[0:24] i don

[0:25] t think we do the other

[0:30] one, but there might be. But I.

[0:32] Thank you. So we

[0:32] ll build it

[0:58] after you. Yes. Thank.

[1:00] And after the first talk, a

[1:01] little.

[1:01] Something.

[1:03] The Joyner Press Council member

[1:04] Clark here.

[1:05] Council member.

[1:06] Bohlen here.

[1:08] Council member. Sisco. Mayor

[1:09] pro tem. Adams. Thank you.

[1:10] Council member. Taylor.

[1:11] Present.

[1:14] Council member. Hall and

[1:17] council member. Burke.

[1:18] Thank you very much. Please

[1:20] join the City council meeting

[1:33] in a moment of silence. Thank

[1:35] you so much. Would you please

[1:36] join the City Council in me in

[1:40] the Pledge of Allegiance? I

[1:42] pledge allegiance to the flag

[1:45] of the United States of America.

[1:48] To the body which is state, one

[1:51] nation under GOD, indivisible,

[1:53] with liberty and justice for

[1:58] all. Thank you very much. Our

[1:59] sergeant at arms tonight is

[2:01] Lieutenant Langdon. Thank you

[2:02] for being with us tonight. And

[2:04] our fire marshals. Peacock to

[2:06] be with us. Before we get into

[2:07] the city manager

[2:08] s report

[2:10] tonight. Obviously, we have a

[2:11] very special group of

[2:13] individuals who are with us

[2:15] tonight. Might recall that on

[2:17] the on the JULY 4th at the

[2:20] stadium, we recognized number

[2:21] of centurions from our

[2:22] community here, those who are

[2:25] 100 years old or older. And

[2:26] instead we wanted to actually

[2:28] bring them or ask them to come

[2:30] down to City Hall tonight. So

[2:33] we could recognize them in

[2:34] person as part of us

[2:36] celebrating our 250th

[2:38] anniversary as a country. I

[2:38] can

[2:40] t think of a better way to

[2:42] do that than to recognize those

[2:43] individuals who have made it a

[2:45] special part of our of our

[2:47] city. So we do have a number

[2:49] of, of of folks here tonight.

[2:49] I

[2:50] m going to call your names.

[2:52] And if you would just raise

[2:54] your hand and wave at us there,

[2:54] and we

[2:55] re going to give you a

[2:59] little gift there. I think, uh,

[3:09] good to be here for so but so.

[3:11] Okay, so our first one is Ben

[3:14] Meeks. Briggs. Briggs, thank

[3:21] you for being with. All right.

[3:21] Briggs won

[3:22] t mind me saying

[3:22] he

[3:24] s a 104 years old. All right.

[4:52] Elizabeth Linsky, there she is,

[5:12] right there. Althea McIntyre.

[5:26] Annie Smith. And Lena Wardlow.

[5:27] We are just delighted to have

[5:29] you with us tonight. And we

[5:29] re

[5:30] delighted that you

[5:30] ve been a

[5:32] part of our community. Thank

[5:35] you for all your wives. Uh,

[5:37] make such a difference. I do

[5:38] want to unfortunately

[5:40] acknowledge that since the JULY

[5:42] 4th event, we have lost two of

[5:45] our sisters. Um, when Robert

[5:47] Lindsay Greer, who was one of

[5:49] our original firefighters on

[5:51] the original African-American

[5:52] firefighters created the fire

[5:55] department, he was 104. And

[5:58] then maybe when we have members

[5:59] of their family and our family

[6:07] here. Where m is to deal with

[6:11] those 127. What a great legacy

[6:12] for our community. We

[6:12] re glad

[6:15] to have you tonight. Uh, uh,

[6:15] we

[6:16] re going to move on with our

[6:17] meeting now, but feel free to

[6:20] stay as long as you like. And

[6:22] feel free to go any time you

[6:24] like as well.

[6:25] You can do whatever they want.

[7:06] Yeah, right. Your prayers. And.

[7:07] I wish.

[7:10] Along highway 93. From her.

[7:11] Mouth. By the time.

[7:38] I just received.

[8:00] A little for a long. Uh, time.

[8:00] It

[8:00] s worth.

[8:04] Every second.

[8:27] I took. Thank you.

[8:29] Of.

[8:44] Of. They were live their life

[8:50] is almost. I will thank you.

[8:52] Everyone of us. So resume the

[9:01] meeting. Uh. Let me. Call on

[9:03] the city manager if you

[9:03] re

[11:24] ready for your, uh. Continuing

[11:25] to be serviced.

[11:26] Uh, until the replacement

[11:28] stickers are received. So, uh,

[11:29] if you

[11:29] re having problem with

[11:31] your red sticker staying on,

[11:32] there is another one coming in

[11:35] that were have asked them to be

[11:36] a little bit more intentional

[11:38] with the adhesive that they put

[11:38] on those.

[11:40] This time.

[11:42] , just before our next meeting,

[11:42] I also want.

[11:43] To.

[11:45] Remind Council and the public

[11:48] that our Wisdom Transit

[11:49] Authority will be implementing

[11:52] the largest service redesign in

[11:54] in a number of years. On AUGUST

[11:56] the 30th, transitioned from

[11:59] primarily 60 minute and waste

[12:01] service to primarily 30 minute

[12:03] service to provide more

[12:05] frequent and convenient transit.

[12:10] Extensive community outreach

[12:11] and public education to help

[12:13] shape, communicate, and service

[12:15] changes. And there will be more

[12:18] information can be found on our.

[12:20] Let me ask transit not call our

[12:26] website about the change. One

[12:28] of the council know the public

[12:29] and we

[12:30] re also starting our

[12:31] annual city of Winston-Salem

[12:33] University program this

[12:35] Thursday, AUGUST 20th, which

[12:37] will run through NOVEMBER 2nd.

[12:39] Council members are welcome to

[12:40] tent sessions. We

[12:42] re excited to

[12:44] have a group of community

[12:45] residents that really want to

[12:47] learn more about the city, city

[12:49] government, and what is offered

[12:50] in our community, so we

[12:50] re

[12:52] excited to talk them starting

[12:55] this Thursday in the

[12:57] construction of the Helen

[12:59] Walking Church, located on

[13:00] Carbon School Road, began in

[13:05] APRIL, is now about 99.5%.

[13:06] Proven. Solution. Boardwalk

[13:08] pedestrian trail, fitness

[13:11] equipment, shade structures,

[13:13] scratch resistant landscaping

[13:16] and completion is expected

[13:18] around the end of SEPTEMBER and

[13:20] the public grant development

[13:26] plan as we get closer to. A

[13:27] want a couple of recognitions?

[13:27] Don

[13:31] t recognize City Manager

[13:33] women who are recently

[13:35] completed the public Executive

[13:37] Leadership Challenge to to the

[13:39] Community School of Government

[13:40] Program Development and

[13:42] leadership collaboration and

[13:44] placemaking skills. Local

[13:46] government effectiveness. So

[13:52] congratulations. Thank. And I

[13:52] m

[13:53] going to actually turn it over

[13:56] to to her right now to our

[13:58] parking.

[14:01] Uh thank you. So we recently

[14:03] for today do general Services

[14:05] Department, which is comprised

[14:07] of our property facilities

[14:09] management and vegetation

[14:11] management, sustainability and

[14:12] our central warehouse. And we

[14:16] just hired a perfect. And so he

[14:20] just started two weeks ago. As

[14:23] the director of departments, he

[14:24] has said it

[14:25] s been more than a

[14:27] decade. Local government

[14:29] leadership with the county

[14:33] since 2012. And now several

[14:41] leaders. Deputy Fletcher, major

[14:49] individuals. In criminal

[14:56] justice. Administration. So I

[14:56] m

[15:07] excited to have. To. For and

[15:27] see.

[15:33] Have the city. Because we want

[15:35] to support it in all others to

[15:39] make public facilities. And our.

[15:45] Come all the things in the past.

[15:52] Help us to second is trying. To

[15:58] just places. With some of our

[16:07] with. That and resources around

[16:16] the policies. First and. 635

[16:26] dash. One elements. 12. Master

[16:31] is expanding how? The council a

[16:36] lot of houses, a lot of

[16:41] housing, stores Council budgets

[16:48] and tuition provisions as human

[16:51] are with the city. On

[16:53] Wednesday, AUGUST 26th, from

[16:56] 930 to 1130 at the Old Town

[16:58] Neighborhood Center at 4550

[17:01] Chaplin Drive. Residents are

[17:02] invited to meet with city staff

[17:04] and community partners, learn

[17:06] about city services, ask

[17:07] questions, share ideas, and

[17:09] discuss issues affecting their

[17:11] neighborhoods, complimentary

[17:12] coffee and refreshments will be

[17:16] provided. And then, at our

[17:18] communities last week,

[17:19] particularly in the public

[17:20] works Committee meeting last

[17:21] last week highlighted the

[17:23] outstanding work across

[17:26] multiple city departments that

[17:28] took place to resolve the a

[17:29] major water main break that

[17:32] occurred at the end of JULY.

[17:32] I

[17:33] d be remiss if I didn

[17:33] t take

[17:35] a moment at this platform to

[17:37] acknowledge the extraordinary

[17:38] around the clock effort of our

[17:40] employees, many of which you

[17:42] are also feeling the impact at

[17:44] their homes on this water

[17:46] outage. Our water main break,

[17:48] whose example our one team

[17:50] approach to city government in

[17:52] action around professionalism,

[17:54] commitment and collaboration of

[17:55] all these individuals working

[17:57] not only with one another but

[17:58] with the county and the

[18:00] community as a whole, including

[18:01] the many organizations and

[18:03] individuals to step up to help

[18:05] those who need it. During this

[18:07] time, the Council is our

[18:08] expression of appreciation for

[18:11] their work on that. And joining

[18:12] me in the spirit of Christmas.

[18:15] Thank you to the public for his

[18:16] patience and for all those who

[18:18] played a hand in taking care of

[18:26] the situation. So thank you. I

[18:27] know you had some of them. Some

[18:29] of them were even much needed

[18:31] break right now from the work

[18:33] that they had on. And then just

[18:35] finally, I wanted to

[18:36] acknowledge the International

[18:38] Theater Festival that was in

[18:40] full spring, actually full

[18:41] swing. What am I going to

[18:43] cover? But the city worked with

[18:44] the festival organizers, hotels

[18:46] and host sites to minimize the

[18:48] impact on the tens of thousands

[18:49] of guests that were in town.

[18:50] For one of our community

[18:52] signature events, the spirit

[18:54] and enthusiasm of the attendees

[18:56] and participants was powerful,

[18:57] and the festival was a true

[18:59] celebration of the arts like

[19:00] culture and the power of

[19:02] community to bring people

[19:04] together to find. The festival

[19:05] featured more than hundred and

[19:06] 20 performances by 30

[19:07] professionals like the

[19:09] companies, many of the

[19:11] performances were sold out,

[19:13] most of them organizers

[19:14] estimate that the weeklong

[19:16] event generated economic impact

[19:19] for dollars. City caused the

[19:21] impact positively impacting

[19:23] hotels, restaurants, retailers,

[19:24] transportation providers, and

[19:26] other local businesses. They do

[19:28] always kind of like always does

[19:30] a fantastic job with this

[19:31] festival together. And I felt

[19:32] like we needed to recognize

[19:36] them for that work. Since and

[19:37] since, unless we

[19:37] re meeting

[19:40] together. So without camera,

[19:40] which.

[19:41] Was a delicious.

[19:43] Display.

[19:45] Good. Thank you very much.

[19:48] Thank you. Have a two honorees.

[19:53] Who have I?

[19:55] Resolution recognizing national

[19:57] emergency Management Awareness

[19:57] Month.

[19:59] Whereas emergencies.

[20:00] And disasters, including

[20:01] natural. Manmade and

[20:02] technological.

[20:04] And occur unexpectedly posing

[20:06] significant threats to life,

[20:08] property and environment. And

[20:10] whereas the Winston-Salem

[20:11] Forsyth County Office.

[20:13] Of Emergency Management, the

[20:15] city of Winston-Salem emergency

[20:17] managers across all sectors,

[20:18] community leaders, the North

[20:20] Carolina Division of Emergency

[20:22] Management, and the Federal

[20:24] Emergency Management Agency,

[20:26] fema dedicate countless hours

[20:27] to developing preparedness,

[20:29] response, recovery, and

[20:31] mitigation programs to protect

[20:33] the lives and property of all

[20:34] persons living in the United

[20:36] States and U.S. Territories.

