2026-10-06 - City Council

00:02like to call the meeting to order of the

00:04Wington City Council. I'd like to

00:05welcome all those who are with us this

00:06evening and all those who are watching

00:08us at home. Thank you for taking an

00:10interest in your government. At this

00:12time, I'd like to call on

00:16Well,

00:17Pastor Nikki Stevenson of the Divine

00:19Faith and Restoration Church for the

00:21invocation. Asked that everyone remain

00:23standing and then standing for the

00:26pledge of allegiance. Very welcome.

00:29Father, we tell you thank you and we

00:31praise and bless your name. Father, we

00:33thank you for your spirit that's in this

00:35place on this evening. Now, Father, I

00:37lift up, Lord God, our mayor and the

00:39entire council, Father, and every city

00:42official. I ask that you would just be

00:44with them and protect them and guide

00:46them, Father. Let them lead, Father,

00:48with integrity, Father, oh God. And help

00:51them, Lord God, to make wise decisions,

00:54Father. We thank you for your protection

00:56over them. keep them in Jesus mighty

00:59name we pray. Amen.

01:00>> Amen.

01:02>> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the

01:04United States of America

01:06>> and to the republic for which it stands,

01:09one nation under God, indivisible, with

01:12liberty and justice for all.

01:25We have several presentations this

01:27evening. Our first presentation, I'd

01:29like to recognize Mr. Ativa Johnson,

01:31who's the exe executive director of the

01:34minority chamber of commerce, a

01:36proclamation naming October the 5th,

01:382026 through October the 10th as

01:40Minority Enterprise Development Week. If

01:43TA will meet me in the front, council

01:45would like to join me.

01:49It's always good for everybody to see

01:51couch.

02:22Hello everybody.

02:23>> Hello. How you doing? Good.

02:34City of Wington North Carolina

02:35proclamation reads, "Whereas National

02:37Minority Enterprise Development Week,

02:39also known as National Med Week, is

02:41observed in October to recognize and

02:44celebrate the achievements and

02:45contributions of the minority business

02:47enterprise community. And whereas North

02:49Carolina agencies, municipalities, and

02:52organizations host events to honor

02:55small, minority, and womenowned

02:56businesses. And whereas the city of

02:58Wilmington encourages and actively seeks

03:00to be business with minority and

03:02womenowned business enterprises, better

03:05known as MWBE, for all advertised

03:08projects. And whereas MWBE program

03:12increases opportunities for historically

03:14underutilized businesses and fosters a

03:16businessfriendly environment that

03:18promotes collaboration, creativity,

03:20accountability, and inclusion. All of

03:22which are directly aligned with the

03:24city's core values as we strive to make

03:26a better Wilmington every day. And

03:28whereas creating and operating a

03:29business is a cornerstone of the

03:32American dream and the city of

03:33Wilmington believes that dreams belongs

03:35to everyone and celebrates the

03:37accomplishment of our MWBE and values

03:41the many ways that our community is

03:43enriched by them. Now therefore, on

03:44behalf of the Wilmington City Council, I

03:46Bill Sappa, do hereby proclaim October

03:48the 5th through the 10th, 2026 as

03:51Minority Enterprise Development Week and

03:53encourage all residents of Wilmington to

03:55get to know their local MB NWBees and

03:58business owners and work together to

04:00celebrate their accomplishments. So, we

04:01thank you for everything that you do

04:03every single day. I tell you, I'm going

04:04to turn this over to you. Thank

04:06[clears throat and snorts] you.

04:08Uh, good evening everyone. Thank you for

04:11those that are watching. Thanks to

04:13Wington City Council, everyone, Natalie

04:16with the Greater Wington Chamber, thank

04:17you for always supporting as well. Um, I

04:20I really just want to say thank you when

04:22you guys we have a slew of events. This

04:25May week wouldn't be possible without

04:27our Wilmington City Council. Seriously,

04:31they get a lot of flack for a lot of

04:32different things, but they really

04:33stepped up and honed in on this thing.

04:36So, I just I I definitely want to say

04:38thank you to them. Um, we are better

04:40together, guys. And that's in everything

04:42we do. So come out and support whether

04:45you are a small business owner, a large

04:48business owner, man, woman, child,

04:50black, white, green, yellow, Wilmington

04:53and all of us are better together. So

04:55thank you.

04:55>> Thank you. Thank you very much.

04:58[applause]

05:05>> Thank you.

05:07>> Thank you. Thank you.

05:34That was scary.

05:53Okay, we'd like to recognize Miss Mandy

05:56Aruras.

05:58Mandy, come on over here. Outreach

06:00director of domestic violence shelter

06:02proclaiming and naming October as

06:04domestic violence awareness month.

06:07I hope we pronounced that name

06:08correctly. I was getting some

06:10>> You're so close. You're great.

06:12>> Oh,

06:14>> oh my goodness. Come over here.

06:17>> Thank you so

06:25>> Wilmington, North Carolina. Proclamation

06:26re whereas domestic violence transcends

06:29all ethnic, racial, gender, and

06:31soioeconomic boundaries, weakening the

06:33very core of our community. And whereas

06:36many persons throughout Wilmington,

06:37North Carolina and the United States

06:39find themselves in abusive relationships

06:41and need to find a safe and empowering

06:43environment. And whereas the effects of

06:45domestic violence are farreaching and

06:47have lasting implications on the

06:49well-being and security of individuals,

06:51families, the criminal justice system,

06:54and our community as a whole. Whereas

06:56Domestic Violence Shelter and Services

06:58Incorporated provides emergency crisis

07:00intervention, including shelter and

07:02ongoing support services in Wilmington,

07:04North Carolina for victims and survivors

07:06of domestic violence. And whereas, 161

07:10adults and 85 children received direct

07:13services such as court, accompaniment,

07:16advocacy, empowerment groups, and

07:18counseling, including 130 adults and

07:21Eddie Turan who received emergency

07:22shelter through the domestic violence

07:25shelter and services incorporated in the

07:27year 2025.

07:28And now therefore, I, Bill Sappa, on

07:31behalf of the Wilmington City Council,

07:33do hereby proclaim October 2026 to be

07:36domestic violence awareness month in the

07:38city of Wilmington and urge all citizens

07:40to enhance their efforts to work

07:42together to address the problems of

07:43domestic violence. This year's theme

07:46rooted in resilience serves as a

07:48reminder to citizens of Wilmington,

07:49North Carolina to encourage, support,

07:51and empower one another to live lives

07:54free from violence. and we can't thank

07:56you enough for everything you folks do

07:58every single day, the domestic violence

08:00shelter. So, I'm with Mandy, I'm going

08:02to turn this over to you.

08:04>> Thank you so much, Mayor Sappo, and to

08:06the city of Wilmington, our council

08:08members, um our community and survivors

08:11everywhere. This is an issue um that

08:14doesn't, you know, discriminate. It is

08:16alive and well in Wilmington. And the

08:19good news is that there are support,

08:22resources, and help. And we are

08:24available 24 hours a day by calling

08:26910-343703.

08:30That will connect you with a real live

08:32Wilmingtonian in our community for help

08:3524 hours a day. And we could not do this

08:37work without you all. We invite you to

08:39celebrate this month with us. We have

08:40several really exciting events planned.

08:43Next Monday at 6:30 at Port City

08:45Community Church, we will be um

08:47partnering with the Community Justice

08:48Center um on a faith summit on domestic

08:51violence to engage our faith leaders in

08:54learning more about appropriate

08:55responses to domestic violence. And

08:57that's going to be a really exciting

08:58event. Also, October 29th is our

09:01Takeback the Night march and rally that

09:04will be held at Plaza on Princess and

09:06we're excited to have North Carolina

09:08Attorney General Jeff Jackson who will

09:10be joining us um and showing commitment

09:12for survivors. So, thank you so much. We

09:14appreciate your ongoing support.

09:16>> Thank you. Thank you. We have a

09:17question.

09:24[applause]

09:26Our

09:29last presentation this evening, Miss Mr.

09:32Thomas Eninsley of GE Hitachi Nuclear

09:35Energy proclaiming the name the um

09:38October as

09:41through October as nuclear science week.

09:44It's interesting. Thank you. Thank you.

09:46Come on up here.

10:09City of Wilmington, North Carolina

10:10proclamation reads, "Whereas nuclear

10:12science and technology play a critical

10:14role in the lives of many Wilmington

10:15citizens, especially those who work

10:17locally in the industry or our students

10:20pursuing an education in nuclear nuclear

10:21science and providing essential energy

10:23that ensures the continued flow of

10:25critical services, commerce, tourism,

10:27and visitors to our region. And whereas

10:29nuclear science and technology have an

10:32immense economic impact on Wilmington.

10:34And whereas Nuclear Science Week offers

10:36a unique opportunity for citizens of

10:38Wilmington and the surrounding areas to

10:40engage in educational programs,

10:42celebrate scientific discovery, and

10:44recognize local researchers, engineers,

10:47and educators who contribute to our

10:49techn technological advancements. And

10:51whereas the city of Wilmington has great

10:53interest in the dedicated community

10:54outreach in public forums during this

10:57week which helped demystify scientific

11:00concepts encourages critical thinking

11:02and cultivate the next generation of

11:04innovators who will lead our city

11:06forward. And whereas nuclear science and

11:08engineering play an indispensable role

11:10in modern society, providing clean,

11:12reliable, and carbon-f free energy,

11:14advancing medical diagnostics and

11:17treatment, and driving vital research

11:19not only in the city of Wilmington, but

11:21also across the global industries. Now,

11:23therefore, on behalf of the Wilmington

11:25City Council, I'm Mayor Bill Saf. I do

11:26hereby proclaim October the 19th through

11:29the 25th, 2026 as Nuclear Science Week

11:32in our community of the city of

11:34Wilmington. And I thank you for

11:36everything that you folks do out there.

11:38G nuclear. You folks are now producing

11:41or starting to produce the next nuclear

11:43reactors of the 21st century. And I know

11:45it's an exciting time and we really

11:47appreciate all the hard work that all of

11:48you are doing here in our community. So

11:50I'm going to turn this over to you.

11:52>> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you the city

11:54and the members of the city council. Um

11:57on behalf of the American Nuclear

11:58Society with membership from GE Hitachi

12:01and our partners at Duke Energy, um we

12:03want to welcome everyone to the upcoming

12:05celebration of Nuclear Science Week. We

12:07have a wide variety of educational and

12:09hands-on events throughout the week. One

12:12that I'll highlight this evening is our

12:14nuclear expo event on the Friday and

12:17Saturday of that week hosted at SE Hall

12:21at UNCW. We'll have organizations from

12:24across the Capefir region and across the

12:26country um hosting different educational

12:29events and different hands-on activities

12:31including scout badges and STEM fairs

12:33and lots of great activities. To check

12:35out the full schedule of events, uh our

12:38website is nuclearcienceweek.org.

12:41Thank you very much for your support.

12:42>> Very much. Thank you everybody. Thank

12:43you. [applause]

13:04Yes, we're done.

13:40Next item business is our consent

13:42agenda. We have three items on our

13:44consent agenda. Are there any items any

13:46council member would like to hear

13:47separately? If not, what are the wishes

13:48of council in respect to consent agenda

13:501 through three? We have a motion to

13:52approve by council member Sleta Andrews.

13:55Second by council member Shaima Kintana.

14:00Any other discussion? All in favor of

14:01that motion, please indicate by saying

14:03I.

14:03>> I.

14:04>> Any opposed? That item passes

14:06unanimously. That brings us to our next

14:08item business, which is our public

14:10information segment. We have two

14:11speakers that have signed up to speak

14:14with us this evening. Each speaker will

14:16be limited to three minutes. Our first

14:18speaker is Mr. Rodney Dixon who is a

14:21city resident who will be speaking to us

14:23about law enforcement. Mr. Dixon, here

14:26sir. Mr. Dixon.

14:31>> Um, good afternoon everybody. on um

14:35August 21st at about 7:25

14:40um my mom called the police cuz my son

14:43was acting erratic and he had a weapon.

14:46the officers um came, they parked a

14:49block away and as they walked up and see

14:53the video. When they got toward the

14:55corner, they started running toward him.

14:58And at a minute and 39 seconds is when

15:01they first encountered him. And at a

15:03minute and 52 seconds, they shot about

15:0560 70 rounds with 20 of them, over 20 of

15:08them hitting him. They shot his

15:10testicles off.

15:12After the gunfire ceased, one officer

15:16walked up to him and shot him three more

15:19times while he was on the ground. If you

15:21would like to hear audio, I do have it.

15:25Don't want to hear it. Yeah. And then so

15:28during this time, um, I had just had

15:31surgery. So I came back and

15:34I went to the hospital. The surgeon came

15:36in and she told me that he had

15:40about four bullets that went straight to

15:42him. They took two bullets out of him.

15:44Then um they had to his abdomen, his um

15:49had to redo his intestines,

15:52his lower back, his buttocks, his

15:55thighs. They had shot his uh feur off.

15:58Basically, they had to put rods in that.

16:00Got shot both arms. and um this leg uh

16:04the other leg too.

16:07And um I tried to reach out. I left a

16:10message at the mayor's office. I I was

16:13trying to um talk to anybody. They let

16:16me see my son uh that Sunday and he was

16:20laying there on the ventilator

16:22and this cop that I seen like 2:30

16:26Saturday morning in my mom's house

16:28tearing out the tape. I tried to talk to

16:30him and he came he was said um relieved

16:34this guy and he was so arrogant

16:37and me and him had some words and then

16:39they said that I was belligerent. So I I

16:42just want to ask anybody what's the

16:43protocol

16:46to look at your son like this after they

16:48got shot up.

16:50They didn't try to just escalate it.

16:52They had a guy shoot at shoot a cop in

16:55Columbus County. They had over 300

16:57officers, three helicopters. They walked

16:59them out the woods hand in hand.

17:02They had a shooter over at Walmart this

17:05past Wednesday or Thursday. The police

17:08over there, they escalated. No shot, no

17:10shots fired.

17:14People told me, and I got a couple

17:17videos, people said it was it was just a

17:19shame.

17:21And I'm I'm I mean, I'm just appalled.

17:24Then the then the sheriff and the um

17:27chief decides to take him from the

17:30police I mean the um hospital to a

17:33prison. He hadn't been con convicted of

17:35anything. He was getting the best care

17:37at Novant. And Novant kept me up on what

17:40was going on with him. And the lady was

17:43sad about it. She said that that they

17:45were real real eager to get him out of

17:48Wimon. They don't want us to see him.

17:49They haven't let us seen him. And it's

17:52it's just sad. I have no faith in the

17:55police or the sheriff department.

17:58Yeah. Thank

18:08speaker speaker is Sonia Benitone

18:10Patrick a non city resident who will be

18:12speaking to us about law enforcement in

18:13Wilmington.

18:20>> Good evening. My name is Sonia

18:21Bennington Patrick. I currently chair

18:23the Black Caucus Southeastern Region and

18:25I'm here on the issue that concerns me

18:27is safety and law enforcement. We stand

18:30in solidarity with with Rodney Wilson

18:34and his family. The altercation that

18:37happened August 21st to terrorize

18:39residents

18:41in that neighborhood. It happened in

18:44district downtown Wilmington when he was

18:47gunned down by law enforcement. As his

18:49father just explained after he was

18:52called for help, having a mental crime,

18:55I'm sorry, having a mental illness is

18:56not a crime. Those who work with mental

18:59illness confirmed if law enforcement had

19:01simply called his name, the situation

19:03could have been deescalated. It is

19:05disturbing that the sheriff of New

19:07Hanover County and Women PD use

19:10excessive force in black and brown

19:12communities. However, that's not the

19:14same where there is a white suspect.

19:17When recently a white suspect was taken

19:19into custody for shooting law

19:21enforcement. Is this the kind of legacy

19:23Wilmington wants printed in the history

19:25books of injustice? As a result, we do

19:29not feel safe in our communities with

19:31the Wington Police Department who

19:33refuses to collaborate community leaders

19:35to build trust for the possibility which

19:38eliminates the possibility of community

19:40policing. Our agenda with the Black

19:43Caucus is clear. All officers should

19:45have mandatory training in culture

19:48competency with implicit bias training

19:51and also have training on how to deal

19:53with people with mental illness. Having

19:55a mental illness should not be a crime.

19:57Law enforcement cannot be judge, jury,

19:59and executioner. Community policing

20:02should be mandatory, not optional. All

20:05officers deal with hidden battles of

20:07their own and should have psychiatric

20:10treatment and evaluations often to

20:13ensure that they are competent to

20:16perform their duties. We demand complete

20:18and authority investigation and we

20:21demand accountability for Rodney Wilson

20:24Elderberto

20:26Paso Sierra who was always who was

20:29murdered in the district of downtown

20:31Wilmington. Those were two altercations

20:33in the black and brown community where

20:35there were multiple 60 shots fired 20ome

20:39in one instance and 90 killing. We are

20:42glad and fortunate by God's grace and

20:44mercy that Rodney Wilson is still with

20:46us. Again, we demand complete and

20:49authority investigation and we demand

20:51police accountability. We do not feel

20:54safe with the current law enforcement.

20:56Thank you for listening.

20:57>> Thank you.

21:01brings us to our next item vision which

21:03are public hearings um which is item PH1

21:06which is an ordinance amending the

21:07official zoning maps of the city to

21:09reszone property containing 12.126 acres

21:12located at 2225 Stonecrop Drive and 1124

21:17Gallery Park Boulevard from an existing

21:20ONICD office and institutional

21:22conditional district to a new ONICD

21:25office and institutional conditional

21:27district to allow for a future mixeduse

21:29use development. Uh I have been um

21:32instructed by staff is asking that this

21:34item be continued to our council's

21:37October 20th meeting. Is that correct,

21:39Madam CL?

21:40>> That's correct.

21:41>> Okay. So, do I have um can I have a

21:44motion to continue this item to October

21:47the 20th, 2026? We have a motion to

21:50approve by council member Andrew, second

21:51by council member Santaita. All in favor

21:54of that motion, please indicate by

21:55saying I.

21:56>> I.

21:56>> Any opposed? Item passes unanimously.

21:59That brings us to our next item of

22:01business, which is item PH2, which is an

22:03ordinance amending the official zoning

22:05maps of the city of Wilmington to

22:06reszone property containing 2.176

22:10acres located at 120 Canal Street and

22:14124 Canal Street from R20 Ale

22:17Residential Legacy District to R7 CD

22:20medium density single dwelling

22:22conditional district for residential

22:24development. Uh, at this time I' like to

22:27recognize our city manager, Miss Becky

22:28Hawk. Miss Hall.

22:29>> Thank you, Mr. Mayor, mayor prom, and

22:31members of council. This item will be

22:33presented by Tucker Cherry, our zoning

22:35planner in our planning and development

22:36department.

22:43>> Good evening, Mr. Mayor, Mayor Prom, and

22:45members of council.

22:48Excuse me.

22:50for your review this evening. I present

22:52a conditional district reszoing uh at

22:55120 and 124 Canal Street.

22:58A community meeting was held in for in

23:00July prior to the application being

23:02submitted. Staff has reviewed this and

23:04this has been heard and recommended by

23:06the planning commission and tonight is

23:08at its second public hearing. This site

23:11is zoned R20 uh which is a low density

23:14residential legacy district. Uh the

23:16potential uses include residential and

23:18recreation. The the applicant is

23:21proposing an R seven conditional

23:22district with eight town home units. The

23:24town home units are proposed to be three

23:26stories tall with a maximum height of 35

23:28ft each with a garage and parking pad.

