrial, and it is in the tier one growth area, it's very close to the interstate.

And as your staff has noted, it does support your goals of growing economic competitiveness and preserving the inventory of developable sites compatible with corporate and industrial uses.

But this is just typically a layout that you would see.

Obviously, all of the setbacks and the landscaping and buffering requirements.

Mr.

Fox, can I interrupt you for one minute?

There was one item that was not read in.

We did it the right way, which is also H6, which is a public hearing for an ordinance for original zoning for portions of Interstate 8540 and Mill Stream Road right of way for the city of Greensboro.

Sorry for the interruption.

No worries, thank you, Madam Mayor.

I I understand that in terms of how the city likes to annex the joint adjacent interstate to be able to continue to grow if if it's the council's choice.

So this concept and site plan is conceptual, but uh it it um we certainly will comply with all of the city regulations and ordinances regarding setbacks and access, etc.

Um we have done uh an updated traffic um letter uh regarding the proposed traffic and the folks from Davenport are here and they've worked with GDOT regarding uh the access and uh GDOT is as approved, you know, what they've requested and uh uh has it and and the Davenport folks have indicated that uh the this site plan is laid out and the existing roads uh can handle the additional traffic.

We know that there are there have been a history of some addition of some traffic issues down at the intersection of Knox Road and Mount Hope Church Road, um and there are some things that have been done already.

I believe the convenience store there has been requested and has complied with uh re rearranging their access uh to make that intersection work better.

There's also a future uh intersection improvement project that is planned there, it's not scheduled but but is planned uh going forward, and the council recently approved another development uh right there at that interchange that would have some interchange improvements as well.

So uh it's one of those uh situations where this is a fast growing area of the city, and the infrastructure is working to keep up with it as well, but there are plans out there for that.

And if you have particular questions about the details of that, uh the folks from Davenport are here and happy to answer that.

Um we have had quite a bit of communication with uh the neighborhood primarily.

I'll go back one slide.

Uh primarily there's a uh single-family uh neighborhood uh Marley Drive, which you can see really to the south, it borders the interstate and borders the uh southwestern portion of this property.

Uh we had a lot of communication with those folks when we originally did the industrial zoning in the county.

Uh we did a neighborhood meeting and had a few of them attend, and we've had some conversations with uh one of them you know regarding traffic concerns.

neighborhood uh Marley Drive which you can see really to the south it borders the interstate and borders the uh southwestern portion of this property uh we had a lot of communication with those folks when we originally did the industrial zoning in the county uh we did a uh neighborhood meeting and had a few of them attend and we've had some conversations with uh one of them um you know regarding traffic concerns some of the concerns were initially they uh the city's plan called for Marley Drive to be an access road along the interstate and uh once uh everyone understood uh we certainly never had any intention to connect to Marley Drive that was never a goal of ours and once the GDOT staff understood the residential nature of that road they quickly said yes that's not a good idea uh no one wants to put truck traffic on that road so uh that road uh would continue to stay as is for the foreseeable future um with those single family residences there so uh they would not there would not be any access to or from this site from Marley Drive uh and that was there were also questions your typical questions when you have an annexation it's if you're annexing your properties does that mean my property has to be annexed and of course the answer to that is no annexation in North Carolina is typically a voluntary thing uh uh these days so uh we answered that uh at the zoning uh hearing there were questions about uh the conditions on Knox Road in general uh which I would describe as really existing now not necessarily brought by this project but uh concerns that folks had existing now and uh if the council uh would like or has questions or perhaps in rebuttal I can have our traffic experts um identify those but those were generally the types of um questions that we had and uh we had a good conversation we didn't always agree on everything but uh we certainly had a good conversation and that's uh I'll try to be brief with your time um that's really our presentation if you have any questions about the the specifics of the site plan or the traffic uh I'm happy to answer them it is consistent with your future land use plan it is in the tier one growth area staff does recommend approval and it got unanimous approval from the zoning commission so we would respectfully request that uh you approve this as well both the annexation and the original zoning any questions for Mr.

Fox Chair I just have one quick question um can you talk about the traffic piece of it what exactly the improvement's gonna look like out there because I know you're not connecting to Marley correct I'm gonna ask all your traffic is going to be it's it's gonna be all on Knox Road yeah and Miss Brown is coming up if there's a more specific question than that but our only connection will be to Knox Road.

There'll be two different points of access and then just on Knox okay yeah you can see you it I apologize for uh the way this this um rendering is you can't really see the top the northernmost access but you can see a southern access there's also a northern access onto Knox Road uh to the north of the first building okay but basically you're right to the highway anyway correct both of those Knox Road from Knox Road you can go down to Mount Hub Church and access Mount Up Church and and access the interstate there or you could go up on 70 uh if you went north to Knox Road and and reach 70 yeah which is go Burlington Road or Sam Highway 70 whatever you want to call it but you're not going to drive traffic that way.

No it's anticipated industrial most of the traffic would would go toward the interstate came up I think we asked the on Brown 119 Bookstown Avenue with the Salem.

Yes ma'am yeah I was just asking how was the traffic going to be flowing because I know that um is my hope is two lane as well so I don't know if any improvements were coming through there or Knox Road is two lane so yes ma'am we have majority 95% of our traffic coming off of the highway um we'll say it's up south but I'm pretty sure is in the south what is it's a skew east west area and only five percent coming off of um US 70 so the way your project is designed that's gonna drive anyone going I guess truck traffic now to the highway to the highway piece and away from neighborhoods obviously correct I think that was just me or my question because I couldn't really see yes there are two access points on Knox Road one for vehicles and one for trucks.

Oh, there's one for trucks yes, okay.

If they decide to have the big trucks that they don't know exactly who their user is, but that would be two access roads or two access points for that.

So you're so that being the case you you won't need the acceleration lanes, acceleration lanes, you will we're still recommending um left turn lane for the access to the south.

Okay, because that would then take some of the truck traffic kind of out of the way.

Yes, ma'am.

Thank you very much.

You're welcome.

Ms.

Brown, do you have remarks or are you here for questions only?

I'm just here for questions.

Okay.

Okay, thank you.

I'm available.

Mr.

Hartzman, you are signed up to speak in favor of this project.

No, he's gonna go off the George Hartzman.

I object to the zoning ordinance, although I'm in favor on the grounds of clear conflicts of interest that violate North Carolina General Statute 160 D 109.

You might want to look that one up as we speak, counselor.

State law says no members shall be excused from voting upon matters involving the consideration of the members' own financial interest or official conduct, or on matters on which the members prohibited from voting under GS 14234, GS 160 D 109.

The statute is unambiguous.

Governing board members cannot vote on zoning decisions where they have a close familial business or other associational relationships with applicants, associational, or where the outcome would have a direct substantial, readily identifiable financial impact on the member.

I believe who's here.

Hi.

I apologize in advance.

I tried not to be here.

He also sits on DGI's board.

That's an associational relationship, and this is a zoning item, counselor.

It creates a direct business relationship between the decision-making body and the applicant.

Second, the timing of Roy Carroll and his wife's 10,000 donation to council member's campaign immediately following 20,000 dollars in Zach's campaign expenditures on web advertising and billboard space with Carroll owned SNAP publication, establishes a clear pattern of financial association.

These relationships clearly create exactly the conflicts that 160D 109, the first paragraph, was designed to prevent.

The appearance of impropriety undermines public trust in our zoning process and potentially exposes the city to a legal challenge.

Are you finished?

I'm asking for Zach Methane's recusal on this island.

So madam may I have a question of Mr.

Hartzman, because I'm very confused.

Yeah.

Very confused.

Because it says I'm not for ordinance, but I am for the project.

How you expect to get them done if if this is the case?

It's not split where one is opposition and one is in favor.

I'm in favor of the project.

As long as Zach McCann we accusers.

We're talking about the project.

This is a project coming to an area of the project and for industry in an area that needs more industry, so we have more housing, so we have more communities coming to the area.

So beautiful.

Really?

I think we should hear from the city attorney.

I'm moving the item whenever we're going to do it.

Well, you know, let whenever public whenever publicity.

Madam City Attorney, would you like to weigh in?

You confused too.

So he's speaking about 160 D 109, and Mr.

Matheny would be part of the governing board.

He does not derive any direct financial interest in this vote in this project.

It does not matter that if the allegations that Mr.

Hartzman puts forth are true, that there is some type of uh if Mr.

Fox represents DGI or this or that, Mr.

McTheney would have to derive a direct financial benefit in order for him to have to recuse himself.

And he just doesn't.

And so if he does not vote, it will count as a yes vote unless, madam mayor, you excuse him.

And you know, just to be clear, the phrase is direct substantial and readily identifiable.

I don't think it meets any of those tests.

Anything else, Mr.

Hartzman.

The state law says no member shall be used for voting.

We are here here.

Did you did I get muted?

No, you did.

We are here to talk about the zoning.

That's what we're here to talk about.

If you want to talk about the pros and cons of the rezoning, please take the last three minutes and 26 seconds to do it.

But please stay on topic.

I favor the project, Sherry.

Madam Mayor, I believe we have another speaker, don't we?

No.

No.

He was the only one on this.

Well, do you have around this sign?

Okay.

Um move the to close the public hearing.

Um moved by Mrs.

Hightower, seconded by um Mr.

Holston to close the public hearing.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

That passes 9 to 0.

I did not see.

Is it here?

I think for the on zone.

Mark Wilson and Colin Club.

I'm sorry, I don't see them on my list.

Oh, next.

For um H four.

Five and six.

This is H4, five, and six.

And on the list that we were just given, I have a I have a um Mark Wilson and a Colleen Faircloth that are.

Um, yes, we do have two.

We do have two in opposition, Mark Wilson and Colleen Faircloth.

I apologize.

You have 15 minutes.

Thank you.

Up to 15 minutes.

Absolutely.

I had the wrong sheet.

Mark Wilson 5460, Marley Drive, McLean's Well.

I'm an attorney, and I'm also with the Marie Rolf Charitable Trust.

We help persons with disabilities in finding employment, housing, and assistance.

I'd like to introduce Colleen Faircloth.

She's been with us at the Marie Ross Trust now for at least three years.

We have tried to help people in their homes so that in the final stages of life, they can pass away in the security and safety of their own homes rather than in an institution.

We have to use Marley Drive, and so I'd like to introduce Colleen Faircloth.

She's a registered nurse and she's a valuable team member.

Colleen Fairclus, 3800 New Garden Commons.

As Mark says, I'm a registered nurse and I use Knox Road at the intersection with Mount Hole Church Road.

Until we get four lanes on Knox Road at the intersection beside the truck stop, just one stalled out transfer truck can cause a head-on collision or accident.

There is simply not enough room to get 400 new transfer trucks each day through that intersection safely.

Please deny annexation and rezoning or limit the number of transfer trucks that may use the intersection until we get four lanes on Knox Road at the truck stop.

As a registered nurse, I am concerned that the possibility of the possibility of death or injury will be much higher until we get four lanes.

Having seen death and injury, I can assure you it's not a pretty thing.

It's not a pretty sight.

Thank you for your time, attention, and consideration.

Any questions you might have, Mark Wilson will answer.

He's going to get a picture up for us.

I don't know where it is now.

It was in the earlier.

Is it that one lady?

It looks like this.

Yeah, I know which picture is it?

I don't know what's happened to it.

Can you use this?

Yeah.

Yeah, there we go.

That's great.

Okay.

Um here's a picture of the intersection.

Um thing they didn't tell you, and it's it's like a Trojan horse.

I think it's almost hidden.

If you have 400,000 square feet in a distribution center, you're most likely going to have if we're with a successful distribution center, you could have 400 transfer trucks per day.

Um that's per day generated by a large distribution facility.

As this picture shows at the intersection of Mount Hope Church Road and Knox Road, we have a problem.

Did I do something?

Just in the town right now.

Oh, okay.

Um, thanks.

So before the picture goes away again, you can see one transfer truck that has stalled out has caused the possibility of a head-on collision.

There's a small vehicle.

The driver is on in the wrong lane up there at that stoplight beside that ST's truck.

And so that the SD's truck stalled out, and so the driver of the small car decided to go around and go on on the wrong side of the road.

I have to go through here every day more than one time a day, and Colleen has to go through here if she's coming to help on some of our projects.

And so there's a huge risk of head-on collision and accidents.

We need four lanes right here at this intersection, only really beside the truck stop itself would help greatly.

You have to go to the left if the truck stalls out a long time.

And I I have sat there many minutes, many minutes waiting on trucks, and I couldn't get through, and so people would start going in the wrong lane.

And if I was coming towards that small vehicle, I could get hit in a head-on collision, we could have an accident.

So what I feel like is, and my neighbors are saying the same thing.

They say that our Knox Road cannot handle 400 new transfer trucks a day.

We need the four lanes in this one area to prevent uh head-on collisions and accidents or to lower the risk of that.

Um the city went to great efforts.

Um at one point the city put up um barriers on the side of the road.

The uh the city put up no stopping signs, and the truck stop itself has reconfigured its traffic.

The traffic used to come in uh mid-range or the middle part of the lot, but now it comes in further down.

But the lot itself where the truck stop is fairly small and narrow, and it doesn't it's not a really good location for a truck stop to begin with.

So 400 new transfer trucks here is just not going to work.

Uh 50 we might be able to get by with.

Uh, so I think that this project needs to be limited in some way, or the trucks need to go out.

Uh Knox Road to the north and go to highway 70.

We need to limit the number of trucks that can go through this intersection.

My neighbors and I are risking our lives to go through here each day.

Uh just one transfer truck can cause this problem, so 400 would be a huge problem.

Um after having gone to great efforts to reduce truck congestion, the the congestion used to be much worse.

Now the city uh or now the um developer is proposing to the city, well, forget about everything you did, City, to reduce congestion.

Let's put the congestion back in there again.

Well, what was the point of reducing the congestion to begin with if you're going to let this developer and this attorney have their way?

Why why would the city do something inconsistent?

So, what I'm thinking is uh we need to have four lanes, we need to have reduced the traffic going through this intersection, have the traffic the uh transfer trucks go out uh another way, go out the end of Knox Road and onto highway 70.

If you look in the city's own figures, uh it says that uh the trips per day generated by this facility will be 1,482, I believe it is, and that the maximum peak per hour can be up in the 500 range per per hour.

So even the city's own figures uh support this, and uh Mr.

Tipton with the Greensboro Engineering Department, I mean uh Greensboro DOT, he's an engineer, was here last time.

And now, if it was a warehouse, there would be fewer transfer trucks than 400 per day.

But I think the money is in a distribution center, that's what everybody's building out there.

So with a distribution center, 400,000 square feet, 400 new trucks per day going in and out, it would be 200 entering per day, 200 exiting uh per day.

Um it's simply uh too many, and uh but the city's own figures support the what I'm coming up with.

So I've done research on this, and 400,000 square feet in the distribution center can generate 400 new transfer trucks per day.

Um so I think it would be inconsistent now that the city has helped reduce this congestion to to let it back in.

Uh things have been done at that truck stop.

I think that at the truck stop that they uh were required to uh limit laundry facilities uh for truckers and uh or eliminate them and to um stop providing showers to truckers to keep the congestion out because we have a lot of congestion in that area.

Now, a year or two ago, fire trucks from the Greensboro uh city fire department could not get through this intersection.

The sheriff's department had to be called in to get the um congestion out of the way so the fire trucks could get through to a fire.

So things have been done to eliminate the congestion or reduce it, but we still have it just with one transfer truck.

Um my neighbors do not want to um be in a head on collision, they do not want to be in an accident.

This project would uh lower the desirability and value of our houses, it would increase our risks.

Uh there's going to be a lot of uh noise, uh fumes, uh pollution from all those transfer trucks going up and down there, and it makes our houses less valuable, not more valuable.

So uh I'm asking that the city deny this project or uh limit the number of um trucks that can use this particular intersection until we get four lanes here.

If we got four lanes here, I can see where it could support more traffic.

So I think as Mr.

Fox admitted, the infrastructure is not there yet.

And why do they hide the fact it's buried?

Maybe it's not hidden, it's just buried.

Let's just uh give them the benefit of the doubt.

Why did why do they not tell the city that there could be a lot of transfer trucks?

400.

They didn't come forward with that information, and that would have been good to have heard from the very start.

Why should I have to bring it up and point it out to the city?

It would seem that it'd be better if the city had the information before it in the very beginning.

Um I um I appreciate the help of staff.

I think you have an excellent city staff.

I used to work for the City of Charlotte Engineering Department myself, and I'm indebted to them for helping me get through college.

Uh, and so I appreciate everything our city staff does and has done.

Um, but um sometimes things don't work out uh perfectly.

Sometimes growth is not progress.

Uh yes, I know you want growth.

Yes, I know you want uh improvements, but um we're not ready for 400 new transfer trucks right now.

That needs to wait until we get uh the four lanes and other improvements.

Now the city uh, if you look at this picture on the left is where the truck stop is, and on the right, there's another uh property.

Now that developer, the owner of the property on the right, was told that he's got to make improvements to this intersection before he can have commercial development.

Now he can have residential development to generate funds for his project, but before he can have commercial development, he's been told okay, you've got to make uh improvements to this intersection.