[20:39] And Whereas, emergency managers

[20:40] across the United States and

[20:42] U.S. Territories are charged

[20:44] with establishing and

[20:46] capabilities necessary to

[20:48] effectively direct, coordinate,

[20:50] and support emergency and

[20:51] disaster response and recovery

[20:53] efforts. And Whereas, the

[20:54] efforts of our nation

[20:55] s

[20:56] emergency managers have helped

[20:58] millions of community members

[20:59] across the United States to

[21:02] cover, rebuild and become more

[21:03] resilient in the face of

[21:05] adversity. Now, therefore, be

[21:07] it resolved, the Mayor and City

[21:08] Council of the city of

[21:10] Winston-Salem hereby recognize

[21:12] the month of AUGUST as National

[21:13] Emergency Management Awareness

[21:15] Month in the city of

[21:16] Winston-Salem, in conjunction

[21:18] with the National Preparedness

[21:20] Month in SEPTEMBER, with the

[21:21] support of the North Carolina

[21:23] Division of Emergency

[21:24] Management, the International

[21:26] Association of Emergency

[21:28] Managers, and the National

[21:29] Emergency Management

[21:31] Association, all U.S.

[21:32] communities are urged to

[21:33] express their sincere

[21:35] appreciation for emergency

[21:37] managers in every sector who

[21:39] work diligently to prepare,

[21:41] protect and serve our cities,

[21:43] counties and states. Tribes,

[21:45] territories, regions and

[21:47] organizations against all

[21:48] hazards and risks.

[21:50] Through motion.

[21:52] MR. Mayor Pro Tem actions by

[21:55] Councilmember all although to

[21:58] say I. A unanimous asked the

[22:00] CHAIRMAN Of the Committee to

[22:02] present us to our Director of

[22:16] Emergency Management to offer.

[22:19] On behalf of our city. We thank

[22:20] you for all of your excellent

[22:22] work that you do in your

[22:25] department. We are excellent

[22:27] because of your diligence, your

[22:31] commitment and all of the time

[22:33] your staff gives. When we have

[22:36] mercy, we thank you. We

[22:52] appreciate you and we are.

[22:53] Thank you, MR. Mayor. Mayor Pro

[22:55] Tem and members of the council

[22:57] for the proclamation. Just very

[22:58] briefly, the Office of

[23:00] Emergency Management. We plan

[23:01] to coordinate our community

[23:03] response to disasters. Large

[23:06] scale emergency, natural avenue

[23:09] and technological development,

[23:11] and major infrastructure. And

[23:13] they occur. We do this by

[23:14] partnering with our local,

[23:17] city, county, regional, state,

[23:19] federal, private and nonprofit,

[23:21] non-governmental organizations.

[23:23] Our office is a very small team

[23:25] of five individuals and self,

[23:27] and we are typically working

[23:28] behind the scenes at public

[23:30] eye. So I think the

[23:32] proclamation excellent where we

[23:34] are now and what our team does

[23:36] and our mission is. And with

[23:37] that, I just want to accept the

[23:38] proclamation on behalf of my

[23:44] teams, recognition. One word.

[23:45] Thank you very much and have

[23:51] you. Thank you, MR.. Going over

[23:53] to fc during the water main

[23:55] crisis, here with full house

[23:59] work. First I will say about

[24:01] the city performance and we are

[24:05] to the beginning. Thank you.

[24:07] Have our needs to.

[24:08] Thank you for resolution

[24:10] honoring the 2026 Winston-Salem

[24:12] Police Department. Citizens

[24:14] Police Academy graduates.

[24:15] Whereas 12 citizens have

[24:16] successfully completed the

[24:18] Winston-Salem Police Department,

[24:21] Citizen Police Academy. Shannon

[24:24] Dula, Antoinette Conrad Montego

[24:27] Davidson, Lacey Dickens,

[24:29] Jocelyn Grace, Leticia Harrison

[24:32] Brooks, Jewett, Judith

[24:34] Renteria, Marion Chantelle,

[24:38] Shante Reynolds, and and Cisco.

[24:41] Ladies. And whereas the course

[24:42] is intended to provide

[24:44] residents with a deeper

[24:45] understanding of the inner

[24:47] workings and complexities of

[24:48] law enforcement and the

[24:49] Winston-Salem Police

[24:51] Department. And Whereas the

[24:54] 2026 Citizens Police Academy

[24:56] has included more than 30 hours

[24:57] of interactive instruction

[24:59] across 13 weeks, giving

[25:00] participants a behind the

[25:02] scenes look at Winston-Salem

[25:04] Police Department. And Whereas

[25:05] the coursework covers city

[25:07] government and governance

[25:09] structure and community

[25:11] engagement, investigation,

[25:12] field operations, and

[25:14] constitutional law, and much

[25:16] more. Whereas participants

[25:18] experience specialized units

[25:20] such as Swat, k-9, forensics,

[25:22] and the real time crisis and

[25:24] have completed a ride along or

[25:26] cit, along with patrol or

[25:28] communications. And Whereas

[25:30] their dedication has resulted

[25:31] in a better understanding and

[25:33] appreciation of city government

[25:35] and law enforcement, and their

[25:37] participation has given them

[25:38] resources to serve their

[25:40] community and the world better.

[25:42] Now, therefore, be it resolved

[25:43] that the mayor and the

[25:44] Winston-Salem City Council

[25:46] hereby approve honoring the

[25:49] 2026 Winston-Salem Citizens

[25:51] Police Academy graduates in

[25:52] which the much discussed with

[25:54] their future as community

[25:55] leaders.

[26:00] Come. For our second, because

[26:02] they are pursuing a position

[26:04] that has unanimous and

[26:08] presented us to begin to. Alan

[26:26] recognized. Thank you, Kenzie.

[26:28] Thank you for helping to make

[26:31] all this happen here. And Chief

[26:32] Fan has joined us here. How are

[26:35] you? Uh, so we are delighted to

[26:36] have this program in our city

[26:38] and our public safety chair and

[26:40] member of the class is here as

[26:41] well. So I

[26:42] ll present this to

[26:44] you and invite you to make a

[26:50] comment to your life.

[26:51] Good evening. Mayor. Mayor Pro

[26:53] Tem, member of the Council.

[26:55] Thank you for this recognition

[26:56] for the Citizens Police

[26:59] Academy. And I also wanted to

[27:00] take this opportunity to extend

[27:03] my gratitude to them. Although

[27:05] it is very clear to me that

[27:08] everyone knows how to do our

[27:11] job, when, where and how to do

[27:12] it. Um, it

[27:14] s especially I want

[27:16] to thank them this committee

[27:19] group, for the 13 Thursdays

[27:21] that they spent learning all

[27:22] about the police department.

[27:24] Um, they took ownership of

[27:26] their police department, and

[27:29] they learned a lot. I will tell

[27:30] you that as much as they

[27:32] learned during those 13 weeks,

[27:34] we learn just as much from

[27:35] them. And I

[27:36] m going to warn

[27:36] them, like I did at the

[27:39] beginning of class. They hear

[27:41] all this knowledge with them.

[27:42] However, if every time they

[27:44] watch in cop movies with their

[27:46] family members, they say they

[27:46] can

[27:47] t do that or they can

[27:47] t do

[27:48] that, no one will want to watch

[27:50] tv with them. So please refrain

[28:01] for that. But thank you.

[28:03] I will add that we have the

[28:05] fall version of Citizens Louis

[28:07] County coming up on AUGUST

[28:08] 27th. Thank you all so much.

[28:13] Thank you. Now go to our

[28:15] regular agenda. Our agenda is

[28:16] comprised of two parts the

[28:18] consent agenda and the general

[28:20] agenda. As always, practice of

[28:21] our Council to pay to consent

[28:22] agenda is the first order of

[28:24] business. Items on this agenda

[28:26] have been unanimously

[28:27] recommended by committee of the

[28:29] City Council, or are being

[28:30] submitted in accordance with

[28:32] established city procedure.

[28:33] There will be no discussion of

[28:35] the items on this agenda unless

[28:37] council members so request that

[28:38] item be removed. The consent

[28:39] agenda and considered

[28:41] individually. Item is not

[28:43] remove will be enacted with one

[28:45] motion. Councilmember. Hall was

[28:47] asked by seven with any other

[28:50] items. Councilmember seeing

[28:51] none is here.

[28:51] I

[28:52] ll move for approval.

[28:53] Of the consent.

[28:54] Agenda.

[28:57] Second, Councilmember Clark.

[28:59] This is what chronic disease

[29:00] electronic vote. Please

[29:03] indicate a voting yes if no one

[29:05] can invoice with. All in favor,

[29:07] please say aye. Aye. Opposed?

[29:07] And that

[29:08] s unanimous. MAY have

[29:11] item c7, please.

[29:14] Item c7 resolution establishing

[29:15] a new date for Winfield Forward,

[29:17] llc to complete construction of

[29:20] the Residences at Indiana to

[29:21] provide affordable housing

[29:50] located in the North Ward.

[29:52] Presented at city at the

[29:55] Committee. This is fine. I can

[29:58] do my remark, which is a very

[29:59] general. I

[30:00] ll just be

[30:03] presenting what I did on last

[30:03] Monday, if that

[30:04] s okay. Mayor

[30:07] Jones okay, um, what I wanted

[30:08] to do was make sure that I

[30:10] reiterated what I mentioned at

[30:12] the Housing and General

[30:14] Government meeting on last

[30:17] Monday. That was just that, um,

[30:18] the representatives from

[30:21] Winfield for, uh, to follow up

[30:23] with Mayor Pro Tem Adams, who

[30:25] is the representative for this

[30:27] ward, to be sure that they are

[30:28] able to follow up with the

[30:29] residents who are across the

[30:31] street and Stonewall community.

[30:33] I know that they did make that,

[30:36] um, promise during that meeting

[30:38] on last Monday. I just want to

[30:39] make sure that that is stated

[30:41] on record. So they do follow up

[30:43] and make sure that they have

[30:45] that meeting with, uh, Council

[30:46] Member Adams, as well as the

[30:48] residents that are nearby for

[30:51] the update with the um, site

[30:52] plans and also with the new

[30:53] date for completed

[30:55] construction. Thank you, Mayor

[30:56] Jones.

[30:57] , promotion Council member.

[30:59] I am. And with that, I move to

[31:02] approve item c7.

[31:03] By Mayor Pro Tem Adams. Any

[31:05] discussion? If not all those in

[31:06] favor of this motion, please

[31:08] indicate by saying I.

[31:09] I.

[31:11] Oppose no. And that unanimous

[31:14] thinking. Now go to the general

[31:15] agenda, which is concludes

[31:17] public hearings on alleyway

[31:19] closure, flood insurance

[31:20] compliance, text amendment

[31:22] seven zoning petitions and

[31:25] elected body special use permit

[31:27] petition, public hearings are

[31:29] called uh. Persons in the

[31:30] Council chamber will be given

[31:32] an opportunity to speak if

[31:33] there is opposition to a public

[31:35] hearing item. The proponents

[31:37] and opponents will be given 15

[31:38] minutes for presentation and

[31:40] three minutes for rebuttal. If

[31:42] no one wishes to speak on

[31:43] public hearing and the City

[31:46] council will consider the item

[31:47] which we have, item g one,

[31:50] please.

[31:52] Item g one public hearing and

[31:53] consideration of a petition to

[31:56] close an abandoned a 1.25 acre

[31:58] unnamed alleyway between Allen

[32:00] Street and Wilbur Street,

[32:02] located in the southeast ward.

[32:04] Thank you. Is there anyone in

[32:05] the Council chamber who wishes

[32:10] to be heard on this item?

[32:11] Seeing no one, I declare the

[32:12] public hearing closed and

[32:13] recognize the CHAIRMAN Of the

[32:14] Public Works Committee.

[32:28] Councilmember.

[32:30] I move for approval of item.

[32:31] Chief.

[32:33] Second., which is a second by

[32:39] Councilmember Taylor. Go ahead

[32:40] and say that.

[32:42] I move for approval of item g.

[32:46] One second in the discussion of

[32:48] this item. Not afraid. The

[32:49] motion, please. In the

[32:51] capability. Yes. Anyone opposes

[32:56] vote no. And as unanimous.

[32:59] Thank you. Item g2.

[33:01] Item g2 public hearing and

[33:04] consideration of Udo cc 36

[33:05] National Flood Insurance

[33:08] Program Compliance testimony.