23:32This site is located on Canal Street um

23:34near the intersection of Eastwood Road

23:36and Writesville Avenue.

23:38The site is currently used for single

23:40family residential and is adjacent to

23:42commercial residential and mixeduse

23:44properties. The site is as I mentioned

23:47zoned R20 L legacy low density legacy

23:50district. The site is bordered by

23:52community business office and

23:54institutional and more R20.

23:57Uh here we have photos of the subject

24:00property looking uh from Canal Street

24:03and adjacent properties looking

24:05northwest and south on Canal Street.

24:10Here is a site plan for the proposal

24:13showing the eight town home units with

24:14associated driveway and parking spaces.

24:16There will be uh 16 parking spaces are

24:19provided. There are 83 regulated,

24:21significant, and specimen trees located

24:23on the site. 12 regulated trees and nine

24:26significant trees are proposed for

24:28removal. They will require mitigation.

24:30Uh there are five specimen live oak

24:32trees that will be retained and

24:33protected. Here are proposed elevations

24:37uh from Canal Street and from M Creek

24:40Pond.

24:43The subject property is designated as an

24:45inter coastal tidewater area of

24:47opportunity. relevant policies uh from

24:49the comprehensive plan uh excuse me uh

24:53focus the policies for that area of

24:54opportunity include focus on preserving

24:56character and single family

24:58compatibility and to limit the number of

25:00driveways along parkways and loop road

25:02corridor types encouraging shared access

25:04and a network connect uh shared access

25:07and a network of connected streets and

25:08pathways.

25:10The comprehensive plan uh the create

25:12Wilmington comprehensive plan offers

25:14policy guidance to shape development

25:16throughout the city. Staff assessed this

25:17application with relevant policies and

25:19found modest support for the application

25:21with the plan. Key policies that support

25:23this develop uh this proposal highlight

25:25the need for compact development,

25:27transitional buffers, increasing housing

25:29supply while protecting desired

25:30neighborhood character and tree

25:32preservation.

25:34Uh one policy was found to not be in

25:36support of this proposal.

25:40Uh no comments or testimony have been

25:42received in support of the proposal. One

25:45comment has been received in opposition

25:46to the proposal and I believe it's been

25:47forwarded to you all.

25:51To summarize this resoning would go from

25:54an R20 lowdensity residential legacy

25:56district to R seven uh conditional

25:58district which medium density single

26:00dwelling. Um the storm water management

26:03is required. Uh trees that would be

26:06removed for essential site improvements

26:08uh would need to be mitigated and five

26:10specimen trees will be retained. Uh the

26:13proposal is again for eight uh town home

26:15units. Um staff finds this request to be

26:18reasonable in public interest and at the

26:20first public hearing the planning

26:21commission uh unanimously approve uh

26:23recommended approval. And this concludes

26:26staff's presentation. I'm happy to

26:28answer any questions and the applicant

26:30is here as well.

26:32>> Any questions of staff?

26:35>> Salah.

26:38>> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um this is a staff

26:41question but it may not be your

26:43department. Um but the

26:46site drains drains directly into the

26:48inter coastal. Are there um do we do

26:51extra silt fence um inspections or

26:53anything like that? Is it different um

26:56when it drains straight in um to the

26:58waterway like that?

27:00>> I'll turn that over to Mr. Chambers.

27:04>> I don't know if I have a good answer to

27:05this. Um, it would be the grading would

27:07be established through New Hver County

27:09grading permit. I would assume there

27:11would be silt fence around the entirety

27:12of the construction area. I don't know

27:14if they put additional fencing adjacent

27:16to the creek. There will have to be

27:17additional protections for those

27:18resources based on our conservation

27:20resource standards though.

27:22>> Great. Thank you.

27:23>> Yes, ma'am.

27:24>> Miss Andrews. Um so along those lines

27:28similarly are the uh 25% imperous limit

27:32and preservation of all five specimen

27:35live oaks um clearly secured in the plan

27:38that we're approving.

27:42>> Yes ma'am.

27:43>> Okay.

27:45And then how will the storm water design

27:47account for groundwater and tidal

27:49conditions and avoid increasing flooding

27:51on neighborhood properties?

27:55uh storm storm water management would

27:57have to comply with the city and state

27:58standards. I do not have the knowledge

28:01to answer that question as to what

28:02specifically would be required. Um they

28:04would have to to treat um treat the site

28:06as if it's pre-development with the

28:09water that's created by the impervious

28:11impervious coverage. How they do that

28:13would be um and maybe the applicant has

28:15a better answer as to what their

28:16thoughts are on what the stormwater

28:17design will be, but that that it would

28:19be it would be brought up in the the

28:20technical review of this project.

28:22>> Okay.

28:23And then just one more um if I could,

28:26Mr. Mayor. Um so residents asked about

28:30short-term rental restrictions and has

28:32the applicant committed to those and

28:34where would that commitment be

28:35documented?

28:36>> So uh I wouldn't defer to the applicant

28:38exactly, but uh it could be a required

28:41condition as a required by approval and

28:43they would have to follow that I

28:44believe.

28:46>> Okay,

28:46>> that's m

28:50>> that'd be if the applicant agrees to it.

28:52Yes.

28:53>> Okay.

28:54>> Anybody else?

28:56>> Okay. Thank you, sir.

28:57>> Thank you. This time to recognize the

29:00applicant.

29:07>> Good evening. My name is Cindy Wolf. I'm

29:08here on behalf of the owners of these

29:10two properties.

29:16As um Tucker pointed out, Canal Street

29:20is a deadend road. The rightaway stubs

29:23into the Tidal Creek, so there's no

29:25feasibility for future extension. The

29:27four-story Grand View mixeduse is on the

29:30approach from Eastwood Road and an

29:32existing contractor yard, which is

29:34non-conforming to any of the current

29:36regulations for screening sidewalk or

29:38improved driveways on the opposite side.

29:41Although the back access of Atlantic

29:43Marine Boat Service is at the end of the

29:46road, um they have built the first of

29:48their two mixeduse buildings and that

29:50adds a really positive character to the

29:52street. We believe

29:54the zoning map shows that those

29:56surrounding uses are what would be

29:59expected at this deadend road just off

30:01of Eastwood Road as far as being

30:03commercial in nature. And although the

30:06R20 legacy zoning district is certainly

30:08still appropriate for the summer haven

30:10community across Mottz Creek, these last

30:13two parcels are no longer attractive for

30:15the same style of single family use. The

30:19proposed small increase in the density

30:21of residential units would be consistent

30:24with other development activity in the

30:26vicinity and provide a transition.

30:30These are the aerial and survey of the

30:32existing conditions. There is a

30:34difference between the taxed land area

30:37which is approximately two acres and the

30:39actual upland lands which is what we

30:42work with when we're doing land

30:43development. Uh the layout was created

30:46with great consideration to the trees

30:48and the topography. We have already done

30:50soils testing and that soils testing

30:53resulted in the two test spots in the

30:56front of the units which would be

30:58underneath the pavement with um

31:02excellent storm uh whatever seasonal

31:05high water or I'm sorry seasonal depth

31:08to the storm water and then those two

31:11had 19 and 20 inches per hour in

31:14infiltration. So it is certainly

31:18feasible for us to have not only

31:21underground infiltration in a good way

31:24but then also um to meet the criteria of

31:29the resource protection overlay and the

31:3225%

31:34other along with what the low density

31:36procedures that you would use for storm

31:38water. As far as the runoff, it will not

31:41drain directly into the creek. The

31:44runoff will be in front of the buildings

31:45which is on the canal street side.

31:48Obviously all runoff has to be directed

31:50to the storm water management provisions

31:53which will be in front and then their

31:55overflow will go into the storm system

31:58that is in Canal Street. So yes,

32:00eventually that storm system drains to

32:03the inter coastal waterway, but

32:05everything is protected that will run

32:07off of these rooftops and this um

32:10pavement.

32:13uh as he pointed out the view to the

32:15north to the end of Canal Street. We are

32:17off to the right and our layout was

32:21intended to be able to keep these trees,

32:24one or two of them, which are some of

32:25the specimens, but also some of the

32:27other existing vegetation.

32:31Uh looking the other way from the end of

32:32the street, you can see that same

32:34vegetation that we're striving to keep

32:36in the sort of front yard, if you want

32:38to call it that. Again the site plan um

32:42the building footprints were located

32:44with maximum attention to those existing

32:46trees and the conservation resources

32:49total building coverage is less than 15%

32:52of the overall project area. All trees

32:55within the marsh and the cood

32:58I guess one of these days it'd be nice

33:00if the city um had the touch screen

33:03which the county has. It makes it very

33:06simple when we're on this side. But

33:08anyway, the green line that runs behind

33:10those buildings is that vegetated

33:12buffer. Um, and nothing of the

33:15vegetation that is regulated regulated,

33:18significant, or specimen can be taken

33:20out below that point.

33:24uh just a little bit easier with the

33:26aerial photograph of seeing how the site

33:28lays out and the vegetation that will be

33:31kept because these are the only

33:33essential site improvements.

33:36Um fairly it's important to I think

33:39acknowledge that the views across the

33:41pond both from Summer Haven and this is

33:43on the small bridge that crosses the

33:45outlet of the pond towards the inter

33:47coastal waterway. um those elevations.

33:51This is the 120 address. You can't even

33:54see the 124 address and the new building

33:57footprints are relatively in these same

34:00footprints of those existing homes. And

34:04so between the conservation setback and

34:07the vegetation preserved in it, we

34:09believe that it will be a very muted

34:12vision from across the pond.

34:16It is a fairly contemporary style. Both

34:18the front and back will feature an

34:20abundance of windows and architectural

34:22features. We're meeting with an

34:23architect hopefully on Thursday if this

34:25is approved to get things moving a

34:28little u more detailed. Streetyard and

34:31foundation plantings are aesthetically

34:33featured in any upscale home development

34:35project such as this and they'll be

34:38between those driveways and Canal

34:40Street.

34:42So with that, we appreciate both staff

34:44and the planning commission's

34:45recommendations that man uh the Manttown

34:49Homes can meet the positive strategies

34:51of the city to provide housing

34:53transitional uses and preserve the

34:55environment. The composite growth map

34:57shows the parcel as an area of

34:59opportunity and we believe that that

35:01proposed plan would meet those

35:03strategies for smart growth development,

35:05streetscape enhancements, and best

35:07design practices. I'm here with Nathan

35:09Singerman and uh we'd be happy to answer

35:11any questions you might have.

35:14>> Any questions of the applicant?

35:17Mayor Pro.

35:20>> Cindy, what's the price point for these

35:22town homes?

35:24>> I feel sure that it is not in what you

35:27would consider the affordable range

35:29based upon the location and the tax

35:31values of this land. That being said,

35:34the Bowen housing needs study certainly

35:36identifies that there are all ranges of

35:40home values and home costs um in our

35:42deficit currently.

35:44>> Right. And not I I wouldn't I wouldn't

35:46even go into the affordable housing

35:49>> conversation. It's always hard to say

35:51until the the buildings are designed and

35:54constructed.

35:55>> I'm I'm I'm going to go a different

35:57angle this time. So, I was doing some

36:01research this week and and you're right.

36:04So, there are we are missing housing in

36:07general. We are in a housing crisis,

36:10right? But I I think when

36:14with what we're doing, when we're adding

36:16housing at different price points, we

36:19are helping to exacerbate the

36:22displacement of people with low to

36:23moderate income. And that's a problem

36:26that we have in this area.

36:28So, I mean, I that's not necessarily

36:31your problem right now when it relates

36:33to this, but it's definitely a thought

36:35that came to mind when I was looking at

36:39this agenda item and also just thinking

36:41about what's taking place in in our

36:43community.

36:45So, I I just thought that I would ask

36:47and and you mentioned the the zones the

36:50the zones of opportunity. How does one

36:53find these zones of opportunity? The

36:55comprehensive land use plan, the create

36:58Wilmington, has a map and it's well

37:00there's five of them total posters that

37:03come along with that report. One of them

37:05is entitled areas of opportunity and I

37:08believe there's five or six of them and

37:09the descriptions are there. I'm sure

37:11that staff

37:11>> Yeah, I was looking through the the

37:13documentation and I saw all these.

37:15>> It's part of the create Wilmington and

37:17there's links to it.

37:19>> Okay. Thank you.

37:20>> Thank you,

37:21>> Council Member Santuo.

37:23>> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I wanted to follow

37:25up on the question about short-term

37:26rentals and that feedback from the

37:28surrounding I guess neighborhood. What

37:30is that a condition that um you all are

37:33willing to adhere to

37:36to not have short-term rentals?

37:37>> Yes, I I think it would be Sorry, Nathan

37:40Singerman. I'm working with Cindy on

37:42this project and yes, it's something

37:44that we we um we expect to implement

37:47within the HOA.

37:49>> So, to prohibit short-term rentals

37:50>> to prohibit short-term rentals. Yeah.

37:52>> All right. Thank you. Would they accept

37:54the condition?

37:55>> We would. We would absolutely accept.

37:57It's our intention anyway. So, we would

37:58absolutely accept accept.

37:59>> You would accept that condition?

38:00>> Yes.

38:01>> Thanks,

38:03Council Member Law.

38:05>> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um, first of all,

38:07I want to say how much I appreciate the

38:09site plans um preservation of so many um

38:13of all the specimen trees actually. So,

38:15I appreciate that and working with the

38:18uh sidewalk there on the corner to um

38:21make sure we stay as as far out of the

38:24critical root zone as we can. I

38:25appreciate that um design and I have all

38:29um the confidence in the world of our

38:31storm water team. My question was mostly

38:32about during construction because um

38:34I've seen some sorry silt fence. So, and

38:37this is specifically um a very sensitive

38:40area of course, but um I know that

38:42between the city and the county um

38:44inspectors if there was any additional

38:47um that was my question. So, yes, but

38:49thank you.

38:49>> I feel sure that that'll be a high

38:51point.

38:51>> Yeah.

38:53>> Thanks.

38:56>> Anybody else?

38:58>> Okay. Thank you, Cindy. I'm sure if

39:00there's any questions, we'll ask you to

39:02come back up to explain them. At this

39:04time, I'm going to open up the public

39:05hearing and ask if anybody in the public

39:07wishes to speak on this particular item.

39:10The public um hearings as limit is 30

39:14minutes. So, if anybody wants to speak,

39:16if you please come forward and name your

39:18state your name for the record

39:21and uh each speaker will be allotted

39:24three minutes.

39:30>> Hi, my name is Deborah Dobbins. I reside

39:32Oh, I'm sorry.

39:35>> We can hear you.

39:36>> I've never used this before. Okay. Uh my

39:38name is Deborah Dobbins. My husband and

39:40I reside at 124 Summer Haven, which is

39:43directly across um the creek from the

39:47proposed 12124 demolition of Canal

39:50Street. We are not opposed. I don't

39:53know. I mean, we've sent letters. We

39:54sent letters to the council and

39:56everything as well as the planning

39:57department and the builders and we are

40:00not opposed to the construction. We kind

40:02of see it as the lesser of several evils

40:05that could happen there. But we do have

40:07concerns. I can now see those two

40:10properties from my house, the back of my

40:12house, my back windows, my patio, my

40:14screen porch now. And those are single

40:16structure

40:18single level homes. So what they're

40:21proposing are three stories. And we have

40:23concerns about the lighting coming off

40:25those upper stories across the creek. We

40:27have um concerns as our letters to you

40:31all um represented concerns about the

40:34lighting used along there. Grand View

40:36was required to do low lighting that it

40:39didn't reflect into the creek which can

40:41upset the migratory and the delicate

40:44ecosystem of the creek. We have

40:47concerns. The property actually slopes

40:49down from where it is proposed for the

40:52runoff from the back into the creek. So,

40:55we do have some concerns about that. And

40:57as our letters stated to you all, we

41:00have concerns about the use of

41:02pesticides, high nitrogen fertilizers,

41:05and what the amount of impervious

41:07surfaces is there. I'm sorry. It's very

41:09nerve-wracking for me to stand here and

41:11do that. Um but the bigger issue going

41:14forward is the destruction of the

41:17properties, the deconstruction of the

41:19properties and um what happens to all of

41:24that deconstruction. Silt fences are not

41:28necessarily

41:30really active. We're concerned about

41:32asbestous and lead given the times these

41:35were built and that runoff and

41:38preventing that from going into the

41:40creek and ensuring that best practices

41:43are used to remove these things from the

41:46property so it doesn't impact there.

41:48We've lived there on the creek for 10

41:50years now and we are take kayaks out

41:54with our neighbors to pick up cups and

41:56dirt and trash that wash into it from

41:59the boats off the inter coastal canal

42:01from other things going on there. and we

42:04just encourage the developers to

42:10be considerate neighbors and that's all

42:13we can ask and we hope they will follow

42:15suit with that because we don't oppose

42:17this and we do think that it's probably

42:20one of the better proposals for the

42:22property. Thank you.

42:24>> Thank you.

42:29Anybody else?

42:32Anybody else?

42:34Okay, Cindy, you want to address that?

42:38>> Certainly. Thank you. We did receive a

42:40copy of the Dobbins um letter and I was

42:43trying to I thought um address most of

42:46those things in my presentation, but

42:48just to follow up on the things that she

42:51said was, as you can imagine, um a major

42:53asset of this project is going to be the

42:56views out over the pond, similar for

42:58those folks in Samar Haven. And it's

43:00it's a priceless um situation obviously.

43:05So low lighting would be self-imposed

43:08just because the eight owners here want

43:11that same type of experience that the

43:14folks over in Summer Haven have. So I

43:16don't see any issue that that is going

43:19to raise. Um there are certainly

43:21building codes for demolition of older

43:23homes when they involve asbestos or

43:25anything like that. uh erosion control

43:28and the oversight of the county making

43:31sure that erosion control and sediment

43:34don't go off and into water sources is

43:38inspected on a regular basis. And so I

43:41believe that there are provisions in

43:44place for all of those concerns.

43:47Similarly with the um you know

43:49fertilizers and those types of things.

43:52Uh

43:54and the the homeowners association.

43:57I think had this been two single family

44:00lots that could build a house and

44:02perhaps build an ADU, there wouldn't

44:05have been any controls over the trees,

44:07over the feasibility of not having um

44:11short-term rentals, none of that. But

44:14when you have seven other people that

44:17you're living with and you're all under

44:18the same HOA, I think there's just an

44:21inherent uh policing of the entire

44:23situation and that's how I think we can

44:26only address that that way.

44:29>> Okay. Very good. Any other questions?

44:32>> Okay. Anybody else?

44:36Um okay.

44:40There no other comments from the public.

44:42I will close the public hearing and ask

44:46if council has any additional questions

44:48and if not what are the wishes of

44:49council. We have a motion to approve by

44:52council member Andrews, second by

44:53council member Joiner and I will note

44:55that whoever makes the no motion which

44:57is council member Andrews. You must read

44:59the consistency statement for the

45:01record, please.

45:02>> Mr. Mayor, if I could interrupt just

45:04briefly. Um, is the motion by Council

45:06Member Andrews to accept the item as is

45:08or to accept the item with an added

45:10condition number five under section two

45:12for no short-term rentals allowed on the

45:15property?

45:16>> Yes. The second one.

45:18>> The second one.

45:19>> Okay. Before Before you go there, um,

45:21Madame Clerk, are there any additional

45:22comments that you have received on the

45:26property?

45:26>> No, sir. I have not.

45:28>> Okay. Very good. Council member Mendes.