So after the city went to the trouble of putting up no stopping signs, putting up barriers, and I guess working with that uh truck stop to get the traffic reconfigured uh so that people didn't have to wait behind the trucks.

You know, at one point the trucks were waiting to get in to fuel up, and so they were backing up on this left-hand side here and keeping people from being able to get in because they were waiting to fuel up.

Well, now the trucks have to go down further to fuel up, but we still have this this problem uh with just one truck.

Um the city has gone to a lot of effort to reduce this congestion, but now to let it all back in is just inconsistent.

It doesn't make sense, it seems to be arbitrary and capricious.

Um the city is going to require the developer on the right-hand side to make improvements.

Uh why now all of a sudden are we going to let in uh a bunch of trucks?

It doesn't make sense.

Mayor Mayor, can we get some?

Well, I guess what's his hand is up here from the rebuttal, please from the traffic.

Um because I I don't know where those numbers come from.

And Mr.

Fox may address some of that in his rebuttal.

Yeah.

Okay.

Mr.

Fox.

Thank you.

Uh good evening.

I again, I certainly, while I would certainly respect Mr.

Wilson and his opinions.

I think he has uh a lot of the facts wrong, and he certainly misquoted me.

I never said that the infrastructure was insufficient out there.

Uh I've got um John Davenport and Dion Brown here who are gonna answer that question and tell you that it is sufficient, and some of the numbers he's quoting are inaccurate.

I would remind everyone that it is currently zoned for industrial use, and it calls for industrial use in your future land use plan.

All we're asking for really is annexation.

I I wouldn't be remiss if I didn't point out one thing.

A lot of the things that Mr.

Wilson spent a lot of time talking about have already been corrected uh in terms of the situation of the truck stop.

Um and if there are a lot of there are a lot of two range two lane roads on major roads in in Greensboro and Guilford County that if you were to have a wreck, they occasionally, you know, there's a traffic slowdown or they get slowed down.

I could go out in it, you know, once a month and take a picture on I forty with six lanes where there's a wreck and it's closed.

Does that mean we shouldn't allow anything else to happen to the city?

Absolutely not.

Uh occasionally things happen that will slow down traffic, but we're fortunate to be in a vibrant growing area that now we've got to keep up with the infrastructure and and make good investments in that regard, but we we can't quit growing uh because uh there happens to be an accident that slows down on one road.

So I'm gonna turn it over to Dion Um Brown and and John Davenport uh to address some of the con questions that Mr.

Wilson raised and also answer any questions the council may have if you if you believe I I I put somebody up.

Um so the proposed not built yet development, you don't know what it's gonna be.

You you're anticipating or is it going to be a district?

You don't know currently.

We we know it will be a light industrial development.

Could be it it's typically going when when you say light industrial development, it's it's a a building of some size, several hundred thousand square feet.

We've limited it to around three eighty max, uh and that's total.

If there's two buildings, it's it's a max of that.

So not it won't be four thousand square feet.

Won't mean what, ma'am.

Four four thousand, I think it is.

It won't be those bigger than that.

No, it's okay.

Yeah, and it's currently in the county the the numbers were down at six hundred thousand.

So it this is essentially making it smaller.

Yes, ma'am.

And those those roads out there are state roads, correct?

Uh not and I'll let Dion address that.

Okay.

Good afternoon, John Davenport of Davenport Engineering, one nineteen Brookstown Avenue, Winston Salem, North Carolina.

I just want to kind of and Mike took a lot of my thunder.

I it was like I'm gonna make some of these points as it relates to this.

Um, you know, we follow the processes of the city of Greensboro.

So the the land use that we use is what we agreed with staff, which is light industrial and the numbers that you've looked at and the uh the trip gen, the analysis, all those things meet your standards.

So I don't know where this gentleman got his numbers, but I I really can't refute that.

The points that Mike made about a vehicle potentially breaking down that hypothetical situation, every two-lane road that's the same situation.

So you have to make a decision.

Do I violate the law and break go across the line?

Do I make sure it's safe?

Those aren't things that you do and look at in a traffic study.

We we we we're looking at capacity, we're looking at fundamental safety issues out there.

Site distance is fine, you can bring that picture back up.

You know, as long as you're driving the way you're supposed to, there's nothing fundamentally unsafe with that intersection.

There's traffic that backs up sometimes.

That happens at all these intersections in Greensboro.

But we're not talking about something that is fundamentally unsafe that these trucks are all of a sudden gonna make a a problem that that's not there already.

So I just want to make sure that we're clear on that.

We've we followed the standards, we've looked at capacity, we've looked at the overall intersection.

And another point, this pro this property is already zoned for this land use in in Guilford County.

So if they didn't need to get the water and access, then they could go ahead and develop it, and you still have those trucks there.

So we're not adding anything that hasn't already been approved.

We're just gonna put it under the city's covering and then the city's uh watch.

Gotcha.

And so I had asked earlier, I think when Dion was up, if you were doing any kind of deceleration lanes or acceleration.

Are you creating a extra space so that the trucks kind of move out the way and traffic continues to go?

At our entrance, yes, ma'am.

Yep.

So we'll follow up.

So that will G dot standards, yes, ma'am.

That will do away with some of the bottleneck.

At our driveways, yes.

Won't be down at at the Knox.

Where he's talking about we're not doing any improvements there.

At Knox Park.

That's right.

At our driveways, yes, ma'am.

At your driveways.

So those trucks will get out of the way of other trucks.

That's right.

And I can tell you pretty emphatically, it's not 400 trucks.

I don't know where that number came from.

Okay.

But it's not 400.

That's not what the manual indicates, and that's not what we've worked out with the city of Greensboro.

So I don't know where we got that number.

Thank you.

That kind of helps clear up my question.

But to answer the question.

Because yes, the daily trips are 1488, but those are vehicles.

Those are not trucks.

I did run some numbers this morning on 300 uh thousand square feet of light utility.

I mean light industrial.

And it's going to produce 75 trucks if they did all trucks that come into the site.

It'll be 75 trucks and 200.

So they know nothing.

Like 200, one way and 200, another way.

28 and 200 out is what I wrote down.

And that is incorrect.

So 75.

Okay.

That that's great to hear and to be clear on it as well.

Um, because I understand they run a home and I don't want it to be so that maybe traffic creates a problem, an emergency situation for that for them, but that low amount of trucks that should be able to be managed.

Answers my question.

Take another 31 seconds or any other questions for one I have.

Quick question.

As I understood it when you were speaking about the traffic study in the first 15 minutes, um, you also also indicated that not all of the trucks are going to go down to Mount Hope and Knox, correct?

Some you anticipate some of them going up to 70 as well.

Some, yeah.

Do you want to give the number?

Yes, yes.

We had about what I'm just trying to understand.

So what is the question?

Um of all the trucks that will be coming through that you anticipate might be coming through, they will be some will go down to Knox Road and Mount Hope Church, and some will go up to 70 to get to the highway.

Yes, ma'am, that's correct.

Okay, so even if we have 400, which you're saying we won't, they're not going through that intersection.

They're not all going through that.

And the more I would think the more traffic there is, the more likely they're gonna go up to 70 rather than coming down to the light.

If it was 400, we have a completely different presentation today.

I can assure you.

The Greensboro, your staff would not be okay with that.

Thank you.

Oh, you good?

I know you and I were just talking.

Marley, Marley will not be accessed.

And I no, there would be no no connection to Marley Drive from our development.

It would just continue to be a one single fan, one single street going in and would not be connected to us at all.

And it's separated the entrance from Marley is separated significantly from our entrance, so that's not a conflict.

Thank you.

With those in opposition, you have up to five minutes.

Uh in all due respect, um, I think Miss Brown was incorrect about something.

Um so when we were in front of the commission, we were talking about how the city's figures show 1,400 and some trips per day.

Okay, so 1,400 and some trips per day.

Now, Mr.

Tipton with your Greensboro Department of Transportation, who is an engineer, said that the 1,400 includes trucks and passenger vehicles.

Okay.

So we really don't know how many trucks and how many passenger vehicles because uh they don't really have those figures.

In the future, I think they should have those figures so the city can make a good decision, and so that people like me have the figures too and can talk about them.

Um I think I heard earlier that they said that five percent of these trucks would be going to highway seven, and most of them, I guess 95% of large number, will be going through Mount Hope Church Road and that intersection to get to the interstate because that's the closest way to get to the interstate.

Now I don't think that they really know how many trucks will be generated.

It depends on what kind of building they put in.

Uh a warehouse would have fewer trucks, the distribution center would have more with the warehouse, you sort of bring in the the products and dump them off and leave them a while with distribution, they sort of go in and out pretty fast.

With distribution, they sort of go in and out pretty fast.

When we talk about 1,400 and some trips per day, we're the they don't count them the way people normally would, I is the way I would put it.

The same trucks could be going in and out, but if one truck goes in and that same truck goes out, that's two trips.

Okay.

Because if they're using that intersection, they're going to go through that intersection twice.

So when Miss Brown tells you 75, I don't know if she's talking about 75 or 150.

Because you could have 75 coming in and 75 going out in that intersection.

The fastest way to get to the interstate is through that intersection of Mount Hope Church and uh Knox Roads.

Um if you're going to have a successful distribution center, what I have found through my research is that it could be up to 400 trips per day.

That's 200 coming in and 200 going out.

Those could be the same 200 trucks, but it counts 400 trips because uh a trip is going to go through that intersection.

So I I don't think that they have uh looked at the seriousness of the problems we've been having.

My neighbor, um Mr.

Pratt, David Pratt got rear-ended at that intersection.

I've had the way to that intersection up to 30 minutes to get through.

People don't generally go across the yellow line.

Now, Mr.

Fox tried to he tried to talk about vehicles, um, stopping, but and accidents, but sometimes people just stall out at a stoplight, especially.

The two places where you can stall out, two common ones are going up a hill, and this property is down the hill from Mount Hope Church Road.

So coming up that hill from this property, there's a likelihood of stalling out, and when you get to the stoplight, there's a likelihood of stalling out for a transfer truck.

So it's not just accidents we're talking about, and we're not just talking about people breaking the law.

The problem here is not people breaking the law, the problem is too many trucks and transfer uh truck congestion, and trucks can stall out.

There are innocent and uh easily justifiable reasons why a truck may be stalled out or not moving.

So I ask that you um either deny this or limit it in some way, um require that they go out highway 70 more often uh or wait on the four lanes to get in there because I don't want to die in an accident, not a head-on collision.

I don't want my neighbors to, and I don't uh want what could be even one of your members of your family to die there or be in an accident.

Mr.

Wilson, quick question for you.

Um earlier you stated that well, obviously from Davenport we heard that there's some 1488 trips per, and then that they were estimating some 75 trucks.

Uh then when you stated that I guess at first that we don't really know how many trucks they're going to be, but then you said they're going to be 400 trucks.

How did you uh derive that number of 400 trucks or trips?

For one thing, when Mr.

Tipton was at the commission hearing, we were talking about these figures, and he didn't dispute them.

They figures.

Excuse me?

Which figures?

758.

Well I said 400.

Okay.

He said that a warehouse could involve uh fewer than 400 transfer trucks, trips per day.

But uh if this was a distribution center, it would be more because you would have more traffic with the distribution center.

So um I think it's within the realm of reason and uh that you could have 400 uh truck trips per day.

When I say 400 transfer trucks per day, I'm talking about 200 coming in and 200 going out.

That's 400 trips.

And so um if Mr.

Tipton didn't agree with my figures, he could have said so at the commission hearing.

But he said it would just be fewer if there was a warehouse.

The problem is you don't really know the exact number of transfer trucks that you could have.

But I think that uh we could all do a better job of trying to um marshal the information in the future and getting it before the city and coming up with with some estimates that would help you in the future, especially in this situation.

Um I think that there's a way to estimate uh roughly uh what it could be, but I think it would be more than 75 or even 150 uh because 400.

I it could be 400 trips per day, yes, sir.

I I've been researching this, and uh a successful, I mean if assuming it's a successful distribution center, it could be 400 truck trips per day, 200 and 200 out.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Mr.

Wilson, just so you were aware.

I know you had said that you know we could maybe approve something different or approve a lesser amount.

The city council can only approve or disapprove what is sitting in front of us.

We can't make adjustments to the application.

Well, then just just for your knowledge.

Well, if I may respond, then I think the only solution is to deny until we get the four lanes.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um do we have a motion to close the public hearing?

Closed by Mr.

Holston, seconded by Dr.

Wells.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

That passes nine to zero.

Um comments or motions.

I'm move the aye.

So um moved by Mrs.

Hightower, seconded by Mr.

Holston.

Um, Mr.

Mazzini.

I I just want to uh I've been reading the zoning minutes, um, and as it relates to Mr.

Tipton, what the minutes state is that the applicant's traffic engineer could give a better response to satisfy what how many trips per day would be.

And so I think it's important if Mr.

Tipton's gonna be our our staff is gonna be you know somewhat quoted or questioned, it states in here that he added um that it was overestimated and the estimates would be uh based on worst-case scenario, but he also advised the zoning, the planning and zoning board to take the advice of an actual traffic engineer.

And so I just want to to make sure that Mr.

Tipton is referenced appropriately.

Thank you.

Yes, I was reading them as well.

Um, Mrs.

Thurm.

Yeah, I just want to clarify for folks that are might be listening to this, and this zoning, there's some question of we need to know what it's gonna be before we can zone it.

Well the problem is the landowner can't market this property to potential users without having the zoning first.

So, you know, if if we were to not approve this zoning, then that would inhibit the ability to figure out who's gonna use the land.

Um it's a chicken or egg thing, but the zoning has to come first so that they can then appropriately market this property.

And I just want to make sure folks that might be watching understand that they can't tell us what it's going to be first because they can't they haven't marketed the property, they can't market the property because it doesn't have approved zoning.

So the is uh the zoning has to go through first.

Thank you.

I have one quick question on a light industrial.

Only leads itself to have what types of industry.

Um this space could become a grocery store or a Mr.

Kirkman.

Can you tell me this because I don't want to limit us, but I'm sure the general range of users are going to be uh industrial manufacturing and assembly, warehouse uses and distribution uses.

You could also do office uses.

Uh you could not do uh retail uses.

I didn't mention that as part of the question on there.

And while a restaurant use is allowed, it would be only allowed without a drive-through use on there, for instance.

So that the heavy commercial types of things.

It could be a drive, they could but a drive to restaurant on it.

They could not do that in the correct.

Okay.

Yeah, I just wanted to be clear on the uses.

So but jobs and jobs we need.

So we do have um a motion on H4, which is the annexation moved by Mrs.

Hightower, seconded by Mr.

Holston.

Council, please vote.

Item H5 will require a statement of consistency.

Second, um, so it is moved by Mr.

Holston, seconded by Mrs.

Hightower.

Um, if you would read the statement, please.

The Greensboro City Council believes that its action to approve the original zoning request for the properties at 725, 729, and 749, Knox Road, and 5437 and 5441 Marley Drive from County C Z L I, Conditional Zoning Light Industrial, to City C D L I, Conditional District Light Industrial, to be consistent with the adopted GSO 2040 comprehensive plan and considers the plan taken, the action taken to be reasonable and the public interest for the following reasons.

The request is consistent with the comprehensive plan's future built form map and future land use map.

The proposed city C DLI zoning district as conditioned permits uses that fit the context of the surrounding area and limits negative impacts on adjacent properties.

And the request is reasonable due to the size, physical conditions, and other attributes of the area.

It will benefit the property owner and surrounding community, and approval is in the public interest.

Council, please vote.

Okay, okay.

Okay.

The Greensboro City Council believes that this action to approve the original zoning request for the properties at a portion of interstate 8540 right-of-way and millstream road right-away from County AG Agricultural and County C Z L I with the adopted GSO 2040 Comprehensive Plan and considers conditional zoning light industrial to City Lied light industrial to be consistent with the adopted GSO 2040 comprehensive plan and considers the action taken to be reasonable and in the public interest for the following reasons.

The request is consistent with the comprehensive plan future built form map and future land use map.

This property the proposed city LI zoning district permits usage that fit the content of the surrounding area and limits negative impacts on adjacent properties.

It will benefit the property owner and surrounding community, and approval is in the public interest.

Council, please vote.

We will move on to item number seven.

Mr.

Kirkman.

Yes, thank you, Mayor Vaughn.

Again, the request this evening is our this is a rezoning request from R3 residential single family to C D RM18 Conditional District Residential Multifamily.

North, East and West of the request is currently zoned R3, residential single family, and south request is zoned RM8 residential multifamily.

The subject property currently contains undeveloped land.

North, east, south, and west request contain single family dwellings.

The property is designated as residential on the future land use map of the comprehensive plan and as urban general on the future built form map.

This application originally had two conditions when it went to the planning and zoning commission.

The applicant wishes to introduce changes in additions to the conditions, so I'll read everything into the record for the council to accept.

Condition number one is edited to remove short-term rental as an allowed use.

Condition number two is noting that no less than 20% of the building facade will consist of brick or stone, and then additional language was added to say additionally.

The following shall consist of 100% brick or stone, except for doors, windows, soffits, trim, and accents.

Those would apply to building facades facing McHouston Road, the first floor of all sides of each building, the first 20 feet of the eastern and western side of each building as measured from the corner closest to McHouston Road.