[33:10] This is a public hearing. Is

[33:11] there anyone in the Council

[33:13] chamber who wishes to be heard

[33:14] on this proposed amendment to

[33:16] the National Flood Insurance

[33:21] Program compliance text. C one

[33:23] under threat public hearing

[33:24] code close to recognize Mayor

[33:25] Pro Tem items.

[33:27] Thank you. Mayor. I move for

[33:28] approval of one the statement

[33:30] of consistency for the approval

[33:33] of this item and two. Udl cc

[33:34] 36.

[33:37] Second. Second by Councilmember

[33:40] Clark. Any discussion questions

[33:41] now for the motion please, and

[33:43] keep a voting yes. Anyone who

[33:43] s

[33:52] vote no. That is unanimous.

[33:55] Thank you. Item g three.

[33:56] Item g three public hearing and

[33:58] consideration of the Zoning

[34:01] petition of young keeping him w

[34:05] 3687 from Rs nine and rm18 to

[34:07] Rs seven. Property is located

[34:09] east of the Andrews Drive, and

[34:09] we

[34:10] ve asked Boulevard

[34:12] intersection located in the

[34:13] North Ward.

[34:15] Is there anyone in the council

[34:16] CHAIRMAN Who is opposed to this

[34:21] rezoning? Seeing that we

[34:21] re not

[34:22] the chair of the public hearing

[34:25] closed and recognize the

[34:26] appropriate Adams, I

[34:27] ll.

[34:28] Move for approval of one. The

[34:30] statement of consistency for

[34:32] the approval of this item. And

[34:35] two w 3687.

[34:39] A second. Second second.

[34:40] Council member Taylor. Any

[34:43] discussion questions? Not all

[34:44] for the motion, please indicate

[34:46] by voting yes. Anyone opposed?

[34:51] Vote no. That is unanimous.

[34:53] Thank you. Mayor Pro Tem, item

[34:54] g.

[34:56] Item g for public hearing and

[34:57] consideration of a zoning

[35:01] petition of Lewis David Vargas.

[35:05] W 3688 from Rs nine to gbl

[35:06] properties located on the west

[35:08] side of Home Road, north of

[35:10] Indiana Avenue, containing

[35:12] approximately 0.36 acres.

[35:15] Located in the North Ward..

[35:16] So anyone in the Council

[35:17] chamber who is opposed to this

[35:23] proposed rezoning. Seeing no

[35:24] one, I declare a public hearing

[35:26] closed and again recognized

[35:28] mayor put on work. You are

[35:29] less.

[35:31] I move for approval of one

[35:32] statement of consistency for

[35:35] the approval of this item, and

[35:38] two w 3688.

[35:41] For a second. Second second.

[35:43] Councilmember. Clerk in session.

[35:46] Questions on this item? Not all

[35:47] those in favor, please indicate

[35:49] voting yes. Anyone who

[35:54] s. As

[35:56] unanimous. Thank you. Item g

[35:58] five.

[36:00] Item five. Motion to excuse

[36:01] Council Member Taylor from

[36:03] voting item g6.

[36:04] Thank you. Chair a motion to

[36:05] excuse Councilmember Taylor.

[36:07] I move to Councilmember Taylor.

[36:11] Be voting on item g six.

[36:12] Second above for all. Any

[36:15] discussion. All those in favor

[36:16] of the item, please take the

[36:18] voting. Yes. Anyone opposed?

[36:22] Vote no and that is unanimous.

[36:24] For whatever your excuse for

[36:27] voting on item. Uh, g6, they

[36:28] will have on Jesus.

[36:30] I g6 public hearing and

[36:31] consideration of a zoning

[36:34] petition for Water Holding llc

[36:35] doing business as equal

[36:39] properties w 3689 from R.M.

[36:44] Eight s and lil two lifo

[36:45] properties located at the

[36:47] southeast intersection of South

[36:49] Main Street and Arnold Avenue,

[36:51] containing approximately 0.81

[36:53] acres. Located in the southeast

[36:54] ward.

[36:56] Thank you. Is there anyone in

[36:56] the Council CHAIRMAN Who

[37:01] opposed this rezoning? Seeing

[37:03] no one, our declare the public

[37:05] hearing closed and just comes

[37:06] prepared. Excused. I

[37:07] m

[37:09] councilmember. Motion. Thank

[37:09] you.

[37:11] Thank you. Mayor. I move for

[37:13] approval of the statement of

[37:15] consistency for the approval of

[37:20] this item. And w-3689.

[37:22] Second by Mayor Pro Tem Adams.

[37:24] Any discussion questions on

[37:26] this item? Not all those in

[37:28] favor. The motion please. Yes.

[37:39] Anyone opposed? Nope. That is

[37:41] unanimous with Councilmember

[37:43] Taylor being excused following

[37:46] on it. Item d7.

[37:48] Item g7 Public Hearing and

[37:49] consideration of the Zoning

[37:52] Petition of hhs Holdings, llc.

[37:56] W 3690. From lds to gps

[37:57] properties located along the

[37:59] southeast side of South

[38:00] Stratford Road and at the

[38:02] terminus of Ashwood Drive,

[38:04] containing approximately 2.38

[38:06] acres located in the southwest

[38:08] Ward.

[38:09] Thank you. Is there anyone in

[38:11] the Council chambers opposed to

[38:17] this rezoning? See, you want to

[38:18] declare a public hearing closed

[38:19] and recognized? Councilmember

[38:22] Andre Bowman.

[38:23] MR. Mayor, I move.

[38:25] For approval of one statement.

[38:26] Consistency for the approval of

[38:31] this item. And to w 3690.

[38:34] Second Councilor Scipio. Any

[38:38] discussion questions? Now, all

[38:39] those in favor? The motion,

[38:41] please keep the voting. Yes.

[38:47] Anyone knows those have. And

[38:49] that is unanimous. Thank you.

[38:51] Item g8.

[38:53] I am g a public hearing and

[38:54] consideration of the zoning

[38:56] petition of all Red Investment

[39:00] Company, llc. W 3692 from gi

[39:03] and cpo to gpl properties

[39:05] located on the north side of

[39:06] East Haynes Mill Road, across

[39:08] from Brasfield Drive,

[39:11] containing approximately 44.45

[39:13] acres. Located in the northeast

[39:14] Ward.

[39:16] Thank you. Is there anyone in

[39:17] the Council CHAIRMAN Who is

[39:22] opposed to this rezoning?

[39:23] Seeing no one on declare the

[39:24] public hearing closed and

[39:26] recognized, Councilmember.

[39:26] Fortune.

[39:29] Thank you, mayor. I move for

[39:31] approval of one. The statement

[39:33] of consistency for the approval

[39:38] of this item. And two w 3692.

[39:40] One mayor Pro Tem Adams any

[39:41] discussion questions on this

[39:44] item? Not all those in favor,

[39:46] please. Yes. You want to close

[39:54] out that? As approved

[39:58] unanimously. Item g nine.

[40:00] Item g9 public hearing and

[40:01] consideration of a Zoning

[40:05] Petition of alma mater w 3693

[40:08] from Rs nine to Knoll

[40:09] Properties, located on the

[40:11] south side of Country Club Road

[40:13] between South Cliff Dale Drive

[40:15] and Harbor Street, paying

[40:17] approximately 0.33 acres.

[40:20] Located in the southwest Ward.

[40:21] I understand there is

[40:22] opposition to this item, so we

[40:26] will have a public hearing for

[40:27] the proponents here to make

[40:30] comments. Uh, MR. Murphy is

[40:53] going to do that for us. Mayor.

[40:54] Um, mayor Pro Tem, members of

[40:57] council, uh, this request is to

[41:00] rezone 0.33 acres of property

[41:01] located on the south side of

[41:02] Country Club Road, between

[41:04] South Lift and Rob and Harbor

[41:06] Street, located in the

[41:08] southwest ward from Rs. Nine to

[41:11] Knoll neighborhood office.

[41:20] Limited use. This is a map of

[41:23] the for 2045 Growth Management

[41:24] Area Plan map showing the

[41:26] property located in gma three

[41:27] suburban neighborhoods. It is

[41:28] located to the south side of

[41:30] Country Club Road, just to the

[41:32] west of South Creek Parkway.

[41:33] South Creek Parkway, and that

[41:35] area does serve as the dividing

[41:36] line between gma

[41:37] s two and

[41:39] three, but this is located

[41:40] within the suburban suburban

[41:41] neighborhood. Growth management.

[41:45] Uh, this is a subject property

[41:47] highlighted in yellow, again

[41:49] shown on the south side of

[41:51] Country Club Road. You see, it

[41:53] is located just slightly west

[41:56] of a large office, uh, zoning

[41:58] across the road from an us

[42:01] townhome project. It is located

[42:02] in between Harper and Cliff

[42:04] Dale, and it is located close

[42:06] to the on and off ramps as

[42:12] follows. Creek Parkway Road.

[42:14] Outlined in yellow. This is the

[42:16] existing single home. This

[42:19] would be an adaptive reuse. And

[42:20] again you do see the

[42:21] development pattern in the

[42:23] area. Some intense single

[42:25] family and multifamily to the

[42:27] north have traditional older

[42:29] homes on that south side of

[42:31] Country Club Road. And again

[42:32] you do see the office

[42:35] development there to the east

[42:38] along South Creek Parkway. And

[42:39] you see to the west the

[42:41] beginnings of the um,

[42:45] commercial area. There to the

[42:50] west, the Gordon Manor area.

[42:51] This is the subject property

[42:52] shown on the West Suburban Area

[42:54] Plan update, which was updated

[42:56] in 2018. It does recognize the

[42:57] existing single family

[42:59] residential use of the property

[43:01] and recommends for this

[43:03] property to be developed as

[43:05] single family residential. Uh,

[43:07] also in the area plan. Uh, you

[43:09] know, does talk about the

[43:11] neighborhood office and zoning

[43:13] can be an acceptable transition

[43:15] use and can be accepted

[43:18] alternative to single family

[43:21] residential, especially along,

[43:23] uh, urban corridors such as

[43:25] country Club Road. So again, it

[43:25] doesn

[43:26] t meet the specific

[43:28] recommendation of area plan.

[43:30] But there is some flexibility

[43:31] there for adaptive reuse of

[43:35] existing structures. Uh, this

[43:37] is just some images. This is

[43:38] looking east along Country Club

[43:39] Road to subject property is to

[43:41] the right to see the zoning

[43:43] sign there on the other side

[43:44] you see some of those townhomes

[43:46] that were built about 8 to 10

[43:48] years ago. You do in the

[43:50] background over there. See the

[43:52] southbound offramp from South

[43:53] Creek Parkway, home to Country

[43:57] Club. Uh, this is looking west

[43:59] on along hundred Club Road. The

[44:00] subject property is to the left

[44:03] in the on the image you see the

[44:05] apartments, uh, apartments of

[44:07] townhomes across country Club.

[44:08] Again, there

[44:08] s a wall, there

[44:09] s

[44:10] a vegetated screen, but there

[44:12] is more intense side of the

[44:15] road. Uh, this is looking

[44:16] south. Home kind of club road

[44:18] at the subject property. This

[44:21] is the house in question. Uh,

[44:22] this is looking west from the

[44:24] property and adjacent vacant

[44:28] parcel. Their own country club.

[44:29] This is looking east from the

[44:31] subject property and another

[44:34] adjacent to make it parcel to

[44:35] give. This is looking more

[44:37] directly across the backs of

[44:38] the townhomes across Country

[44:42] Club Road. And looking at the

[44:44] project can provide an analysis

[44:45] of West Suburban area plan

[44:47] update recommends this property

[44:49] for low density single family

[44:50] development. The district is

[44:52] intended to accommodate home

[44:53] office conversions at the edges

[44:55] of existing residential

[44:57] neighborhoods. The proposed

[44:58] request is compatible with the

[45:00] residential development pattern

[45:01] of the area, and would

[45:02] accommodate reuse of that

[45:04] existing single family home on

[45:06] the site. Proposals. Also

[45:08] consistent with forward to 2045

[45:09] recommendations to create

[45:11] compatible transitions between

[45:14] different land uses. This was

[45:15] heard by the Planning Board at

[45:16] their meeting in JULY. Uh,

[45:17] there was one speaker in

[45:19] opposition, primarily concerned

[45:20] with the additional business

[45:21] development along the country

[45:23] Club Road corridor. I believe,

[45:25] specifically related to traffic

[45:27] concerns. Uh, following the

[45:28] public hearing of the, uh, the

[45:29] planning board did voted

[45:30] unanimously to recommend

[45:31] approval of this request to

[45:33] council. And with that, I stand

[45:35] ready to answer any questions.