45:30>> Okay. I move to approve the proposed

45:33amendment to reszone property located at

45:35120 and 124 Canal Street from R20 L

45:40residential legacy to district district

45:43to R seven CD medium density single

45:47dwelling conditional district for an 8

45:49unit residential development and find it

45:52consistent with the relevant policies in

45:55the comprehensive plan based on the

45:57application materials and the

45:59information provided at the public

46:01hearing and in the staff report and with

46:04the uh the the additional condition of

46:07limiting of no short-term rentals and to

46:10find approval of the reasonzoning

46:12request is reasonable and in the public

46:14interest for the following reasons. The

46:17proposal provides an appropriate

46:18transition between existing commercial

46:20areas and the adjacent residential

46:22neighborhood while limiting impervious

46:25coverage and impacts to protected trees.

46:28Okay, any questions? All favor of that

46:31motion, please indicate by saying I.

46:33>> I.

46:33>> Any opposed? That item passes

46:35unanimously on first reading. Is there a

46:36motion to wave second reading?

46:40>> Motion made by council member

46:42Clinton Quintana. Second by council

46:44member Lauo. Any further discussion? All

46:46in favor of that motion, please indicate

46:48by saying I.

46:48>> I.

46:49>> Any opposed? Item passes unanimously on

46:51first as well as second reading. That

46:53brings us to our next item, which is

46:55item PH3, which is an ordinance amending

46:58the official zoning maps of the city of

47:00Wilmington to reszone property

47:01containing 2.02 acres located at 3301

47:05Burnt Meal Drive from LI Light

47:08Industrial Industry to O and I Office

47:12and Institutional District. This time,

47:13I'd like to recognize city manager Miss

47:15Hawk. And I will also note that whoever

47:16makes the motion must read a consistency

47:19statement for the record. Miss Hawk.

47:21>> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mayor Prom and

47:23members of council. This item will be

47:25presented by our long-range planner,

47:26Hillary Taylor.

47:29>> Good evening, Mayor, Mayor Prom, and

47:30council members. For your review, I

47:33present a general reasonzoning from Li

47:35Light Industry to ONI office and

47:38institutional district at 3301 Bert Mill

47:41Drive.

47:44This application was submitted in mid

47:46July, has been reviewed by staff, was

47:48approved 7 to zero by planning

47:50commission, and is now at the second

47:52public hearing.

47:54The site is currently zoned LI light

47:57industry, and is occupied by a

47:58singlestory multi-tenant office

48:00building. The allowable applicable uses

48:03in the LI district include professional

48:05offices, light manufacturing, wholesale

48:08retail, and warehouse and distribution

48:10centers. The maximum height is 45 ft

48:13with an additional height of up to 90 ft

48:15allowed with a step back.

48:17The allowable applicable uses in the

48:19proposed ONI district include

48:21professional and medical offices,

48:24personal services, studios, and colleges

48:26and universities.

48:28The maximum height is 45 ft with an

48:30additional height of up to up to 90 ft

48:33allowed with a step back.

48:38The site is located on Burnt Mill Drive

48:41between Emerson Street and Randall

48:43Parkway and appro and consists of

48:44approximately 2.02 acres. The site is

48:48located within the Burnt Mill Business

48:50Park and is in the vicinity of reserve

48:52at Forest Hills, Avalon Apartments and

48:55Aspire 349 apartment complexes as well

48:58as Admra Park.

49:01These are views of the property looking

49:03north and northwest from Bert Mill

49:05Drive.

49:08The site is currently zoned LI Light

49:11Industry. Zoning districts neighboring

49:14the site include MD17 Highdensity

49:17Multiple Dwelling Residential District

49:18to the north and northwest and ONI

49:21Office and Institutional to the

49:23Northeast, East, South, and Southwest.

49:27For context, in June of 2002,

49:30approximately 42 acres of the Burnt Mill

49:33Business Park were reszoned from LM

49:35Light Manufacturing and HM Heavy

49:37Manufacturing to ONI to better reflect

49:40the office oriented character of the

49:42business park. The owner of the subject

49:44property requested not to be included in

49:46the resoning application since the LM

49:49district was appropriate for the site's

49:51use at the time as the corporate

49:53headquarters of an automotive oil and

49:54gas company.

49:58The site is currently occupied by a

50:00singlestory multi-tenant office

50:01building. Tenants include a construction

50:04company office, vocational and technical

50:07schools, and a radio station permitted

50:09in 2010 as an office use, all of which

50:12are allowed in both the LI and ONI

50:14districts.

50:16Uses of the surrounding properties

50:18include educational services to the

50:20northeast.

50:22Um, let's see. Social and health care

50:25services to the southwest and healthc

50:27care services to the west.

50:31Staff has reviewed this application's

50:33alignment with the relevant adopted

50:35plans. The create Wilmington

50:36comprehensive plan is the only adopted

50:38plan that applies to this site.

50:42The create Wilmington comprehensive

50:44plans growth strategies maps identifies

50:46areas of opportunity with corresponding

50:49policies to guide the look, feel, and

50:51use of new development. The site is

50:53located within a live work innovation

50:56zones area of opportunity and an

50:58employment academic center as well as

51:00along a special character street and

51:02conceptual green connection.

51:07The create Wilmington comprehensive plan

51:09also offers broader policy guidance to

51:11shape new development throughout the

51:12city. Staff assessed this application

51:15with relevant policies and found modest

51:17and strong support for the application's

51:19alignment with the plan. Key policies

51:21that support reszoning the site at 3301

51:24Burnt Mill Drive from LII Light Industry

51:27to OI office and institutional district

51:30promote compatible mixeduse development

51:32in appropriate areas and the

51:34redevelopment of industrial land for

51:36non-industrial uses where industrial

51:38activity is no longer viable or

51:40appropriate.

51:44Comments from the community are accepted

51:46leading up to the public hearing. Staff

51:48received one comment in support of this

51:50application stating that this resoning

51:52will bring the parcel into conformity

51:54with the with the business park's

51:56existing character. Staff did not

51:58receive any comments in opposition of

52:00this request.

52:05To summarize staff the application and

52:07staff's findings, reszoning the site

52:10located at 3301 Btill Drive from Li

52:13Light Industry to ONI office and

52:15institutional district would create the

52:17opportunity for office, institutional

52:20and studio and personal services uses

52:22with potential to enhance access to

52:24neighborhood goods and services in the

52:26vicinity. Commercial district mixed use

52:29or CDMU is also permitted in ONI which

52:32could further allow for residential uses

52:33in the mix.

52:35Staff finds this application to align

52:37with the recommendations of the

52:38comprehensive plan particularly policies

52:41that promote office and academic

52:43development while integrating

52:44residential uses within mixeduse

52:46development areas.

52:50Staff finds the request to be

52:51reasonable, in the public interest, and

52:53consistent with the relevant policies in

52:55the create Wilmington comprehensive

52:57plan. Staff recommends approval, and

53:00planning commission likewise recommended

53:02approval 7 to zero in the se on in the

53:04September 2nd, 2026 public hearing.

53:09This concludes staff's presentation. I'm

53:11happy to answer any questions. And the

53:12applicant is here as well.

53:14>> Any questions for staff?

53:17dangerous.

53:18>> Um just a question. Are there any O andi

53:21uses that would materially change um the

53:24impacts on this area beyond the existing

53:27office operation because it's a general

53:30reasonzoning so we need to um understand

53:33the full permitted range.

53:35>> So um this is um on the screen here is

53:38the use table that shows um the

53:40differences between the uses allowed in

53:42LI and ONI. Um the light blue um the

53:48light blue columns show um that for

53:51example colleges and universities would

53:54be allowed in O andi which are not

53:55allowed in alli

53:58um we also have spas and health clubs

54:02studios like um dance studios fine art

54:06studios etc. So,

54:10um I think that O and would

54:14allow for less intense commercial uses

54:17than LI generally. So, um and the

54:20surrounding properties are all zone O

54:23and I so they would be um consistent in

54:27character with the surrounding areas.

54:29>> Thank you.

54:33>> Thank you, ma'am.

54:35>> Thank you. Thank you.

54:38This time I like to recognize the

54:39applicant. The applicant here.

54:51Good evening, Mr. Mayor, Mayor Pro Tim,

54:53and members of council. I'm Andy Van

54:56Trite. I'm a Merkusen. I'm an attorney

54:57at Merkson Taylor and Gibson, and I'm

54:59here tonight on behalf of the property

55:01owner, KA Properties LLC. Um, this is a

55:04relatively straightforward and hopefully

55:07uncontroversial request and Hillary's

55:09done a great job presenting it to you.

55:11So, I will keep my remarks brief, but of

55:13course remain available to answer any

55:15questions you may have. We're requesting

55:17a general resoning of approximately 2.02

55:20acres from light industrial to office

55:22and institutional.

55:23The site's already fully developed with

55:25an existing singlestory multi-tenant

55:27commercial building. There's no

55:29expansion or redevelopment proposed as

55:31part of this request and all existing

55:34infrastructure is sufficient for the

55:35uses that would be put to use in ONI

55:39district were this to be approved.

55:42In 2002, the city reszoned approximately

55:4442 acres of the business park from the

55:46former manufacturing districts to OI to

55:48better reflect its increasingly

55:50officeoriented character. Um, this

55:52parcel was not included because, as

55:54Hillary mentioned, it was at the time

55:57used as the headquarters for GOASS. The

56:00former owner of GOASS and his wife are

56:01still the owners of this property. And

56:03after that company was sold, they

56:05continued to use it for their own office

56:07purposes, but over time, it's evolved

56:09and into a multi-tenant building.

56:13Um, as the zoning map shows, this parcel

56:16is essentially an LI island in an OIC.

56:19The properties immediately to the east,

56:20west, and south are already zoned oi.

56:23The multif family property to the north

56:25is separated from the site by the

56:26railroad railroad right ofway. In

56:29practical terms, this resoning would

56:30bring the remaining LI parcel into the

56:32zoning pattern that's existed throughout

56:34this portion of Btill Business Park for

56:35more than 20 years at this point.

56:41At its September 2nd hearing, the

56:43planning commission voted unanimously to

56:45recommend approval. Planning staff also

56:47recommends approval and has concluded

56:48that the request is generally consistent

56:50with the create Wilmington comprehensive

56:51plan. No one spoke in opposition at the

56:54planning commission hearing and the city

56:55received one comment in favor.

56:59In short, this request does not

57:01introduce a new development pattern.

57:02It's a modest zoning adjustment for an

57:04existing developed property that aligns

57:06with the parcel with its present

57:08commercial function, the surrounding ONI

57:09zoning, and the city's adopted planning

57:11policies. The owner is pursuing the

57:13resoning proactively and in good faith

57:15to establish an appropriate long-term

57:17zoning framework for the property and

57:18its tenants. For those reasons and

57:20consistent with the recommendations of

57:22both planning staff and the planning

57:23commission, we respectfully ask city

57:25council to approve the resoning from

57:28LI to O and I. Thank you. And I'm happy

57:30to answer any questions that you may

57:31have.

57:31>> Any questions for the applicant?

57:35>> Thank you.

57:37>> We'll now open up the public hearing and

57:39ask if anybody in the public wishes to

57:40speak.

57:43on this particular item.

57:47Seeing none, are there Madame Clerk,

57:48have you received any additional

57:50comments?

57:51>> No sir, I have not.

57:53>> Any further questions from councel?

57:56Okay, I would now close the public

57:57hearing. Ask for the wishes of council.

57:59We have a motion to approve by council

58:01member Joiner, second by council member

58:03Clinton Quintana. U Mr. Joiner, will you

58:06please read the uh consistency statement

58:09for the record, please?

58:10>> Yes, sir. I move to approve the proposed

58:12amendment to reszone property located at

58:143301 Burnt Mill Drive from Li Light

58:17Industrial to O andi Office and

58:20Industrial District and find it to be

58:22consistent with the relevant policies

58:23and the comprehensive plan based on the

58:25application materials and the

58:27information provided at the public

58:28hearing and in the staff report and to

58:30find approval of the resoning request is

58:32reasonable and in the public interest

58:34for the following reasons. The proposed

58:36resoning is consistent with adjacent

58:38properties and is compatible with the

58:39surrounding area.

58:40>> Okay, very good. Okay, all in favor of

58:43that motion, please indicate by saying

58:44>> I

58:46item passes unanimously on first

58:47reading. Is there a motion to wave

58:48second reading?

58:53Motion made by council member Sanua,

58:55second by council member Andrews. Any

58:56further discussion? All in favor of that

58:58motion, please indicate by saying I.

58:59>> I.

58:59>> Any opposed? Item passes unanimously on

59:02first as well as second reading. That

59:03brings us to our next item, business,

59:05which is our ordinances. Item 01 is an

59:07ordinance making supplemental

59:08appropriation in the amount of $193,825

59:12from committed revenue funds for Live

59:14Oak Bank Pavilion at Riverfront Park and

59:17the Hugh Morton Amphitheater at

59:18Greenfield Park for maintenance and

59:21improvements at these facilities. At

59:22this time, I'd like to recognize the

59:23city manager, Miss Hawk. Miss Hawk.

59:25>> Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Mayor Prom, and

59:27members of council. This item will be

59:28presented by our director of asset and

59:30property management, Robin Slade.

59:39Good evening, Mayor, Mayor Pro Tim, and

59:40city council. Um, this ordinance is in

59:44regards to the committed revenue for uh

59:47maintenance at Riverfront Park and Green

59:50the amphitheater at Greenfield Lake

59:52Park. The purpose of committed revenue

59:54is to fund maintenance repairs for

59:55operational needs. Um, and the fee

59:58schedule currently calls for a 50 cent

1:00:00per ticket search charge on nonprofit

1:00:02agencies, two lots per ticket search

1:00:05charge for four-profit productions

1:00:07hosted at both facilities with a dollar

1:00:09allocated to the general fund and $1 for

1:00:11maintenance.

1:00:12The categories of maintenance that will

1:00:14be included uh to be funded by this

1:00:16committed revenue include landscape and

1:00:18grounds maintenance which is our mulch,

1:00:20turf care, insect control, irrigation

1:00:23maintenance, replacement plants, pathway

1:00:24repairs, site hardscape and recreation

1:00:27repairs which is our concrete asphalt,

1:00:29rubber padding, playground maintenance

1:00:31and repair, facility and infrastructure

1:00:33maintenance, mechanical, electrical and

1:00:35plumbing repairs, restroom fixtures,

1:00:38water fountains, lighting, cameras

1:00:40related facility components

1:00:42our water feature maintenance. So

1:00:45maintenance necessary for the holding

1:00:47tank cleaning, UV light services,

1:00:49inspections, water treatment and

1:00:50plumbing and other custodial and

1:00:53operational supplies and equipment for

1:00:56hand tools equipment and again custodial

1:00:58supplies. Major equipment and site

1:01:00improvements. our mowers, our permanent

1:01:02fencing around gardens and playgrounds

1:01:04would be under our major equipment and

1:01:06site improvements.

1:01:12Sorry,

1:01:15I lost the slide in here. I'm sorry.

1:01:18Um so this ordinance this ordinance

1:01:21calls for um a total of 37,250

1:01:26um for fiscal year 27 out of committed

1:01:28revenue for Greenfield Lake Amphitheater

1:01:30and 156,575

1:01:34for the Riverfront Park for a total of

1:01:371938 $825

1:01:39of which is 39% of the total committed

1:01:42revenue for fiscal year 27 which was

1:01:44494303. Three.

1:01:48>> So,

1:01:49>> are there any questions?

1:01:50>> There any questions? Staff

1:01:53Mayor Pro

1:01:55and Miss Lee, this question may not be

1:01:57for you. It may be for the city manager.

1:02:00What What's the price? What's the cost

1:02:02of replacing the bridge?

1:02:06The Lions Bridge

1:02:07>> at Greenfield.

1:02:08>> Yes.

1:02:09>> Sorry, we've been talking about another

1:02:10bridge lately.

1:02:11>> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

1:02:13>> Way way more than this budget. Um I

1:02:16believe we're at 1.4

1:02:18million or so.

1:02:20>> Okay.

1:02:21>> Um but we do have several grants um that

1:02:23will be applying to that cost to offset

1:02:25it. So the city's contribution will be

1:02:27much lower than that.

1:02:28>> So we're working towards that.

1:02:30>> Yes, we do have now have the funding in

1:02:32place. Um we just recently got a second

1:02:34grant on it and um so we are moving

1:02:36forward with getting some community

1:02:38input on the design aspects of it and

1:02:41then we'll be um designing and having

1:02:43that constructed. Okay, great. I I did

1:02:46Mr. Johnson alluded to it earlier, but I

1:02:49don't know if it was this week or last

1:02:50week. Somebody was raking us over the

1:02:52coals about some of the stuff that we

1:02:54were doing, but we didn't we haven't

1:02:56addressed that bridge yet. So, I just

1:02:58wanted to ask. So, thank you. And I I do

1:03:00know the difference between this bridge

1:03:02and the other bridge. [laughter]

1:03:06>> Any further questions, staff?

1:03:08>> Thank you, ma'am.

1:03:09>> Thank you.

1:03:11>> Okay. Any further questions from council

1:03:13questions? If not, what are the wishes

1:03:15of council in respect to the ordinance?

1:03:17We have a motion to approve by council

1:03:18member Clinton Quintana, second by mayor

1:03:20prom Spears. Any further discussion? All

1:03:22in favor of that motion, please indicate

1:03:23by saying I.

1:03:25>> I.

1:03:25>> Any opposed? Item passes unanimously on

1:03:28first reading. Is there a motion to wave

1:03:30second reading?

1:03:33Motion made by council member Clinton

1:03:34Quintana. Second by council member

1:03:36Joiner. Further discussion. All in favor

1:03:38of that motion, please indicate by

1:03:39saying I.

1:03:40>> I.

1:03:40>> Any opposed? Item passes unanimously on

1:03:42first as well as second reading. That

1:03:45brings us to our next item of business

1:03:47which is a resolution.

1:03:50Um there's three parts to this one. We

1:03:52have item R1A which is a resolution

1:03:54authorizing an interlocal agreement

1:03:56between the city and Kfir public utility

1:03:59authority to for reimbursement of up to

1:04:01$257,532

1:04:05for relocation of water and sewer line

1:04:07facilities affected by the Pirates Cove

1:04:10drainage improvement project. And then

1:04:13item 01B is the ordinance which we'll

1:04:16need two votes on making the

1:04:18supplemental appropriation of 257,582

1:04:22from Kate Public Utility Authority to

1:04:24the Stormwater Capital Projects Fund for

1:04:26the Pirate Pirates Cove Drainage

1:04:29Improvement Project. And then item R1C,

1:04:32which is a resolution awarding a

1:04:34construction contract to East Coast

1:04:35Contracting Incorporated of Wilmington,

1:04:38North Carolina, in the amount of

1:04:391,96,362

1:04:43for the Pirates Cove drainage

1:04:45improvement project. So at this time,

1:04:47I'd like to recognize our city manager,

1:04:48Miss Hulk. Miss Hulk.

1:04:50>> Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Mayor Prom, and

1:04:51members of the council. These items will

1:04:53be presented by Rob Baker, our project

1:04:55manager in our design and construction

1:04:57group.

1:05:03Uh, good evening, Mayor, Mayor Pro Tim,

1:05:06and members of council.

1:05:07>> Bring that thing up a little bit so we

1:05:09can hear you.

1:05:22>> Is that better?

1:05:23>> Better.

1:05:23>> Okay. Uh, good evening, Mayor, Mayor Pro

1:05:25Tim, and members of council.

1:05:27Uh I'm here um from design and

1:05:29construction to provide some information

1:05:31on the pirate cove drainage improvement

1:05:33project.