New condition number three, building height shall be limited to a maximum of 45 feet.

New condition four along the eastern property boundary.

New condition four along the eastern property boundary, they'll shall there shall be a type B landscape yard that includes a 20-foot undisturbed buffer.

Any new required plantings within this buffer yard shall be of evergreen material for year-round screening.

New condition five along the western property boundary for approximately 220 feet as measured from McHuston Road.

There shall be a type B landscape yard that includes a 20-foot undisturbed buffer.

Any new required plantings within this buffer yard shall be of evergreen material that reach at least 15 feet at maturity.

And new condition six, a seven-foot-tall opaque fence where allowed shall be constructed along the southern border adjacent to Covington Place.

Thank you.

Staff notes that this request does support the conference of plans filling in our framework goal to arrange land uses for more vibrant and livable Greensboro and the Creating Great Places goal to expand Greensboro citywide network of unique neighborhoods offering residents of all walks of life a variety of quality housing choices.

Proposed CDRM 18 zoning district would allow residential uses that are compatible with the surrounding area.

Staff notes the carrier should be taken with respect to building orientation materials height and visual buffers to ensure an appropriate transition to lower density residential uses on adjacent properties.

The Planning and Zoning Commission originally heard this item at their June 16th meeting and denied the request at that time.

There was one speaker in favor and for an opposition.

The applicant appealed that decision and then hired an additional counsel to assist with the request, and that brings it before city council this evening.

Well, you did answer one question because I saw the zoning meeting where it got denied, so I wonder why it came back so quick.

But understand that I can ask the attorney if there's been any further engagement.

Because that was a problem.

Yeah, if you couldn't make a full screen.

Good evening.

I'm Tom Terrell, 230 North Helm Street, representing the investment group of North Carolina.

Miss High Tower, I'd like to just start off by addressing your question.

I think that is maybe the elephant in the room.

I was not involved when this went to the zoning commission, planning and zoning commission.

But I did watch the video, I watched it twice.

And I think that if you watch it, you cannot escape the fact that the biggest problem was the lack of community engagement.

So I was not involved, I should say again, but when I became involved, the very first thing that we did was to do a six-page letter that had graphics that had information and that explained what the project was.

We did uh at a community meeting, and we took every single one of the comments that we heard, and if they were addressable in a condition, they found their way into a condition, and those conditions were told to the neighbors in the ladder that went out, and there was also an additional ladder that went out to the next door neighbor.

That ladder included an apology asked if the letter that went to all neighbors within 750 feet.

So I hope that you will find that the community engagement has gotten back onto the track that it should be on for this type of presentation.

Now, um, if I could give you a high level on this, it is R3 to CDRM 18, but it's a very heavily conditioned CDRM 18.

Um, this is not a large project, it's actually a small project for 48 multifamily homes.

You can put approximately seven or eight single family homes on the site right now.

Um the proposed height right now was 42 and a half feet.

Height became an issue, so I'm highlighting that, and it's on 2.672 acres.

Location always has a context.

And if you look at that red square in the middle top left, you will see that it essentially sits on Interstate 73, but it's also just north of Interstate 85.

All along 85, you have industrial use.

You have a lot of mixed uses in the neighborhood, including especially out toward Holden Road.

This is a closer up aerial that illustrates that the property to the South Covington Place.

It's a very nice community if you were to drive through that.

But when it was zoned RMH, it was zoned for something that was much higher density than what had already been there and that had been there for decades.

So we are trending towards higher density as we grow as a city, and Covington Place participated in that trend of higher density.

We have a futuristic comprehensive plan.

I love what Greensboro has because Greensboro does not micromanage future land use maps to create density suggestions on a block by block or a property by property basis.

It gives you much more flexible.

And this is the future land use map.

And there's no distinguishing feature here.

And as if you drive through this neighborhood, there are many different densities out there, but all residential.

But it will be designed so that the entrance to the building is internal, is right in between them, and they will be on McHuston Road.

Parking would be in the rear, and then beneath that would be a stormwater device, as is required, is always required.

I want to lift one paragraph out of the staff report.

First, the proposed density is appropriate, but care should be taken with respect to building orientation, and I think that you will find that that has now been addressed.

Building materials, I'm going to address that.

We have conditions that specifically address building materials.

Building height, we clearly have addressed that.

And I'm going to go into details to show that visual buffers are very carefully added here.

And in fact, we exceed greatly exceed what the LDO requires of a developer of multifamily adjacent to single family.

All the rest of these basically were not before the zoning commission.

They did not have the advantage of these conditions.

Building height limited to 45 feet.

I will repeat, it's probably going to be 42 and a half, but it has to be no more than 50 feet.

Why is that significant?

It's because today you could put seven or eight single-family homes that are 50 feet in height by right under this zoning district.

You can go to three stories 50 feet in height.

That can already go there.

This is not a change in the law except to bring it down.

Right now, if uh there will be a seven-foot tall opaque fence, probably some type of nice attractive stockade style fence at the lower part separating it from Covington Place.

These are the architectural conditions added, and I'll emphasize the facade facing McHuston must be 100% brick and stone.

Now, at the zoning commission, there were comments about how the quality of the building might attract problems because it would might get run down.

And we address that very consciously address that as you wrap around the buildings.

That first 20 feet on all floors has to be brick or stone.

The first floor all around every building has to be brick or stone.

On the buffers, we were trying to say this in a different way.

Staff work with us and convince us just to say type B buffer because it has to be an enforceable buffer, and we know what type B is.

But basically it's a 20-foot undisturbed buffer on each side, and where it has to be supplemented, it will be supplemented by an evergreen and the ever of a variety that has to go upward to 15 feet at least.

The first one was that three stories just does not fit around single family.

And we heard that apartments in single families don't uh work adjacent to each other.

Now the I'll repeat again, you can have much taller building at 50 feet than what uh would be allowed here, and you could have it today by right.

But our ordinance, this shows you if you look at the bottom, height, feet, and stories in R3 is 50 feet.

Now that has a footnote there, and that just says for a standard home, so it is no uh qualification.

There are examples.

I have some examples, um, but there are examples everywhere of three-story apartment buildings next to residential.

This right here is an older style three-story apartment building with brick facade, but it backs up to Hillcrest Avenue in High Point.

This is near my home.

Hillcrest has some of the highest uh property values in the city of High Point.

This is uh, and I just show you how they are adjacent.

Here's another example of a single family home adjacent to a three-story apartment building.

What's significant for this?

People always say, would but would you want to have this in your neighborhood?

Well, that is my neighborhood, that's my street.

That's a half a block from where my house is, and 100% of all the people on my street purchased knowing that there was a three-story apartment building on the street near them.

Um about two months ago, this council approved what probably will be one of the most signature outstanding uh mixed-use projects in Greensboro for a long time, but I will say this clearly five stories adjacent to of multifamily.

There will be 250 apartment units here, five stories adjacent to single family.

So this is this you should have approved this.

This is uh the type of density we need to be moving towards.

We will lose our privacy was something we heard a lot.

Um I represent developers all over the state uh who does uh residential developments.

This is what you see.

This is now more the norm than anything where backyards, you can just walk through the backyard, not every uh subdivision, but most, but I will say this privacy is not a zoning standard by state statute.

Privacy is not a zoning standard in our LDO and privacy is not a standard in the vast majority of the industry right now.

This is another uh it's a snip from GIS showing this is how we have many neighborhoods that look like this.

But having said that, I would like to show you this is uh the neighborhood, this is the property where all those trees are.

Those trees are 60 to 75 feet in height.

Yes, they are deciduous, and yes, they will lose their leaves for about four months of the year, but it is very thick in here, and if it doesn't meet type B will have to be supplemented by evergreens, there will be 20 feet undisturbed, but I just remind you to in under the current LDO, no type of vegetative buffer or screening is required in this in this situation.

So this is greatly exceeding uh what is there.

This is another shot.

The property line is pretty much right with that.

Telephone pole is, and it's a bit dark in this photo, but those trees are the eastern side of this property.

Uh that that home next door I learned at the neighborhood meeting.

Uh, we were told it's an abandoned building, but you can see how thick that is even uh in winter.

Two more uh concerns you're going to hear traffic volume from 48.

Um this doesn't even trigger a traffic impact study, but um the traffic would be, of course, uh dispersed throughout today.

You're going to hear that there is uh there are cut through uh vehicles, people trying to cut through on McCouston, and then they get down and find out it is a dead end, and they have to use private driveways to turn around.

Well, to my I will say the people who will be future homeowners are not causing that right now, and if this is approved, they will know as uh inhabitants, they will know that there are no uh there's no outlet.

So they won't exacerbate it uh when they're there.

Now um and then the last thing is I keep hearing different numbers every single day as to what our crisis is.

This is what I heard, in fact, uh Ms.

Boozway's at the park meeting um last week um for my someone I think knows what they're talking about, but we're in a crisis, and we have to find ways to get homes everywhere we can.

And I think we all know that when the supply of homes is low, but the demand for those homes is high, price goes up, and the only way to address affordability, the best way to address affordability is to increase that supply.

That's the end of my presentation.

I'm glad to answer any questions that you may have.

Any questions for Mr.

Carroll?

Ms.

Pinder.

Can I?

Um so going back to you mentioned earlier when you first started saying about the community engagement.

Yes.

So how many community engagement conversations have you had since the initial one that you had, or has it just been that one?

We we had um I sent out a six-page letter, uh, which is about standard what I do.

I do it in a QA format it's and it should be in your packet.

I have had calls from three or four neighbors, took every one.

I never screen calls, it calls call me and I take them.

But my my letter gave them my direct phone number.

Um I wrote a letter to the neighbors next door, a personal letter to them, and invited them to call me back, and they did, in fact.

Um I suggested a private meeting.

They came to the neighborhood meeting instead, and that's when I met the next door neighbors to the west.

Um, but that is um in this short uh time span since the planning and zoning commission, that's what took place.

And then I just have one additional question.

So just looking at the number of units, so what's the price point?

Because I know you mentioned um we can.

Okay, thank you.

Sorry.

Sorry, I'm sorry.

Well, no one knows price point.

Well, the the units, because you just talked so these are this it market rate.

I mean, this is not a um it's just not a workforce housing project.

Okay, that's thank you.

That's what I was trying to get at.

Thank you.

Um, Miss Pender asked one piece of my question was around the community engagement.

Um, I know you and I don't kind of see on this one, but you always send correspondence, and I always think in-person meetings because sometimes people don't read all that stuff because they're so busy.

I I find myself not always when I got six pages, I read two and put it down and come back and read two and come back and read two.

Um but um actual engagement, you may mention of that.

Um so the neighbors that you saw on the zoning meeting, and I think I was actually here in that meeting, um, when I heard their concerns, I watched it.

So uh it was denied by all of zoning because I think zoning um board commission members had some issues too, and so did I.

Um have you did you reach out to those that you saw that were part of that meeting?

You say you said letters.

Yes, but yes, the uh the ones that I reached out to personally were the ones next door.

Now there were others who spoke.

There was a gentleman who spoke, and I looked up where he lived.

There are two people who spoke who lived very deep in Covington Place, and I realized on GIS there's not going to be any way they can even see this property, let alone the buildings.

So I did trying to uh decide how I spend my time.

I did not reach out to town, but to the people next door I did.

And they will tell you that uh in front of the 30 or so people at that meeting.

Um I apologized on behalf of the owner and developer, and I meant it, and I say it again right now.

What about um the apartments being at the dead end?

I think that was the other thing.

Well, they're not at the dead end, but they're in the middle of the road.

The road is a dead end, so which means Yeah, if you keep going, Paris at that end, um nothing about these apartments cause the cut people trying to find their way into that community.

Nothing about the homes that are currently there causes people to try to use it as a cut through and figure out that it's uh it's not a way that can get through.

So emergency vehicles, which now I'm sure uh access it will still be able to access turnarounds and that's correct.

There are two there are two um uh entrance uh uh entrances to the neighborhood and exits.

One is out McHuston itself uh to uh um Halding Road, and the other was is out Osborne, and the Osborne Road um exit is uh half a block uh down McHuston.

Okay.

I think that's probably not correct.

I just wonder if because I watched as much only meeting I was here one and away or the other, I just was trying to make sure.

Um, but I appreciate all the conditions because I think you did address a lot of things that I heard um there, so hopefully um this will be able you'll be a good neighbor to the end of that live in that area already.

Thank you.

Mr.

Terrell, yes, two questions for you.

One is um, and just to clarify, because I thought I heard you say that there was a neighborhood meeting.

Did you have a neighborhood meeting?

Because I know that you did the letters.

Yes.

I know you sent the special letter to the next door.

Yes.

You invited phone calls in, but then I thought I heard neighborhood meeting.

But when uh Ms.

Pinder asked the question, I don't think that the neighborhood meeting came up.

Um I may have failed to say it, but yes, there was a neighborhood meeting very close by at the Greensboro Public Library on Vandalia.

There's a very nice meeting room, and the staff there, by the way, is very good to work with.

They're very cooperative, uh, and they made it very easy.

But uh we had um a very long time of QA uh until everybody had something to say.

Um was it well attended?

It was airwattended, about 30 people.

Um I wasn't listening to Sharon's um and then the next question is uh there is just one access point, one egress ingress.

But you're saying that when you talked about off of McHuston to hold anything off of Oz that that's that's actually outside of the property.

So it's just one way into the property, one way out.

That is correct.

There is one drive entrance if yes, if you discuss access for the traffic in the neighborhood, there are two, but there is only one, and only one would be needed.

Um this, of course, if that is an issue, would be addressed at TRC.

Thank you.

Um we do have two speakers in opposition.

Okay.

Thank you.

Um Deborah Johnson and Ray Adams.

Good evening, Madam Mayor and members of council.

My name is Ray Adams, and I have a property at 3607 McKeaston Road, which is located at the Covington Place development.

I appreciate the opportunity to speak to you today on this rezoning issue.

Even after the developer's info and invite to his only neighborhood meeting held on July 31st, I have not wavered in my opposition to this rezoning.

These three-story building apartments uh would be situated in the area that is surrounded uh by single-family residents.

The RMA and R7 zoned Covington Place and Anniston Dill developments are essentially the same as the surrounding R3 single-family homes, just having smaller yards making the transition less drastic.

However, placing apartment buildings taller and more densely populated in an area mostly one-story structures will drastically and glaringly be out of place at this location on McHuston Road.

The 2030 Comprehensive Plan does not address each individual situation.

Sufficient transition with no negative impact to residential neighborhoods is required.

This proposed development would affect the well-being and welfare and enjoyment of the area neighbors.

Eight zoning commissioners members thought it was not a good fit for the neighborhood and voted to deny the rezoning.

They visited the site and saw the neighborhood.

Hopefully, you have confidence and trust that the zoning commissioners, you put in authority, made the right decision.

The proposed site is only accessed from one direction via the dead end McCuston Road.

The Keuston Road and Osborne Road, the two Greensboro Roads providing access from the proposed property to Holden or Vandalia are just two-lane roads.

With approximately 318 residential homes using only these two roads for access, adding 75 cars to a possible 636 cars will pose traffic issues.

Neighbors all along McHuston have voiced their concern about traffic hazards.

RM18 apartment developments should be located closer and with direct access to major thoroughfares like Holden and Vandalia, so the added traffic will not affect the area neighborhoods.

Village Walk, which is across from the Hemp Hill Library, is an example of an apartment complex that has two accesses to two major thoroughfares, Holden and Vandalia.

Apartment developments should be reserved for larger undeveloped areas where several buildings can be built and not dropped in the middle of a single family area just because there is a vacant lot or two.

Rather, they should be located where commercial use is more appropriate because apartments are essentially a commercial building.

Also, most apartment developments have more than two buildings and amenities, making them more financially feasible to upkeep.

A concern is that if these buildings are not profitable, the lack of upkeep might lead to deterioration becoming a blight to the adjacent neighborhood.

Now, regarding watershed, with about one half to two-thirds of the proposed apartment building site covered with impervious surfaces, even with a proposed BMP, some water will most likely end up downstream on the lower Covington Place development, possibly affecting at least 15 homes in the call-de-sac there.

Also, there is a 30-foot-wide recorded drainage and maintenance utility easement appearing to serve the Covington Place call-de-sac that has for some reason been removed from the proposed site, even though it is on the 2005 recorded plat.

This project does not greatly benefit the city as a whole, like a park, water sewer infrastructure, or road improvement.

It benefits only the developer, but negatively affects the neighbors in the immediate area.

If you approve this rezoning project, you would be ignoring those citizens who are the ones who will have to live with any consequences for uh such as increased traffic or other issues that may come up.

Hopefully, you will be sensitive to the desires of your constituents, especially in regard to this isolated zoning issue.

No one wants a development place where they live if it doesn't fit the neighborhood.

Existing owners in the area bought their homes, expecting single-family style homes versus apartments, and that is how it should be kept.

Due to the fact that the three-story apartment buildings will drastically and glaringly be out of place, not fitting in with the surrounding areas, shorter single-family homes, increased traffic, possible lack of upkeep, and watershed concerns.

I respectfully request that you deny this rezoning proposal.

Now I have pictures to support my claim.

Okay, so that's it.

So this is the this is the area in question.

This is the site of the apartments.

This is the area that houses the Aniston area development, single family homes.