[45:39] MR. Murphy. Good morning. Thank

[45:43] you, MR. Murphy. Um, so what

[45:43] are the what can

[45:44] t what are the

[45:46] limitations of moving from what

[45:49] is currently to what the Noel

[45:51] what are the major limitations?

[45:52] Because we spoke earlier that

[45:54] there are things they just

[45:54] can

[45:56] t do. They can do. Can you

[45:57] explain that a little bit in

[45:59] detail? As much as you can.

[46:00] Under this request, they are

[46:02] specifically asking for a

[46:03] limited number of uses or

[46:04] asking for an office use,

[46:06] asking for a couple of

[46:07] different kinds of adult

[46:09] daycare uses. They

[46:09] re asking

[46:11] for a couple of different kinds

[46:12] of child daycare uses, and

[46:12] they

[46:13] re asking to keep the

[46:15] existing single family home as

[46:17] a potential use. But it can

[46:19] only be one of those four

[46:21] things. All of us residence,

[46:23] daycare center, or adult

[46:26] daycare provider, or a

[46:28] combination thereof. Of course,

[46:29] if they keep the existing home,

[46:30] they would have to make sure it

[46:32] meets, uh, non-residential

[46:34] code. Uh, if they

[46:34] re going to

[46:35] have it as any type of

[46:37] occupancy other than single

[46:39] family, um, there are no

[46:40] conditions of approval related

[46:42] to this. As far as keeping the

[46:42] home, we don

[46:43] t really have

[46:45] anything that would kind of if

[46:47] you remove it and you violated

[46:48] the zoning condition, there

[46:48] s

[46:49] not really a remedy to put the

[46:51] house back if you tear it down.

[46:52] Given the limited nature of the

[46:54] uses that are being requested,

[46:54] I don

[46:55] t think it

[46:56] s likely that

[46:58] the house is to be torn down

[47:00] and rebuilt for something else.

[47:01] Perhaps the petitioner could

[47:02] speak to that, but again, it

[47:03] wouldn

[47:06] t be binding. But very

[47:08] limited frame of uses that are

[47:10] being requested here. I know

[47:12] that one of the concerns of the

[47:14] people who are opposed to this

[47:16] is around the traffic. Um, is

[47:18] there a limitation of how many

[47:22] cars can go into this proposed,

[47:24] zoning? Not as part of this,

[47:24] because there

[47:25] s no site

[47:27] specific development plan. The

[47:28] uses that are here and

[47:29] obviously a child daycare

[47:30] center would be somewhat

[47:32] limiting by the square footage

[47:35] of the structure. Uh, and

[47:36] office, you know, again,

[47:37] generally speaking, of all

[47:39] pesticides would generate a lot

[47:40] of traffic, but there would be

[47:42] any guarantees or assurances

[47:44] related to traffic because it

[47:44] s

[47:46] a limited use request, can

[47:46] t

[47:49] speak to the fact that the

[47:51] existing traffic count in that

[47:52] area on Country Club is at

[47:56] 15,500, and the capacity before

[47:57] you tip over into level of

[48:00] service d is 15,800. So it is a

[48:04] heavily congested road. Thank

[48:06] you. We now will have our

[48:07] public hearing. Uh, is the

[48:11] proponent here a proponent?

[48:13] Yes. Okay. We

[48:13] ll get back to

[48:17] you. Anyone to speak for the

[48:25] proponent of okay. Yes. MR..

[48:26] Please come forward. And just

[48:27] give your name and address for

[48:29] the record. Please.

[48:31] Hello. My name is alma mater,

[48:32] and I

[48:33] m representing the House,

[48:38] 36 Oak Country Club and I don

[48:39] t

[48:40] know how to serve, but, um, we

[48:44] are, um, having concerns about

[48:46] the traffic. Uh, usually we try

[48:47] to use the house for home

[48:51] office. Um, the main point is,

[48:53] uh, well, I don

[48:53] t know what to

[48:55] say, but it is, uh, it

[48:55] s

[48:57] somebody really interesting to

[48:59] use the house for. Home office?

[48:59] It

[49:02] s a lawyer. Is, I guess it

[49:02] s

[49:03] not going to be heavy traffic.

[49:07] If it is a problem, but I don

[49:07] t

[49:08] know what I

[49:10] m say.

[49:10] Okay.

[49:13] Thank you. All right. Anyone

[49:16] else? For the proponents right

[49:18] now and ask for the opponents?

[49:19] Yes, ma

[49:20] am. State your name and

[49:22] address for the record as well.

[49:23] Hi. Um, I

[49:24] m Valerie Martin, my

[49:27] address is 417 South

[49:31] Cloverdale. And, um, I am also

[49:34] speaking today on behalf of the

[49:35] Sheffield Garden. Um

[49:38] Association. Central Garden.

[49:39] Sorry, there

[49:39] s a Sheffield

[49:40] garden club that I

[49:41] m a part of,

[49:43] as well as the Sheffield

[49:46] neighborhood. Um, Association.

[49:49] And I have a list of names of

[49:51] people that I spoke with. And

[49:51] I

[49:57] m. Copies of. Um, so as a

[49:58] lifelong resident of this

[50:00] neighborhood, um, I am also I

[50:01] m

[50:02] very happy that about the

[50:04] office building that is there

[50:07] on the office across Harper

[50:08] Street. If you look at your map

[50:11] and I will have to say three

[50:12] things, your pictures must have

[50:14] been taken. I don

[50:15] t know what

[50:17] time of day it showed no

[50:22] traffic at all. And, um, the

[50:23] office building that is built

[50:26] there was heavily contested by

[50:28] the entire neighborhood at that

[50:29] time. It was during the 90s. It

[50:31] was a tie three three vote. And

[50:34] our previous mayor nine was tie

[50:36] breaker. But, um, and there

[50:38] used to be a surveying company

[50:40] that was down the street. They

[50:43] actually wrote a report that

[50:46] talked about how, um, damaging

[50:48] that office building was going

[50:50] to be. Our neighborhood because

[50:52] of water runoff, which is a

[50:53] problem that we it

[50:54] s our

[50:55] neighborhood is downhill from

[50:57] the country club. So we

[50:58] constantly have a problem with

[51:00] the runoff. I do know that the

[51:02] state just passed a law about

[51:02] the parking, so that

[51:03] s great

[51:05] that the permeable surfaces

[51:06] surfaces won

[51:07] t be a problem

[51:10] here. Um, but I will have to

[51:13] say that the neighborhood, um,

[51:16] surveying with the 500 radius,

[51:20] um, and I find that very, um,

[51:22] not substantial to get a good

[51:24] opinion about what the people

[51:26] in that area will be impacted

[51:29] by this development. Um, I

[51:31] understand and appreciate my

[51:33] council person asking me

[51:34] directly about the, um,

[51:36] furthering of, like what? That

[51:38] you know, what the, um,

[51:39] limitations are on that

[51:42] building. And, um, just my

[51:44] concern and yesterday, it might

[51:46] just be an office for one

[51:48] lawyer, but who

[51:49] s to say that

[51:49] they don

[51:51] t care now and then?

[51:52] Like you said, there

[51:52] s nothing

[51:54] really good about that. And

[51:55] then next thing you know, it

[51:55] s

[51:57] like a bait shop or whatever,

[51:59] because that is high density. I

[52:01] understand the high density

[52:03] area stops right there. So

[52:03] we

[52:05] re right on the border. Maps

[52:08] also do not show that it is the

[52:13] entrance for southbound False

[52:15] Creek. And the off ramp of

[52:17] House Creek on Harper Street.

[52:17] There

[52:19] s two streets that Harbor

[52:23] Street does not have a direct

[52:24] intersection. Do not meet up.

[52:25] So it

[52:26] s an offset intersection.

[52:26] That

[52:28] s where the light is. All

[52:29] the residents that live in that

[52:31] neighborhood cannot leave the

[52:33] neighborhood except for through

[52:35] that light. There

[52:36] s no turning

[52:37] on that light. You already

[52:38] discussed about how much

[52:40] traffic is. It? It

[52:40] s almost an

[52:43] access to that area. The other

[52:45] street comes down that borders

[52:47] that house is, um, political

[52:50] drive, which is my street, and

[52:52] I cannot leave my neighborhood

[52:54] going on with Gail because the

[52:57] traffic is such so backed up

[52:58] there. There

[52:59] s, you know, one

[53:01] thing that goes east on Country

[53:02] Club Road, one lane that goes

[53:03] west on Country Road. There

[53:04] s a

[53:06] turning point in the middle.

[53:08] That turning lane is often

[53:11] backed up between, um, Arbor

[53:15] Street and the street exits all

[53:17] the way down past Colonial

[53:19] Drive. So you cannot exit

[53:21] Brookdale Drive going either

[53:22] way because there

[53:22] s turning

[53:25] there that is hacked. Also, if

[53:27] I wanted to go across Country

[53:29] Club Road straight to

[53:30] Cloverdale, the other north

[53:32] side of Cloverdale, there is no

[53:33] way to do that through the

[53:37] traffic there. Again, I totally

[53:38] understand that somebody wants

[53:40] to put an office there. I think

[53:40] that there

[53:41] s a lot of office

[53:43] space throughout the city that

[53:46] you could find to pursue that.

[53:48] Um, we are talking about that.

[53:51] We need housing. So for people

[53:53] to live in. So I think that

[53:53] it

[53:55] s been a house for since the

[53:57] 40s, it should continue to be a

[53:58] house that is right at the

[54:01] border of the. I

[54:01] m sorry, I

[54:01] m

[54:03] not familiar with the terms,

[54:03] but it

[54:05] s right at the border of

[54:06] where you

[54:08] re going to stop the

[54:10] density of business on country

[54:14] road going forward on the, you

[54:16] know, going into like across

[54:20] our street, into the. That they

[54:23] would never put that into. So

[54:24] thank you for your time. Thank

[54:26] you for all your services. Um,

[54:29] and I apologize because, um,

[54:30] that I wasn

[54:31] t at the previous

[54:33] meetings, but I have called

[54:35] every day. As soon as the sign

[54:36] went up, I called. I

[54:37] ve tried

[54:38] to be as civically engaged as

[54:40] possible. I went around and

[54:41] surveyed my neighbors as much

[54:43] as possible about the traffic

[54:45] and about the situation. Um,

[54:47] but I just I find that it

[54:47] s

[54:50] just excessive to to make this

[54:53] decision in favor of that. And

[54:54] thank you for your time.

[54:55] Appreciate you listening to me.

[54:58] Thank you very much. Anyone

[54:59] else for the opposition? Yes,

[55:07] sir.

[55:09] I live in Cliff Moore across

[55:12] the street. Uh, at the time of

[55:14] this Planning Board hearing, I

[55:16] was actually living in Ardmore.

[55:18] So my first knowledge of this

[55:21] was the letter I got. Say, I

[55:24] live with within 500ft. And to

[55:28] be adhering tonight. Uh, I

[55:30] talked to planning about this

[55:33] and my concern is, is not what

[55:33] we

[55:35] re being told is going to be

[55:37] there. But in answer to my

[55:40] question, yes, the House can be

[55:42] torn down and an office built,

[55:45] and that office can be 40ft

[55:50] high. So my concern is not

[55:52] necessarily what is being

[55:55] proposed, but the potential of

[55:58] what this is resolved can

[55:59] happen. Thank you.

[56:02] Thank you sir. Anyone else for

[56:07] the opposition? Seeing anyone,

[56:08] in the proponents, you can have

[56:09] three minutes for any rebuttal

[56:10] you

[56:19] d like to present.

[56:21] Um, I wanted to mention

[56:22] something a little bit ago. I

[56:24] know there are some concerns

[56:26] about traffic, but one of the

[56:27] things that made me think about

[56:29] it, uh, I just received a

[56:32] letter, um, maybe two weeks ago

[56:33] about the going to tear the

[56:35] bridge down, the one that are

[56:37] concerning about it. And for

[56:38] that, maybe I don

[56:39] t know if

[56:39] they

[56:40] re going to do remodels

[56:41] for the bridge. They

[56:41] re going

[56:44] to be make the bridge more, I

[56:46] mean, concerned, I mean, do

[56:47] something to remove to do that

[56:50] traffic more easy.

[56:52] Okay. The bridge over the

[56:52] river.

[56:55] Yeah. The one they saw scream..

[56:56] Right.

[56:56] Thank you.

[56:57] Thank you.

[56:59] And thank you so much for your

[57:01] help.