1:05:40This project uh is a uh storm water

1:05:42drainage improvement project. Our design

1:05:45consultant is McGill that will also have

1:05:47them through construction. The project

1:05:50duration is approximately 8 months. The

1:05:52corridor length is about half a mile.

1:05:54The estimated completion is fall of

1:05:572027.

1:05:59We had an openhouse dropin meeting for

1:06:00the public that will be impacted by this

1:06:02project uh on August 11th. Um our

1:06:06project budget for construction is

1:06:07approximately 1.4 million. Our bid open

1:06:11our bid opening was on August 13th. We

1:06:14had six bids with East Coast Contracting

1:06:16coming in with a low bid and we have an

1:06:19interlocal agreement with Capefar Public

1:06:21Utility Authority for 257,257582

1:06:29uh reimbursement up to that.

1:06:34The Pirate Cove drainage improvement

1:06:36projects generally consist of

1:06:37improvements to the existing drainage

1:06:39system which includes open channel and a

1:06:41pipe system within a portion of the

1:06:42Pirate Cove subdivision to reduce

1:06:45flooding. Uh currently uh Mason Brill

1:06:48Sound Road between um Buccaneer and East

1:06:52Blackbeard Road will over top and also

1:06:55the intersection of Buccaneer and

1:06:59Blackbeard also over top during uh storm

1:07:01events.

1:07:04Uh this uh project attempts to improve

1:07:07undersized and failing infrastructure,

1:07:09stabilizes heavily eroded in size

1:07:11channels and creates access for future

1:07:14maintenance uh while reducing flooded

1:07:16flooding during heavy rain events. Um

1:07:19this this shows the channel that is

1:07:21between Mason Sound Road and the

1:07:24intersection of Buccaneer and

1:07:25Blackbeard. That's the current status of

1:07:27it. Um, as part of the design, the

1:07:30bottom width would be increased to

1:07:32approximately three feet and then we

1:07:34would have side slopes uh of of three to

1:07:36one. Uh, so they wouldn't

1:07:40in in an attempt to reduce the erosion

1:07:42and flooding.

1:07:44Uh, these are pre-construction photo uh

1:07:46photos that were taken. Um, some were

1:07:49given by residents, others that you know

1:07:51we've had on file. Um, this shows the

1:07:54larger picture shows the channel right

1:07:55before it gets to Buccaneer. um that

1:07:57same picture that we saw before or that

1:08:00same channel that we saw before. Um the

1:08:02top picture is Mason Burl Sound Road and

1:08:05the picture right below is another

1:08:08picture of that channel. Uh and you can

1:08:10kind of see how it over tops that and

1:08:11then impacts private property.

1:08:16Oops.

1:08:20Um, and this is another uh picture just

1:08:22on Mason Burl Sound Road where it over

1:08:24tops

1:08:27and I can answer any questions if you

1:08:28have them.

1:08:30>> Is most of that water coming off of the

1:08:31Sound Road? I'm sure I mean I know that

1:08:34certain amount of it is being captured

1:08:36within the subdivision itself and the

1:08:38properties there, but is the vast

1:08:39majority of that coming from the Sound

1:08:41Road?

1:08:42>> Uh, that well there's there's

1:08:44development on the other side of Mason

1:08:45Burl Sound. It's heavil I think pretty

1:08:47heavily developed and a good bit is

1:08:49coming from that and just because that

1:08:51um channel and the system as part of

1:08:54that uh neighborhood are just undersized

1:08:57uh it's just backing up onto the road

1:08:59>> but isn't that I mean when that area was

1:09:01developed I guess that shopping area

1:09:03there there's a storm water uh retention

1:09:06facility there I know when Pirates Cove

1:09:09was built they didn't have storm water

1:09:10regulations in those days and I would

1:09:12seeing that it's coming through the back

1:09:13there so it's not part of a regulated

1:09:15development from it. So, is it coming

1:09:17upstream from there?

1:09:18>> Uh, I I believe so.

1:09:24>> Just wondering how much of it is being

1:09:26captured that wasn't captured by storm

1:09:28water ponds of newly developed property.

1:09:32That's what I guess this is old stuff

1:09:34that we're capturing that did not have

1:09:36it.

1:09:38>> Yes. Yes, sir. Uh, good evening, mayor,

1:09:40mayor, and council. Um, so this picture

1:09:43shows runoff from to your point

1:09:46Masonboro Sound as it loops around or

1:09:50Masonboro loop as it roots around to the

1:09:51Sound Road. Some of the neighborhoods

1:09:53within that footprint which didn't have

1:09:55the regulations when they were built. So

1:09:57that all is coming this way. The

1:09:59development you're speaking of, it does

1:10:01have its own pond. Yes, sir.

1:10:03>> I know that doesn't seem to be impacting

1:10:04it, but it does seem as you get further

1:10:06down some of the older stuff that did

1:10:08not have it is

1:10:10>> That's correct. You're right.

1:10:11>> Like most of our drainage projects, the

1:10:13the annexation area doesn't didn't have

1:10:15necessarily the regulations at that

1:10:17time. So,

1:10:17>> Gotcha. Okay. Thank you.

1:10:19>> Thank you.

1:10:20>> Thank you. Any other questions, staff?

1:10:22>> Okay. Thank you guys.

1:10:26>> All right. We'll take one at a time. Um,

1:10:28what are the wishes of council in

1:10:30respect to the resolution which I've

1:10:31already read into the record, which is

1:10:32item R1.A?

1:10:34We have a motion to approve by council

1:10:36member Joiner, second by council member

1:10:38Lau. Any further discussion? All in

1:10:40favor of that motion, please indicate by

1:10:41saying I.

1:10:42>> I.

1:10:42>> Any oppose? That item passes

1:10:44unanimously. That brings us to item 01B,

1:10:48which is the ordinance, which we'll need

1:10:49two votes on. What are the wishes of

1:10:51council in respect to the to that? We

1:10:52have a a motion to approve by council

1:10:54member Santaita. Second by council

1:10:56member Clinton Quintana. Any further

1:10:58discussion? All in favor of that motion,

1:11:00please indicate by saying I.

1:11:02>> I.

1:11:03>> Any opposed? Item passes unanimously on

1:11:05first reading. Is there a motion to wave

1:11:06second reading? Motion made by council

1:11:09member Clinton Quintana, second by

1:11:10council member Santaita. Any further

1:11:12discussion? All in favor of that motion,

1:11:14please indicate by saying I.

1:11:15>> I.

1:11:15>> Any opposed? Item passes unanimously on

1:11:18first as well as second reading. That

1:11:19brings us to item R 1.C, which is

1:11:22another resolution. What are the wishes

1:11:24of councelor in respect to item R1C? We

1:11:28have a motion to approve by council

1:11:29member Santa, second by mayor pro Tim

1:11:31Spears. Any further discussion? All in

1:11:33favor of that motion, please indicate by

1:11:35saying I.

1:11:35>> I.

1:11:36>> Any opposed? The item passes unanimously

1:11:38on first and only reading. That brings

1:11:41us to our next item of business, which

1:11:42is item R2, which is a resolution to

1:11:44adopt a detailed staff comments on the

1:11:47Kayfair Memorial Bridge, North Carolina

1:11:50DOT HB-000039

1:11:53Environmental

1:11:55Assessment. At this, I'd like to

1:11:56recognize our city manager, Miss Hawk.

1:11:58Miss Hawk.

1:11:59>> Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Mayor Prom, and

1:12:01members of council. We uh obviously have

1:12:03a lot of people who will be joining us

1:12:05for this conversation. Um, but it will

1:12:07be led by our chief of staff, Dennis

1:12:09Licaria.

1:12:16>> Y'all aren't about Y'all aren't about to

1:12:18read this whole packet, are you?

1:12:20[laughter]

1:12:34>> Is this different? I already have a

1:12:36>> Yes, this is the red line version. So,

1:12:38we wanted to make sure you had both the

1:12:40clean and the red line just so you could

1:12:42compare the the the version history. So,

1:12:45apologies for not having all that

1:12:46together, but our printers went on

1:12:48strike.

1:12:55>> How many documents should we be getting

1:12:57right now?

1:12:58>> One copy of the red line, sir.

1:13:02this one.

1:13:06Thank you.

1:13:28All right. Thank you, Mr. Mr. Mayor,

1:13:30Mayor Prom, members of council, we

1:13:32appreciate the opportunity this evening

1:13:33to come before you to speak further

1:13:35about the Capefir Memorial Bridge

1:13:37Replacement Project. As you can see, I'm

1:13:40flanked by some incredible and uh very

1:13:43talented professionals that I'm actually

1:13:45quite humbled to work with. That

1:13:47includes Linda Payner, our director of

1:13:48planning and development, Gareth

1:13:50Spencer, our director of legislative

1:13:51affairs, Susan Abina Ward, our director

1:13:54of transportation, and Justin Carter,

1:13:57the director of design and construction.

1:13:58And we were also heavily supported by

1:14:01Lauren Edwards and the the Department of

1:14:03Communications Engagement. It's not just

1:14:05these folks, but the people who work for

1:14:07them who are also heavily involved in

1:14:09the work that is before you and the

1:14:12presentation that we're bringing to you

1:14:13tonight. I think it's important as uh we

1:14:16start um we we recognize that this work

1:14:21frames the comments

1:14:24as a response to the environmental

1:14:26assessment that was issued by the North

1:14:28Carolina Department of Transportation.

1:14:30But they're not just technical comments.

1:14:32These also reflect the things that we

1:14:34heard and that you heard through the

1:14:36public listening sessions, through

1:14:38emails that were received through public

1:14:39comment at at city council meetings. um

1:14:44from the community abroad and there's

1:14:46been significant public concern and

1:14:49frustration around towing the proposed

1:14:52alternatives that have been advanced to

1:14:54this point by the North Carolina

1:14:55Department of Transportation, the

1:14:57community impacts, and whether even the

1:15:00range of options that they've advanced

1:15:01have been adequately assessed prior to

1:15:04being put forward. So, it's key to note

1:15:07that our comments respond not only to

1:15:09the deficiencies that we identified in

1:15:11the EA, but also to the clear public

1:15:14outcry that we heard in both

1:15:16communities. The other thing to note is

1:15:18that in addition to our professional

1:15:20staff, we did retain the services of two

1:15:23different firms and they're joined

1:15:25they're joining us this evening. So, in

1:15:28person this evening are KCA

1:15:30representatives, John Sloan, Derek

1:15:32Lewis. Um,

1:15:35KCA was formed in 1976 and has grown

1:15:38into a multid-disciplinary firm with

1:15:40over 450 employees in multiple states.

1:15:43Since its inception, KCA has been a

1:15:45leader in bridge design and

1:15:47construction. Recent projects include

1:15:49the award-winning Sandal Causeway

1:15:51emergency repairs project, the Penelis

1:15:54byway structure, and the Northwest Kerry

1:15:56Parkway bridge over Black Creek, just to

1:15:58name a few. The team members that are

1:16:00supporting this bridge and traffic work.

1:16:02John Sloan PE served as the program

1:16:04manager for over 1,800 bridge

1:16:06inspections, over $150 million of bridge

1:16:09replacement projects, and has worked on

1:16:11some of the North Carolina Department of

1:16:13Transportation's most complex bridge

1:16:15preservation projects. John was also the

1:16:17project manager for the Capefir Memorial

1:16:19Bridge inspection conducted in December

1:16:22of 2023.

1:16:23Derek Lewis, also PE, he has over 35

1:16:26years of engineering experience,

1:16:28including previous work on the Capefir

1:16:30Memorial Bridge. Ashley Buchard, who's

1:16:32not present, has over 10 years of

1:16:34experience as a transportation engineer

1:16:36and roadway designer. the firm that we

1:16:38had help us with the economic impacts.

1:16:40And again, because of the time that we

1:16:42had, we really were only able to focus

1:16:44on the economic impacts to the city of

1:16:46Wilmington. Um, HRNA has been uh has

1:16:50been a firm also since 1976. They

1:16:53focused on partnering with a range of

1:16:55clients to build stronger cities. HRNA

1:16:57has offices all over the world, but is

1:16:59headquartered in New York City. They do

1:17:01have an office in Raleigh, which helped

1:17:03support the work that this firm

1:17:05undertook on our behalf. Some of their

1:17:07clients and projects include an

1:17:09assessment of regional health,

1:17:10environmental, and socioeconomic impacts

1:17:13of the Washington DC metropolitan area

1:17:15transit authorities capital projects.

1:17:17And they also have estimated the direct

1:17:19and indirect economic and fiscal impacts

1:17:21of the research triangle parks

1:17:23generation of high-tech regional

1:17:25employment. Team members for the

1:17:27economic analysis including in the EA

1:17:29who are joining us remotely uh include

1:17:32Ignasio Mononttoyo who has worked with

1:17:34HRA since 2015. He did work on that DC

1:17:38capital project study. Alex Stokes who

1:17:40was with HAA from 2010 to 2015 before

1:17:44founding his own firm and has worked in

1:17:46both Sarasota, Florida and Greenville,

1:17:48South Carolina and economic development.

1:17:50And Candace Damon, who has worked with

1:17:52HRNA since 1988, ultimately becoming the

1:17:55chair of its board. Candace has a JD

1:17:58from Harvard Law and has been engaged in

1:18:00Charlotte, Greensboro, and Raleigh in

1:18:02addition to her work in Dallas, Houston,

1:18:03Norfolk, New York City, and many other

1:18:05areas. Also supporting their work was

1:18:07Michael Tran of Bluebird Adviserss LLC

1:18:10with 16 years of experience in

1:18:11infrastructure and finance work. So,

1:18:14more about these firms and the

1:18:16individuals that are represented can be

1:18:18found in the appendex to the EA

1:18:20response, but I wanted to let you know

1:18:22that um this was not amateur hour. the

1:18:26bridge replacement timeline. Uh I think

1:18:29it's important for us to again ask why

1:18:31now? Why why this comment? Why this

1:18:33engagement? And it recognizes the fact

1:18:36that the bridge was first a glimmer of

1:18:39an idea of a project in November 2020.

1:18:42But an environmental assessment was

1:18:44released to the public on August 14th of

1:18:47this year for review and comment. And

1:18:50that is the effort that you see before

1:18:53you and what you're going to hear about

1:18:55tonight. So in the 54 days since this

1:18:58was released for comment, um this highly

1:19:02technical uh document was assessed,

1:19:06analyzed and taken apart by the team of

1:19:09people that you see before you before

1:19:11assembling the comments that we are

1:19:13seeking your consideration and

1:19:15endorsement of before we go further

1:19:17because this is a very long presentation

1:19:21and it's dense but there is a lot of

1:19:23there is a lot of other um anecdotal and

1:19:26and human elements to this, but it is a

1:19:29technical report. We do want to ask if

1:19:31we can reserve questions until the end

1:19:34just so that we also have the

1:19:35opportunity for our experts to weigh in

1:19:37when there's something that's related to

1:19:39their work and we're not having to

1:19:40explain something that that they put pen

1:19:43to paper on. So, with that, I would uh

1:19:46like to turn this over to Linda Painter

1:19:48to take you through the overview and

1:19:50remind you of council actions to date.

1:19:53Before

1:19:58we dive in to the details of the project

1:20:01and staff's comments, I I think it's

1:20:03important to understand the philosophy

1:20:05that staff had as that guided the

1:20:07comments we we are bringing to you this

1:20:09evening. We are not trying to be

1:20:11obstructionist. We view NC DOT as a

1:20:14partner in the effort to ensure that

1:20:15decisions made today are based on the

1:20:17best available information and are made

1:20:20with a goal of minimizing impacts to the

1:20:22community. And I think that's reflected

1:20:24in the bullets you see on the screen,

1:20:26particularly the last one, which

1:20:28indicates that we support a safe,

1:20:31reliable, environmentally, and fiscally

1:20:33responsible solution for the bridges

1:20:36replacement.

1:20:38As a reminder, the NC DOT has two

1:20:42alternatives or designs under review.

1:20:44One thing you will note in our comments

1:20:46is we intentionally use the word design

1:20:49because the term alternative implies

1:20:51that there are only two A and B which NC

1:20:54dot has provided where whereas we

1:20:56believe as you'll hear later this

1:20:58evening that there are other design

1:20:59options worth exploring further. Design

1:21:02A is a movable span sim similar to what

1:21:05we have today with a 65 foot vertical

1:21:08clearance in its normal closed position

1:21:11that rises to provide 135 ft of vertical

1:21:14clearance. Design B would be a fixed

1:21:16span with 135 ft of permanent vertical

1:21:19clearance. And because of its height and

1:21:22the need then to taper down slowly, it

1:21:24extends the ramps uh from its current

1:21:27intersection with Third Street to Fifth

1:21:30Avenue on Worooster and Dawson Street.

1:21:32Both alternatives are located south of

1:21:35the existing bridge, include six 12t

1:21:38wide travel lanes, three in each

1:21:39direction, that are separated by a

1:21:41median, and have a multi-use path on the

1:21:43north side of the bridge.

1:21:47As Dennis mentioned, uh, you have taken

1:21:49several actions over over the over many

1:21:51years, and what you'll see on your

1:21:53screen right now does not represent

1:21:55every action this body has taken, but we

1:21:57did want to highlight some of the key

1:21:59actions and and resolutions you have

1:22:01adopted. In particular, what it

1:22:04highlights is that you have been

1:22:05consistent in repeatedly stressing the

1:22:09need for state and federal funding to

1:22:10fully fund the replacement of this

1:22:12bridge, the need to protect downtown

1:22:14neighborhoods from the impacts of the

1:22:16designs under consideration, and

1:22:18consistent opposition to tolling as a

1:22:21means to fund the bridge given the

1:22:22negative impacts to commerce and

1:22:24business and the disproportionate impact

1:22:26on vulnerable persons.

1:22:30One other key action that you've taken

1:22:32just this past year on June 16th was

1:22:35adoption of the greater downtown plan.

1:22:37And as part of that plan, there's four

1:22:39points that we're it includes advocating

1:22:42for. One, protect protecting our

1:22:44historic uh neighborhoods and resources.

1:22:48Two, preserving the bridg's existing

1:22:50connections to South Third Street.

1:22:53Three, reflecting the fact that this is

1:22:56a regional icon and the the replacement

1:22:58bridge needs to be consistent with that.

1:23:01And last but not least, including

1:23:02multimmoal connections for walking and

1:23:04biking both to the battleship North

1:23:06Carolina and Brunswick County.

1:23:10Moving on to the bridge itself, as

1:23:13identified in the downtown plan, this is

1:23:14not just an icon for Wilmington, it is

1:23:16an icon for the region. It is also what

1:23:19is called a contributing structure to

1:23:21the Wilmington National Register

1:23:23Historic District and eligible for

1:23:25individual listing in the National

1:23:26Register of Historic Places. Those two

1:23:28points are important because it means

1:23:30that mitigation for the loss of this

1:23:32significant structure will be required.

1:23:35In the eyes of the city, the loss of

1:23:37this iconic structure must be mitigated

1:23:40through the construction of a bridge

1:23:41that has a similarly iconic silhouette,

1:23:45not just another concrete ribbon

1:23:46crossing a waterway. Similar to the many

1:23:49great bridges you see crossing the inter

1:23:50coastal waterway.