This is Covington Place.

And then have McHuston with various houses along McHuston, clear up to Osborne, and then there's a few other areas of single family homes in this neighborhood.

This is the house directly to the west of the two lots that are being proposed to be rezoned.

This individual who owns this house spoke against the proposed rezoning at the commissioner's meeting.

And actually his name and his wife's name is on the petition that has been presented, I believe, to the mayor this evening.

So these are examples of the two houses that are going to be directly across from the proposed rezoned site.

And this is going up McCuston, headed towards Anniston Place and Covington Place.

These are examples of houses that you would see going up the road away from the proposed developed site.

This is Aniston Place.

These are examples of the single-story single-family homes in Anniston.

Then we get up to Covington Place, and Covington Place is essentially single-family homes.

Interspersed are a few one and a half story homes.

Now this is the call-de-sac that if we had any issues with water runoff, they would be affected by the new development and rezoning.

Now this is Village Walk.

This is the depart uh the apartment complex that I spoke of that's across from Hemp Hill Library.

It has two accesses out of it, one to Holden and one to Vandalia.

Both are four-lane highways, so they have sufficient access that gets them out to the highway.

And I don't believe this is the actual that I have.

So we need to find I think this gives you a better view of what we had.

Well, maybe not.

Okay.

So this is the corner of McHuston on Osborne.

Okay, this is the main intersection.

Once you get through most of the residential single families of Annison and Covington Place.

Two weeks ago they had an accident at this intersection.

Okay.

Two cars collided and plowed into this swell here.

Now the owner of this corner house is wondering who's going to fix it and when can it get fixed?

Okay.

And not only did they uh you know end up in the culvert, but they also took the city sign down.

Okay.

So he ended up just putting the city sign in his backyard.

So there is currently some concern with the neighbors about the traffic that's going to end uh up being increased with 75 extra parking spaces.

And you can see McHuston here, and at this corner, they're indicating that there are 10 to 19 in the last, I believe, four years, okay, from 2024.

I pulled up uh with a uh request uh from um Guilford 911.

Um so there's one from 22, one from 20 uh five, uh actually two are from 25, and this was the last one that ended up uh happening on um August 8th of this year.

So there is a concern for traffic um issues uh currently, and um we're just concerned that it may just be exacerbated with added parking and added um dwellings in this area, and that's uh my presentation.

Do you have any questions?

Any questions, Mr.

Soffer?

Just wanted to be sure I heard you correctly.

Did you say that apartments were more like commercial buildings?

Is that what I heard you said?

They run under the commercial code, they are built under the commercial code, but in reality, they are somebody's home at some point in time.

So Sharon or Q who had a question?

Um okay.

I heard you talk about water runoff.

Okay, can you talk to me about that a little bit more?

So the more clearing you have of a piece of property, the more watershed you will have.

Um they count the the roof project system, they count uh impervious uh or uh yeah, impervious surface like driveways, um parking and all that.

Right now it is fairly forested, and if you if you had fewer coverage with um impervious surface, you would not have as much water runoff.

Now they are required to put a BMP or some storm water um you know uh element in there, um, but there's still gonna be some water that's probably gonna be missed, and Covington Place is down basically in a hole in that area, and there's a call-de-sac that when it rains currently, you know, has an issue, and so that's where even though there may be precautions, uh it just covering the land with so much impervious surface can create a problem.

So I I heard in the presentation from the applicant there was going to be a sanitary sewer drainage, I think there, maybe I didn't quite get the verbiage right.

Um and I'm wondering if that will help with some of the problem you're talking about.

There will and I can ask them when you're it will help, it will help with some of the problem.

However, if that is not the only that wouldn't be the only concern.

Okay.

And then there's one other thing you said when you were talking, something was removed from the plat.

And I didn't quite catch what you said.

Um it's one of the it's one of the questions I would have for uh the planning department on how a 2005 um drainage and utility easement was removed for this project because it does not show up on the current plat that the developer has platted.

So from 2005 it was on that plan.

It was.

And has the property being replied and now it has been removed.

So it's been removed by the developer who put it on.

I have no idea.

What the plat said in 2005 is that this was to be deeded to the city forever.

Okay.

So do we know, Mr.

Kirkman?

What where that is, what happened.

Said Mike is looking was looking it up.

We don't know what the the we'd have to look at the history of the property um 20 years since that that plat.

So let me see what Mike has found just a second.

But if this is the journey's utility easement that was granted to the city, it should still be referenced and recorded on the plat.

And have been taken off.

And I believe I believe it was there to service the Covington place um storm sewer.

You all have a package in front of you that has that sheet uh, like maybe the third or fourth sheet back from the end from the back of your packet.

Right.

And I think I think these are things that would be discovered at the TRC meeting.

I mean, we're really here just to talk about it.

Right, but it's part of the zone of the land.

If you've got land is flat, then land is flat, it should be platted.

And what's on the plat should be on the plat.

And that is land.

But I think that's as well.

But you looked at but water has become a concern as of late.

And so we need to make sure.

If easements are easements and they are on plates, they need to be on plats for their own plaques for a purpose.

So they should make sure that it's still on a plat so that it does address all the water concerns and the drainage concerns.

So questions?

We'll make sure I get the hands today.

Thank you for the petition.

I do appreciate that.

Is the basis of your uh concern that even with the additional engagement with the letter with the meeting at the at the uh henfield library, with the addition of the conditions that were brought in, the height and and the like, and also the facade and the brick and stone.

In addition to adding the buffer, which wasn't required, then it comes down to the additional density and the fact that it's not uh single family homes.

For the most part it is.

Now, as far as the meeting, um, when um Mr.

Terrell sent the letters out for the meeting.

Um I was out of town, so I opposed it being an email back.

Uh according to the people who ended up at that meeting, um, pretty much it was a heavily um attended meeting, and they uh uh as a whole turn the idea down because the buildings building an apartment, two apartment buildings drop down in a single family area uh surrounded by single fair uh single family area homes, just it is unreasonable.

I mean, they're gonna look out of place, and there's there's not more land there necessarily that they could end up building the development, and it's at the end of McHuson Road, so they can't go out the other direction, so it's not like well, well, let's build on 73 some more apartments and you can get out somewhere else.

I'm not sure if you're actually answering Mr.

Holston's question.

Um I think he's answered it.

Okay, thank you.

Um there is three minutes and seventeen seconds left if um Deborah Johnson would like to speak good evening, council members.

I'm Deborah Johnson, 3607 McHuston Road in the Covington Place.

Uh first I'd like to say that I was at that community meeting, and it was over very well attended.

There are eight people here, at least in the chambers that were also at the meeting, and the neighbors are overwhelmingly against this proposal.

Mr.

Terrell also likes to claim that we're complaining about quote cut throughs.

I don't think the apartments are going to cause cut throughs.

They're wanting to build 48 units.

I don't care if they're one story, two story, three.

The fact that there's 48 apartment units that they want to build, one bedroom, two bedroom, and three bedroom units.

We can assume that if there's 48 units, there's going to be 48 cars.

But in reality, it's more like 96 cars.

96 cars going up and down that street.

Um this is the that's not being is that being projected.

Okay.

This is the proposed site.

Uh we this is Covington Place, and this is Osborne, and just for reference, over here is Holden Road, and this is the end of McHuston Road, dead ends right there.

You cannot reach this site from the west from the south or from the north.

You have to at least come from Osborne Road right down here.

So I don't care if it's one to a three-story, it's the fact that it's 48 units.

I would be against 20 units.

I think a fourplex would be more appropriate.

A $54,000 investment in the land parcel, that's a good price.

But 48 units is ridiculous.

We on this strip of land between Osborne to the end, there are 26 houses with driveways on McHuston Road, and now a proposed 48 units is going to make our single family uh neighborhood a multifamily residential neighborhood.

It's going to create a transient population, whereas right now we have a very stable uh community.

I like the the crime is not bad, but I think it 48 units is just too much, in my opinion.

Um they are planning 75 parking spaces, in my opinion, that is not enough, and people are going to have yes over, they need more than that.

So I just want to boil it down.

I don't care about the uh all the the little nitpicky things as size and the construction, it's just the fact that 48 units is way too much and outnumbers us in the single family community, and the community is against it.

You have a petition with 90 signatures opposing this.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Any questions?

Uh Mr.

Terrell, five minute rebuttal.

And very briefly, and I'm I would like to use the um visual that's already on your screen.

I was not here when Covington Place was rezoned to RM8.

I don't know what the minutes show.

I have not looked it up, but I would be surprised if neighbors and the homes that are much smaller in this area did not come out to complain about the 80 homes that are in Covington Place and about the traffic that would be created by the 80 homes in Covington Place, and you can see that Covington Place, although it's not a per acre density uh much greater, but it is a total number of units, it is far greater than the 48.

But I want to address one more thing, and that is sameness and change.

There is a sense that if it's not the exact same thing as we have, or if it changes, it's inappropriate, it doesn't belong.

If you can follow my cursor to where it I am up right here, my daddy was born on that little square 99 years ago.

It was in a small two-room, I'll call it a shack.

We don't have any pictures of it.

They were people of no means, born to uh to teenage parents, and it was out in the country.

That much I have heard many many times.

That's where he was born, and it was out in the country.

Everybody who lives there now has moved in some form or another, and it has been changed.

It is not sameness, but it has been changed.

Change happens.

Change occurs all the time we evolve, and I would appreciate that uh you accept the fact and recognize that uh this is not an outrageous volume of homes.

Uh the conditions have been um applied to what dress concerns, and that yes, this is part of the evolution of a city that over the last hundred years has added homes to this part of the city.

Thank you, uh Mr.

Terrell.

Would the uh those in opposition like to utilize their rebuttal?

That is up to five minutes.

No, I wanted to ask Mr.

Terrell a question, but I guess he dropped a Mr.

Terrell.

I guess he dropped the mic walk away.

So I'm sorry, Mr.

Tyrrell.

Um I was going back to the water runoff concern that they expressed of the gentleman expressed, and in your design of this building, um the layout and and the land use of your building, and you mentioned in your presentation, I think a storm drain.

There is a stormwater pond, that's correct.

And so that want to be addressing.

So is that a in in anticipation about addressing the concern that he talked about?

Obviously, I was not the one who engineered the site, but um that is required uh as it has been determined by the engineer who laid this out that there needs to be a stormwater pond of a certain size in order to meet state regulations, and whether that handles the drainage is not a question an attorney can answer, but I accept someone who is a professional engineer, and I I accept their uh determinations it would be handled in TRC as you know, and there hadn't been any preliminary conversations with TRC.

No, ma'am.

Not to my knowledge.

I not uh was my fault that they have not been okay, and there was no traffic concerns, no in and out concerns, no the the trigger a traffic impact analysis.

As a matter of policy, our transportation department has decided that you don't even need to bring in a traffic engineer to look at medication until it creates uh a certain number of vehicle trips during morning and evening peak hours, and this doesn't trip that.

Okay, okay, thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Um Adams, Mr.

Adams I know a lot of the issues will be handled in the TRC um you know meeting and and development meeting.

Um however with the apartments being situated on the west side of this single family development, we're gonna we're we don't have a transition there.

And one of the things that is real important is that we transition.

So even though you might say the RM8 and the R7 have greater increased you know number of homes in an R3, some of those R3 homes were not there when Covington and Aniston were put in.

So you know, there is still a good transition from the RM8 to the R7 to the R3, but when you get to the RM18, even with conditions, it's still going to be out of place.

And people are going to drive through this nice area that has single family homes, they can go through Anniston where they have the single family homes, and they can go through Covington where they have single family homes, single-story home, and they'll drive down to McCuster down McHuston and end up seeing this larger larger three-story apartment building, two of them.

Okay, and that just it is out of place in that area.

Um like um Pam said, Um, you know, it'd be more appropriate for a lower density at that location.

Um that's um, you know, I don't think it's all about watershed, I think it's more about what it will look like in the neighborhood.

And as I said, you know, I don't think most of us would want something, you know, that did not fit in the neighborhood to be next door to us or in that area where we would end up possibly driving by daily.

Okay.

Um I have I have one question.

Can I have a show of hands of who opposes it?

Well, you'll find out soon enough.

Okay.

That's why I'm asking.

Okay.

The commission commission allowed me to do it.

So that's fine for that.

And uh, yeah.

So um anyways, that's uh again, eight of your commissioners turned it down.

Um motion to move moved by Mr.

Holston.

Second closed the public hearing.

Um seconded by Mayor Pro Tem.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Okay.

Um do we have um or discussion?

Motion to approve the that will require a statement of consistency.

Kami, did you have a question?

No, I'm sorry.

Okay.

Um, I I certainly understand the concerns of the neighbors, especially at Covington Place.

Um, you know, just re well in the past six or seven years, our single family neighborhood has had a five-story apartment complex built just down the road, and also six medical buildings at the end of our dead end street at the beginning of our dead end street that we were on.

Um so I understand the concerns about what's being proposed.

Um I wanted to address a couple things in terms of the folks and the comments that you just made, sir.

Um you talked about driving by this daily and seeing this building daily.

Um looking at the the lay of the land.

The only reason you would see it daily is if you're going to look at it, because the only way to get out of your neighborhood is to go the opposite direction.

So you wouldn't be seeing it daily.

Um I understand the commission turning it down, and one of the things that we all feel very very strongly about, and I think all of us on council as well as our commissioners, is the need for public engagement and the need for the neighbors to be involved, and that was as Mr.

Terrell said, totally botched up.

Um I think I would have turned this down given the lack of participation, the lack of communication, whether I thought it was a good project or not.

I too would have turned it down based on the information that the commissioners had at that point in time.

I appreciate that the owner, the developer, Mr.

Terrell have uh worked to communicate with the neighbors since that time.

They've admitted their mistake.

Um, and they have communicated extensively with the folks around it.

I think the buffers being significantly larger than required is a positive thing.

I also appreciate the orientation of the property, so that it's you know, you're seeing that when you drive by it for those people that do drive by it, you're gonna see a nice brick end of the building.

You're not gonna see everybody's balconies or everybody's windows or or whatever.

Um I just think a lot of work has been put into this.

Um I know it's not popular with the neighbors, but this is something we're facing all over the city in terms of the need to improve to uh increase our density, the need to build more housing for individuals to live and to live comfortably.

Um I really think that um as it's planned, it's a good project, and I will be supporting this project, and I know that's unpopular.

Um I know that the neighbors are not going to be happy with me.

It's a it's in my district.

Um, but I do think that it's the right thing, and I think that it will fit as well as we can fit it anywhere in the community.

Um these are hard decisions that have to be made, and yet this council, the next council will be forced to make hard decisions as we continue to grow.

I'll be supporting this project.

I think I've misses Hoffman and Dr.

Wells and Mr.

Holston Sharon.

You don't have to Mrs.

Hoffman.

Thank you, Mayor.

Uh I'm gonna be supportive of this project, but I just want to make a couple of comments.

Um you know, when I looked at this, if I I was struck by if you sort of flip-flopped what we saw here, it reminded me very much of the uh town home community that I lived in at the corner of Friendly and Holden for you know 12 plus years, um surrounded by the uh the the Wedgewood um neighborhood as it uh and opening up into uh to uh Web Shell Drive.

Right now we have been constructed just a couple of blocks down from where I live for a number of years, um, the um Hayden Place, which are three-story uh brownstones facing um friendly at West Avondale, and again that that feeds right into uh an older uh residential uh neighborhood that's been there since I guess the the 40s probably or late 30s across the street, Mr.

Terrell addressed uh the uh Carroll project that will uh that that will come out of the ground perhaps next year at Hobbs Friendly, where you're going to have five stories, and again backing up to a very upscale neighborhood and across the street uh from Hawthorne, which is uh a major, again, a apartment for four-story, four-story, I guess, or five story.

So what you're going to see here is not any different from what we are seeing in other parts of the city.

Um, again, I I lived in a neighborhood with 48 townhomes.

That's the same amount of traffic that you're that you're speaking about here with 48 apartments.

Um, you know, the the world is changing, it's it's always changing.

Um, but we have a huge need for um for for um residences or residential properties in the city, and they can be apartments, they can be townhouses, they can be attached, detached, they can be uh small lot line, they can be accessory dwellings.

We want all of them, and um and I don't think we you know it seems inappropriate to denigrate apartment living.

Um those are homes that that people are are choosing to live in, and it's no different from how we might choose to live in some other sort of residential housing in this city.

So I'm gonna be supportive of this project.

And sometimes that's not pleasing to all of us, uh, but um it's it's it you know it's it's it's it's the it's the it's appropriate uh for the time that we're living in and the housing needs that we may need to meet uh in this city.

Um greater density is just something that uh that uh that we are going to see more of, we need more of in order to um uh to meet the housing needs that we have.

And I always go back and say to people, this is the way people lived if you go back to the 1920s.

There were all sorts of housing built right next to each other in major cities all over this country.

We only um we only began to have suburban sprawl um after World War II when we needed to build lots of housing for lots of people uh returning uh from um from World War II.

So um I'm supportive of this project and um thank you very much.

Thank you.

Dr.

Wills I I said I think it was about four years ago when we were on the campaign trail, and the question was asked, what's gonna be, what do you think will be the greatest challenge facing?