[57:01] Thank you.

[57:04] Oh my GOD. The address is 3606

[57:06] Country Club Road.

[57:09] Okay. Thank you. Ah. Anyone

[57:12] else on rebuttal? Okay. Thank

[57:14] you. The opposition would have

[57:15] three minutes for rebuttal. If

[57:15] you

[57:16] d like to add anything else.

[57:21] Okay. You

[57:23] re good. There. Okay.

[57:24] All right. Thank you. I

[57:24] ll

[57:25] declare the public hearing

[57:27] closed. And MISTER Murphy

[57:27] s

[57:29] already given basically the

[57:31] report of the planning board. I

[57:33] recognize a council member,

[57:34] Andre Baldwin.

[57:34] If you don

[57:34] t mind, I

[57:35] d like a

[57:36] couple more questions, if you

[57:37] don

[57:38] t mind for MR. Murphy. Yes.

[57:40] Thank you, sir. MR. Murphy, um,

[57:41] there were a couple of things I

[57:42] would like to just kind of make

[57:43] sure that we

[57:47] re clear on, um,

[57:49] if this if this, this rezoning

[57:54] goes through, um, the the

[57:54] there

[57:55] s a possibility of

[57:58] allowing this to be a house

[58:00] with a business attached to it.

[58:05] Is that correct?

[58:06] Let me make sure I understand

[58:06] what you

[58:07] re asking. Could could

[58:09] it be used jointly as a

[58:10] residence in an office?

[58:12] Yes. Okay. And from the

[58:13] conversation that I

[58:14] ve had with

[58:15] the person who

[58:15] s making that

[58:17] proposal, that is what is being

[58:19] proposed. Okay, um, and then

[58:22] there was a question about if

[58:24] this if this goes through

[58:26] building it one day, turning it

[58:29] into a larger office space, if

[58:31] this if this does go through,

[58:33] if there was proposed, if they

[58:34] wanted to make it a larger

[58:35] office space, it would have to

[58:36] come back to be rezoned. Is

[58:37] that correct?

[58:38] Incorrect.

[58:39] Okay. Please can you expand

[58:39] that.

[58:39] Because it

[58:39] s, it

[58:41] s a as long as

[58:43] they are not changing the uses.

[58:44] In other words, if this were to

[58:45] get approved tonight, they

[58:45] ve

[58:47] asked for offices, adult

[58:49] daycare or home, adult daycare

[58:51] center, child care home drop in

[58:53] single family residential. As

[58:53] long as it

[58:56] s one of those uses.

[58:56] There

[58:59] s nothing that requires

[59:01] that building to stay there. So

[59:03] if this were approved tonight

[59:06] and they move in there and they

[59:07] have an office for several

[59:08] years and then decide, hey, you

[59:10] know, I think we could do a

[59:12] bigger office. And they tear

[59:14] the building down and build a

[59:17] two three story office,

[59:18] assuming they could fill in a

[59:20] lot with the setbacks, they

[59:22] could do that, and it would not

[59:23] have to come back before this

[59:23] board because it

[59:24] s a limited

[59:26] use request, not a special use

[59:28] request that ties it to a site

[59:30] plan, a specific development

[59:32] approval. That

[59:32] s that

[59:32] s not

[59:34] what this does. This is limited

[59:35] use. So you

[59:35] re just looking at

[59:37] the uses.

[59:46] Okay. Thank you. Okay. Um,

[59:46] let

[59:50] s get the right one. Well,

[59:51] I don

[59:52] t know the deal. Uh, I

[59:52] guess I

[59:53] ll go ahead. I move for

[59:55] approval of one. The statement

[59:56] of consistency for the move,

[59:58] the approval of this item. And

[1:00:01] two, 3693.

[1:00:02] Thank you. Is there a second?

[1:00:04] Second. Second. Counselor.

[1:00:06] Scipio. Councilmember Clark and

[1:00:08] Councilmember Joyner. Yes. I am

[1:00:09] the COUNCILMAN Across the

[1:00:11] street. I don

[1:00:12] t have any

[1:00:13] trouble. If someone wanted to

[1:00:16] use the house as an office, but

[1:00:17] if it was me, I would have put

[1:00:19] restrictions on what you could

[1:00:23] do. Uh, this is a third of an

[1:00:24] acre. I don

[1:00:25] t know how big an

[1:00:26] office building you could put

[1:00:28] in. Raleigh just did away with

[1:00:29] all the parking requirements.

[1:00:32] So, um, since there are not any

[1:00:34] restrictions, you could tear it

[1:00:36] down and put up a larger office

[1:00:37] building. I will have to vote

[1:00:38] no. That

[1:00:40] s where. Joyner.

[1:00:43] Thank you. Mayor. I, um, I

[1:00:46] really feel that in most cases,

[1:00:47] someone should be able to do

[1:00:48] what they want to do with their

[1:00:51] property. But in a residential

[1:00:54] neighborhood, and as the woman

[1:00:58] said, uh, we are strapped for

[1:01:00] spaces to put housing. And

[1:01:04] under the original idea of a

[1:01:05] plan for this property, it

[1:01:08] would be great. Um, because it

[1:01:10] could be a resident and an

[1:01:11] office. But that

[1:01:12] s no

[1:01:14] guarantee. Five years, five

[1:01:17] months or 50 years. But the

[1:01:18] thing that we know, five

[1:01:20] months, five years or 50 is

[1:01:23] that we need housing. So for

[1:01:25] that, as much as I believe

[1:01:29] entrepreneurship is a a

[1:01:31] stronghold and something that

[1:01:33] needs to be, I would have to

[1:01:35] vote no for this.

[1:01:38] Okay. Thank you very much. Just

[1:01:39] do we have a motion to approve

[1:01:40] the rezoning? All those in

[1:01:41] favor of the rezoning, please

[1:01:43] vote yes. Anyone opposed? Vote

[1:01:55] no. Motion passes 5 to 3. Five

[1:01:57] in favor of three. Opposed.

[1:01:59] Thank you. Councilmember Bone.

[1:02:02] All right. Item g ten.

[1:02:04] Item g ten. Public hearing and

[1:02:05] consideration of a zoning

[1:02:07] petition of Andrea Adams

[1:02:11] Strickland w 3694 from Rs 12 to

[1:02:14] hbl properties located on North

[1:02:16] on the northeast intersection

[1:02:18] of University Parkway and Laura

[1:02:19] Avenue, containing

[1:02:21] approximately 0.9 acres.

[1:02:24] Located in the northeast Ward.

[1:02:26] Thank you. Is there anyone in

[1:02:28] the chamber who is opposed to

[1:02:33] this rezoning? See no one. I

[1:02:34] ll

[1:02:35] declare the public hearing

[1:02:36] closed and recognized.

[1:02:40] Councilmember Burke.

[1:02:42] I move for the approval of one.

[1:02:43] The statement of consistency

[1:02:45] for the approval of this item.

[1:02:49] And two w-3694.

[1:02:51] Second second by Mayor Pro Tem

[1:02:55] Adams. Any discussion questions?

[1:02:56] No. Those opposed the motion.

[1:02:58] Please indicate by voting yes.

[1:03:02] Anyone opposed? Vote no. And

[1:03:03] that is unanimous. Thank you.

[1:03:07] Councilmember Burke. Item g 11.

[1:03:09] Item g 11 public hearing and

[1:03:10] Consideration of an Elected

[1:03:12] Body. Special Use Permit

[1:03:14] petition of w Sanders, Moseley

[1:03:17] and Elizabeth Moseley. W 3691.

[1:03:19] Property is located on the west

[1:03:21] side of Chatham Road, north of

[1:03:23] Buxton Street, containing

[1:03:26] approximately 1.93 acres.

[1:03:28] Northwest Ward.

[1:03:30] Thank you. As mentioned, this

[1:03:32] is a public hearing regarding

[1:03:32] the petitioner

[1:03:33] s application

[1:03:35] for a special use permit for

[1:03:36] the establishment of an outdoor

[1:03:39] enclosure for a kennel, indoor

[1:03:41] use, and a g1 zoning district.

[1:03:43] The process of approving the

[1:03:44] issuance of a special use

[1:03:47] permit is quasi judicial, which

[1:03:48] requires speakers for this item

[1:03:50] to speak under oath. Speakers

[1:03:52] should also rely only on their

[1:03:54] own information, and not based

[1:03:55] on remarks on what someone else

[1:03:58] has said or knows the applicant

[1:03:59] or other witnesses have the

[1:04:00] right to ask questions of each

[1:04:03] other. All testimony and

[1:04:04] evidence relate must relate to

[1:04:06] the four findings of fact that

[1:04:08] the Council must make as it

[1:04:10] relates to this quasi judicial

[1:04:12] hearing. Council is prohibited

[1:04:14] from considering opinion

[1:04:15] testimony from non-expert

[1:04:17] Witnesses, in particular

[1:04:19] testimony as to how the

[1:04:21] proposed use would impact the

[1:04:22] value of neighboring

[1:04:23] properties. Additionally,

[1:04:25] counsel must only consider

[1:04:26] evidence provided at the

[1:04:28] hearing. Communications with

[1:04:29] members of the City Council

[1:04:30] outside of the hearing are

[1:04:32] prohibited and must be

[1:04:34] disclosed if. The four findings

[1:04:36] of fact are going to be shown

[1:04:38] on the screen here in a moment.

[1:04:42] I think. Um, the process

[1:04:44] requires that the City council

[1:04:46] issue a special permit only

[1:04:48] when it is able to make an

[1:04:49] affirmative finding. As to each

[1:04:51] of the four findings. The

[1:04:53] applicant has the burden of

[1:04:54] proof as to the second and

[1:04:57] third findings. The opposition

[1:04:58] has the burden of proof with

[1:05:00] respect to the first and fourth

[1:05:02] finding. Uh, anyone who wishes

[1:05:04] to speak on this item should

[1:05:05] come forward right now and be

[1:05:21] sworn in.

[1:05:31] Do I come up now? Yes.

[1:05:33] All opposition..

[1:05:33] Well, anyone that

[1:05:34] s taking

[1:05:37] opposition.

[1:05:38] Opposition?

[1:05:39] Yes, everybody. That

[1:05:43] s.

[1:05:46] So you all can maybe all share.

[1:05:52] Yeah. Yeah. Well. Okay. What?

[1:05:55] Can you hold that? Um.

[1:05:56] City clerk.

[1:05:58] Left hand on the Bible?

[1:06:02] Yes. Oh, there we go. We get

[1:06:03] everybody.

[1:06:03] He

[1:06:04] s an attorney. He doesn

[1:06:04] t

[1:06:05] have to be sworn.

[1:06:06] Okay.

[1:06:06] All right.

[1:06:09] So do you solemnly swear or

[1:06:10] affirm that the statements that

[1:06:12] you are about to make are the

[1:06:13] truth, the whole truth, and

[1:06:14] nothing but the truth, so help

[1:06:15] you GOD?

[1:06:16] I do.

[1:06:17] All right.

[1:06:19] All right. Thank you very much.

[1:06:20] Council members, I

[1:06:20] d asked at

[1:06:22] this point if any of you had

[1:06:24] any ex-parte communications on

[1:06:26] this item, and if if so, would

[1:06:27] you disclose it? Councilmember

[1:06:28] Hall?

[1:06:29] Um, thank you, Mayor Jones.

[1:06:30] I did.

[1:06:33] Receive an email on Friday,

[1:06:36] AUGUST the 14th, 2026 at 4:21

[1:06:39] P.M. I am happy to share that

[1:06:41] email for the record. Um, I did

[1:06:43] not respond to the email, but,

[1:06:46] um, I need to disclose it based

[1:06:48] off of what you just read. So

[1:06:48] I

[1:06:50] m happy to read the the email

[1:06:52] in its entirety. City attorney,

[1:06:53] if you would like me to or just

[1:06:55] to note, um, who the email was

[1:06:57] from and the date and time

[1:06:58] spent.

[1:06:59] Um, Councilmember Hall, if you

[1:07:01] could just, um, summarize the

[1:07:02] email and then give it to the

[1:07:04] clerk for the record.

[1:07:05] Um, I think that would be

[1:07:05] sufficient.

[1:07:08] Okay. Um, so I did receive an

[1:07:11] email from a constituent, uh, a

[1:07:13] resident of the northwest Ward.