1:23:55NC DOT has provided the following

1:23:57illustrations to help the public

1:23:59understand what this bridge will look

1:24:01like uh when completed. On the left

1:24:03you'll see design A, which as I

1:24:05mentioned has that maintains the 65 ft

1:24:07height in its closed position. So the

1:24:10ramps that you see coming down are very

1:24:12similar and much lower in scale than

1:24:15what you'll see for design B where due

1:24:17to the height that they have to bring

1:24:19down to the ground, you will see a very

1:24:21large ramp with tall retaining wall that

1:24:25uh fronts on South Second Street, Queen

1:24:28Street, and Front Street.

1:24:35These renderings from NCD dot address

1:24:38how the new new replacement bridge will

1:24:40intersect with our existing streets.

1:24:43Design A, as mentioned, would the ramps

1:24:45would continue to intersect with Third

1:24:47Street uh for both Worster and Dawson.

1:24:51Design B on the other hand will change

1:24:53those ramps to intersecting with Fifth

1:24:55Avenue. By its very nature, that would

1:24:58change Fifth Avenue to be to being the

1:25:01main north south corridor through

1:25:02downtown, shifting traffic away from

1:25:04Third Street, which is designed to

1:25:06handle that capacity to a primarily

1:25:08residential street uh which currently

1:25:12has on street parking, bicycle lanes,

1:25:14and one lane of traffic in each

1:25:16direction. Essentially not designed to

1:25:18accommodate the level of traffic that's

1:25:20being proposed with design B.

1:25:24In terms of direct property impacts,

1:25:27staff has made our best attempt to

1:25:29identify the types of impacts these

1:25:31property properties in the vicinity of

1:25:33the bridge uh would would endure. I also

1:25:37want to note this is not conclusive

1:25:39because the best we could do is to go by

1:25:41NC DO's maps. Uh they did not identify

1:25:44specific properties for acquisition or

1:25:46other impacts. But what you'll see on

1:25:48your screen is what we believe uh to be

1:25:51the case. So in red is potential

1:25:54right-of-way acquisition based on the

1:25:56location of the new ramps, other

1:25:58features, and we believe these

1:26:00properties would be in would either be

1:26:02acquired in total or partially. The

1:26:05bright green parcel that you'll see on

1:26:07both maps was previously acquired by NC

1:26:09DOT a few years ago for this project.

1:26:12Dark green represents the existing right

1:26:14ofway. And in orange, we've highlighted

1:26:17some some parcels that we feel will have

1:26:19additional conflicts, visual

1:26:21obstructions, noise, access

1:26:23restrictions, changes to roadway and

1:26:25traffic patterns, and increases in

1:26:27traffic volumes. And in the light pink

1:26:30are the areas that NCDOT has identified

1:26:32as potential prop noise impacts to

1:26:34properties.

1:26:38When we look at the historic

1:26:39significance of this area, it's

1:26:41important to understand that NC dot in

1:26:44evaluating impacts has looked at a very

1:26:46defined study area immediately around

1:26:49the actual bridge and its ramps that can

1:26:52be seen on the left side of your screen

1:26:53in the with the yellow outline. On the

1:26:56right side of your screen, you'll see

1:26:57the boundaries of the Wilmington

1:26:59National Historic District. Much larger

1:27:03and those impacts that we talked about

1:27:06for option B or design B will extend

1:27:09further into this district than NC DOT

1:27:11is currently evaluating. As mentioned,

1:27:14Fifth Avenue would become the main north

1:27:15south corridor, changing that that

1:27:17traffic pattern that exists today.

1:27:26One of the most sign, as mentioned, one

1:27:28of the most significant impacts is going

1:27:29to be to Fifth Avenue.

1:27:32Omitting this from the study area is one

1:27:34of the most significant concerns that

1:27:36staff has because we do believe both

1:27:38from a traffic perspective, uh, as Susan

1:27:40will discuss later, but also from the

1:27:42impacts on on historic district, it's

1:27:46something that needs to be studied now,

1:27:48not postponed until after a decision is

1:27:50made. But as mentioned, both NCDOT

1:27:53designs assume that Fifth Avenue will

1:27:55have four travel lanes instead of the

1:27:56two existing.

1:27:58Four lanes cannot be accommodated

1:28:01without changing something, without

1:28:02modifying something in that street

1:28:04configuration. Today, currently, the

1:28:06street has a center landscaped median,

1:28:08one lane in each direction, bike lanes

1:28:11in each direction, and on street

1:28:12parking. I would also note that that on-

1:28:14street parking is essential for those

1:28:16properties. Many of them do not have

1:28:18off-site parking just based on when when

1:28:20they were developed and the lack of

1:28:22alley access for some of them. With the

1:28:25increased traffic that's going to be

1:28:26directed here, we believe that'll be

1:28:28incompatible with the residential nature

1:28:30of the mo majority of this street and

1:28:34there will [clears throat] be impacts to

1:28:35whether or not residents want to

1:28:37continue to live on along this street

1:28:39with that traffic volume.

1:28:42There are also potential indirect

1:28:44impacts on historic resources. The

1:28:46report notes that for design A, they

1:28:49estimate 50 properties would be impacted

1:28:50by noise as compared to design B, which

1:28:53would have double the impact at 102

1:28:55properties. Vibration is also a concern

1:28:58when you're dealing with historic

1:29:00structures, particularly with regard to

1:29:02construction and potential increased

1:29:04traffic and the impacts that they that

1:29:06may have on foundations of these

1:29:08buildings.

1:29:09And last but not least, the visual

1:29:11impacts. The design of this bridge and

1:29:14how it interacts with local streets will

1:29:16change the character of those streets.

1:29:18The houses that you see on your screen

1:29:20are located on South Second Street and

1:29:22will be facing that large retaining wall

1:29:24for design B that was shown earlier.

1:29:30In summary,

1:29:32we have three three requests. one that

1:29:35the NC DOT coordinate with both the city

1:29:38and the North Carolina State Historic

1:29:40Preservation Officer to determine

1:29:42expanded study area and we recognize

1:29:44that study area may be different from

1:29:46what is for each option. It a

1:29:50study area for design B wouldn't

1:29:53necessarily be larger with those changes

1:29:55to Fifth Avenue and the traffic network.

1:29:58The second request is to void the

1:30:00programmatic agreement which is the

1:30:02agreement that NC do and federal highway

1:30:05have had decided to use as a way to

1:30:07address historic impacts. Uh they are

1:30:10doing that because they believe they

1:30:11cannot fully assess the impacts because

1:30:14there are two options to consider and so

1:30:16they are postponing that assessment

1:30:18until after a a design is selected. We

1:30:21argue that that assessment needs to be

1:30:23done now and should be informing the

1:30:25design that is selected because

1:30:27ultimately we they are responsible for

1:30:30choosing the least environmentally

1:30:32damaging practicable alternative. And

1:30:34from our perspective, the way that you

1:30:36do that is to understand what the the

1:30:38impacts of each alternative or each

1:30:40design are going to be. And last but not

1:30:43least, accounting for mitigation costs

1:30:46when comparing alternatives. The two

1:30:48costs that you will see in the in the EA

1:30:50today do not include any mitigation

1:30:53cost. The the cost that looks lower

1:30:56today today may not be lower when

1:30:58mitigation is included. If you think

1:31:00back to design A, which will have a lift

1:31:03bridge, a very similar structure to what

1:31:05is there. That reduces the need for

1:31:07aesthetic mitigation that would be

1:31:09associated with uh design B because it

1:31:11is just that flat concrete ribbon.

1:31:16And with that, I'm going to turn it over

1:31:18to Susan Habina Ward, our director of

1:31:20transportation.

1:31:23>> Thank you, Linda.

1:31:28When we talk about environmental

1:31:30impacts, it's not just the natural

1:31:31environment, but also the human

1:31:33environment and this design being uh

1:31:37environmentally responsible. Let's start

1:31:40with the complete streets component. We

1:31:43know for those that aren't familiar with

1:31:45complete streets, I have this

1:31:46infographic for you that demonstrates

1:31:48the elements of complete streets that um

1:31:51benefit the health, safety, and welfare

1:31:53of the community, environmental, and

1:31:54economic impacts. Yet, the EA only has

1:31:58their multiuse path on the bridge as the

1:32:00only complete streets element. We would

1:32:03have liked to seen more analysis about

1:32:05the existing bicycle facilities on Fifth

1:32:07Street uh Fifth Avenue that Linda

1:32:10mentioned and the pedestrian crossings

1:32:12on the front street corridor

1:32:14or looking at all of the bicycle and

1:32:16pedestrian travel patterns within this

1:32:18project area. Additionally, transit

1:32:21needs are not addressed at all and crash

1:32:24impacts due to the increased traffic.

1:32:29Speaking of increased traffic, um

1:32:31there's going to be a sixlane bridge

1:32:33instead of a four-lane bridge. So, we

1:32:35know increased traffic brings increased

1:32:38vehicle emissions. That is talked about

1:32:40in the EA, but with no mitigation. Same

1:32:43with mobile source air toxics. Um not

1:32:47identified as to how those will be

1:32:48mitigated.

1:32:51Also in the report talks about increased

1:32:53vehicle speeds may benefit air quality,

1:32:56but we know that increased speeds are

1:32:58detriment to the overall safety of the

1:33:00transportation system.

1:33:02At the same time, there's lots of level

1:33:05of service F intersections noticed in

1:33:08both designs. That means at those

1:33:10intersections, traffic will be stopped,

1:33:12cars will be idling, thus further

1:33:15increasing emissions.

1:33:20Any work in a river or waterway is going

1:33:23to have some water quality impacts. Um,

1:33:26missing from the EA though is the risk

1:33:28of mobilizing contaminants that we know

1:33:30are in the riverbed such as PAS.

1:33:34Impacts to wetlands and flood planes

1:33:36vary between their designs and we know

1:33:38that these um natural features support

1:33:41water quality.

1:33:44There's a robust section on federally

1:33:46protected species and managed fish

1:33:48habitats

1:33:50but inconclusive and there are

1:33:52mitigation on these protection measures.

1:33:54In some cases it's unidentified whether

1:33:57the habitats even exist or not and the

1:34:00the main source of mitigation is um

1:34:03suspending inwater work for a specific

1:34:06period during the year.

1:34:09The EA does include this summary of

1:34:13environmental impacts. Um, reminder that

1:34:16the goal of the environmental assessment

1:34:19is to inform the merger team as they're

1:34:22selecting what's called the LEDA, the

1:34:25least environmentally damaging

1:34:27practicable alternative. And we feel

1:34:30that this table is very telling for the

1:34:32two designs presented in the EA as which

1:34:36of the damages um for each design. So I

1:34:39mentioned flood plane and wetland and

1:34:41the benefits of those environmental

1:34:44features. Linda talked about the human

1:34:47environment and here you see tabulated

1:34:49the impacts of those as well.

1:34:53Not listed in the table are the human uh

1:34:56impacts or the human environment of

1:34:59traffic impacts.

1:35:01um our consultant helped us understand

1:35:04some of the data that we didn't really

1:35:05have access to the no build scenario

1:35:08that's presented which is the basis of

1:35:11comparing all other scenarios. It lacks

1:35:14the supporting traffic forecast. So

1:35:16while we see in there the no build

1:35:18scenario what we don't have is how did

1:35:21they arrive to those traffic volumes.

1:35:25The build forecasts on the other hand

1:35:27are that the forecasts are there but

1:35:29they do not include all of the projects

1:35:31ident identified in the metropolitan

1:35:33transportation plan. This is standard

1:35:36practice for forecast is to include all

1:35:38of the projects.

1:35:40I mentioned level of service F

1:35:42intersections. Those typically come with

1:35:44mitigation like turn lanes or widenings.

1:35:47that isn't clear in the EA nor is it

1:35:49clear if the costs associated with

1:35:51mitigating those levels or poor level of

1:35:53service is included.

1:35:57Also, as the consultant expanded the

1:36:00network analysis,

1:36:02we realized that there are definitely

1:36:06more impacts than just this small

1:36:09network that the EA shows in their

1:36:11forecast. Even northward of Market

1:36:14Street, we see impacts to neighborhoods

1:36:17and we we have identified two volumes

1:36:20are doubled or in some cases five-fold

1:36:23in the case of Fifth Avenue.

1:36:27The design B uh eliminates connectivity

1:36:31um which elim which which reduces

1:36:33transportation choices and also the only

1:36:36exits off the bridge on design B are on

1:36:39our bicycle corridor Fifth Avenue or our

1:36:41pedestrian corridor which is Front

1:36:43Street. Looking at a more micro level,

1:36:46some properties may lose access to the

1:36:48road network and it's unclear how that's

1:36:50going to be mitigated and the cost

1:36:52associated with that.

1:36:55In summary, on the environmental

1:36:57section, we request that the study areas

1:37:00for both the uh natural environment and

1:37:02human environment be updated um be

1:37:05expanded and that the base data be

1:37:07updated. that they conduct all needed

1:37:10studies for both environmental traffic

1:37:14before selecting a design, prepare

1:37:16better cost estimates, cost benefit

1:37:18determination, and to remove

1:37:20consideration of design B, which was

1:37:22shown on table 14 to have more negative

1:37:25environmental impacts. Now, I'd like to

1:37:28turn it over to Justin Carter to uh to

1:37:31discuss additional design options.

1:37:38Thank you, Susan. So, I'm going to talk

1:37:39to you about our additional design

1:37:41options, but I want to start with the

1:37:43understanding that as we we've worked

1:37:44through the past month with staff with

1:37:46KCA, our consultant, that these are

1:37:48highlevel estimates, understanding the

1:37:50time frame we had and what we've put

1:37:52together. Now, as saying that, I believe

1:37:53when we look at these as we get into

1:37:55this portion of the presentation, we'll

1:37:57understand that these really do bear the

1:37:59need to look at further when we present

1:38:01these. I also want to state that as we

1:38:04looked at all of these council has

1:38:07continuously emphasized that it does not

1:38:09want to delay the progress of these

1:38:11efforts. This also reflects the

1:38:13commitment to fully understand the

1:38:14choices and consequences of a

1:38:16significant decision where Wilmington's

1:38:18interests are at stake. This council has

1:38:20asked the question, could another bridge

1:38:22design meet the regional and

1:38:23transportational needs while having

1:38:26fewer damaging impacts? And we believe

1:38:28that they can. These possibilities

1:38:31deserve serious evaluation, particularly

1:38:33if they can reduce costs and impacts or

1:38:36even both. Last, I want to say we are

1:38:39grateful to NC DOT, Federal Highways,

1:38:42the Army Corps of Engineers, and the

1:38:43Coast Guard along with our state and

1:38:45federal representatives for working with

1:38:46us, communicating with us, being

1:38:48responsive when we have questions, and

1:38:50meeting with us as well when we ask to.

1:38:53With that, let's get into our

1:38:55presentation about the options that we

1:38:56have. Number one, we look at a Bascu

1:38:59bridge. I know everyone's going, "What's

1:39:00a Bascu Bridge?" As we look at the

1:39:02Isabel Holmes Bridge on the north part

1:39:04of our town, that is what a Bascu bridge

1:39:06is. That is how it operates. And we'll

1:39:07see that further as we get into it. When

1:39:10we look at our cost estimates, we have a

1:39:12four-lane and a sixlane option. We will

1:39:13present and the information you have,

1:39:15you only see a four-lane option right

1:39:17now. We are working on that sixlane

1:39:19option to put it in the table. That will

1:39:21come after tonight's meeting, but will

1:39:22be in our final report that goes to NC

1:39:24DOT.

1:39:26When we look at a Bascu bridge, we look

1:39:28at having a 200 foot width under that

1:39:30bridge, which means that the current

1:39:31channel that is there today would have

1:39:33to have its authorized limits reduced.

1:39:36And we'll talk more about that as well

1:39:38as you look at getting over 200 ft. A

1:39:39Basu bridge just doesn't really work

1:39:41from a cost effectiveness perspective.

1:39:44Our second option are two lift bridges

1:39:46that would reutilize the existing

1:39:48Capefir bridge. We would also then build

1:39:50an adjacent bridge to the south. The

1:39:53existing Capefir bridge we are proposing

1:39:55to either be rehabilitated or the metal

1:39:58portion of that brid bridge replaced and

1:40:00we'll talk further about that too. Each

1:40:02of these bridges would carry traffic in

1:40:04one direction. The existing Capefir

1:40:07bridge would then go to three lanes and

1:40:08take traffic out of Wilmington with a

1:40:11multi-use path being one of the other

1:40:13the other fourth lane. The new bridge

1:40:15would be three lanes and bring traffic

1:40:17into Wilmington.

1:40:19The last option we have and we want to

1:40:21caveat this with saying we understand

1:40:22the EA was not directed at this but we

1:40:25believe it it needs to be talked about

1:40:27and considered is looking at the

1:40:28southern bridge. The southern bridge

1:40:30which was considered back in 2019 as

1:40:32part of the EIS

1:40:34would again rehabilitate or replace the

1:40:36existing Cape Memorial Bridge. But we

1:40:38think it's incredibly important to talk

1:40:40about what the benefits are that that

1:40:41could bring even though there is a high

1:40:43cost to that but all of the positives

1:40:45that it could have. So, as we dive

1:40:48further into things, one of the most

1:40:49important things to start with before we

1:40:51get more into those alternatives is a

1:40:52section 216 navigation study. Council

1:40:56obviously issued a letter asking for one

1:40:58along with other parts of our community

1:40:59have as well. As we look at this, what

1:41:02is a section 216 study? I know you have

1:41:04all done your research and are very

1:41:05informed, but as we talk at it from a

1:41:07high level, that determines the channel

1:41:09width needed to support the current and

1:41:12future navigation. not what is required

1:41:14today through previous studies but what

1:41:17is needed for our community today as we

1:41:20can reduce that channel authorized width

1:41:22that significantly affects the cost and

1:41:25the design of the bridge I'll be honest

1:41:28with you as we look at the time process

1:41:29for that is a two to threeyear process

1:41:31and we understand that and that is led

1:41:33by the army corps of engineers and I'll

1:41:35also be honest with you with my previous

1:41:37experience having worked for the core

1:41:38for over 10 years that will heir more

1:41:40towards the three-year side of things.

1:41:43So there's a long process and we

1:41:45understand that especially with the

1:41:46grant and other things that are on the

1:41:47table.

1:41:49Lastly, when we look at why these can be

1:41:51initiated, we look at a changing in

1:41:52economic activity, urban growth and

1:41:55aging infrastructure. All things that

1:41:57we're seeing here right now. The

1:41:59previous information used in this study

1:42:01references a 1996 design. When we look

1:42:05at 1996,

1:42:07look how different downtown is. We look

1:42:09at the the planning and the zoning for

1:42:11there. It's light industrial and

1:42:14manufacturing. Today it is completely

1:42:17different. So when we talk about what is

1:42:19needed that has significantly changed

1:42:21from that time period to what we have

1:42:23now where it is a commercial business

1:42:25district, it is residential, it is

1:42:27tourism, it is everything that this city

1:42:29has grown into.

1:42:32That leads us into our first design

1:42:34option. When we talk about that section

1:42:35216, if again the core of engineers

1:42:38isn't willing to do that, then the

1:42:39possibility of a 203 that leads us into

1:42:42this exploratory design option similar

1:42:45to the Isabel Stelling's Holmes bridge

1:42:48that again is a Basco bridge 200 ft

1:42:50wide. We still maintain that 65 ft

1:42:53closed vertical clearance. When it

1:42:55opens, it is an unlimited vertical

1:42:57clearance. If we are able to reduce that

1:43:00vertical clearance while we may see some

1:43:02additional openings needed, you can even

1:43:04reduce the impacts that we would have in

1:43:06the downtown further. So by reducing the

1:43:08vertical clearance, we can reduce

1:43:09impacts. By reducing the width, we

1:43:11definitely see a reduction in cost

1:43:13significantly.