And I said it will be change having uh citizens to accept the fact that there will be more density, there will be different kinds of houses next to each other, because the city's growing.

We have more people and where they're going where they're going to live.

Everybody can't afford a house.

In fact, a lot of people don't want to buy a house now.

They just want an apartment.

So we have to have apartments, we have to have single houses, we have to have duplexes, we have to have a variety of places for folks to live.

I think as citizens, as neighbors, we need to think about someone other than ourselves.

There are people who need an apartment, just like you have been fortunate enough to have your house.

But these houses are not going to, the city's not going to stay the same.

It's not.

I think when we hear the word apartment, we have a lot of labels that we put with apartments.

And I heard the word transient.

So they think people would be in and out.

They think there'll be people who would lower incomes.

They think there'll be people that don't look like me.

A lot of things go along with just when you say apartments.

I'm trusting that the folk that move into your neighborhood will not be a downfall to your neighborhood.

But Jell, you will accept them and be thankful for the house that you have and where you live, but accept the fact it's not just for this neighborhood, but for neighborhoods all over Greensboro.

They will be changing.

There will be more density, and we're gonna have to accept it.

There's no way we're gonna get to 10,000 homes.

And there's no way, and then we hear people complaining about the folks on the street that don't have any place to live.

So we can't turn down houses.

So I will be supporting it.

Mr.

Holster.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Density and change.

I think we've heard it quite a bit from our fellow council members.

That uh those are the two things that we are looking at, Dr.

Wells.

You're exactly right.

Umfortunately, those are those are two things that a lot of our fellow residents don't like.

Uh I appreciate the neighbors of Covington Place and the entire community.

Uh gosh, with this petition of some 80 names in the entire community.

Uh Mr.

Adams and Miss Johnson articulating the concerns, um, our planning and zoning, listening to the conversation.

But from my perspective, uh looking at what this type of density brings to our city as a whole, and what our city is going to be needing.

There are some communities that have density, but it's not market rate density, it's a concentration of a different kind of density.

In this case, I see more of a mixed use being created.

You have those who are buying their properties with this project, you have those who will be renting their properties at at market rates.

We have the roads at 10,000, and you hear that quite often.

We have, as we know, that the city just doesn't have the ability to annex outside of its limits.

So we have to be smart about how we use those properties that are that are inside our city limits, those infield properties, those properties that come available.

I see this as being one of those types of properties.

Uh the engagement was lacking from the very beginning through the the case of the planning and zoning.

Uh that seems to have been corrected with the letters and the meeting at the library, uh the phone calls, the additional letter to the neighbors next door.

The adding of the buffer is really huge, not something that had to be done, but something that was done for the benefit of the community because folks are going to be living there are going to be a part of that McCuston Road community.

The conditions were added, and uh it could have been taller, it could have been of a different material, it could have been a lot of different things that may not have been as palatable to the neighbors.

The message that that I've shared that we've shared from from this guy is that you know going forward, not everybody is gonna come away, or no one's gonna come away winning, and no one's gonna go away losing entirely.

And as you sit here, those of you all who are residents of McCuston Road, um, there are other communities in our city who are going to be having the same conversation, and we as the council in the planning zoning as the stewards of it are gonna have to make some tough decisions, and no one's sitting up here just excited and joyful that we're making this decision.

But I can tell you that from my perspective, from my heart, looking at housing and the housing need, looking at the workforce needs, looking at all the different things that are going on and going to be going on for the future of Greensboro that is important that we have developments like these, uh, but that we also have them in all parts of our city, so that no one feels overly burdened or overly um concerned about having a mixed use.

But mixed use is somewhat to me like a like a diversity, and for me, diversity is a strength, uh, whether it's single family, multifamily, senior housing, student housing, it's it's all in the same mix, and so I'll be supported.

Uh this case, and um again, it's about density and change, and we're gonna all have to become more and more comfortable with it, more comfortable with the uncomfort of density and change.

Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Um, Mrs.

Hightower.

I'm le long.

I I did want to address, I know the community heard me talk about water, um, and um because there's been a lot of talk lately about water and water runoff and and streams of that nature um and with housing.

Um, but I am going to trust that what we've always said is that TRC will identify and help to remediate and come up with solutions that the attorney for the developer uh will work closely with that developer, but that the dialogue with the community will continue.

It doesn't have to stop tonight just because you get an answer that okay, my zoning is approved.

They still are your neighbors, they still are people that have concerns, and they should be respected.

I've always said development should be responsive and respectful, um, not just I've got a win in my pocket, haha.

No, it's a win for everyone if we if it's worked in such a manner that we're all working together, and I hope that that will continue to be the case here.

Um, you know, earlier this evening we had a um item that we talked about industrial, and we talked about traffic, and it was concerns around traffic as well, um, and those things are going to be continued to be looked at.

But when we talked about having that industrial space, we talked about jobs.

Well, people in those jobs are gonna need somewhere to live, and those apartments might be the first step toward home ownership.

I've lived in an apartment.

Many of I'm sure of you have lived in an apartment, and today I live in a house for the last 30 years is mine with my name on it, and so that is a goal when we talk about generational wealth.

That's how we have to create that.

Um, and this puts us on the path to that.

So I think, yes, change in density is a concern too, but I think developing neighborhoods, that's where our strength lies is how our neighborhoods um are designed and built um here in the city, and um see change happening is sometime undoing.

Um there's a building behind my house I didn't like, and I don't like still, but it's there.

Um, and so I have to work through that, and so you will find yourself in that same situation, but I think we're better together than we are apart, and so hopefully um I will support this tonight, but I do ask that ears still remain open, and dialogue continues to ensure this development is a good one.

Thank you.

Mayor for a comment, and then uh Miss Pinder.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Um most everything I was gonna say has been mentioned.

I think everyone kind of has heard um everything that everyone has said, but one theme that keeps coming up among most council members is we have something very similar, either very close to us or we have lived where there has been something very similar close to us.

Uh I walk outside of my front door, step on the sidewalk that is attached to my home, not the sidewalk on the street.

We don't even have one of those, but um, I'm looking at three-story apartments, and originally my neighborhood was totally opposed to those three-story apartments being in the neighborhood.

There's gonna be more traffic, our the the value of our homes is gonna go down, there's gonna be people walking through our neighborhood.

336 apartments.

That's a lot.

Traffic has not increased.

People have not been walking through our yards.

Our home values have increased quite a bit.

So the reason I'm saying all that is I have to agree with my colleagues who have spoken.

And you know, there is going to be change.

But I'm not going to be a person who says that change like this is not good.

It has actually benefit our benefited our community.

We've actually seen improvements around our community.

We've actually seen where more retail is going in within walking distance.

We've seen more transit.

We've seen things that you know we want to have a walkable livable city.

We see things that are helping with that.

Um, you know, things that people were totally opposed to, and now one reason they moved to our area is because we have all of those things.

Am I saying all of that is going to happen here?

I don't know.

But I am going to say that the fact that there's going to be how many is it?

86 apartments?

48?

48 versus 336.

I'm looking at that's huge.

That's huge.

So I also will be supporting this.

And I agree with my colleagues who have stated various in a sundry, made various uh comments on it.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Thank you.

Ms.

Pinder.

Yes, I would echo the sentiments that many of my colleagues up here have stated, but I would also just want to lift up the not forsaking the impact of community engagement.

And again, it it was a it was a miss the first time, and then the second time they came back around, and so want to continue to encourage community engagement as you continue to move forward this.

And then just want to leave you with different doesn't mean less.

So just because something different is happening doesn't mean it's less than, and so we can continue to look at creating those communities of engagement, talking to each other.

And as you said, um, Ms.

Johnson, you talked about trans amp versus stable.

That might be that neighbor might be the very thing that brings stability to maybe you or maybe a neighbor that may not realize it now, but later, as we're thinking about not now, but how are we creating for the future?

How these are opportunities for us to build those safe and healthy communities, but it starts with looking at different not being less and how we can all work together to be able to increase housing access for us all in the city.

Thank you.

Um would you have a motion by Mayor Pro Tem seconded by Mr.

Holston?

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

The Greensboro City Council believed that believes that its action to approve the rezoning request for the property at 3707 McCuston Road from R3, residential single family three to CDRM 18, conditional district residential multifamily 18 to be consistent with the adopted GSO 2040 comprehensive plan and considers the action taken to be reasonable and in the public interest for the following reasons.

The request is consistent with the comprehensive plans future built form map and future land use map.

The proposed CDRM 18 zoning district as conditioned, permits uses that fit the context of the surrounding area and limits negative impacts on adjacent properties.

The request is reasonable due to the size, physical conditions, and other attributes of the area.

It will benefit the property owner and surrounding community, and approval is in the public interest.

Council, please vote.

Thank you.

Volvo trucks made a quick stop at Safety Town to teach kids an important concept, but a simple one.

Stop, look, and wave.

And we're Peter, why are you here today?

So we're here today for Stop Look Wave.

It's a safety campaign focused on school children to increase safety in uh traffic.

We're doing it together with Safety Town with the city of Greensboro.

We're very happy that we can work together on this because safety for children in traffic is so important.

Stop Look Wave.

I've actually heard about this from years.

It's been going on around the world, but not right here in Greensboro.

No, so we run this since I don't know 10-15 years all over the world.

We've done it in 30 countries already.

Uh in April we started here with Steinberger Elementary.

Uh now December we will have 500 children uh coming through the through the program.

Um yeah, it's it's it's uh well I'm glad that you heard about it.

It's it's getting getting a little bit famous.

Yeah, so explain how it works.

What what's the premise?

So safety is super important, right?

For for us with involve what's in our DNA, and and now specifically on this so we develop beautiful safest tricks on the roads, but we also focus on behavior of people, and in this case then uh specifically for children.

So the idea is as follows.

Accidents happen because you don't see things or you're not aware.

So what we said, okay, well, then you need to make sure that we get aware of each other.

So what do we tell children in traffic when you for instance go to a crossing?

You stop, you look around your surroundings, and then if you see the driver, and that can be your semi-trick, but it can be your car as well, you look at the driver, you look the driver in the eyes and you wave.

And at that moment there is a mutual recognition, and then there does an accident doesn't happen anymore.

And have you seen it in practice working?

Yeah, absolutely.

Before I was in the US, I was in other countries.

We went to school, schools came to us, and and you see children talking about it and practicing it in real life.

And do you practice it in real life?

It's not just for kids.

Yeah, of course.

Sometimes we gotta stop looking wave also before we run out into traffic.

Absolutely, yeah, absolutely.

Yeah, it works for children, but it works for adults as well, of course.

It's it's about mutual recognition.

And then we thought that this was a fun way to start early.

And let's face it, I mean, you know, whenever we have each other on the phone, we always say drive safe, walk safe, call me when you get there.

So the safety and traffic or whilst moving is so important, and this is one of the initiatives that we do.

You know, your job doesn't entail working with children a whole lot, I know, but when you get to what does it mean to you?

That's fantastic.

I mean it it it's almost emotional sometimes.

It is fantastic too, because the kids are so dedicated and they're so you know taking it all in.

It's it's I I wish I didn't do it more.

Learn more about Safety Town and get involved by going to the website.

It is Safety Town Greensboro.com.

Litter has become an eyesore in Greensboro.

Let's take pride in our city and do our part to keep our roads and streams litter free.

Keep the green clean.

Do you think you have what it takes to be a Greensboro firefighter?

What about you as a teenager?

Well, Camp Blaze gives high school boys the chance to try.

Go, baby.

Yeah, grab that.

Good job.

Zee, what made you decide to come to Camp Plaze?

Ever since I was eight years old, I always looked up to fireman.

Yeah, it's a very cool camp.

Yeah, I like the experience of it.

Yeah.

I want to get into the academy, the fireman.

I love it.

What has been the best part about this week?

Definitely the food.

Just like meeting new friends, talking to the firemen, learning what they do.

What's the hardest part?

This course.

The course that we just did.

Very tough.

Well, other than that, the hardest part was the maze.

Definitely maze.

What do you think the best part about being a firefighter?

Actually, working for the department would be.

Um I think the best part about being a firefighter is saving people.

Sean, what brought you to Camp Blaze?

Well, I know Ian and he told my dad that I should come out, and I first didn't really want to do it, but then a couple weeks prior I said like looking at firefighter things, and I really got an interest in it.

So that's what brought me out.

Now, do you have a parent who works for the City of Greensboro?

Yeah, my dad's a cop, John Matthews.

So you uh decided firefighting is better than police work?

Oh, yes.

Why?

Because you actually get more action.

You get to go into fires and you get to save people.

Do you think this might be something you want to do with your life?

Yes, ma'am.

Tell me, Jeremiah, why did you decide to come to Camp Plays?

Um, I always wanted to be a fighter fighter when I was younger, and I saw it, so I asked my dad to signed me up, so he signed me up.

Is it what you thought it would be?

No, it's not what I thought it was.

It's actually better than what I thought it was.

It's a lot of things that we watch and do together as a team and competitions and stuff like that.

What has been the best part about this week?

Well, it's definitely not coarse.

I mean, I didn't think I could do it.

Pulling 180 pound dummy, and then I did the course, and it was amazing.

What about you, Jeremiah?

Uh everything that I did.

Um I would say the course was the best thing.

What's been the hardest part?

Definitely the maze.

No more than 10 inches wide.

It's really hard.

Yeah, same for me, yeah.

Maze is the most hardest thing.

What will you tell people about this week when you go back to school and tell your friends about it?

It's definitely amazing.

Like, I want other people to come out here.

I want this camp to grow.

And it's very fun.

I mean, we get to watch fires, we get to watch other people, and it's extraordinary.

We get the rappel off stuff, we get to do things that most kids don't even get to do.

It's a lot of fun.

Have you been inspired this week, Jeremiah?

Uh, yes.

Because at first I didn't want to do it, but I was working and I had to focus and more focused.

I could do it.

So that made it interesting for me.

So tell us the inspiration behind Camp Blaze.

Really, the uh the Camp Spark kind of no pun intended, but sparked it for us.

Uh Aaron and I got together and we're just talking one day, and we're like, hey, I think we need a boys' camp, and I've been sitting on it for a while and Blaze was sitting in the back of my head, and I was like, What do you think about Camp Blaze?

She's like, I like it.

We got our core group, put a presentation down for the Chiefs.

The chief's like, let's go.

Let's do it.

And then they've been 100% supportive ever since.

And whatever we need, they're there.

We're asking for a lot.

A lot of money, and the community really stepped up too with donations.

What's been the best part?

Seeing these kids grow.

Day one, we're kind of all like, what's going on here?

We thought boys would be rambunched, and they're quiet, really, really quiet.

So we had to work on getting them out of the shell, and that's all it took.

And watching them grow from fears, uh, just a trust fall, a low trust fall.

They're not wanting to doing it, to um tight mazes that some of the young men already talked about.

Um, not wanting to do that and seeing them do it.

And Sean didn't want to do the course.

He said, I don't want to drive that dummy.

But he went out there and did it.

And seeing, I mean, it's just it's like a proud parent moment, you know.

We've only known these kids for three days.

Well, some of them we know a little bit longer, but um, watching them grow in this short amount of time's been pretty pretty amazing.

I feel like you're getting a lot out of this too.

You another firefighter.

Selfishly, yes.

They've impacted me, and uh a lot of us got to help out with Camp Spark too, and it impacted us probably more than it impacted them, and they don't realize what they've been doing for us.

What would it be like to work with some of these guys one day?

It'd be amazing.

We have two that are gonna apply for our next academy.

So we'll have to put a little different game face on for them.

But um that I would love to see obviously we want to recruit, but we're trying to build better young men.

The following segments are pre-recorded and sponsored by Longworth Production.

We are all aware of the importance of water and how it moves.

From the highest points of land, it moves downstream through streams and rivers, eventually making its way to the sea.

Cities like ours collect and treat this resource so it can be used safely by all residents.

But this water does not belong to us alone.

Once it's been used, it's collected again, treated and released back into those same rivers and streams, which take it downstream to our neighbors and other towns and cities who depend on it just as much as we do.

The City of Greensboro Water Resources collects and treats as much as 11.9 billion gallons per year.

Take a moment to think about how you use water daily.

When we take showers, we use soap, shampoo, and other products.

When we wash dishes and our clothes, we use detergent.

Most of what we use water for at home, aside from drinking and cooking, require that we add some product to it.

Any personal care products, cosmetics, hair treatment, things that you wash off, all end up in the wastewater that is treated and sent to our neighbors who use the water for the very same things.

It's important that we consider the safety of our downstream neighbors as we use water in our city.

By being aware of the types of products we are using, we can avoid the buildup of harmful byproducts.

By being aware of the types of products we are using, we can avoid the buildup of harmful byproducts.

For example, 14 dioxane, which is a byproduct of a manufacturing process called ethoxylation, is found in many common household products.

This organic chemical is one of many found in trace quantities in both ground and surface waters throughout the U.S.

Uses and sources of 14 dioxane include industrial solvent stabilizer found in paint strippers, varnishes, soaps, makeup and personal care products, annefrees, etc.

It also exists as an unintended byproduct in manufacturing and recycling of certain plastic and polyester products.

Because 1-4 dioxane is a byproduct of the manufacturing process, it's not listed on the label of household products.

Read the label of any product that generates suds.