[1:07:16] Um, Frank Frye, on Friday,

[1:07:19] AUGUST 14th at 4:21 P.M.. Um,

[1:07:20] wanting to express his

[1:07:22] opposition to the outdoor

[1:07:25] kennel proposal at 740 Chatham

[1:07:28] Road. Uh, and that he knows

[1:07:30] several property owners on West

[1:07:31] End Boulevard overlooking the

[1:07:35] site, uh, who also oppose the

[1:07:39] proposed use.

[1:07:41] Okay. Matter of record. Thank

[1:07:43] you. And Councillor Warner.

[1:07:45] Thank you. Mayor. Um, before,

[1:07:46] uh, council meeting started

[1:07:49] this evening, I did encounter

[1:07:51] and speak cordially with one of

[1:07:54] the residents of that area who

[1:07:57] is here for, uh, to oppose it.

[1:07:59] We did not have a conversation

[1:08:04] about it. Um, I was told why

[1:08:06] they were here. I acknowledged

[1:08:08] that, and we moved on.

[1:08:09] Okay. Thank you. COUNCILMAN

[1:08:11] Clark. I go to church with the

[1:08:13] petitioner. Petitioner,

[1:08:15] whatever, but he and I have not

[1:08:18] discussed it. Thank you for it.

[1:08:18] All right, we

[1:08:19] ll move forward

[1:08:21] then. Um, Councilor Murphy, you

[1:08:22] want to Council member MR.

[1:08:25] Murphy? We have. You take a pay

[1:08:25] cut.

[1:08:27] Oh, yeah.

[1:08:28] See that for it, please?

[1:08:31] Yes. Uh, the this is a request

[1:08:33] to, uh, for a special use

[1:08:34] permit for 1.93 acres located

[1:08:35] on the west side of the Chatham

[1:08:37] Road, north of Buxton Street,

[1:08:38] and again located in the

[1:08:39] northwest ward. It

[1:08:40] s an elected

[1:08:41] body. Special use permit for

[1:08:43] the establishment of the

[1:08:45] outdoor enclosure. Enclosure

[1:08:47] for a kennel, indoor use in gis

[1:08:48] zoning district. And I want to

[1:08:50] make that distinction because a

[1:08:52] kennel indoor use is allowed in

[1:08:55] gi zoning by right. Uh, but

[1:08:55] there there

[1:08:56] s a proposal for an

[1:08:58] outdoor run as part of the

[1:08:59] indoor kennel. And that

[1:08:59] s what

[1:09:01] requires the special use

[1:09:02] permit. So this is not a

[1:09:02] rezoning. It

[1:09:03] s a special use

[1:09:04] permit for the establishment of

[1:09:07] the outdoor kennel with outdoor

[1:09:10] run as part of the kennel. I

[1:09:10] m

[1:09:10] not going to go over the

[1:09:12] findings again. I will get to

[1:09:15] those at the conclusion. Uh,

[1:09:17] again, we treat this similar to

[1:09:18] a rezoning case. So we do kind

[1:09:21] of show you the property in its

[1:09:22] situation. On the growth

[1:09:25] management area plan map. It is

[1:09:26] located within gma two, in the

[1:09:28] urban neighborhoods just on the

[1:09:29] fringe of gma one, but it is

[1:09:32] located within gma two, which

[1:09:34] is urban neighborhoods. This is

[1:09:36] a subject property highlighted

[1:09:37] in yellow. Again, you do see it

[1:09:41] is on the north side of where

[1:09:42] West End Boulevard. Kind of,

[1:09:46] uh, traverses the area. Uh, it

[1:09:48] is on the edge of the Ho

[1:09:49] district, but not in the Ho

[1:09:52] district. Chatham Road is a

[1:09:53] road that kind of transitions

[1:09:55] from, uh, I think Crystal

[1:09:59] towers and the, um, substation.

[1:10:02] And it kind of goes into the

[1:10:05] traditional industrial area to

[1:10:06] the north there along Northwest

[1:10:09] Boulevard, you have the Heinz

[1:10:11] plant there on the right. Uh,

[1:10:12] this was an old industrial

[1:10:14] building. Its last use that we

[1:10:16] have recorded as an approved

[1:10:17] use was as a church, probably

[1:10:20] in the in the 2000 through the

[1:10:21] early 20 tens. I

[1:10:22] m not sure if

[1:10:22] it

[1:10:23] s been vacant, how long it

[1:10:23] s

[1:10:25] been vacant, but it had been

[1:10:26] used as a church. But again,

[1:10:28] you do see there is a a lot of

[1:10:30] various zoning classifications

[1:10:31] in the area. But again, this is

[1:10:35] on ge General Industrial. The

[1:10:36] aerial photo there again you

[1:10:40] see the um the area primarily

[1:10:42] residential to the south and

[1:10:45] southwest, uh, industrial and

[1:10:49] uh, redevelopment of previously

[1:10:51] used industrial areas there on

[1:10:53] to the north, uh, on the west

[1:10:55] side of Chatham Road. Again,

[1:10:56] you see, there is an existing

[1:10:57] building here. You

[1:10:58] ll see those

[1:11:01] in the site, photos. Uh, this

[1:11:03] is the subject property shown

[1:11:05] on the south central

[1:11:06] Winston-Salem area Plan update.

[1:11:08] It does recognize this again as

[1:11:10] an institutional use, because

[1:11:12] whenever the plan was done, at

[1:11:14] least probably 11 years ago,

[1:11:16] this was still being used as a

[1:11:17] church, even though it was

[1:11:18] zoned industrial. But again, it

[1:11:20] is adjacent to an extensive

[1:11:21] area zoned for light industrial

[1:11:25] and general industrial. Uh,

[1:11:27] this is looking south along

[1:11:28] Chatham Road. The subject

[1:11:29] property is to the right. You

[1:11:31] do see the special use permit

[1:11:33] sign posted there along Chatham

[1:11:35] Road in the background. There

[1:11:38] you see the Mac and the Winston

[1:11:39] Tower building. You don

[1:11:39] t

[1:11:41] really see Crystal towers from

[1:11:42] here, but it is just up the

[1:11:45] hill. Uh, this is looking north

[1:11:46] along Chatham Road. The subject

[1:11:48] property is to the left. You

[1:11:49] see the railroad? Um, they

[1:11:50] re

[1:11:51] about the middle of the image.

[1:11:52] You see the railroad crossing

[1:11:54] on Chatham Road? Um, the

[1:11:58] signage, uh, this is behind the

[1:11:59] building in question. This is

[1:12:01] the location of the proposed

[1:12:02] outdoor enclosure. Again, this

[1:12:04] is an existing building, zoned

[1:12:06] industrial allows the use. But

[1:12:08] this is where the outdoor

[1:12:09] kennel would take place on the

[1:12:10] backside of that building. The

[1:12:14] outdoor enclosure. Um, this is

[1:12:15] looking south from the outdoor

[1:12:18] enclosure. Uh, looking into the

[1:12:19] West End neighborhood on top of

[1:12:21] the hill. So again, they

[1:12:22] re

[1:12:23] single family homes up there

[1:12:26] that would look down onto the

[1:12:28] rear of this project and

[1:12:31] property. Uh, this is looking

[1:12:33] southeast from the back of the

[1:12:34] paved area. Enclosure would be

[1:12:35] on the left side of the image.

[1:12:36] And again, the West End

[1:12:37] Historic District is on top of

[1:12:41] the hill. And this is just

[1:12:42] looking at the main parking

[1:12:44] area there on the south side of

[1:12:45] that existing industrial

[1:12:46] building. But that

[1:12:46] s where the

[1:12:48] hill is. That goes up to the

[1:12:51] west end. Uh, this is a site

[1:12:53] plan. Uh, again, it

[1:12:54] s basically

[1:12:55] most of it is cleaning the site

[1:12:57] up and re utilizing the

[1:12:59] existing facility, there MAY be

[1:13:00] a slight expansion of the

[1:13:02] parking on that south side. I

[1:13:05] will let the, uh, petitioner

[1:13:07] and, uh, folks representing the

[1:13:08] petitioner speak to that. I

[1:13:09] can

[1:13:10] t 100% say whether or not

[1:13:12] this is all existing parking on

[1:13:14] that south side or not. You do

[1:13:15] see some, I believe that

[1:13:15] s some

[1:13:18] proposed asphalt. Uh, excuse

[1:13:20] me? Concrete walkways. And then

[1:13:22] you do see the proposed outdoor

[1:13:23] enclosure labeled there on the

[1:13:24] right side of that building.

[1:13:24] It

[1:13:26] s a 5100 square foot

[1:13:27] enclosure, along with some

[1:13:30] fencing and other things, uh,

[1:13:32] specified by the Udo. Again,

[1:13:36] there are, um, uh, does show,

[1:13:37] uh, maintaining the existing

[1:13:38] vegetation. There isn

[1:13:39] t a

[1:13:41] requirement for a buffer yard

[1:13:42] in between industrial zoning

[1:13:45] and residential zoning. Uh, so

[1:13:46] again, they can get credit for

[1:13:48] existing vegetation and

[1:13:51] supplement that as they need to.

[1:13:53] And looking at those findings

[1:13:54] that were mentioned before the

[1:13:57] hearing, uh, the first finding

[1:13:58] is that the use would not

[1:14:00] materially endanger the public

[1:14:01] health or safety if located,

[1:14:02] were proposed and developed,

[1:14:03] according to the application

[1:14:04] and plan, as submitted and

[1:14:07] approved. In response to that,

[1:14:09] staff says that yes, this can

[1:14:10] be found. The subject request

[1:14:12] would not materially endanger

[1:14:13] the public health or safety due

[1:14:15] to relatively low traffic

[1:14:17] generation, use of an existing

[1:14:19] building and access points, and

[1:14:20] compliance with operational

[1:14:22] standards for an indoor kennel

[1:14:25] with outdoor enclosure use.

[1:14:28] Established in section 5.2.4,

[1:14:30] one of the Udo. Further, the

[1:14:31] presumption is that the use is

[1:14:33] permitted in the if. If the use

[1:14:34] is permitted in the zoning

[1:14:36] district, it is not a threat to

[1:14:37] public health or safety unless

[1:14:40] proven otherwise. Under two

[1:14:41] that the use meets all required

[1:14:43] conditions and specifications.

[1:14:44] The finding there is. Yes. The

[1:14:45] subject request will meet the

[1:14:49] minimum requirements of the Udo

[1:14:51] and it did go to the Planning

[1:14:52] Board. Who did certify that it

[1:14:54] does meet those requirements.

[1:14:54] And that

[1:14:55] ll be on the last

[1:14:58] slide. Three that the use will

[1:14:59] not substantially injure the

[1:15:00] value of adjoining or abutting

[1:15:02] property, or that the use is

[1:15:04] deemed a public necessity. That

[1:15:05] is not something that staff has

[1:15:07] the expertise to testify on.

[1:15:09] Uh, so and again, that

[1:15:09] s one of

[1:15:10] the findings. That is the

[1:15:12] burden of proof originally lies

[1:15:13] with the petitioner, and I

[1:15:14] believe they

[1:15:14] d have some

[1:15:15] information that would speak to

[1:15:18] that. Uh, so there is no

[1:15:20] finding from a staff level for

[1:15:23] that finding. And then finally

[1:15:24] the fourth finding that

[1:15:25] location, character and

[1:15:26] character of the use, if

[1:15:27] developed according to the

[1:15:29] application and plan submitted

[1:15:30] and approved, will be in

[1:15:31] harmony with the area in which

[1:15:33] it is to be located and in

[1:15:34] general conformity with for

[1:15:37] 2045. From a staff perspective,

[1:15:39] we find that this that this

[1:15:41] finding can be met. The request

[1:15:43] will allow the reuse of an

[1:15:44] existing vacant building in a

[1:15:46] zoning district, and is

[1:15:47] generally consistent with the

[1:15:49] industrial character of the

[1:15:51] surrounding area. The proposed

[1:15:52] outdoor enclosure is located

[1:15:53] behind. The existing building

[1:15:55] includes buffering elements

[1:15:56] intended to mitigate visual and

[1:15:58] auditory impacts on nearby

[1:16:00] residential properties. The

[1:16:01] request would support the

[1:16:02] redevelopment of an

[1:16:03] underutilized industrial site,

[1:16:04] consistent with the general

[1:16:05] recommendations of forward

[1:16:07] 2045, and again, the

[1:16:09] presumption is that if the use

[1:16:10] is permitted in the zoning

[1:16:11] district, it is in harmony with

[1:16:12] the area. Unless proven

[1:16:15] otherwise. As far as the

[1:16:16] recommendation, I

[1:16:17] ve gone over

[1:16:18] the four findings the

[1:16:19] establishment of an outdoor

[1:16:21] enclosure for a kennel, indoor

[1:16:23] use requires the issuance of a

[1:16:24] special use permit from the

[1:16:26] elected body, uh, following a

[1:16:27] site plan review by the

[1:16:29] planning Board for the gi

[1:16:30] zoning district, the Planning

[1:16:32] Board did determine that the

[1:16:33] site plan meets all Udo

[1:16:35] requirements. On JUNE 11th of

[1:16:38] 2026, so the next steps are to

[1:16:39] hold a public hearing, which

[1:16:39] we

[1:16:41] re doing now, and then make

[1:16:42] a determination regarding those

[1:16:44] four findings. And based on

[1:16:46] that either issue or deny the

[1:16:48] special use permit request. And

[1:16:48] with that, I

[1:16:49] m glad to answer

[1:16:50] any questions.