1:43:16So when we look at those and here is our

1:43:18picture of our Isabel Holmes bridge with

1:43:20a large ship passing underneath it, you

1:43:21see how a basial bridge functions and

1:43:24acts. Again, as we talk about why this

1:43:26is such a valid option, it minimizes

1:43:28those downtown impacts, provides the

1:43:31traffic needs, whether it's a four-lane

1:43:33or a sixlane option. Building a new

1:43:35bridge also reduces future maintenance

1:43:37costs, which is one of the big drivers

1:43:39for NC DOT. Also, a bridge of this

1:43:42nature, different than a lift bridge,

1:43:44also sees significant rec reduced costs

1:43:46and maintenance from how it is built and

1:43:48constructed over the lift bridge, which

1:43:50has the tall towers and and items like

1:43:52that. Again, understanding the time

1:43:55frame though for something like this to

1:43:57reduce those channel widths. We want to

1:43:59continue to work with our partners to

1:44:00see if we can find another way outside

1:44:02of the time frames of the 216 study to

1:44:04reduce those limits. But right now, this

1:44:07is one of the best better case scenarios

1:44:08for that.

1:44:11As we look at option two, we talk about

1:44:13those two bridges again, two lift

1:44:16bridges. So again, our Cape, we'll start

1:44:18with the Capefir Memorial Bridge and

1:44:20what that would mean again, a

1:44:22rehabilitation replacement. I'll get

1:44:23more into that on the next slide. But as

1:44:26we look at that, we have three lanes on

1:44:28that Capefir Memorial Bridge that would

1:44:30be converted to outbound traffic leaving

1:44:32Wilmington. That fourth lane that would

1:44:35be converted to a multi-use path. So we

1:44:37maintain that bike and pedestrian

1:44:39facility on the side.

1:44:42We look at the new bridge, which would

1:44:43be a three-lane bridge to the south.

1:44:45That would be newly constructed. It

1:44:47would be a mirror of what is there today

1:44:49in the Cape Memorial Bridge. Another

1:44:51lift bridge right next to it. That

1:44:53bridge would be three lanes coming into

1:44:55town.

1:44:57So, we talk about rehabilitation and

1:44:59replacement. I know those are

1:45:00engineering and construction terms. Not

1:45:01everybody understands what is

1:45:03rehabilitation. That is spot repairs,

1:45:06uh, local replacements of smaller items

1:45:08and modifying those existing members. It

1:45:11maybe is something along the lines of

1:45:13replacing the deck instead of that metal

1:45:14grate that we all drive across. Maybe

1:45:16it's putting concrete, adding drains,

1:45:19maybe it's looking at the underside and

1:45:20replacing members or strengthening

1:45:22members to provide additional

1:45:23redundancy.

1:45:25Then we talk about replacement. And when

1:45:27we talk about the replacement here at

1:45:28the $125 million number, that is just

1:45:31the metal portion you see in the screen

1:45:33there. That is that lift bridge portion

1:45:35only between those two big concrete

1:45:37monoliths. That'd be about $125 million

1:45:40is what we're estimating. And I want to

1:45:43caveat that in saying that both of these

1:45:45options are calculated as part of that

1:45:48other bridge construction. If we do them

1:45:50standalone, they would cost more is

1:45:53because of mobilization for these that

1:45:55are calculated together. That also looks

1:45:58at having equipment that would be on

1:45:59site longer, which we could see reduced

1:46:01costs and usage because we have it there

1:46:02for so long. So those costs would

1:46:04increase a little bit, but also with the

1:46:06understanding of that that those numbers

1:46:09still fall even if we were to put them

1:46:11as standalone underneath what the

1:46:13current NC DOT grant is. Now for NC DOT

1:46:16to use the funding that way, it may

1:46:18cause the rescoping of their project. We

1:46:21not sure that would be something they

1:46:22would have to talk with the federal

1:46:24agencies about if they did it

1:46:26standalone. If they did that as part of

1:46:28the three-lane bridge build, then it

1:46:30would fall in line with a new bridge

1:46:32construction. As we look at some of

1:46:34those important features, I'm going to

1:46:35talk about redundancy, and I will hit

1:46:37that more because it is critical. But as

1:46:39we move down, we look at what the price

1:46:41of that six lane structure is with the

1:46:43multi-use path at $585 million. I want

1:46:47to pause for a second and understand

1:46:49that what do presented for A and B are

1:46:53over a billion dollar. That is $515

1:46:58million possible. Now again

1:47:00understanding these are highlevel

1:47:02estimates. That is a huge cost

1:47:04difference in what we can do. We

1:47:06understand that there would be increased

1:47:08maintenance costs there. We would have

1:47:09two lift bridges instead of one that

1:47:12could drive maintenance costs. But does

1:47:14that cost outweigh what the future

1:47:16maintenance could be? And I think that

1:47:19in requires DOT to look at the life

1:47:20cycle cost, the return on investment and

1:47:23do that analysis because that is a

1:47:24significant number that may not be

1:47:26outweighed by the maintenance. This also

1:47:29maintains the existing chab channel

1:47:32requirements today and I want to be

1:47:34clear that is requirements not need

1:47:36requirements. The 216 will determine the

1:47:39need. The requirements that are put

1:47:41forth today for the 400 foot width and

1:47:44the 65 foot vertical clearance in the

1:47:46closed and the 135 in the open position

1:47:48could be met by these bridges that we

1:47:51are proposing today.

1:47:53We talk about redundancy right now our

1:47:56system has two bridges that cost cross

1:47:58the river. What happens if one of those

1:47:59bridges is closed? And we felt that in

1:48:022023 when DOT closed that bridge and all

1:48:04the traffic came across the Isabel homes

1:48:06and through downtown and it was a bit of

1:48:08a nightmare. Having a third bridge if

1:48:10something happens allows us the

1:48:11flexibility to shift traffic around and

1:48:13reroute things if we absolutely needed

1:48:15to. It allows us to look at a hurricane

1:48:17if traffic is if a hurricane is coming

1:48:19in and we have to evacuate the city and

1:48:21adjusting those traffic patterns and god

1:48:24forbid something happened on one of

1:48:25those bridges and it allows us again

1:48:26that flexibility. Redundancy is so

1:48:29critical. When you only have two items,

1:48:31you are really at risk. And having a

1:48:34third would provide us that.

1:48:37And as we talk about redundancy, that

1:48:38pushes me into our third option where we

1:48:40talk about the southern bridge. Again,

1:48:43understanding that that was never part

1:48:44of this EA. We understand why that was

1:48:46not put in the documents that DOT

1:48:48provided, but we think it's important to

1:48:50have that conversation from a

1:48:52redundancy, a traffic, a port

1:48:54perspective, and how everything flows

1:48:56and moves around our region, not just

1:48:58our city, but our region as a whole. So,

1:49:01as we look at the map here, you'll see a

1:49:02little circle there in the middle of the

1:49:04screen for option T. That is really what

1:49:06we used for our initial estimates. We

1:49:09are not stating that that is what should

1:49:11be done. That would require further

1:49:12analysis and further determination, but

1:49:15for our numbers, that is what we used.

1:49:17That lands at Shipyard Boulevard as it

1:49:19crosses the river right there at the

1:49:21port. There is a reason for that as we

1:49:23will go into, but that is really what we

1:49:26looked at. We didn't do additional

1:49:28analysis on this one. We took what NC

1:49:30DOT has already done in 2019 and scaled

1:49:32that accordingly.

1:49:35Why is this a really good option? Why

1:49:37should this be considered? Again, we

1:49:39talk about resilience, evacuation, and

1:49:41redundancy. In NC DO's own reports, they

1:49:44aim for 19 hours to evacuate a community

1:49:46if needed. As we look at where the city

1:49:48is going, if we maintain two bridges

1:49:51exist, especially at the existing four

1:49:52lanes, we start to push upwards of 27,

1:49:5528, and 29 hours. It also improves port

1:49:59access and efficiency. If we bring that

1:50:00bridge to the south and we can reroute

1:50:02truck traffic to the south that allows

1:50:04us to bring goods in and out of the port

1:50:06more efficient. The port has been

1:50:09looking at doing a harbor deepening

1:50:10where they quote efficiency efficiency

1:50:12efficiency. This is another way to get

1:50:15that without doing the environmental

1:50:17damaging things that we were looking at

1:50:18with the port deepening. This gets us

1:50:20there as the port looks to try to be

1:50:22more efficient. This is a great way to

1:50:24do it. It would also reduce costs on the

1:50:26existing Capefir Memorial Bridge because

1:50:28all of those trucks can be routed along

1:50:30the southern route or around town. And

1:50:32not only does it reduce maintenance

1:50:34because trucks are a main driver for

1:50:36that cost in terms of the fatigue on a

1:50:38bridge and impacts for maintenance, it

1:50:40also reduces the traffic issues and

1:50:43congestion flowing through our downtown

1:50:45by removing big trucks from that area

1:50:47unless of course they're making

1:50:48deliveries. It helps on so many

1:50:51different fronts, not just for our city,

1:50:52but for our region and how we get goods

1:50:54from Brunswick and people from Brunswick

1:50:56to the beaches and all of those local

1:50:59communities. Now, understanding there is

1:51:01a huge price tag to that number when we

1:51:03look at it. 6 billion, but we've already

1:51:06talked about spending a billion. 6

1:51:08billion is definitely more, obviously,

1:51:10six times more, pretty clear. But it's

1:51:13the benefits that it provides are

1:51:16impressive. And as we talk about that

1:51:18though, as of today, right now, this is

1:51:21a new route that could be toll today

1:51:23under existing laws and everything else.

1:51:26As we talked about our other bridges and

1:51:28how we are, no one in this city right

1:51:30now is for tolling and the laws would

1:51:33have to change. It doesn't for this. We

1:51:35can do that under here. So, when we look

1:51:37at that $6 billion number, understanding

1:51:40that that is financed through tolling,

1:51:42that's not borne completely by the

1:51:45state. it can be paid through tolling on

1:51:47a new path.

1:51:51Here's a summary of all that we've

1:51:52talked about and I will understand and I

1:51:54will let you know that as we look at

1:51:56Wilmington alternate one at four lanes,

1:51:58we will have a sixlane option for that

1:52:01coming. I will also tell you that just

1:52:03tonight as we worked with our

1:52:05consultants and talked through it, the

1:52:06sixlane option would be about $780

1:52:09million. So when we look at the

1:52:11four-lane option for that Bascal bridge

1:52:13being at 540 million, a six-lane option

1:52:16would be at about 780 million. We will

1:52:19also have a standalone multi-use path

1:52:21line in there so you can understand the

1:52:23cost of a multi-use path for that as

1:52:25well. Outside of that, this table

1:52:28summarizes what we've worked on. I will

1:52:30also point out that as we look at NC DOT

1:52:33alternate B, our consultant has looked

1:52:35at what they have and at a high level

1:52:37determined that they believe it would be

1:52:39around 1.4 4 billion not the number that

1:52:42is underneath alternative A just on just

1:52:45over 1 billion. We believe that number

1:52:47to be higher understanding that that

1:52:49does not take into account the

1:52:50mitigation items that that we have

1:52:53talked about earlier today. That is just

1:52:55a highle price per square foot look.

1:52:57I'll also talk a little bit more of the

1:52:59Capefir crossing. That $6 billion number

1:53:01includes 9 miles of interstate. That is

1:53:04not just a bridge. That is the property

1:53:06purchase of that which at DOT estimated

1:53:08around a billion dollars in itself. That

1:53:10is utility relocations. That is

1:53:13everything included there. That is not

1:53:15just the number for a bridge. That is

1:53:16the entirety of that connection.

1:53:20So, as we summarize and look at some of

1:53:22the things we're requesting, we look at

1:53:24a 216 review by the Army Corps of

1:53:26Engineers, and you have all asked for

1:53:28that already, but we want to continue to

1:53:30coordinate with the Army Corps of

1:53:32Engineers and the Coast Guard to

1:53:33determine what the acceptable clearances

1:53:35are and be a partner in that. If we can

1:53:37do that in a quicker fashion, in a more

1:53:39economical fashion, we would love to do

1:53:41that. And we want to continue to have

1:53:42that conversation. We also want NC DOT

1:53:46to respond and review to all

1:53:47alternatives. If you thought of these

1:53:49things, please show us why. Why weren't

1:53:51these considered? Why did you think

1:53:53these weren't things that should move

1:53:54on? Provide us some additional context

1:53:56in that. We really want to be clear

1:53:58though. We want to we want to bring

1:54:00solutions to the table. We think we have

1:54:02and we want to be a partner in this.

1:54:03We're not trying to stop progress. We're

1:54:06not saying we don't want to bridge, but

1:54:07we want to do what's right for our

1:54:08community. And we believe these options

1:54:10do that. They do everything that Linda

1:54:13mentioned at the start. We talk about

1:54:15safe and reliable, environmentally and

1:54:18historically at least impactful and

1:54:21being fiscally responsible. And we think

1:54:24th this bridge these bridge alternatives

1:54:26do that. With that, I will turn it back

1:54:29over to our chief of staff to close

1:54:30things out. Thank you.

1:54:36>> Thank you, Justin.

1:54:38So

1:54:40fiscal responsibility is a overriding

1:54:44concern both on the first cost for the

1:54:47bridge but also the ramifications of

1:54:50tolling and what that means to the

1:54:52people in this community and in this

1:54:54region. Uh our economic analysts have

1:54:58said that the toll cost could equal as

1:55:00much as 14% of a family at uh poverty

1:55:05levels uh annual income. And so when you

1:55:09start looking at things where we say

1:55:11potential shift in discretionary funding

1:55:13away from the area, some of these

1:55:15choices aren't really discretionary. If

1:55:17somebody's choosing between paying the

1:55:19toll to get to their place of employment

1:55:22and putting food on their table, that's

1:55:24not really discretionary. So these

1:55:27impacts can absolutely be real for the

1:55:29people that we serve.

1:55:32I think the other thing, and Justin

1:55:34alluded to this earlier, is that in

1:55:36order to toll the Capefir Memorial

1:55:39Bridge replacement project, there has to

1:55:41be a change to state law. And we believe

1:55:46that this has the potential to set quite

1:55:49frankly a dangerous precedent for this

1:55:51community and for the state. If there is

1:55:54the ability then to toll this facility,

1:55:58there's the ability to impose a toll

1:56:00quite frankly on any state facility.

1:56:04And and that's something that that

1:56:06really concerns us.

1:56:10When you look at the fiscal impacts from

1:56:14the bridge design, in and of itself,

1:56:17alternative B harms Wilmington.

1:56:21It shouldn't be a surprise to anyone

1:56:23that taking properties off of the tax

1:56:26roles or reducing the value of the

1:56:28properties that remain is going to lead

1:56:31to a decline in revenue. At the same

1:56:33time, pushing traffic, diverting traffic

1:56:36around the bridge onto our city streets

1:56:39as a result of the new bridge

1:56:41connections in alternative B means that

1:56:44we will also have to pay more to

1:56:46maintain our roads while facing a loss

1:56:50of revenue.

1:56:52That's just the bridge. When you layer

1:56:54tolling, the impacts can be pretty

1:56:57severe. You're looking right now at a

1:57:00loss of more than 200 jobs directly

1:57:03attributable to the imposition of tolls,

1:57:06loss of compensation to the families who

1:57:08hold those jobs and an overall decrease

1:57:11in our net economic output

1:57:17and then of course again the loss of

1:57:19revenues to the city, the county and the

1:57:22state.

1:57:24So, I think another thing to point out

1:57:26is the NC DOT estimated project costs

1:57:29are incomplete. We've touched on our

1:57:33design alternatives,

1:57:35but also their own alternatives have a

1:57:38significant funding gap. And so as you

1:57:41move through our city design options,

1:57:43again recognizing these are high level

1:57:45cost estimates, we still anticipate

1:57:48fewer impacts, therefore less mitigation

1:57:51being necessary, less right of way being

1:57:54necessary, less damage to our community.

1:57:59And I think again the estimated funding

1:58:03gaps is lower

1:58:06for the options that we've proposed even

1:58:09without the federal grant funding. So

1:58:11taking away the federal grant

1:58:13altogether, the options that we've

1:58:15proposed still have a smaller overall

1:58:17funding gap than the alternatives that

1:58:20NCDOT has proposed with the federal

1:58:23grant.

1:58:25So from a fiscally responsible request

1:58:27summary, the city is asking that one,

1:58:30tolling be removed as a funding option

1:58:32because of the concerns that we have for

1:58:34the economic vitality of this region and

1:58:37this city. Two, we want a full economic

1:58:40impact analysis of any designs that

1:58:42don't maintain the current landing

1:58:43locations because those will have a

1:58:45deltorious impact wherever those those

1:58:49footprints are. We want mitigation costs

1:58:53included in the EA and we want

1:58:55right-of-way cost estimates to be

1:58:57confirmed.

1:59:01In summation, our message is not that we

1:59:04are asking NC DOT to delay addressing

1:59:07the long-term transportation needs of

1:59:09this region. Our message is simply that

1:59:11there is not enough information today to

1:59:14make an informed designed selection. So

1:59:19our overall request summary could be

1:59:22evaluate the additional design

1:59:24alternatives whether those are the ones

1:59:26that we've brought forward or others

1:59:27that they wish to explore. Remove their

1:59:30design B from consideration period

1:59:34assessing all the impacts before

1:59:36selecting a preferred design and again

1:59:39no tolls.

1:59:42We believe that there are additional

1:59:44alternatives that merit serious

1:59:46exploration and those should be select

1:59:48subjected to the same level of scrutiny,

1:59:50analysis and comparison as any

1:59:51alternatives that NC do advances, ours

1:59:54included. But we should not be backed

1:59:57into rushing a generational

1:59:58infrastructure decision simply because

2:00:00of the timeline associated with a

2:00:02federal grant, particularly when that

2:00:04grant would not even fund a quarter of

2:00:06either of the designs as currently

2:00:08proposed by NC DOT. The goal should not

2:00:11be to select a design as quickly as

2:00:14possible. The goal should be to select

2:00:16the right alternative based on complete

2:00:19information and a fair evaluation of the

2:00:21options. Our city, our community, and

2:00:24our region deserve no less than that.

2:00:26And with that, we welcome your questions

2:00:28and feedback.

2:00:34Anybody?

2:00:41Council member Andrews.

2:00:44Yes, I did find

2:00:46one inconsistency that I think needs to

2:00:49be addressed. Um, so this is on page 45

2:00:53of the clean draft

2:00:56that's ahead that's in front of us. And

2:01:00two paragraphs above section 9.3.

2:01:05Um, it talks in the last sentence there,

2:01:08it says in 2025, the bridge recorded 69

2:01:11openings, most of which were for

2:01:12maintenance and training. These values

2:01:14have continued to decrease year after

2:01:16year. Well, that that second that very

2:01:19last sentence I think is correct. Um

2:01:22I have the the 2025

2:01:25lift logs and um

2:01:30they they have 94 operations including

2:01:3357 vessel related operations. I don't

2:01:37think that there was really a breakdown

2:01:38in 2025 that I could tell that that came

2:01:40out to 69. But but the June 2024

2:01:44navigation impact report um that

2:01:47mentioned 69 lifts were required for

2:01:50recreational vessels in 2023

2:01:54and that 67 of those or 97% were for

2:01:57sailboats. So that's the only place that

2:01:59I found the 69 number. If you

2:02:03have a different reading of the 20,

2:02:06excuse me, [clears throat] the 2025 lift

2:02:07logs,

2:02:09then maybe I'm I'm wrong.