Try to avoid chemicals ending in ETH.

For example, sodium loreth sulfate, as well as products that have chemicals ending in oxenol and PEG.

Often these chemicals are found in things like laundry detergents, shower gels, and personal care products that create suds.

Paints, dyes, waxes, and grease can also contain these chemicals.

You can look for unfragranced castile soaps or wording like USDA organic and made safe as alternatives.

For more information about these alternative products, you can visit the Environmental Protection Agency website at WWW.epA.gov slash safer choice slash products.

The City of Greensboro's Water Resources Department has been investigating sources of 1-4 dioxane within the city's sewer collection and wastewater treatment facilities since 2015.

Considerable progress has been made, and the department continues to work proactively with local industries through the industrial pretreatment program.

Greensboro has a long and strong working relationship with NCDEQ and appreciates its guidance and assistance in our efforts.

Through these partnerships, the city fully commits to developing a management strategy to further reduce the release of 1-4 dioxane into waterways that may potentially impact downstream communities who rely on the Hall River and Cape Fear River for their source water.

For more information, please visit the City of Greensboro's Water Resources Department online at Greensboro-NC.gov slash water.

Equitable investment on the east side has been an ongoing effort to enhance the quality of life for our residents, students, and visitors.

A hub of recreation is evidenced through the downtown greenway, which touches all walks in different ways.

Construction continues on the final mile of this one-of-a-kind four-mile greenway.

The western branch, winding from Smith Street to Spring Garden Street, is expected to be open in the summer of 2025.

The walking and biking greenway connects at least a dozen neighborhoods, including Ole Ashboro, South Side, Douglas Park, and the Dunleaf neighborhood, all on the east side.

There are more than $600 million in planned and completed projects along the downtown Greenway.

This urban loop enhances quality of life with a variety of fitness classes, community walks, and an emphasis on public art, cementing Greensboro's reputation as a creative city.

With the connections to the existing and planned trails in the city and the county, this loop is the center of the entire system and will one day connect us from all parts of the community and beyond.

A future East Greensboro Greenway will connect the J.

Douglas Gallion Depot in downtown to Barber Park.

In collaboration with the city, NC DOT is developing a feasibility study for the route of the East Greensboro Greenway.

The first phase of the Randleman Road Corridor enhanced transportation services and encouraged additional reinvestment on the east side.

The city will work with a consulting firm to assist with drafting a plan for the Southeast area, which spans approximately eight square miles.

Recommendations based on significant public input will guide the future growth and development necessary to improve services and connectivity for a variety of established neighborhoods in the Southeast area.

The city is investing three million dollars of American rescue plan funding to revitalize our oldest golf property with prominent ties to the civil rights movement.

The Gillespie Golf Course Master Plan relies on the facility's historical and cultural relevance as a guide for future improvement.

Additionally, we applaud the PGA Reach Foundation for awarding a 250,000 dollar grant to commission a mural of the Greensboro 6.

These courageous men integrated the Gillespie Golf Course in 1955.

The city is taking a new approach to meet the needs of the East Greensboro community in a way that has never been done before.

Greensboro public libraries and parks and recreation have set out to create a centralized community hub, the Windsor Chavez NOCO Community Complex.

Thanks to the advocacy of Congresswoman Kathy Manning.

This supports several much needed improvements to NOCO Park, which aligns with plans for the $65 million Windsor Chavis NOCO community complex.

The community approved design will integrate the existing Windsor Recreation Center, Vance Chavis Library, and NOCO Park.

In collaboration with Guilford County, the 65,000 square foot facility will incorporate public health, social services, and cooperative extension.

It won't be long before the shovels begin turning the dirt on the first phase of construction.

These initiatives offer a mere glimpse of the metamorphosis of East Greensboro.

Thank you.

And one sixty-nine Marshall Smith Road, 59.42 acres, Tom Terrell for Poulty Homes and others.

An item H9, a public hearing for an ordinance for original zoning for properties at a portion of one sixty-four and all of one thirty-five C Z and one sixty-nine Marshall Smith Road.

Tom Terrell for Poulty Home and others.

I do not think we have any buddy in opposition to this.

Mr.

Terrell is here for questions or for a brief presentation.

Mr.

Kirkman.

Yes, and I'll also do a very brief presentation.

Again, the request is an annexation and original zoning from County Agricultural to City Planned Unit Development.

North, East, South and West requests crying zone County AG Agricultural.

The subject property contains agricultural land and undeveloped land.

North and south of this property contains single family dwellings as well as undeveloped lands.

East requests is single family dwellings and western quest as undeveloped land.

The future land use map is actually referenced in the adoptive western area plan, which talks about this as an agricultural area.

And the future built format of the conference plan speaks to this as urban general.

These are the conditions that are associated with the requests and advertised as part of the hearing.

This also, as a planning development, has an associated unified development plan, which was approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission.

In approving this request, staff notes that this does meet the creating great places goal of the conference of plan to expand Greensboro citywide network of unique neighborhoods offering residents of all walks of life, a variety of quality housing choices, and the building community connections goal to maintain stable, attractive, and healthy places to live and raise families.

This proposed PUD designation allows a mix of residential uses that are complementary to the surrounding area and expand housing choices in close proximity to major employers.

These items were heard at the July 21st planning zoning commission meeting, and the commission did uh unanimously recommend approval of both the annexation and original zoning.

There was one speaker in favor and none in opposition.

I can answer any questions.

Any questions for Mr.

Kirkman?

Mr.

Terrell, do you want to give brief remarks?

Very important.

Or does the council have questions for Mr.

Terrell?

I will sit down in 60 seconds.

You why don't you go ahead?

Okay.

Thank you.

Um Tom Terrell, 220 North Helm Street.

There is a theme tonight of community engagement.

I would like to add to that.

Most companies do a pretty good job.

They know that they need to do it.

It makes sense to have community engagement, but Pulti Home Company represented by George Price, does an extra job.

They go an extra mile to try to reach out.

And they did so in this instance.

We actually had uh one literal kitchen.

Uh I think it was a three and a half hour meeting in a kitchen.

But this is possible when a community is willing to talk with you.

And Pulti and I would like especially to thank the community and in particular, Mr.

Wayne Marshall, who is here tonight.

Mr.

Marshall is of the family for whom the road is named.

This family has been there for at least seven generations.

He is a fierce advocate for his community.

He is a fierce and effective advocate for the legacy of his family, but he does it with grace.

He does it with integrity, he does it with professionalism, and it's worth comment.

Um recognize that and would like to name, in fact, will name this project in honor of the Marshall family, and it will be called Marshall Preserve.

Uh so we thank him and the others for being willing to work with Polte for this good project.

We are glad to answer questions if you have.

Any questions for Mr.

Terrell?

Thank you.

Mrs.

Thurm?

Yes, I just wanted to thank Mr.

Marshall for his communication as well as Pulti and Mr.

Terrell.

Um, you know, this could have been a very difficult rezoning, but all the parties involved talked and invested a lot of time and effort together.

Um it's always hard when family property gets converted and gets sold out.

Um it raises all sorts of emotional and family ties.

But I'd just like to thank all the parties for for working so closely together, and it's a really a testament to to everyone involved.

So thank you very much.

Thank you.

Um, any other comments, questions, or um do we have a motion?

Moved by um Mrs.

Thurm, seconded by Mr.

Holston.

And this is for the annexation.

And that passes 9 to 0.

Um item H9 will require statement of consistency.

Move the item.

Moved by Mrs.

Thurm, seconded by Mr.

Holston.

The Greensboro City Council believes that its action to approve the original zoning request for the properties at a portion of 164 and all of 135 Z and 169 Marshall Smith Road from County AG to City PUG to be consistent with the adopted GSO 2040 comprehensive plan and considers the action taken to be reasonable and in the public interest for the following reasons.

The request is consistent with the comprehensive plans, future built form map and future land use map.

The proposed city PUD zoning district as conditioned permits uses that fit the context of the surrounding area and limits negative impacts on adjacent properties.

The request is a reasonable due to the size, physical conditions, and other attributes of the area.

It will benefit the property owner and surrounding community and approval is in the public interest.

Please vote.

We will take items H10 and 11 together.

We do have a few speakers signed up, but Mr.

Kirkman.

Yes, thank you, Mayor Vaughn.

Again, the request is to annex this property into the city's limits for and go from zoning of county agricultural to city conditional district R3 residential single family.

North of this request is currently zoned County AG.

East of request is zone county RS40 residential single family.

South and West request is zoned County AG or Cultural as well as Oak Ridge Agricultural.

This property is currently undeveloped at this time.

North of the request or single family dwellings, east to request or single family dwellings and a religious assembly use.

South of request or single family dwellings and undeveloped land and west requests is interstate 73, as well as a wireless telecommunication facility.

The property is designated as residential on the future land use map of the conference of plan and also as urban general on the future built form map.

This is a conditional application, and this is the condition that was advertised as part of this request this evening.

Staff has concluded this request does support the conference of plans creating great places goal to expand Greensboro citywide network of unique neighborhoods offering residents of all walks of life a variety of quality housing choices by enhancing available utility infrastructure in this area.

And notes that this district again does limit it only to utilities use group, which is needed to facilitate future development in the surrounding area.

The planning and zoning commission heard these items at their July 21st meeting, unanimously recommended approval of both the annexation and original zoning.

At that meeting, there were two speakers in favor and none in opposition.

I can answer any questions.

Any questions for Mr.

Kirkman?

Mr.

Fox and we do have a Margaret Agrosa on Zoom in favor.

Good evening, Mike Fox, 800 suite 800, 400 Belmade Street in Greensboro.

Um I'm going to be very brief.

I know you've had a long evening already this evening.

Uh this is a pretty straightforward case.

It's an additional uh substation for Duke Energy in the airport area.

So your staff has done a good job of describing where it is and what it is.

The need is fairly obvious as well.

Uh it's certainly a growing area.

I have a number of people from Duke Energy here in case there are any technical questions about the site plan.

We had a neighborhood meeting with just a handful of people mostly who wanted to know what we were doing, and uh the site has uh been uh well buffered and uh had no opposition uh that we're aware of.

No one came to the zoning commission meeting uh passed unanimously nine zero, then I'm happy to answer any questions that you may have.

Any questions for Mr.

Fox?

Okay, we we do have um Margaret Agosa.

Margaret, are you online?

Yes, I am.

If you would like to speak, you I believe you're speaking in favor.

Yes, I am.

I am speaking in favor.

Go ahead.

Good evening, Council members.

I am Margaret, and I would like to express my support for the annexation and rezoning for it 3521 edge field.

Um, I believe this change will help with the growth within our community.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um move to close the public hearing.

Second.

Uh moved by Mr.

Holston, seconded by Mayor Perchem.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Okay.

Um comments or we need a motion.

The first motion would be for the annexation.

Moved by Mr.

Holston.

Seconded by Mrs.

Thurm.

Council, please vote.

That passes nine to zero.

Um the next item does require a statement of consistency.

Moved by Mr.

Holston, seconded by Ms.

Pinder.

Mr.

Holston.

The Greensboro City Council believes that it's action to approve the original zoning request for the property at 3521 Edgefield Road from County AG Agricultural to City C D R 3, conditional district, residential single family three, to be consistent with the adopted GSO 2040 comprehensive plan and considers the action taken to be reasonable and the public interest for the following reasons.

The request is consistent with the comprehensive plans future built format and future land use map.

The proposed city CDR 3 zoning district as conditioned permits uses that fit the context of the surrounding area and limits negative impacts on adjacent properties.

And the request is reasonable due to the size, physical conditions, and other attributes of the area.

It will benefit the property owner and surrounding community, and approval is in the public interest.

Council, please vote.

Thank you, Mary Vaughn.

Again, the request is to annex property into the city's jurisdiction.

Current zoning is County Agricultural, and then the request is for uh city conditional district commercial medium for the private property making the request, and then for city LI, which is some intervening right-of-way on Burlington Road that connects to the existing city limits.

North and West request is currently zone county AG.

East request is zone county AG and County C Z L I, conditional zoning light industrial.

South request is in City L I light industrial.

The subject properties currently contain a single family dwelling as well as again a portion of the Burlington Road right of way.

North and West request is currently undeveloped.

Excuse me.

And south request is a warehouse and distribution use.

Properties currently designated as residential and the future land use map of the conference of plan and is urban general in the future built format.

This is a conditional zoning, and this is the condition associated with the request.

Staff has concluded that this request does support the conference of plan stilling in our framework.

Big idea to arrange our land uses for where we live, work, attend school, shop, and enjoy our free time to create a more vibrant and livable Greensboro, and the growing economic competitiveness big idea to build a prosperous resilient community economy that creates equitable opportunities to succeed.

The proposed zoning districts do allow land uses that are compatible with the general character of the area, also as a neighborhood and district scaled activity center.

This request was heard at the July 21st planning and zoning commission meeting.

The commission did uh vote to approve both the annexation and the two original zoning requests.

There were no speakers at that hearing.

I can answer any questions.

I just had a quick question.

Is this resident?

Didn't I miss one down?

You say commercial slide is L I plus map?

Councilman.

Yeah.

Mountain Row.

County Agriculture.

Yeah, but it's going to City.

DSP.

Okay.

I thought I heard him say LA.

So the uh there's a little piece of Burlington Road right-of-way that will come in because of the way state laws laid out.

That portion of right-away will be uh designated as light industrial, which will match the LI zoning to the south.

Okay.

I'm not heard LR.

That's why and we do have one speaker in favor and one speaker against.

Okay.

Thanks, Mike.

Good evening.

Uh my name is Mart.

Uh I'm at 3511 Burlington Road, McCannisville.

I tried to join uh this property too.

Uh City of Greensboro.

Uh there is a few things.

Uh first initially, I bought this property uh for my good uh addiction uh to the city.

So uh let me explain.

This property is like three miles.

There is another uh shopping center uh next to the three miles towards to Burlington side and then this side.

Uh in front of that, there is uh uh publics, and it's all commercial.

Uh I feel like this property, if I increase it, make it uh better, it's good for the city, and uh like uh you can say small shops, there is no any small shops in around, uh like uh salon, uh some uh uh small small shops.

So and the offices like attorney office, uh architect office, some so they are small things.

Uh I have enough area and uh road is already uh four-lane in front of, so there is no traffic problem.

And uh the how this thing starts, I simply say uh initially uh when I bought this property, it was on uh well and uh uh um the septic thing.

So now uh it is time to get update everything.

So I said, okay, let me spend money.

I get the estimate it cost me 20,000.

I said okay, let's pay this money to the city, get the connection, and in future, I definitely want to increase this for the city in the future.

But uh, yeah, this is if there is any question, I definitely like to answer.

I just had a quick question.

You say you're gonna put some shops along there.

Actually, I try to cover uh a total 15,000 square feet on the ground floor, like first floor, then the offices on the top.

Usually it's uh shopping complex uh plus offices.

Um I have uh when we uh calculate the area and everything, I can have around hundred plus parkings.

I can have 15,000.

Uh we can make like a small uh thousand square feet salons, uh pizza shop, small shop that is on the walking area for the people around because we have a dollar general, start from there, there is uh body shop, and then the dollar general, then uh there is another small business from home they have, and then there is one property, and uh then mine.

So I think like, and there is a public around public, they have plenty of people.

Everybody need if you need something, fast food for means to say small things.

There is none nearby, so it is better good update to the community idea.

Well, it may have the community, yeah.

But public has their own cafeteria, so they but still but I think there's something else, you know, for other people in the community.

Yeah, I was just asking what second thing, uh this property is like 10 minutes from the city.

And uh if you get uh attorney office in uh city, it costs you maybe five thousand.

If you have ten minutes, it might cost you 1500.

So it is good.

So that's that's what I think uh like a small offices, doctor office, uh laboratories.

Uh you don't see anything lake small which can be fit in uh thousand scared feet, 50 on the first floor, uh second floor, well it is small uh things, and there is no traffic or lake uh small small things, they don't have that much traffic.

It is good for the community.

Okay, thank you very much.

Thank you.

Any question I can happy to answer?

Thank you.

Thank you.

We do have uh one speaker in opposition, uh James Way.

Well, what a long evening.

Yeah.

Uh good evening, all council members, and Madam Mayor, thank you for that break.

Um my name is James Way.

I live at 5405 Burlington Road, and if you have a map, it's partial 119083.

I represent 16 of the neighbors in this area, and they would like to thank uh thank you also for listening to our concerns.

I also would like to thank the applicant for uh he sent a letter to some of the neighbors, not all of them got it, uh, explaining his intentions on in developing the property.

Uh we initially thought that the rezoning was for light industrial, but I think the planning board people told us that's just that right-away out front, not the 2.58 acres.

Then we got to notice that uh the applicant was asking for annexation, which we don't oppose, and uh rezoning to conditional uh uh uh was that CM, yeah, excuse me, commercial uh medium, and there are some restrictions, uh building size 30,000 square feet, that's almost like a football field.

Uh no bars, no nightclubs, no group booth clubs, uh, but it would include all kinds of retail restaurants, office and service uses.

If this were annexation and rezoning to light industrial, we would have no serious concerns whatsoever.

But since we've moved up now to commercial medium, we are concerned, but our concerns are not focused so much on the applicant's intentions, they're focused on what is permitted.