[1:16:54] Questions. MR. Murphy? Yeah.

[1:16:55] Councilmember Clark.

[1:16:58] This is currently zoned gi.

[1:16:58] Correct.

[1:17:00] Could you give some examples of

[1:17:02] what could be built in a gi

[1:17:06] zoning?

[1:17:08] Uh, manufacturing a

[1:17:10] manufacturing, b manufacturing

[1:17:11] c, manufacturing c allows the

[1:17:12] highest that

[1:17:13] s the most intense

[1:17:15] form of manufacturing. You

[1:17:17] could have an abattoir, which

[1:17:19] is essentially a like a

[1:17:21] meatpacking plant. Uh, you

[1:17:22] could do all kinds of things

[1:17:24] under that existing gi zoning.

[1:17:25] If you hold on a second, I

[1:17:25] ll

[1:17:26] actually get to the table of

[1:17:27] permitted uses. I

[1:17:27] m not sure if

[1:17:28] that

[1:17:32] s enough. Um, as far as

[1:17:35] the heavy industrial type uses,

[1:17:38] um, manufacturing a, b, c

[1:17:41] asphalt and concrete plant, um,

[1:17:43] borrow site, hazardous waste

[1:17:45] management, meatpacking plant,

[1:17:47] a mine and quarry, a recycling

[1:17:49] plant, storage and salvage

[1:17:50] yard.

[1:17:52] Thank you.

[1:17:52] And I

[1:17:53] ve never heard of that

[1:17:53] word.

[1:17:55] You used an abattoir?

[1:17:55] Yeah.

[1:17:55] I

[1:17:56] ve learned.

[1:17:56] It

[1:17:57] s not used much anymore.

[1:18:00] Slaughterhouse. Customer.

[1:18:02] Recipient?

[1:18:03] Yes.

[1:18:07] MR. Murphy? Um, the. First

[1:18:09] requirement said something

[1:18:14] about the planning board. There

[1:18:16] was no material endangerment to

[1:18:16] public.

[1:18:18] Health or safety.

[1:18:19] How did the planning.

[1:18:21] Board?

[1:18:21] This is staff

[1:18:23] s analysis. I

[1:18:24] know the planning board. The

[1:18:26] planning board only certifies

[1:18:27] whether or not it meets you

[1:18:29] their requirements. Remember,

[1:18:30] we can only hold one public

[1:18:31] hearing. So this is the only

[1:18:33] place where the public hearing

[1:18:34] is held.

[1:18:34] So.

[1:18:35] Giving the staff

[1:18:38] s assessment,

[1:18:45] how did you look at audible? Uh,

[1:18:50] situations with dogs barking?

[1:18:50] And again.

[1:18:51] You

[1:18:52] re actually making the

[1:18:53] findings of fact. We

[1:18:53] re just

[1:18:55] providing supporting

[1:18:56] documentation and our

[1:18:57] recommendation on how we feel

[1:18:59] like it would meet that. Again,

[1:19:01] we have noise ordinances. We

[1:19:02] have things in place that kind

[1:19:03] of address noise. There

[1:19:04] s not

[1:19:06] anything specific related to a

[1:19:07] kennel indoor, except for the

[1:19:08] fact that they have to get a

[1:19:09] special use permit from the

[1:19:10] elected body.

[1:19:12] But this is the outdoor kennel.

[1:19:14] This is for outdoor runs. It

[1:19:14] s

[1:19:15] not an outdoor kennel.

[1:19:16] Okay.

[1:19:17] So basically there are

[1:19:20] provisions for an outdoor run

[1:19:22] that you have to have. Staff

[1:19:23] has to be out there with the

[1:19:24] dogs. It

[1:19:25] s not just a free for

[1:19:27] all running around. Now

[1:19:28] obviously, you know again I

[1:19:28] m

[1:19:29] not sure what the business

[1:19:30] model is. You can hear from the

[1:19:32] folks whenever they speak. I

[1:19:35] mean, you know, if you have 25,

[1:19:36] 30 dogs, I

[1:19:36] m sure you

[1:19:36] re going

[1:19:38] to have some barking in some

[1:19:39] play and those kind of things.

[1:19:39] But again, it

[1:19:40] s not like these

[1:19:41] animals would be left

[1:19:42] unattended.

[1:19:42] That

[1:19:44] s what I was thinking

[1:19:45] about. They were going to be

[1:19:46] left outside, but that

[1:19:46] s not

[1:19:48] the case. Thank you.

[1:19:50] All right. Thank you. We

[1:19:50] ll now

[1:19:51] hear from the proponents. You

[1:19:52] d

[1:19:53] have 15 minutes for your

[1:19:54] presentation if you state your

[1:19:57] name and address.

[1:19:59] MR. Mayor, mayor pro tem and

[1:20:01] city council. I am Brad

[1:20:01] Friesen. I

[1:20:02] m an attorney at

[1:20:03] Bell, Davis and Pit, and I

[1:20:07] represent, uh, Kelsey and Eddie

[1:20:08] Dolan and Kelsey

[1:20:09] s non-profit

[1:20:10] corporation that she formed

[1:20:10] Stella

[1:20:13] s Rescue, Inc. They have

[1:20:14] a contract to purchase this

[1:20:16] property from MR. Mosley, who

[1:20:17] s

[1:20:20] also here. Uh, I would like to

[1:20:23] start, um, and, MR. Mayor,

[1:20:26] would it be possible to, as a

[1:20:28] to meet the evidentiary

[1:20:29] requirements? I would like to

[1:20:31] question a few questions from

[1:20:34] MR. Murphy and then MISS Dolan,

[1:20:35] and then we have Luke Dickey

[1:20:37] here from Stonewall to talk

[1:20:38] about the site plan. And Rick

[1:20:41] Brandt, an appraiser. And i

[1:20:43] have a good outline. I can move

[1:20:44] through this pretty quickly,

[1:20:46] but I MAY need more time. Uh,

[1:20:47] would it be possible to ask for

[1:20:48] more time?

[1:20:49] If necessary, we

[1:20:49] d ask you to

[1:20:50] move as quickly as possible.

[1:20:52] Okay. Thank you, MR. Murphy,

[1:20:54] can I first ask you a couple of

[1:20:57] questions about the zoning and

[1:20:58] the nature of the site? First

[1:21:00] of all, you mentioned that it

[1:21:01] was previously a warehouse

[1:21:02] building or had a warehouse

[1:21:05] use. Uh, could it again be used

[1:21:08] without any permit again for

[1:21:11] warehousing and trucking under

[1:21:17] its current zoning?

[1:21:18] To answer the question, I have

[1:21:19] to go into a little bit of

[1:21:20] detail. I can

[1:21:21] t sit here and

[1:21:23] testify. I know there was a

[1:21:23] church in it. I can

[1:21:24] t testify

[1:21:25] whether or not the church ever

[1:21:26] got the proper permits, that

[1:21:27] the church got the proper

[1:21:29] permits, they would probably

[1:21:30] there would probably have to be

[1:21:33] a internal submission to the

[1:21:36] inspections division to issue a

[1:21:38] permit if the use had in fact

[1:21:39] changed. But that

[1:21:39] s not

[1:21:40] anything that would require any

[1:21:42] entitlements other than coming

[1:21:43] to our department to get them.

[1:21:44] It wouldn

[1:21:45] t need to be rezoned.

[1:21:46] Correct.

[1:21:48] And there are hourly

[1:21:49] limitations on the use of the

[1:21:51] outdoor enclosure we

[1:21:52] re seeking

[1:21:53] here under the Udo. Is that

[1:21:56] correct? And those are from 8

[1:22:00] A.M. To 6 P.M..

[1:22:01] Before I answer in the

[1:22:02] affirmative, I want to look.

[1:22:16] Yes, that sounds correct.

[1:22:16] That

[1:22:17] s correct.

[1:22:19] And while you have the Udo

[1:22:20] there, it

[1:22:21] s also a requirement

[1:22:23] of the Udo that no animals can

[1:22:24] be left unattended in the

[1:22:26] outdoor enclosure. Correct?

[1:22:26] That

[1:22:27] s correct. And animals

[1:22:29] cannot be housed outdoors.

[1:22:29] They

[1:22:30] re correct.

[1:22:30] That

[1:22:31] s correct.

[1:22:34] And so adding an outdoor run

[1:22:37] for a kennel use would not

[1:22:39] increase the the population of

[1:22:40] animals that could already be

[1:22:41] housed there because they can

[1:22:41] t

[1:22:43] be housed inutdoor

[1:22:44] enclosure. Right.

[1:22:45] Correct.

[1:22:48] And also as a matter of, uh,

[1:22:50] requirements under the Udo, the

[1:22:53] animal waste. And that MAY be

[1:22:54] deposited in the outdoor

[1:22:55] enclosure has to be managed on

[1:23:15] a daily basis, correct.

[1:23:15] I can

[1:23:17] t testify to whether that

[1:23:18] being true. That could be

[1:23:20] within the city code. I don

[1:23:20] t

[1:23:23] see it in the Udo. If you see

[1:23:23] it in there, if you

[1:23:24] ll point it

[1:23:24] out to me, I

[1:23:25] ll be glad to

[1:23:28] testify to that fact.

[1:23:34] Scoop to poop. I got two dogs.

[1:23:35] Oh.

[1:23:35] I just see.

[1:23:36] It..

[1:23:38] Correct. You are correct. It

[1:23:39] does say with animal waste

[1:23:41] being managed daily as per

[1:23:42] applicable sanitation codes and

[1:23:43] ordinances, which again I think

[1:23:46] refers back to the city code.

[1:23:51] Uh, thank you sir. You

[1:23:54] mentioned that the residential

[1:23:57] property adjacent to this site

[1:23:58] are and I can

[1:23:59] t remember your

[1:24:02] exact words, but the staff

[1:24:05] report notes that they are

[1:24:08] significantly up uphill from

[1:24:10] the this property. Right?

[1:24:11] Correct.

[1:24:13] So in terms of water runoff, we

[1:24:14] would not have water running

[1:24:16] from this enclosure. Appeal to

[1:24:18] the residential areas. That

[1:24:18] right.

[1:24:30] Correct.

[1:24:35] There was the staff report on

[1:24:40] page five at the very bottom in

[1:24:41] the analysis of conformity to

[1:24:43] plans and planning issues,

[1:24:46] notes that the existing

[1:24:48] vegetation, steep topography,

[1:24:49] placement of the enclosure area

[1:24:51] behind the existing building

[1:24:53] and the volunteered additional

[1:24:55] plantings will attenuate

[1:24:58] offsite impacts of the request.

[1:24:59] And that is something that the

[1:25:01] the planning staff found to be

[1:25:03] the c case. Is that right?

[1:25:03] That

[1:25:06] s correct.

[1:25:09] And the mentioned it

[1:25:09] s

[1:25:10] mentioned there that there are

[1:25:11] volunteered additional

[1:25:14] plantings. The planning staff

[1:25:16] asked for three additional

[1:25:18] deciduous trees to be planted

[1:25:19] near the outdoor enclosure. And

[1:25:21] the and the applicant has

[1:25:22] agreed to that, right?

[1:25:22] That

[1:25:23] s correct.

[1:25:25] And those trees would be

[1:25:26] between where the outdoor

[1:25:27] enclosure is and the

[1:25:29] residential property.

[1:25:30] On the south side, correct.

[1:25:40] On the south side. MR. Murphy,

[1:25:42] if the outdoor enclosure is

[1:25:44] being used in violation of the

[1:25:45] Udo, let

[1:25:47] s say with dogs out at

[1:25:50] 10:00 at night, that is

[1:25:51] something that the city could

[1:25:53] enforce. Correct?