2:02:12>> You you may very well be correct. Uh

2:02:15that pile of stuff over there on my seat

2:02:18includes all of that. So, we will we

2:02:20will absolutely verify that. Make sure

2:02:22that we've got the the right number in

2:02:24there.

2:02:26>> Thank you.

2:02:31I'm good.

2:02:33>> Councilman Santu,

2:02:35>> thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um, I guess I want

2:02:38to say first to our staff and

2:02:39consultants, thanks for all the work

2:02:40that you've put into this. Um, I don't I

2:02:44don't know how you found all the hours

2:02:45in the day, but you did. So, thanks.

2:02:46Thanks for putting this together so

2:02:48quickly. What' you say? 54 days. That's

2:02:50pretty quick.

2:02:51>> Is that right? Did I get right? Okay.

2:02:53>> Um, just checking that I was paying

2:02:55attention. Um, so I do have I do I guess

2:02:58have a number of questions.

2:03:00Um, I will start with the options uh

2:03:04that Wilmington came up with for the

2:03:06bridges. Um,

2:03:10could the federal grant funds be used

2:03:12for those options? I'm just curious why

2:03:15that that funding was removed from the

2:03:17graph that you just showed us in terms

2:03:19of the funding gap. So uh and I'll let

2:03:23our design consultants and Justin speak

2:03:25to that too, but we we believe that

2:03:27there is some flexibility again

2:03:29depending on how things are defined.

2:03:36Yes. So I'll add that when we look at

2:03:38the way the bridge improvement grant is

2:03:41written, it is written for rehab,

2:03:43replacement, um maintenance of existing

2:03:45bridges. So it allows under the way that

2:03:47is written for that to be utilized. um

2:03:50it can absolutely be utilized for what

2:03:52we have proposed. If we look at some of

2:03:54those options as just a standalone

2:03:57rehab, which was the 50 million that we

2:03:59had put in there and that was the only

2:04:00thing we did to the bridge, that may

2:04:02require a rescoping. But if we did

2:04:05option two, if we did option one, those

2:04:08grant funds could be utilized as long as

2:04:10they can obviously maintain their

2:04:12timeline or if they could get an

2:04:13extension, they can absolutely be

2:04:14utilized for those.

2:04:16>> Okay.

2:04:18Um my my next couple questions I think

2:04:21are going to be for Susan. Um when you

2:04:25were talking about the traffic analysis

2:04:27and the and the way that that was done,

2:04:29it sounded like there was a there was

2:04:31one type of analysis done for the no

2:04:34build option and then the estimates from

2:04:37there used a different methodology for

2:04:41options A and B in the EA. I'm just

2:04:43curious

2:04:45because I'm not a traffic engineer. Uh

2:04:47like what are what are the best

2:04:49practices when doing that kind of

2:04:51analysis? It seemed like there was maybe

2:04:52something missing and I just didn't

2:04:54understand what the miss was from best

2:04:57practices.

2:05:06>> I'll do my best and then maybe Derek um

2:05:09can correct me if I misstate anything.

2:05:11So the point we were trying to drive on

2:05:14that was that when we looked at the

2:05:17forecast which is the standard of

2:05:19practice for developing future traffic

2:05:22projections

2:05:24there was no forecast for the no build

2:05:28scenario. It only went from the 2023

2:05:33forecast to the 2050

2:05:37build one build two.

2:05:39And so we were left wondering well how

2:05:42did they arrive to the no build scenario

2:05:46um the growth factor that was cited for

2:05:49the the bridge inventory is not a

2:05:51standard growth factor. So we didn't

2:05:53know um how they did that. So I would

2:05:57have expected to either see a no build

2:05:58forecast or would I would have expected

2:06:01to see a some sort of statement about a

2:06:04growth factor being applied and what

2:06:06that growth factor is. And neither of

2:06:08those were present. A growth factor it

2:06:10sounds like was present, but we just

2:06:11don't know how they got that.

2:06:13>> So the growth factor that they stated

2:06:15was 3.27% and that was specific to a

2:06:19discussion on bridges.

2:06:21>> That is not the actual traffic growth

2:06:24factors that we would use for a traffic

2:06:26study. Um, Wilmington is more combined

2:06:30and isn't growing as fast as say

2:06:33Brunswick County, but even Brunswick

2:06:34County growth factors we would not see

2:06:36at three and a quarter percent.

2:06:38>> Okay. Um, and then my next question I

2:06:41think is also for you. Um, this is from

2:06:44education. You were talking about

2:06:46mitigation costs not being included.

2:06:48Like can you give an example of what

2:06:50what those costs would be or some

2:06:53examples of what those are?

2:06:55>> So the so the examples of what that

2:06:56might be. So when we see a level of

2:06:58service F intersection, let's say, you

2:07:00know, like a

2:07:01>> a grocery store is doing a traffic study

2:07:04and we see these and then we see that

2:07:06well the mitigation is a turn lane or an

2:07:09additional through lane. We could not

2:07:11determine that those costs were included

2:07:16in the cost estimate for either

2:07:17estimate. So both um design A and design

2:07:21B had intersections that performed below

2:07:24acceptable levels of service

2:07:27but there was the statement in the Yay

2:07:29was well we need to do further studies

2:07:32for traffic but that those costs we

2:07:35couldn't tell were they included for any

2:07:37for any widenings any turn lanes any

2:07:39other mitigation to bring those to an

2:07:42acceptable level of service.

2:07:44>> Okay. Thank you.

2:07:48Um, my last question is about tolling,

2:07:50so I don't know who that's for. Um,

2:07:54so if I'm if I'm reading this table

2:07:57about the economic impact of a toll

2:07:59correctly, it looks like there with

2:08:01option B, there could be a $28 million a

2:08:04year economic impact in Wilmington for a

2:08:09toll facility. I also I also want to add

2:08:12that this project is estimated to cost a

2:08:16billion or more dollars. We have this

2:08:19$242 million federal grant, $85 million

2:08:23from the state. There's a lot to make up

2:08:25there, which which is why a toll

2:08:27facility is being considered.

2:08:30I think everybody in this room follows

2:08:32the news. I've been following the fact

2:08:34that the general assembly is considering

2:08:38uh gas tax relief. I understand gas is

2:08:40expensive. I understand why that would

2:08:42be helpful for families. But how are how

2:08:47is the state going to expect to pay for

2:08:49transportation projects if they are

2:08:52removing the revenue source for those

2:08:54projects? That's the question that came

2:08:57to my mind. Well, I read that lawmakers

2:09:00are saying that the state's rainy day

2:09:02fund um in addition to the inflation

2:09:05reserve and the surplus from this last

2:09:08budget, we've got billions of dollars

2:09:11there. So, I just question

2:09:15if we have enough money to pay for

2:09:16transportation infrastructure so a gas

2:09:18tax can be paused, why do we not have

2:09:20enough money to pay for state

2:09:23infrastructure when it comes to the

2:09:24Caper Memorial Bridge? I don't know who

2:09:26to ask that question to, but it's a big

2:09:27question on my mind right now because

2:09:30either we have the money or I'm sorry,

2:09:31either the state has the money or they

2:09:33don't for transportation infrastructure

2:09:35and I don't understand why Wilmington is

2:09:38expected to pay the toll, pay for the

2:09:40economic impact, pay for the traffic

2:09:43in addition to I guess eventually the

2:09:47gas tax either I guess if it gets

2:09:49relieved we wouldn't be paying that. But

2:09:51it just seems like we're paying for a

2:09:53lot. I don't know who to ask that

2:09:54question to. It's just a question that I

2:09:56want to put out there.

2:10:00>> Well, I think we want to take it. It's a

2:10:03very good question because I I that was

2:10:05the same question I was going to pose to

2:10:07staff and I think we need to ask that of

2:10:10the state since I believe

2:10:12when they tell me that the gas tax is

2:10:14going down because of fuel efficient

2:10:16vehicles. When we look at the state

2:10:18budget, they collected eight billion

2:10:20dollars in gas tax

2:10:23and we're getting none.

2:10:25And we got 20ome billion dollars in the

2:10:27rainy deal fund. We're getting none. So,

2:10:29we're a being asked as a community to

2:10:31pay 80% of the cost of this. And they'll

2:10:33tell us what type of bridge we're going

2:10:35to build.

2:10:36And my concern, and this is I think for

2:10:39the engineers, and I just want to ask

2:10:41this is an engineering question. If

2:10:44you're doing a study or you're designing

2:10:47something, do you walk the property? Do

2:10:50you go look at the the where you going

2:10:52to build this thing or design it? I'm

2:10:54just curious because when I asked the

2:10:57question, I can't get a specific answer

2:11:01because of the fact is and I think the

2:11:02thing that I guess shocked me was we're

2:11:05going to drop a 135 foot fixed span

2:11:07bridge at Fifth Avenue.

2:11:10Does somebody pick up the telephone and

2:11:12maybe ask the city or engineers or NPO

2:11:16directors or somebody

2:11:19what's what's on Fifth Avenue

2:11:22>> or did the city spend any money fixing

2:11:25Fifth Avenue at a cost of 18 million

2:11:27since we've been talking about Doge and

2:11:29this about cutting expenses and we're

2:11:31always concerned about cost. Did anybody

2:11:34look at that? And when I look at the

2:11:36termination to the north,

2:11:38it goes to the Keenan Fountain, the

2:11:40historic Kenan Fountain. And when it

2:11:42goes to the south, it terminates in the

2:11:44Greenfield Lake. So unless they're going

2:11:47to have some kind of crazy design going

2:11:49out of Fifth Avenue into, I don't know,

2:11:52Third Street, I have no idea. And when I

2:11:54asked the question, what is what are you

2:11:56going to do to improve 16th Street, 17th

2:11:58Street, Oana Drive? Because now you're

2:12:00taking that tremendous volume of traffic

2:12:03that you were going to disperse with the

2:12:04southern bridge that went away because

2:12:07of the concerns that the people had in

2:12:09Brunswick County asking the same exact

2:12:12questions that we're asking. Now, you're

2:12:14going to funnel all of it down this

2:12:16channel, which happens to be the city.

2:12:19So, that's one question that I can't get

2:12:21an answer to. And I think any engineer

2:12:24worth their weight in anything would

2:12:26have walked it, asked questions about

2:12:28it, looked at it, and I think they ba

2:12:30based it on some 1996 study. So that's

2:12:32one. The other one, the other tremendous

2:12:35argument about the economic development

2:12:37heading north on the river

2:12:40um is the fact that can you blast north

2:12:45of the Kate Memorial Bridge because the

2:12:47last time it was dredged was dredged, I

2:12:50believe, in 2006 is what I've been told.

2:12:52So, if you're going to go to a deeper

2:12:54depth and 38 ft, I believe is what the

2:12:56depth is in the river at that in this

2:12:58location here outside of our window. Are

2:13:01we going to have to blast like we

2:13:03blasted south to the mouth of the river

2:13:06or to the mouth of of the ocean at 42 ft

2:13:10of depth. And then on top of all that,

2:13:13now the state ports has abandoned at

2:13:16this point in time the dredging

2:13:19um or the dredging permitting process

2:13:22because of concerns about the PAS

2:13:26contamination that is in the riverbed.

2:13:29So that's another issue that I haven't

2:13:31heard any commentary on. Are we going to

2:13:33blast north? Because now we've got a

2:13:35serious issues with our bulkhead with

2:13:38buildings and you're talking about going

2:13:40down significantly cuz you're at 38 ft.

2:13:44You're hitting bedrock. So you're having

2:13:46to go deeper. So what kind of ships are

2:13:48we talking about? We talking about

2:13:49Panamac ships. Are we talking about

2:13:51barges? I don't have no idea. But if

2:13:53somebody should have done an economic

2:13:55analysis of what we're going to do

2:13:56north, how many acres are involved? What

2:13:59is the potential? I don't We're betting

2:14:00on the potential of some development

2:14:03north. But I think it's at least we need

2:14:04to ask that question of our of our

2:14:07partners in this because I'd like to

2:14:09know what they're going to do because at

2:14:10one time we were talking about putting

2:14:12some I guess some slips out here where

2:14:15people could dock up to our riverwalk

2:14:18and the core at that time said no. So I

2:14:20just I just like to know about that.

2:14:23And then um on the mitigation um have we

2:14:27gotten any firm numbers on the

2:14:28mitigation in regards to people that are

2:14:31not willing to pay that toll because

2:14:33they may not be able to afford to coming

2:14:36north to the Isabel Holmes Bridge?

2:14:38Because the Isabel Holmes Bridge to me

2:14:40is the bigger concern right now because

2:14:41we got four intersections that are

2:14:44converging

2:14:46at the Isabel Holmes Bridge. 421

2:14:4917

2:14:51MLK and Third Street. And you've got two

2:14:54stop lightss on either side of that

2:14:56bridge. It's a two mule bridge. So, what

2:14:59are we going to do when we have a

2:15:01significant amount of traffic mitigating

2:15:02through our community going north

2:15:04because there's going to be a certain

2:15:05amount of people, I don't care what they

2:15:07say, that are not going to pay that toll

2:15:09for a lot of different reasons. But what

2:15:11is the mit? Is it 10%, is it 20%, is it

2:15:1430% of the carbine? Do we even know

2:15:16that? Do we have any idea? And if we do,

2:15:19who did the study? Because I like to

2:15:20know that uh because I know there's

2:15:23going to be a significant amount of

2:15:24people mitigating north through the

2:15:26community because to me in in many ways,

2:15:30this reminds me of 1990 when they

2:15:32dropped Interstate 40 in Wilmington and

2:15:34they left us with no access roads. they

2:15:36just dropped the road interstate highway

2:15:38right on College Road and it took us

2:15:40almost two decades to mitigate the

2:15:43traffic that that had impacts upon. So,

2:15:46those are some of the questions that I

2:15:48like to have answered or at least make

2:15:50certain that we have commentary on

2:15:52because I think they need to be

2:15:53addressed because we've heard a lot of

2:15:56discussion about all these things, but

2:15:57I'd like to know the company they use

2:15:59for the mitigation and I like to know

2:16:00the studies they've done for the cities

2:16:02that they've done it in because I want

2:16:03to double check that. There's an old

2:16:05saying that some great president said,

2:16:08trust but verify. And I want to make

2:16:09sure that we're verifying all of the

2:16:11things that they're sharing with us.

2:16:13Okay? because this is a this is a this

2:16:15is a transformational project for this

2:16:17community and for this region. It's also

2:16:19a very important project for the state

2:16:21and for the economics of this area and

2:16:23we want to make sure that we get it

2:16:25right and we want to make sure that the

2:16:27impacts to our community are mitigated

2:16:30just like the impacts to Brunswick are

2:16:32just like the impacts to Rice Beach are

2:16:34and to any road project in this

2:16:36community when when I see mayors and

2:16:38elected leaders stand up when they have

2:16:40concerns and the state addresses them

2:16:43and tries to help those communities and

2:16:45not to do something in rush judgment.

2:16:48This is something that's going to be

2:16:49with us for a long long time. So I want

2:16:52to make sure that we're addressing those

2:16:54if we haven't we need to before the 15th

2:16:57of October.

2:16:59>> Yes. Yes sir. And I think to your point

2:17:01and also to what council member Santa

2:17:03was saying if there is diversion and

2:17:06people are avoiding the toll with the

2:17:08change in the law we could just toll the

2:17:10Isabel Holmes bridge too.

2:17:13Well, and that's the other concern

2:17:14because if you know and and for those

2:17:16that are watching us, this is the first

2:17:19road in this state's history where you

2:17:21have an existing road that has been used

2:17:23for almost 60 years that now you're

2:17:25going to have to pay to cross. And as

2:17:28Dennis alluded to, if it happens in

2:17:31Wilmington, it can happen anywhere else

2:17:33in the state.

2:17:36It can. And this is a big project for

2:17:38this entire community and for this

2:17:39entire region. And then through the

2:17:41public hearings that I have attended as

2:17:43well as all the other council members

2:17:45here, we have seen the huge amounts of

2:17:48people that have come out and shared

2:17:51their concerns with us. And I hope the

2:17:53state is listening to us. But

2:17:55[clears throat] I have to understand,

2:17:58you know, and I and I've said this

2:18:00before, you know, the Rice for Beach

2:18:02bridge raises

2:18:04about 69 times in two days.

2:18:08We have a bridge that has been raised 69

2:18:10times in one year.

2:18:13And out of those 69 times, 12 of them

2:18:16were for to test it.

2:18:19And most of the crossings under that

2:18:20bridge have been 50some plus

2:18:24recreational

2:18:26boats.

2:18:28So

2:18:30I hope we don't rush the judgment here.

2:18:31And I know the state is very very

2:18:33concerned about cost. I mean, that's one

2:18:36of the things that we hear all all. So,

2:18:38we're trying to save the state some

2:18:39money here, trying to mitigate the

2:18:40impacts to our community and make sure

2:18:42that we have the best bridge possible

2:18:45and hopefully not having to toll it

2:18:48because that is an antithesis in the

2:18:49state of North Carolina, but it may

2:18:51become a reality because I understand

2:18:52that if it's a new road, you toll it.

2:18:54And then we understood that the southern

2:18:56bridge, which was going to be the Skyway

2:18:58Bridge, was going to be told because it

2:19:00was a new facility. We understood that.

2:19:01I think everybody was in agreement with

2:19:03that. But like Dennis alluded to, if you

2:19:06tow the memorial and the volume of

2:19:08traffic starts to mitigate north to the

2:19:10Isabel homes, which a lot of it will,

2:19:13are you going to tow that one, too?

2:19:15Because then we have the Cameron, so you

2:19:16just push people further north, which

2:19:18causes us to burn more gas. So, I have

2:19:23some some concerns, but I I think the

2:19:25thing that really

2:19:28really hit me was to see that this

2:19:31bridge was going to have its main access

2:19:34on Fifth Avenue. And when I saw that, I

2:19:36says, "Either somebody did somebody

2:19:38missed this or doesn't care." But that's

2:19:41a big deal for this community and it can

2:19:44impact anybody in this area. And for

2:19:47those that may not live near the bridge

2:19:48and may say, "Well, I don't use the

2:19:49bridge." It will impact what this

2:19:51community and this city looks like if we

2:19:52allow that to happen.

2:19:55Council member Joiner,

2:19:58>> can we get back to the slide with the

2:20:00timeline?

2:20:06The timeline slide, please.

2:20:23Right there. Thank you.

2:20:25So,

2:20:26can we talk about what next steps are if

2:20:29we approve this tonight?

2:20:36Yes, sir. So, next steps would be for us

2:20:40to finish packaging this and then

2:20:42submitting it to NC DOT formally for

2:20:45their review under the the window that

2:20:48closes next week. So, that was the

2:20:50reason for wanting to get this on the

2:20:52council agenda tonight.

2:20:56>> And their public comment or public

2:20:59feedback has a requirement that they

2:21:01have to respond to every comment.

2:21:03Correct.

2:21:03>> That is correct. Um, and then what is

2:21:09the merger team or WNO? Who's the

2:21:12decision maker that makes the next move?

2:21:15>> So, the ball would be in the merger

2:21:17team's court. Um, at this point, we

2:21:20there is obviously some level of

2:21:22involvement from WMO, especially as it

2:21:24pertains to the tolling question in of

2:21:26itself. But one of the things that we

2:21:29explored when we first started down the

2:21:31path of even even figuring out whether

2:21:33or not we should talk about pursuing

2:21:37design options was whether or not there

2:21:40was a willingness for that to be

2:21:41considered. And we we were told that

2:21:44there was a willingness for that and

2:21:46that if what we proposed or changes that

2:21:50we had to their alternatives were

2:21:53amanable that there was the opportunity

2:21:56to return to what's called CP2 the

2:21:59consensus point 2 and take up the

2:22:02whatever

2:22:03that design option or options might be.