And if you look on that LDO table, you all are aware of that.

Go down that table, you'll see all the permitted uses.

We heard tonight, rezone first, market later.

That's the situation we're in now.

Intentions are not promises, intentions are not contractual, and intentions are not reality, so we have to focus on what's permitted, and I'd like to mention some of those coming right off the table.

Those some of those that are permitted, restaurants.

Now I mentioned uh the condition is no bars, no brew pubs.

What if you have a restaurant that contains a bar?

Serves the alcohol.

I don't think that's a restriction.

Uh 24-hour urgent care facility, and another thing, restaurant.

What if we have live entertainment?

Uh operating up to and beyond midnight, uh fitness center, you know, a single occupancy, which is a motel, uh, a convenience store with pumps, operating 24 hours a day.

Right up the road at a bottle and a half, we have our sheets, which we love.

We have our 711, both open open 24 hours a day.

So we don't need that.

We don't need a pawn shop.

Uh in a temporary re uh use situation, it could be a flea market, could be a carnival, could be a fair, movie theater, a recycling center, a bed and breakfast.

And in a in a multi-use context, it could be a multi-family.

I know we talked a lot about density tonight, and we're all for that.

You know, we live in the eastern part, and if you look at the GIS m uh map, you'll see Greensboro's all over the place.

And if you go out west, you look at Windover Avenue.

Well, if you think about it, windover runs, it changes names.

It runs from High Point to the other side of Burlington Road.

I mean, Burlington City of Burlington.

It just changes names.

So that's a tremendous thoroughfare.

And we know development's coming, but we like to have it controlled.

And it where it will fit.

Those are just some of those permitted usages.

Now, if certain standards are met, those uses expand.

Clubs and lodges, outdoor recreation.

What does that mean?

A campground, RV park, a fast food restaurant, car wash, a junkyard, a landfill, an animal shelter.

And I hate to say this, but also it's in the book, it's in the table.

Sexually oriented businesses.

If certain standards are met, a towing service.

So we get back to intentions.

Intentions can change.

You know, I intended to go to church Sunday, but I woke up sick.

You know, circumstances can alter intentions.

The applicant's intentions may change.

Rezone first, market later.

Of course, I understand that.

You have to have the product before you can sell it.

The applicant may choose not to develop the property at all.

It's his choice.

The applicant may choose once rezoning is approved to sell the property.

And then we got a new owner with new intentions.

So in conclusion.

We're not against future development.

It's got to come our way.

You look at the map.

I mean, Greensboro annexed all over the place down our way.

The water and sewer lines already there.

Publics.

You know, two million square foot.

The building in front's refrigerated.

The building and bike is uh dry goods.

Trucks don't bother us.

The road is plenty wide.

But we don't need these possibilities in our neighborhood.

We don't know what's coming.

Light industrial does have some limits on it, which we don't.

It's not a retail, it's not over 24 hours a day normally.

So I want to reiterate, we wouldn't oppose if this we won't oppose annexation anyway.

But if this was light industrial, we wouldn't oppose that.

We wouldn't have any serious concerns, but not commercial medium.

We would like to thank you for considering our opposition.

And we hope at this time that you would deny the approval.

Thank you very much.

Sir, what'd you say your address was?

Sir, what'd you say your address was?

My what?

Address.

5405, Burlington Road.

5405 and partial month.

You have it on that.

Did y'all get my handout?

Um not sure.

In the final sixteen people that are signed along with their addresses and their partial uh parcel numbers.

Yes, sir.

And there's a lot of partial numbers on this list.

Yes, sir.

But we must concentrate on what's permitted.

I mean it's strictly in the table, what's permitted.

You know, no questions asked.

And then if it's sold, if property sold, we have a new owner.

What are theirs and their intentions?

So without knowing, we can uh focus on what the intentions are, but we all know intentions change.

Thank you very much.

Question for you.

Yes.

So the conversation that you had with held with us this evening, have you had that with the have I had what?

Have you had you had this very same?

No problem.

Have you had this very same conversation with the applicant?

No.

Now, I did get a text, or I think it's an email.

I'm not a confrontational person.

I didn't want to get into a big argument.

Because I feel like the applicant would say, I'm gonna do this, I'm gonna do this, I'm gonna do this.

I'm not focused on his intentions.

There's only just a few restrictions here.

Outside of that, typical uses are various retail restaurants, office and service centers.

Um I didn't want to get that conversation going.

I felt like that we might get into a confrontation, and I I don't like confrontation.

I may have the conversation this evening.

Right.

Well, yeah.

So maybe not so you got a letter of his but you all never had an actual sit-down community meeting with the individuals on this petition.

No, in fact, you only make contact today, and it was late this afternoon while I was preparing this.

Okay.

But so you know, very nice man can articulate what he wanted to do.

But I think, as you might have heard one of my colleagues say earlier tonight, that we put a lot of emphasis on community engagement.

Um that has not occurred from what I'm hearing.

That you have not had a meeting or of the neighbors or whoever got the letters and the 750 feet.

Well, there was actually one young couple that received no notice whatsoever.

They bought the property on Spruce Tree on the corner on July the first and actually didn't move in to July 22nd and have received no letter, no notices of the plenty board or anything.

So they want a home.

They're the third uh line down on your on your list.

Oh, they're on the list too.

Okay.

It is kind of depending upon where they are, whether that's 750 square feet, how it falls.

Sometimes folks are in, sometimes folks are they're actually the closest.

And all of these are zone residential.

Those are actually the closest.

Okay.

And I don't know if it's a hiccup because the sale was pending.

You know, just followed it.

I haven't.

So they should have received that letter.

I'm so still having my letter, so I have a question.

I'm sorry.

That's the dealer.

On line three, it's uh Eric and his wife, uh, the other dealer.

Thank you.

Do you so I just I should uh I wanted to ask the city attorney?

Well, that was gonna be my next step, America.

I was trying to wait for him.

We were having too many conversations.

We're having too many conversations.

You have rebuttal period.

Um you wanted to ask the attorney?

Yes, I wanted to ask the city attorney um or maybe Mr.

Schwartz or whoever could answer this.

We're only talking about the annexation, correct?

Not what's we have um annexation and then the original zoning.

The original zoning, right, right.

So we have those the back and forth about all of what's going in there and what isn't going there.

Is that appropriate at this time?

I think permitted causes from a permitted um causes in the right word.

Um, usages um yes, are however isn't that something that a conversation between the gentleman and the community might get my main help instead of back and forth like this.

Um Madam Uh Councilwoman, I do I I think that you're right, I agree with you on that.

That and those are conversations I believe as um Councilwoman Hightower said that probably should have happened.

Right, probably before today.

So these are not the co types of conversations to air out here at City Council.

Right.

You guys are just here to vote on whether the property gets annexed or not.

Great, thank you.

So my other question to city attorney was Mary Kay.

No, I'm saying Jamila has it.

It's okay.

I think she answered my question in terms of because my question was the community engagement comp component of that.

Well, my my question is not for the community engagement piece, so you can go ahead.

I'll I'll just wait my turn.

Well, no, I'm uh it was answered.

She got it answered.

Oh, you got so go ahead.

So let me ask this Miss City attorney though, and this has happened in the past, that we have continued this to allow it.

The applicant has to ask for it.

Right, but to allow more dialogue.

One more time.

What was your question?

Right.

We have I think have I'm not following y'all we can we can do that if the applicant thinks that he would like to have a continuance to the to the meeting in um September where he could take a look at what his application looks like and see if there's any way they're if they have sorry okay, uh as I told you earlier, I'm not building this uh tomorrow.

Uh my concern is uh as I told you earlier, I'm not building this uh tomorrow.

It might take another five years, it might take later.

Why I'm doing this zoning, first thing I call the city of Greensworth.

I said I already have uh uh silver in my backyard and the water on our firm.

I need to connect it.

They said first thing you have to do NX.

What?

Oh, I said okay, what is the procedure?

What is how to do that?

Okay, so this is the first step.

I can't do nothing else until I don't do the NX.

I can't do nothing else.

Okay, if I'm doing that, I have to do zoning.

I can't do nothing else if I can't do this.

These things, I don't know, maybe another five years.

I appreciate he could become he has his concern, I understand.

But when I have two million dollars, then I might might make it right now.

I need to make it see them so I think these advice.

So I I'm gonna try to say something without stepping over the line, and if I step over the line, please tell me.

Um if you we we really do value when the applicant sits down with the neighborhood um and let them know what their plans are.

You looked at the permitted uses and you did withdraw a few.

Yes.

Um, the impression that we're getting is that the neighborhood would like to have some other permitted uses withdrawn.

You might want to do it, you might not want to do it.

But do you want to take a a couple weeks to sit down and talk to them about it, or do you want to risk or do you want to risk us voting on it now?

For me, I I don't mind.

I can uh wait for a few weeks, no problem.

Okay.

Uh if we want, we can arrange a meeting also.

Uh we already sent them letters, uh, whatever list I receive from uh city.

And uh now if they have some more concern and questions, I definitely like to answer.

So you would be open today.

You you will be open to a continuous.

If I don't have a choice, then yes, I I mean this your zoning.

The thing is, okay.

Uh if I say yes, ma'am.

Did you listen to all of the things that can be if we rezone it that can be in that area?

All that was a long list.

They are concerned about some of the things on that list that you could decide to put on it.

You need you if you sit near, you've been hearing about conditions when you talk to the neighbors and find out some things they don't want, then you could put it in your conditions.

No, I'm not gonna have a sexually oriented business.

I'm not gonna have certain things, and that's what they're concerned about.

Right.

And so that's why we say talk to your neighbors to find out.

And the neighbor didn't reach out to you because he could have told you we don't want this and we don't want that, and you would have known that.

So you need to have some communication.

Well, and I think he said he'll go for continuation.

Yes, I I really do want to ask this question.

Does staff know, Ms.

Schwartz, Mr.

Kurtman, what type of communication has gone out and what was replied to?

So the applicant used the city's distribution list of the 750 feet from the um subject site, which of course is what we send the official notice of the hearing as well to all the property that is there.

Um and it is my understanding.

I was looking at an email earlier from uh gentlemen that's working with the applicant to indicated that they had attempted to talk to Mr.

Ray a couple different times and had not received any communication back.

So they he sent letters uh registered mail uh to everybody within 750 feet.

Uh they did try to reach out to Mr.

Ray a couple times via email as well and was not able to talk with him.

So the applicant did what he was supposed to do to reach out to the community.

Is that what I'm hearing?

Yeah, yes, he used the information we provided to then give information on his request to the same area of 750 feet around the request.

Okay, thank you.

Madam Proteam, let me just add that our ordinance does not require community engagement.

I know that the city council likes it.

I know you all um but he did try to value things.

We we understand that we we already know that, but all the but he did his job.

But applicant.

But applicants I think we're mixing two things up here.

First of all, the city provides has addresses that they send out.

The applicant doesn't send you know out from the city.

The city sends the applicant sent out.

The applicant this yeah, you didn't mail out.

You mailed out 750 letters.

He did in the people in 750 feet.

I have that list.

I send everybody.

You sent a letter to everybody.

Did you have a community engagement opportunity?

Let me say this.

Uh let's say this week.

I leave my in the letter, uh, I leave my address, I leave my phone number, email, uh, and uh I receive uh one communication from Mr.

Wee, and then we replay them with uh emails if they have any concerns, they can contact us.

I have two uh emails we send them even and we didn't receive any kind of response back.

That's why we uh hit the well it's just interesting that the opposition is here though, if you didn't have any communication back, huh?

It's not unusual, no, it's not for our opposition to show up.

But um and while I understand all the I think we kind of always been right, but then more you're kind of going out of here.

So I think can right I just do want us to go ahead and live on this, or would you like to continue to the next I prefer to vote it doesn't get over with it?

No, is that your decision?

If you want to continue on your TV, okay.

Let's go vote for it.

Yes, but next question to the lawyer.

If we vote tonight and it's not favorable, can he come back?

House because Sue, I think if it's not favorable, that he can't come back for what 12 months.

Right, Councilman Hightower to answer your question, right?

He could not come back with the same request for a 12-month period of time if this is denied this evening.

Uh he could have the opportunity to come back with a different request if it was substantially substantially different.

Um is a different request, a conditional request?

With more conditions, is that different?

Yeah, it it depends on if it's how much he's eliminating, I guess, in that scenario, is to if it's substantial or not.

If you're living large classes of uses, that probably would be substantial enough of a change to come back.

So in if he if a rezoning has to come back because of a denial, don't you have to apply all over again?

So incur all additional calls.

Yes, you would have to start over at the planning and sending commission and come back up.

And I'm not gonna step on the line again, but an actual continue would probably work better, but um he would have to go back through all that.

I'm sorry.

Yeah, fine.

No, no, no.

If I do continue, so what is the t yeah?

What should I follow to come back?

Let's say you give me a continue for two weeks from now or three weeks.

So you would the if you request a continuance, it would be until September 16th.

Okay.

That is the date.

That's the date.

If that is what you request.

And uh the second thing is do I need to arrange and satisfy all the neighbors and get the other thing.

Well, what you know you need to show that you made an effort to meet with them and to make some compromise.

That's all you have to do to address their concerns.

But you have to make an effort to meet with them or to look at the list they provided.

Um let me take a continuous.

Moved by Mrs.

Hightower, seconded by Mr.

Holston.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

That'll be without further advertising to um September 16th, and it's all three items H12 through H14.

Uh this this happens to be in um district.

This happened to be in the item, please.

It happens to be in district two.

I want you all to get together now.

He said that he didn't want any confrontation.

If the neighbors want something, they have to let the owner know.

So you all get together before the 16th.

I'll come back here with the same thing, haven't talked to anybody.

Okay.

Well, so it it we're gonna it's it's already been moved to the September date.

Okay.

I don't know.

Well, wouldn't it?

The list is long.

Say one more time.

Am I allowed to suggest to the applicant that he might want to hire someone professionally professionally?

Okay.

So now we move on to the general business portion of our agenda.

Item I1 and I 11 are going to be taken together, and that's because I 11 came in late.

Um so we're gonna do I1 and I-11.

I won is a resolution approving a contract for 1,650,000 with Nova Global Inc.

for red light camera system and item I 11, which is an ordinance approving amendments to the city ordinance in chapter 15-58, traffic control photographic systems.

Um we do have let me see.

So that's we do have um somebody on Zoom, Brian Cicerelli, who is opposed to this item.

Is he still on Zoom?

Yes, I'm still here.

Can you see me?

Thank you for your patience.

Um I can hear you is your camera on?

Yes.

Can you put your camera on?

It is on.

It is on.

Well, we can't see it.

No, this is red light cameras.

We're on I1 and I 11.

Thank you.

Go ahead.

You have three minutes.

You can see me now.

Yes, I can.

Thank you.

Okay, yes.

Um cannot really talk about this subject in under three minutes.

The best thing to do would be to talk with you in a meeting that we can set up, and then I can tell you what's really going on.

The reason why there are no red light cameras here in North Carolina is because it's all engineering malpractice.

The DOT deliberately makes people run red lights.

That's the problem.

It's not a bad driver problem.

It is a bad math equation that the NC DOT uses to time yellow lights.

That's the problem.

And so the reason why Raleigh and Wilmington shut down their cameras is because the NC DOT admitted this, and they put in a regulation that your red light camera delay has to be set to the all-red clearance interval or greater.

That takes all the money out of red light cameras.

Um about 98% of all the the red light runners are imperceptible to the human eye.

You can't see them.

That's where the money is made.

And so the DOT doesn't want to ticket safe drivers for being caught in dilemma zones when they approach an intersection.

You're in a dilemma zone when the light turns yellow, and you don't have enough distance to stop your car to stop your car, nor do you have the time to reach the intersection before the light turns red.

The DOT deliberately makes people do this.

And so even the DOT got fed up with this and put in this regulation.

It's now going in uh it's House Bill 189, and uh if it passes, you will be throwing away 165 million dollars just like that.

And no no Navoya Gobel Global NOAA Global is not licensed to practice engineering in the state of North Carolina.

You probably know that.

That's uh uh even to offer installing red light cameras is a crime in the state under the engineering practice law.

So the fact that they did this to you, it's uh it's a crime to the 1.65 million dollars.

That's a felony.

Uh so I suggest that you learn a little bit more about engineering practice law, and I'm glad to share this with you.

And I can tell you exactly 30 seconds.

Oh, okay.

So that's all I can say at this moment, but I suggest that we meet before you make a decision on this one.

If you have any questions, just let me know.

I'm the one that got rid of all the other red light cameras in this state.

I'm the one.

So I also won a 492 million dollar lawsuit against red light cameras in New York.

So please take me seriously.

Thank you.

And we do appreciate the information that you've sent us over the past few weeks.

Ma'ammy.

Do we have more speakers?

No, we're done with speakers.

I would like to ask Cecil City Manager Andrea Harrell, who I've been, you know, pestering.

And this conversation has been in the works for two years now more.

And I think I had uh sent you the email that this gentleman sent all of us, and you did some additional research and legal um research and has come back with that opinion that we are not doing this lightly and without um data and education and understanding the law.

So can you kind of just speak a little bit before we on that?

Absolutely.

Let me make sure my there we go.

Um after receiving the email from Mr.

Cesarelli, I did some research, also reached out to NC D OT.

Um RGDOT has been um partnering with MC D OT all along the way.

NCDOT approves this contract, they approve Novoa Global, have no issues with our installation of red light cameras.

They've also had their legal team do a review of that House Bill 189 and do not see where it violates the general statutes for municipalities to install red light cameras.

So we have done our due diligence here, there are no legal issues.

We expect there may be some challenges, but we we feel like we're equipped to move forward with this program.

Thank you very much because um obviously we we want to make sure we address any concerns and um that have come in, and we certainly don't want to step on the law, um, and we want to stay within those parameters.

Um, but also with this particular item, um, we have the data that shows that we've done crash data that shows that though where those intersections are that have been the most problematic.

That's how we can.

I want to speak for director Cockburn, but I know that she has that data.

They did a very good analysis of that before deciding to go in this direction and make this recommendation.

And so looking at people hear me.

No, sir, we're fin he's is he speaking?

I wasn't asking him a question.

Oh finished your thought.

Oh, okay.

Oh, well, I don't know if I got that thought back in my head again.

It might have gone away.

Um, but um the other thing I was gonna ask um with the data that we have, and we looked at those particular intersections.

Um, what is the implementation going to look like?

We're gonna phase it in, obviously.

We're not gonna do all of them at once, but I also want you to address before you address that.

I heard the previous speaker mentioned the cameras gonna be hidden.

Let's talk about that.

They're not gonna be hidden, they're gonna be mounted, very visible.

There will be signs indicating that this intersection is monitored by these cameras.

We have narrowed it down to I believe 10 intersections.

We're gonna start with four.

Um is that accurate?

Five intersections, my apologies.

We we have 10 identified five that we're gonna start with, um, or just narrowing down which of the which of the five we're gonna move forward with.

Um so we're still a little bit of a work in progress, but we are prepared to go ahead and execute the contract now.

And so, what do you anticipate the timeline is before we would get to the actual uh installation of them?

So we we have a period of time that we can start to educate the community that this is going to occur, this is gonna happen.

Um, you know, they'll be there so they'll know.

That education piece has already started.

I anticipate six months would be a reasonable implementation where the cameras are up and we're looking at data.

Okay, and then as we see how those are, we'll come back, we'll track that data, and then we'll look at other intersections where then we would start to install those.

That's correct.

If we um have additional funding, we can move forward with additional intersections.

Okay, great.

Okay.

Well, I appreciate all the due diligence that you've done.

Um, and I understand now why we delayed it the last time when I thought it was coming on the uh because we do want to make sure we address all the concerns, and I've heard some even asked today.

Um that you know it's gonna create rear end crashes.

I've heard that before.

Um, rear end crashes, but the crashes we looked at were more T bone crashes.

Yes, evidence does not support that it creates more rear end crashes.

Right.

So, and and those are the ones that are very dangerous.

I have had personally, a friend who was T boned at one of those intersections, had to have knee surgery, total a car, was out of commission, couldn't work.

So I had another lady who knew a lady who was killed.

Um, just a couple of examples, and um, but I watch it every day as I drive through.

I no longer uh when the light turned green, I don't move um until I'm sure the intersections are clear.

Um coast people behind me blow the horn, and I understand, but you know, um just you know one second here is not gonna hurt, you know.

But um uh the reason for I think us trying to do this is to address some of the concerns I've heard in the community.

You know, y'all need to stop what are you gonna do about people speeding?

Well, I don't know.

Um, so this could only be one particular piece of it, it's not the whole solution to everything.

But um I know it's been a while, but I'd like to see us try to implement move forward.

The last piece I'll talk about, I asked you about is the revenue because I know there was that big email that said we don't need to give school system any money and all that.

That was all I think in the same email.

Um there this will not be a significant revenue source for this city whatsoever.

So the cost that we're incurring, we're incurring the cost to get the cameras.

We are as a safety um precaution.

And if nobody runs a red light, we don't get any ticket money.

That's right.

So that that would be the best thing.

That's right.

Um this whole program.

There will also be with this particular program the ability for a police officer to go in and watch every single video and process every single appeals.

If there are questions about who was driving, whether they were in the red light, we have processes in place to address those.

Okay.

So you can appeal that, say that wasn't my car or whatever.

Yes.

Um and uh that's a possibility that it can happen, you know.

So I sometimes going through a light is more safer, I guess, depending on somebody's you know, how they carry you, somebody on your heels, but again, that rear hand crash is not the biggest piece of concern.

It is the right angle, it's the T-bone.

So thank you for doing this, and I'm gonna move the item once if but we moved and seconded.

But we're telling you I think I did two percent.

Um I I'm glad that we have this on the agenda, and this is something that I support.

I actually supported it the first time.

I was on council way back when we brought the red light cameras on.

And I voted on it then for safety, and I'm gonna vote on it again for safety.

Um, I know that there is some mixed data when it comes to rear-end collisions, but there is not mixed data when it comes to side impact collisions, and those are the collisions that are more likely to injure or kill somebody, and that is what we want to eliminate.

Um, it's also important for people to realize that this is not a criminal ticket, this is a civil ticket.

Um so if they're concerned about somebody else driving their their car that it wasn't them or whatever, or um, it is not a it is not a criminal ticket, it is a civil ticket, and that is a big difference.

It won't be points against your license.

Um again, points against people's license does have a tendency to make them slow down, but that that will not occur in this um in this case.

And these these locations are very well advertised, and that is according to state law that they have to be advertised, and they have to also be advertised on our website.

So if somebody wants to go on the website and find out where all the red light cameras are, they can do that.

So it is an extremely um transparent program, and I think it is well worth trying it again.

We see the severity of our collisions increasing.

As I said a couple weeks ago, I think people have lost their collective minds when they're out driving, and um this may be one way to slow it down a little bit.

And then Tammy and Hugh after.

Yes, I just wanted to say um, Madam Mayor, that the number one complaint in Greensboro and safety is running red lights or speeding.

And I know that uh the gentleman was worried about how things were going to progress with this, but you know, technology has changed quite a bit in this 20 some odd years since it was here before.

We do have a mechanism where someone can do an appeal.

I think that was one of the biggest concerns when uh the original was in force uh many many years ago, there was really almost absolutely no appeal.

So this time around, I I also believe that we should try this because people are speeding through red lights.

Uh I know the gentleman said that no, you get caught in that one second.

No, people are speeding after my light turns green or your light turns green, they're going through that red light.

And I don't know what has caused people to believe that they will, but with so many more crashes and fatalities, you know.

We as a city want a safe city, and we're gonna have to try something.

So uh I am certainly in favor of this and we'll definitely be voting for this, and I can't wait to see if we can assess the reductions as time goes along, and that's something I know that we will have better statistics than 20 years ago.

So thank you very much.

Um thank you.

Um I'm just curious who actually controls the the timing of how much leeway and and how does that work?

Is that something that the city controls, the vendor controls?

Is it controlled by statute?

It's part of the system, and I think we do have someone here from Novella Global that could speak to the specifics of that, but it's part of the system, it does it on its own.

Okay, it looks like Miss Kypern's coming out.

Thank you.

Sure.

Good evening.

I'm happy to answer your question.

So the camera system is actually completely separate from the signalized system.

The signals are designed by a signal engineer, they are sealed by an engineer, and the timing for the signal itself is um regularly evaluated.

You know, we manage more than 500 signalized intersections inside the city limit, and we're constantly looking at those to re-evaluate how they work, adding things like right and left turn timing.

Um there's a variety of considerations.

So the signal itself will be managed independently from the camera system.

The camera is installed completely independently.

Um this is a turnkey system, meaning the company will own and operate the equipment.

It will maintain the equipment on our behalf under the agreement with us, and what it will do is um be positioned to basically monitor that intersection and that approach and look for vehicles that appear to be entering or likely to enter and start taking pictures and video, and then that can be reviewed by a law enforcement officer before a citation is issued.

I mean, this is there's a lot more technology and stuff to this, but I'm trying to keep it fairly simple so it's easy to understand.

So these based on that, these aren't automatically generating tickets.

This is going to be reviewed before a ticket.

That's correct.

Interesting.

It will it will use the sensors to tell the camera when to start recording, and then that recording is provided to a person who reviews it before a citation is issued.

And then my last question is can you talk to us a little bit about you said that the vendor maintains the cameras and takes care of those, etc.?

Um how does the cost work?

Do we get charged?

We we pay a flat rate for the five intersection cameras that we are leasing under the terms of the contract, and the revenue that comes in based on the citations is split based on the state law.

90% goes to the school district, and 10% is retained as an administrative fee.

We recognize going into this that we were never going to recoup the cost through the tickets themselves.

Okay, thank you for your answers.

Um Hugh?

Yes, along the same school of thought.

Um, I'm looking at it from what is the customer's experience going to be.

That is our residents or those folks who are traveling, traveling through.

I understand that this is the third party handling uh the cameras and the like, but who's there who's gonna be doing the billing?

Who's handling the appeals?

What happens in cases where we have you know, I just get the keys to Sharon's car and just start running through red lights.

But but what is the customer's experience going to be?

For instance, what what what's the cost of the ticket if you know you you you run a red light and the ticket comes in the mail?

I guess it comes from the third party or it comes from the city.

It comes from the third party.

You can appeal to a to a police officer to look at the video if you disagree.

Um, and then a police officer will review the video and take a second look.

Do the calls come into our city line?

I guess they could.

If they have no number on the ticket, uh yes, there's contact information on the ticket as to how you can file an appeal.

They showed us sort of what their website looks like, it's very user-friendly.

Um so I I think the customer experience will be very easy.

Do we have our own FAQ built so that even if it's running in parallel with what the third party has, that we have something on on our side that provides our customers, our residents with the details of this?

There will be absolutely information on the website about this program.

Um you will have to go through sort of their website to to look at the ticket, you know, look at the video, value appeal.

But we'll have that information linked on our website.

Yeah.

Okay, thank you.

Sharon?

So um it this ticket system is very much like the quick pass where you're riding on the toll road, and you drive through the toll, you don't pay to send you a ticket.

Very much like that.

Exactly like the quick pass.

That's right.

So anybody who goes to Riley, goes to you you ride through the toll roll, you may get a statement in the mail from QuickPass.

Yes, okay.

And this is very much how this is operate.

So this is not a police officer standing out there anywhere, ticketing you.

So yeah, and uh you can't appeal uh what comes in.

Matter of fact, my daughter just had that issue with QuickPass, and she appealed it, and all the way to the turnpike people.

So it is the same similar system.

Very much so yes, and the city attorney reminded me you get 15 days to pay the ticket and 21 to appeal.

Okay.

And did we but now I guess your question did get answered about the fee?

What did do we determine a ticket fee?

I believe it's around 200.

I'll ask direct your copy copyright now.

Oh, it's only it's only 50, my apologies.

Oh, 50.

Okay.

You got a discount.

It's just that quick.

Okay, well, well, yeah, and and that's good.

And and I will say this finally as we get ready to do this and approve it.

Um, I think the biggest caveat is it's not a criminal citation, so it's not gonna impact you if you don't pay it, you don't get a uh notice to a your failure to appear in court, you don't go down that path.

And I think that was one of the things one to make sure it did not occur, that it would did not create an additional burden down the line now.

You might not be able to renew your tag because I mean at least this way you all happen.

But seriously, um, you know, that that I think you know is also will help people maybe to uh get back on the straight narrow with stopping uh when the light turns yellow, so it won't they won't go through the red.

So thank you again for all your work on doing this, and uh love to try it, huh?

Can I answer my question?

No, I don't know if we'll be tied in with the DMV or not.

I don't know exactly how they want to say a big thank you to GDI.

Also they ran the RFP process and selected a really good company to do this for us.

So kudos to them.

Jamility still have a question, or I just need a clarification that it is a $50 ticket, and if you don't pay the ticket and continue to get what happens after that.

We have a collections procedure that we can use where yeah, you'll go after them, turn them over to a collections agency.

We would get even less revenue off of that, but we've we've determined that we would prefer to actually pursue these penalties instead of just letting them go by the wayside if they aren't paid.

So we do intend intend to pursue those.

You we do, yes.

Okay, thank you.

When you say we, who who is we?

We the city.

So the city would do the collections.

The company had offers a service where they can do it as well.

Um and so we just we that's one of the touch points that I don't know that we've 100% decided on who's gonna going to do it, but they have offered the service, it's just the cost.

Would it be worth it?

So it's a third party, so after the 15 days that it then we get the receivable on our books, or we're responsible for it, or they're not gonna collect, we're gonna collect again.

I don't know that we fully decided who's gonna do the collections piece of it if it's not paid.

Are we are we staffed for that?

We it depends.

We okay, yeah.

We could utilize the same process that we utilize for other penalties, such as our fire fees, different fines that we have, our collections that our collections department does on their own.

Um you lose my train of thought.

There was something else, but you got another question.

No, I don't, I'm good.

Okay, so we we do have a motion, and I believe it was Sharon and seconded by Hugh.

Was it?

Did you second it?

Who seconded it?

I did.

You did.

Okay.

Sorry.

Um moved by Mrs.

Hightower, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem.

Council, please vote.

And that was for I one, don't we?

And then I need a motion for I 11.

So moved.

Second.

Moved by Mayor Pro Tem, seconded by Mrs.

Hightower.

That passes 9 to 0.

Thank you very much.

We now move on to I2, which is a resolution to authorize the conveyance of vehicles to the town of Black Mountain in the estimated amount of $9,100.

We do have one speaker opposed to this item, Mr.

Hicks, and he is on Zoom.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Can you all hear me?

I can hear you.

Can we see you?

I hope so.

Cameras on.

Up there you are.

Perfect.

So good evening.

My name is Jason Hicks.

I want to begin by informing the city council that the city of Greensboro has been named as a defendant in a $20 million lawsuit involving cyber locks, which was filed earlier today.

Once again, taxpayers are left to carry the burden for poor decisions and reckless spending.

We have warned you about waste before, and here we are again with another example on tonight's agenda.

You are preparing to vote on whether to give away city owned vehicles to the town of Black Mountain at the very same time.

If that is true, then why are we considering giving away taxpayer funded vehicles outside of Greensboro when the need is so great right here at home?

Local nonprofits, such as establishing safe cultures, the interactive resource center, the almond connection, county house, community development, habitat for humanity, and many more could all immediately put those vehicles to use.

They are feeding families, transporting people to shelter, delivering health services, and supporting those who fall through the cracks.

Vehicles would expand their reach and help them better serve our residents.

So the question tonight is simple.

Will you stand with the people of Greensboro or will you give away taxpayer-funded resources to another town while telling our residents we don't have enough to meet their needs?

This is careless, and if you vote to send vehicles out of Greensboro tonight, you are choosing to neglect the very people you are elected to serve.

Therefore, I oppose the item and I urge you to vote no on the item.

Thank you all.

Move the items.

Moved by Mayor Pro Tem?

Do we have a second?

Seconded by Dr.

Wells.

So Mayor, um I I would like to uh speak on this item real quick because if you remember from the last meeting uh where this item came up, I asked two questions.

Did anybody ever answer my two questions?

And I think Mrs.

City Manager you sent me something I couldn't quite comprehend, but I had two questions process and advertisement.

Where were they listed?

That was it.

What is the process for obtaining vehicles throughout system?

Or how do we do it?

And where can those vehicles be found?

Now you sent me something that looked like but they were the same two vehicles.

So are those are only two vehicles that are out there?

But even so, where can I find them at to be able to share that information with any other interested party?

And I'll ask Assistant City Manager Davis to help me with the proper terminology, but we do post our surplus vehicles on our site.

And specifically for this one, we reposted or sent out to public notice in reference to do these two vehicles that are on this particular item.

And anyone who accesses that or has access and reviews that can make the request in this circumstance, and I think I provide a council with uh some information previously that allows the city uh to work with uh another city, such in this case, uh of course the town of Black Mountain uh was in the area that was hit by uh Hurricane Helene had significant damage.

Uh the two vehicles that are on this particular item uh are served in our surplus fleet, and the one is uh about two two thousand four hundred and fifty dollars, the other is six thousand six hundred and fifty dollars.

And so uh I'll ask the assistant city manager Larry Davis to kind of expound a little bit further on on how they post it and how people can actually view them.

Thank you, Mr.

Manager.

And this is a kind of a unique item on the agenda tonight because you are being asked to donate equipment.

Traditionally, we do take items like this to a surplus sale as councilmember hightower is is referencing.

So in this particular situation, we had a town in distress that had reached out, provided a long list of vehicles and equipment that they'd had damaged that were no longer available for use, and basically said, is there anything you have that meets any of our needs?

And it was a it was a painstakingly long list.

We had two vehicles that were being declared surplus uh by the city, which we have asked for as we are required to under state statute, we have to ask for your permission for donation.

So that's a little bit of a unique situation to our typical surplus process, but we surplus vehicles all the time.

We typically have about four surplus sales a year.

Uh we use a third party vendor to uh advertise and actually manage the sale for us.

We keep the vehicles on our lots uh out on uh East Friendly 321 East Friendly.

If you drive by there from time to time and you see city vehicles, um they're getting ready to be surplused, they're bidding they're getting ready to be sold.

The sale is done virtually.

Um the items are posted on the website.