2:22:07And so that that's basically our formal

2:22:09request at this point is to say we we

2:22:12want our alternatives to get the same

2:22:15level of scrutiny and analysis that the

2:22:17NC dot alternatives have.

2:22:19>> Understood. All right. Um I say let's

2:22:22get the ball moving. Thank you.

2:22:23>> Thank you.

2:22:30>> Anybody else? JC, you have any

2:22:31questions?

2:22:36Okay,

2:22:38Miss Law,

2:22:45I have a few questions. Um trying to

2:22:48digest the new stuff. So, if uh they've

2:22:51been addressed, just let me know if

2:22:53they've been addressed in the new um

2:22:55comments that we just got since we've

2:22:58been sitting up here.

2:23:01Um

2:23:03in the in the um the one we were

2:23:07delivered in our packet, it was it's

2:23:08page 45. I don't know what that is now.

2:23:10It starts on page 45 and 46. the um

2:23:13under design one

2:23:16would the um

2:23:19would have a proposed 200 foot

2:23:22horizontal

2:23:24opening. But on the next page on 47, it

2:23:26says that the um clearance above the

2:23:30mean that top paragraph um the clearance

2:23:35um above the mean high water in the open

2:23:38position and at least 250 ft of

2:23:41horizontal clearance through the main

2:23:43navigation space. So, um they were kind

2:23:45of talked about together and I just

2:23:47wanted to um

2:23:50see if I understood the point was to to

2:23:52narrow that um at least 250 ft of

2:23:56horizontal clearance to the 200 ft

2:24:00because I'm very interested in the um

2:24:02six lane basu. So, I appreciate um

2:24:06Justin you adding that to the

2:24:09presentation.

2:24:12>> Yeah. What I'll state is [clears throat]

2:24:14sorry um the 200 foot is what we are

2:24:17proposing for that option for the Bascio

2:24:19bridge. When we look at the 250 ft that

2:24:22is actually a report that was put out by

2:24:25the US Coast Guard for the rail bridge

2:24:28that was considered um back in 2022.

2:24:30It's a memo that was published by the US

2:24:32Coast Guard in 2022 where they're

2:24:35looking at a bridge right next to the

2:24:36Capeford memorial bridge and they state

2:24:38that 250 ft would not cause an

2:24:42obstruction and that they would be all

2:24:44right in that determination with 250

2:24:46foot a 250 foot width. So what we make

2:24:49with that statement is saying that

2:24:50precedent has been set that the Coast

2:24:52Guard has gone under that 400t

2:24:54authorization

2:24:56>> for a rail bridge. Why are we not doing

2:24:58that here? And so that 250 ft that

2:25:02you're referencing is actually a

2:25:04statement out of that U memo that you

2:25:07can find in appendix C. That's the last

2:25:10appendix in there and that's what that

2:25:11250 is referencing. That's not actually

2:25:13referencing what the width of that we're

2:25:16proposing for the basical bridge.

2:25:17>> Okay, great. Thank I want to make sure I

2:25:19understood your point and that that was

2:25:20um exactly what I was um thinking if

2:25:24there wasn't a discrepancy

2:25:26um in the economic

2:25:29evaluation

2:25:30um I think this was outside your scope

2:25:33so

2:25:34that's fine but did was there a um

2:25:40directive to look at bene the economic

2:25:42benefits to the rest of the region and

2:25:45city or we were just focused on um the

2:25:49the uh harm it would cause.

2:25:52>> So, Council Member Laauo, there was not

2:25:55a ton of time obviously to look at this

2:25:57from a sort of regional aspect, but what

2:26:00we do know is that Wilmington is and has

2:26:02been the economic engine for this

2:26:05region. Um that that can certainly

2:26:07change, but for now UNCW, Novon Health,

2:26:12the the major employers in this area are

2:26:14cited in the city of Wilmington. And and

2:26:18so so long as that is the case, anything

2:26:21that damages that engine is going to

2:26:24have downstream negative impacts on the

2:26:27rest of the area that depends on it.

2:26:31That's the um would be the conclusion

2:26:34of uh the downtown area. Also, the rest

2:26:37of the city wasn't part of the scope.

2:26:39>> Correct.

2:26:42>> Um all right, another Justin question.

2:26:46when we can you look at that um the the

2:26:50um rendering that I think it was from DT

2:26:53but it hadn't been on their website long

2:26:55that shows um the landing because I had

2:26:59asked them for that and I didn't think

2:27:00they were going to um put it

2:27:03together that's it um so I had didn't

2:27:05look at it look for it again so I wanted

2:27:07a minute with it um

2:27:10specifically just as for an example uh

2:27:13Justin on Worster Street where um the

2:27:16landing is there next to I guess that's

2:27:18where the Pearl and some of those

2:27:20apartments are.

2:27:22Um,

2:27:24what is the how do you build a bridge

2:27:27that close to the buildings without

2:27:30damaging them is I guess my layman's

2:27:32term question.

2:27:34>> Very carefully. Um, we would have things

2:27:37like vibration monitoring that would be

2:27:39required as part of that construction

2:27:41where they would put those on the

2:27:42building. If those vibrations exceed set

2:27:45requirements that they would have, then

2:27:46then that building could be due uh money

2:27:49to make those repairs. Um, you're

2:27:51talking about just being very very

2:27:53careful with your operating equipment,

2:27:55making sure you're putting up barricades

2:27:57and things like that to protect it. Uh,

2:27:59but the one of the bigger things is the

2:28:01vibration monitoring of that equipment

2:28:02if you're driving piles in the area. And

2:28:04that's not just for those buildings

2:28:06there, but all the houses downtown as

2:28:08well. So when we talk about vibrations

2:28:11from traffic that we worry about on a

2:28:12regular basis once this bridge is

2:28:14constructed, we worry about those during

2:28:16construction as well. The difference is

2:28:18during construction, we put monitors on

2:28:20things to to track that because it's

2:28:22short term. That's not happening for

2:28:24these houses that are in the area for

2:28:2610, 15, 20 years down the road of

2:28:28feeling those constant vibrations. But

2:28:30when we build things that close to

2:28:32structures, we do take mitigation

2:28:34measures to do that. And they cost

2:28:35extra. It's more expensive to build

2:28:37something in tight quarters. It takes

2:28:39more time. It takes more coordination

2:28:40and extra equipment and materials to do

2:28:43so.

2:28:46>> Thanks.

2:28:48I think um

2:28:50one of the I lost the page, but um one

2:28:54of the places in the report suggested

2:28:57and maybe it's been taken out again. I

2:28:58don't um haven't gotten all the way

2:29:00through the comments we were handed. Um

2:29:04says we recommend that the DOT looks at

2:29:07a bridge lower than 65 ft.

2:29:13Yeah, we would ask them to take that

2:29:15into consideration when they're doing

2:29:16their study. Again, with the

2:29:18understanding that that could have

2:29:19impacts that the bridge may need to

2:29:20operate more. The lower you bring that

2:29:22elevation, if there are ships coming in

2:29:25that are in between that elevation, it

2:29:26would cause the bridge to operate more.

2:29:28So that is the potential there for that

2:29:29to happen, but it can also reduce the

2:29:32impacts we see on the the homes and the

2:29:34businesses downtown. If you can lower

2:29:36that elevation, the grade coming in is

2:29:38as is not nearly as steep, so you don't

2:29:41see vehicles having to work as hard from

2:29:43air pollution. You might see less

2:29:44vibration as well. Again, as vehicles

2:29:46aren't having to drive as hard and do

2:29:48those things or break as hard as they

2:29:49come down a hill. So adjusting that

2:29:52elevation and the vertical can help fix

2:29:55some of those impacts that we might see

2:29:57downtown. We're not saying that that is

2:29:59something that should happen, but we're

2:30:00saying that we should think about it and

2:30:02at least look at some data at what that

2:30:04would drive for additional openings and

2:30:06if that makes sense.

2:30:09>> Okay. I don't um

2:30:12I don't really agree with it.

2:30:17So,

2:30:18>> and and I think council member Laos the

2:30:20the precedent and and the controlling

2:30:23factor is the Isabel Holmes bridge. So,

2:30:25the Isabel Holmes bridge is not at 65

2:30:28ft, right? And so, if you're restricting

2:30:30really what you're controlling with

2:30:32Isabelle Holmes and the Capefir Memorial

2:30:35Bridge is the stretch of river along

2:30:38downtown,

2:30:39>> right? So if you're going north of the

2:30:42Isabel Holmes Bridge, you you can't be

2:30:44any bigger than that bridge will allow

2:30:46you to be, right? So So how many vessels

2:30:50really transit in between those two

2:30:52bridges that necessitate a higher than

2:30:5565 ft elevation when closed? that that's

2:30:58just the question we're asking to

2:31:00explore because again the the lower

2:31:03grades, lower ramps leads to less

2:31:05damage, less to mitigate a cheaper

2:31:08bridge. So all all of those factors are

2:31:11around why why we would ask for that to

2:31:14be evaluated. Not necessarily saying

2:31:16that we think that that's where it

2:31:17should be, but if the Isabel Holmes

2:31:19bridge can be at that elevation and be

2:31:22okay, why can't this?

2:31:26I understand the um logic, but I

2:31:30I don't um

2:31:32I think the goal is to get it as low as

2:31:34possible.

2:31:36It's already that height. So, um that's

2:31:39my only comment question if if uh

2:31:43>> Okay.

2:31:44>> Anybody has a thing to say about that?

2:31:47>> Okay. Uh, Council Member Andrews or

2:31:50>> I I withdrew because those were some of

2:31:52my questions as well about the the 2022

2:31:55study. So, we have so many smart people

2:31:58in this community that keep emailing us

2:32:00every day and we just got one this

2:32:01morning about the 2022 study, the 65 ft

2:32:04and all of that that was already

2:32:07discussed. Thank you,

2:32:08>> Council Member Santuo.

2:32:10>> Thank you. Um, I have a very detailed

2:32:12question. I'm looking at um in our

2:32:15agenda packet appendix A. I'm on page,

2:32:19what page am I on? Hang on.

2:32:22Um

2:32:2313 of 22. This is the appendix B

2:32:26detailed results of the economic impact.

2:32:30You tracking with me? Okay. So, it looks

2:32:33like under the category of commuter and

2:32:36visitor spending,

2:32:38um the projections show that we would be

2:32:40losing just over $9 million a year. Do

2:32:43can you or do you have a ballpark? Does

2:32:46anybody in this room know what the what

2:32:50the economic impact is annually? So,

2:32:52what would that $9 million be subtracted

2:32:54from?

2:32:57>> I'll see if our folks at HRNA, are they

2:33:02online and available?

2:33:05>> Sure. Um, can you all hear us?

2:33:07>> Yes.

2:33:08>> Great. Um, so, uh, I can start. I've got

2:33:11two other colleagues, um, here as well.

2:33:13Um but basically uh the 9 million um

2:33:17that is included in that particular

2:33:19table is a reflection um not only of the

2:33:23amount of kind of lost spending um you

2:33:26would see from uh commuters who might

2:33:29choose to you know work from home

2:33:31>> um or visitors who might choose to go

2:33:33elsewhere where they don't need to cross

2:33:35a toll bridge. um but in addition to

2:33:37some of the broader you know impacts

2:33:40across other industries um in the area

2:33:43and so the annual number just for sort

2:33:46of spending lost from commuters and

2:33:47visitors who don't come that's the

2:33:49number above that's the 5 million um but

2:33:52because of all the sort of what we call

2:33:54spin-off or sort of broader regional

2:33:56impact uh from that initial just lack of

2:33:59spending um from workers who aren't you

2:34:02know going out to lunch or businesses

2:34:04that aren't ordering more office

2:34:06supplies size um that expands to about

2:34:08$9 million a year. So just from that one

2:34:10column out of you know what do we have

2:34:12here? Five different columns in this

2:34:14particular table of impacts um it's a

2:34:17total of 9 million every single year um

2:34:19as a result of just pretty modest uh

2:34:23reduction even in uh commuters and

2:34:25visitors who are going to downtown.

2:34:27>> I appreciate that explanation. Thank

2:34:29you. My I think my question is that's $9

2:34:31million of how much? So, I understand

2:34:35that we would be losing $9 million, but

2:34:39what is what is the number? What is the

2:34:42total number?

2:34:43>> The denominator.

2:34:44>> Yeah,

2:34:45>> that's an annual figure. That's n $9

2:34:48million annually.

2:34:51>> I think my question is I don't think I'm

2:34:53asking this the right way.

2:34:55>> Are you going to help me, Dennis?

2:34:56>> I'm going to try. So, the $9 million is

2:34:59subtracted from X. What is X?

2:35:05If you're losing $9 million, you have to

2:35:07have at least $9 million to start,

2:35:10>> right? How much are we generating in

2:35:12that category annually right now is

2:35:14maybe a better way to phrase that.

2:35:17>> Sure. Um I I can start that. Um but uh

2:35:21but yeah, so specifically the 9 million

2:35:23because it includes industries beyond,

2:35:26you know, restaurants and hotels and all

2:35:29the sorts of places that commuters and

2:35:30visitors would spend. um that's really

2:35:32across a pretty broad swath of

2:35:34industries. So, you know, you could

2:35:35compare that

2:35:36>> if you know, I don't have it in front of

2:35:38me, but if we had a statistic about the

2:35:39size of the economy um in, you know, the

2:35:44sort of Wilmington region, the

2:35:46threecount region, um that's being

2:35:49subtracted from that broader size of the

2:35:51economy. Um, and then in terms of

2:35:53visitation specifically, um, again, I

2:35:55don't have that number in front of me,

2:35:56but that would be, you know, that's

2:35:58about $5 million in basically, uh, the

2:36:01total amount of spending, um, in

2:36:03downtown on restaurants, retail, and

2:36:06hotels. Um, so, you know, it's it's not,

2:36:09you know, we're not cutting it in in

2:36:11half. Um but 5 million a year uh is

2:36:13certainly meaningful um to all of the

2:36:16businesses that uh would be losing that

2:36:19certain amount of you know revenue from

2:36:21hotel nights uh from restaurant bills.

2:36:24Um but again I can take a look for for a

2:36:26more detailed number but um but again

2:36:29it's probably a relatively small chunk

2:36:30of the economy but um really important

2:36:33to those downtown businesses.

2:36:34>> Yeah I appreciate that. Maybe we can

2:36:36just have that as a followup. What is

2:36:38the economic output downtown? Yes, we'll

2:36:40work on it

2:36:40>> related to this. Okay, thanks.

2:36:43>> I said downtown, I meant in the city.

2:36:45Sorry.

2:36:46>> Okay. Anybody else?

2:36:50>> Thank you. Thank you to staff. Thank you

2:36:51to everybody here tonight. This is a

2:36:53very important and significant issue for

2:36:55not only the city of Wilmington, but the

2:36:56entire region. And we we're taking this

2:36:59very seriously. And I hope uh everybody

2:37:01understands our concerns and our angst

2:37:03on a lot of different issues here. And

2:37:05hopefully we'll come to a good

2:37:07resolution. Uh what are the wishes of

2:37:09council in respect to the R2 which is

2:37:12the resolution adopting the detailed

2:37:13staff comments? We have a motion to

2:37:15approve by Mayor Pro Tim Spears, second

2:37:17by council member Clinton Quintana. Any

2:37:20further discussion? All in favor of that

2:37:22motion, please indicate by saying I.

2:37:24>> I.

2:37:24>> Any oppose? That item passes

2:37:26unanimously. This concludes the regular

2:37:28agenda. Are there any items be brought

2:37:29forward by our city attorney?

2:37:30>> No sir.

2:37:31>> City manager?

2:37:32>> No sir.

2:37:33>> Madame clerk?

2:37:35>> No sir.

2:37:36>> Miss Santa?

2:37:37>> No. I don't have anything.

2:37:39>> Sanders,

2:37:40>> just uh while we're on the topic, uh

2:37:42just to remind everybody that um the

2:37:46comments, public comments are due uh

2:37:48October 15th, next week. And if you go

2:37:52to Wilmington.gov,

2:37:54right at the top of the page in the

2:37:56orange, you can get all the information

2:37:58you need about how to submit comments,

2:38:00and we hope that everybody does.

2:38:02>> Thank you, Mayor Pro Tim.

2:38:04>> Yes, sir.

2:38:06back from vacation. Well needed. I'm a

2:38:10year older.

2:38:12Feel amazing.

2:38:14I want to thank on on Saturday, I I had

2:38:16the opportunity to be honored by the

2:38:18North Carolina project lead, White

2:38:20Lotus,

2:38:22um

2:38:24as an emerging leader

2:38:26and I was in the company of some really

2:38:29phenomenal people in in this region and

2:38:32and so I I just want to thank NC Project

2:38:35Lead for putting together an amazing

2:38:37program and just an amazing night. And

2:38:41and then I I want to do this for a

2:38:42friend of of mine there. Um

2:38:49people

2:38:50often times we see in this community

2:38:52where people won't allow you to grow,

2:38:55right? So they won't allow you to

2:38:57experience growth. They won't allow you

2:38:59to overcome issues.

2:39:02And most of the time people are clueless

2:39:05to the details of other people's lives.

2:39:08Yet we won't allow them to move beyond

2:39:10those things. And quite frankly, those

2:39:13things aren't any of our business unless

2:39:16we try to help.

2:39:20Some of life's experiences afford us the

2:39:24expertise needed to solve society's

2:39:28issues. So, I wish a lot more people

2:39:31would be way more graceful

2:39:35with other people's issues as they look

2:39:39to help others in this community. Thank

2:39:41you, Mr. Mayor.

2:39:42>> Thank you, Councilman Clinton Quinton.

2:39:47>> Um, I'll simply

2:39:50just remind everyone that we are in the

2:39:53month of October, and this is Breast

2:39:56Cancer Awareness Month, Domestic

2:39:59Violence Awareness Month, National

2:40:01Disability Employment Awareness Month,

2:40:04National Bullying Prevention Month, and

2:40:07Cyber Security Awareness Month. And um I

2:40:11think all of those things have probably

2:40:13touched many of us. I know it's hard to

2:40:16believe, but I was bullied when I was

2:40:19younger. Yeah. But um got past that and

2:40:23kicked a few butts and here I am. So no

2:40:27bullying. All right. Thank you.

2:40:30>> Thank you, Council Member Lao.

2:40:32>> No, sir.

2:40:33>> Joiner. On the uh topic of domestic

2:40:36violence awareness month, we had um the

2:40:39presentation earlier today and domestic

2:40:41violence shelter and services in

2:40:43Wilmington gives out the impact award

2:40:45every year. So, I wanted to recognize

2:40:47WPD Corporal Michael Scott and Deputy

2:40:50Chief Kelvin Hardgrove who are nominated

2:40:52for the impact award this year and um

2:40:54recognize the work that they do in our

2:40:56community each day and that so many in

2:40:58the WPD do each day to um fight and

2:41:01prevent and hold accountable domestic

2:41:04violence and to look forward to seeing

2:41:07how that nomination goes and perhaps we

2:41:09find out that they're the award winners

2:41:11at the end of the month. So,

2:41:12congratulations to them.

2:41:13>> Thank you. Well, with that, thank you

2:41:15for taking an interest in your

2:41:16government. We stand a journ.