[1:25:54] Correct. That would be a zoning

[1:25:56] violation that would be handled

[1:25:57] by the zoning enforcement

[1:25:58] staff.

[1:25:59] MR. Mayor, I would like the

[1:26:01] entire staff report admitted

[1:26:04] in, uh, as evidence in the

[1:26:04] applicant

[1:26:06] s case in this permit

[1:26:07] hearing.

[1:26:09] Brennan.

[1:26:12] Uh, the next witness will be

[1:26:16] Luke Dickey from Kimball.

[1:26:18] So if you would give your name

[1:26:20] and address, please.

[1:26:21] Good evening. Luke Dickey with

[1:26:22] Stem associates, 601 North

[1:26:24] Trade Street, suite 200. MRS..

[1:26:26] 027101.

[1:26:28] Thank you, MR. Dickey.

[1:26:31] See?

[1:26:33] MR. Murphy, do we have slides

[1:26:39] that we could?

[1:26:40] You want the PowerPoint or do

[1:26:42] you want the overhead? Okay,

[1:26:42] let

[1:26:44] s got it. All right. Cuz I

[1:26:45] know you said you might need

[1:26:45] the overhead and.

[1:26:46] That might be problematic.

[1:26:48] But we can figure.

[1:26:49] Yeah. Thank you very much.

[1:26:50] Tonight I

[1:26:50] m just going to kind

[1:26:51] of walk you through the site

[1:26:53] plan that we prepared. Um,

[1:26:54] utilizing of course, the

[1:26:55] information we get from the

[1:26:57] Unified Development Ordinance

[1:26:58] under the Udo Kier code,

[1:27:00] working with planning staff.

[1:27:01] And we prepare these plans that

[1:27:03] get submitted for their review.

[1:27:04] It goes to the departmental

[1:27:06] review. And then we address

[1:27:07] those comments. And then that

[1:27:08] goes into the course into the

[1:27:08] planning board for

[1:27:09] recommendation. And then that

[1:27:11] comes before you this evening,

[1:27:12] uh, up on the screen right

[1:27:13] here, right now is kind of the

[1:27:14] way that just general

[1:27:16] highlighted areas. The building

[1:27:17] is the main white block that

[1:27:17] s

[1:27:19] in the middle. Uh, the blue is

[1:27:21] the enclosure area on the back

[1:27:23] side. Um, highlighted in a

[1:27:24] little bit of a darker green is

[1:27:25] the three trees that were

[1:27:27] conditioned as part of that to

[1:27:28] be planted on the south side of

[1:27:30] the site, uh, the parking lot

[1:27:32] then is located that will be

[1:27:33] expanded to meet the other

[1:27:35] requirements for the size of

[1:27:36] the kennel. Uh, so that gets

[1:27:37] expanded a little bit more

[1:27:39] towards the south side of the

[1:27:41] site. Uh, we designated the

[1:27:42] better stands of trees on the

[1:27:43] side. Those are in the darker

[1:27:46] green corners there for the

[1:27:47] tree safe area that meets the

[1:27:49] requirements of that as well.

[1:27:50] With the expansion of the

[1:27:52] parking lot, there will be a

[1:27:53] street yard requirement. Then

[1:27:55] of course along Chatham Road

[1:27:56] that would be provided to meet

[1:27:57] the requirements. From that

[1:27:59] standpoint, we are showing a

[1:28:00] dumpster at the end of that

[1:28:01] parking lot. That meets the

[1:28:02] requirements of being 50 foot

[1:28:05] setback from any residential

[1:28:06] zoning lot. And then also,

[1:28:06] we

[1:28:07] ve expanded a little bit of

[1:28:08] the parking there on the north

[1:28:09] side, but that

[1:28:09] s up against the

[1:28:11] gi zoning. And there will be a

[1:28:13] street yard required there as

[1:28:15] well. Um, on the overall site

[1:28:17] plan, you can see the slope,

[1:28:18] the dark, the dashed lines that

[1:28:19] are in between the building and

[1:28:20] the residence to the south.

[1:28:22] That is the topography. Each

[1:28:23] one of those that represents a

[1:28:25] two foot step. From that

[1:28:26] standpoint, if you can go to

[1:28:28] the next slide. Oh, just real

[1:28:30] quick. And the closure is

[1:28:30] there

[1:28:32] s one permitted, uh, per

[1:28:32] the ordinance. And that

[1:28:33] s the

[1:28:33] one we

[1:28:34] re providing. Uh, the

[1:28:36] has to meet the required

[1:28:37] building setback requirements,

[1:28:39] which is 40ft from any

[1:28:41] residential zoning. We are 40ft

[1:28:42] away from that at the nearest

[1:28:44] corner. Um, and then I already

[1:28:46] mentioned the recommended

[1:28:47] screening. That was a condition

[1:28:49] for the three trees there on

[1:28:50] the south side. Next slide

[1:28:52] please. This one is just kind

[1:28:53] of going against talk about the

[1:28:54] significant elevation that was

[1:28:56] mentioned in the staff report.

[1:28:57] Uh, the approximate elevation

[1:28:59] of the enclosure there you can

[1:29:01] see is at 860. Uh, the parking

[1:29:03] lot is around 856. Uh, this

[1:29:06] residences to the south is 902.

[1:29:10] Uh, so roughly 42ft above, uh,

[1:29:12] roughly the enclosure and also

[1:29:14] 900. The nearest one is there

[1:29:16] to the east, and that is at an

[1:29:18] 874. So it is 14ft. But that

[1:29:18] s

[1:29:19] also where we

[1:29:19] re going to have

[1:29:21] a remaining vegetation. And

[1:29:22] that will be supplemented to

[1:29:24] from a meeting the buffer

[1:29:25] requirement. So that would be

[1:29:26] addition of evergreen shrubs

[1:29:28] and evergreen plantings to make

[1:29:28] sure we meet the code

[1:29:31] requirements in that location.

[1:29:33] Next slide please. Uh, this is

[1:29:34] again kind of similar to the

[1:29:35] images that MR. Murphy had

[1:29:37] shown earlier. This is where

[1:29:38] the parking lot is. That will

[1:29:41] be expanded there to the left.

[1:29:42] And you can see kind of the

[1:29:43] slope condition there. So

[1:29:45] because of the slope condition

[1:29:45] and where it

[1:29:46] s tucked in,

[1:29:46] that

[1:29:48] ll be not very visible at

[1:29:49] all from the neighbors in that

[1:29:51] location. Next slide please.

[1:29:52] Uh, then this is just kind of

[1:29:53] come up along the side of the

[1:29:54] building. You can see that the

[1:29:55] topography there gets even

[1:29:57] steeper. Um, it was covered in

[1:30:00] kudzu at this point. But again,

[1:30:00] that

[1:30:00] s just kind of

[1:30:02] representing the base of the 40

[1:30:03] foot grade change between the

[1:30:05] residences to the south and

[1:30:06] then where the enclosure is.

[1:30:08] Next slide. Uh, this is looking

[1:30:10] them directly south from the

[1:30:11] enclosure. So basically at the

[1:30:13] northwest corner of the

[1:30:14] building, which will be the

[1:30:15] furthest location of the

[1:30:17] enclosure, uh, looking directly

[1:30:20] south. Next slide. Uh, they

[1:30:20] re

[1:30:21] highlighting the screen in the

[1:30:23] shadows is the closest

[1:30:24] residential unit to this

[1:30:26] enclosure, looking directly to

[1:30:27] the to the south. Um, it

[1:30:28] s kind

[1:30:29] of covered there, but again, we

[1:30:30] will plant the trees on that

[1:30:32] southern side as they grow up.

[1:30:33] Would be kind of more dense

[1:30:34] when you

[1:30:34] re looking down into

[1:30:36] the site than that would start

[1:30:37] to be covered there from that

[1:30:40] location. Next slide. And then

[1:30:42] this is directly, directly to

[1:30:42] the west. So there

[1:30:43] s again the

[1:30:45] residents in the shadows, uh,

[1:30:46] in the backside over there. And

[1:30:47] those trees are going to remain

[1:30:49] in that location. I

[1:30:49] m sure

[1:30:49] we

[1:30:50] re going to clean up the

[1:30:52] understory scrub there, but

[1:30:53] then they

[1:30:54] ll all be replanted

[1:30:55] with make sure we meet the

[1:30:56] ordinance requirements of the

[1:30:58] full screen. Uh, use of the the

[1:30:59] site with the evergreen

[1:31:00] plantings and the evergreen

[1:31:02] shrubs there to create a visual

[1:31:04] break. In addition, of course,

[1:31:06] the the enclosure will have a

[1:31:07] five foot opaque fence all the

[1:31:08] way around it. So anything

[1:31:09] that

[1:31:10] s within the enclosure

[1:31:10] won

[1:31:11] t be visible from that

[1:31:15] standpoint. And that concludes

[1:31:16] my presentation.

[1:31:19] Thank you, MR. Dickie. Anyone

[1:31:21] else?

[1:31:30] Three minutes.

[1:31:32] MR. Mayor, our next witness is

[1:31:35] Kelsey Dolan, who is one of the

[1:31:36] folks who has the property

[1:31:38] under contract to purchase.

[1:31:38] We

[1:31:39] ve been referring to the

[1:31:40] word kennel during this

[1:31:43] application. The intended use

[1:31:44] for this property is actually

[1:31:46] for an animal rescue. There

[1:31:46] s

[1:31:47] not a separate category for

[1:31:49] that in our Udo. However, the

[1:31:50] closest one is kennel, which is

[1:31:51] why that

[1:31:52] s that

[1:31:52] s why the

[1:31:55] application is for a kennel

[1:31:56] enclosure. Kelsey, could you

[1:31:58] introduce yourself and explain

[1:31:59] the intended use for this

[1:32:00] property?

[1:32:00] So I

[1:32:01] m Kelsey Dolan I

[1:32:01] m already

[1:32:02] tearing up. It

[1:32:02] s kind of

[1:32:03] surreal. I

[1:32:04] m super excited. I

[1:32:04] don

[1:32:04] t know how many people show

[1:32:06] up excited about this. Um, but

[1:32:08] it is for a rescue and it is

[1:32:11] all from an animal, a dog that

[1:32:13] we had named Stella, who was

[1:32:15] super special. Um, she kind of

[1:32:17] found me and she was great.

[1:32:18] She, I will say, under oath. I

[1:32:20] think she spoke English. And so

[1:32:22] we named it for her. She was

[1:32:23] great. And I think that the

[1:32:26] biggest part of this is really

[1:32:29] the location itself is making

[1:32:31] that possible, making that

[1:32:32] accessible for everyone. You

[1:32:33] know, we very well could have

[1:32:34] gone somewhere else and built a

[1:32:36] space and built an enclosure

[1:32:37] and an outdoor run, an outdoor

[1:32:38] kennels and space for these

[1:32:40] animals. But a big part of this

[1:32:42] is really wanting to be part of

[1:32:44] the community, part of what is

[1:32:46] helping, you know, in the past

[1:32:48] to have funded this, um, I love

[1:32:49] ever talking. I

[1:32:49] m looking. This

[1:32:50] is like taking at me. So I

[1:32:51] m

[1:32:52] going to try not to ever speak.

[1:32:54] Um, my great grandfather had a

[1:32:55] big hand in developing Winston

[1:32:56] and my grandfather after him.

[1:32:58] And I want to repurpose what

[1:33:01] they did. And as a big tribute

[1:33:02] to take that and invest it back

[1:33:04] into what made them successful.

[1:33:06] And I think that people a lot

[1:33:07] of times say, you know, well,

[1:33:07] it

[1:33:08] d be nice if somebody

[1:33:10] invested in us, invested in

[1:33:11] where we live and made it a

[1:33:12] better place. And that

[1:33:12] s really

[1:33:14] what this is about. And outdoor

[1:33:16] space is because people and

[1:33:17] animals both need to be

[1:33:19] outside. They need sunlight. It

[1:33:20] would not be a very good rescue

[1:33:22] and not be very responsible for

[1:33:23] us if we just left animals

[1:33:25] outside, or if we left them in

[1:33:28] their own mess, and if they

[1:33:29] made a mess, and if they sink

[1:33:31] and if they barked. That said,

[1:33:33] I completely understand anyone

[1:33:34] that would have concerns around

[1:33:36] that. Because if I thought

[1:33:37] somebody was going to build

[1:33:39] outdoor kennels, just letting

[1:33:41] dogs, you know, hunting dogs,

[1:33:42] anything like that, they

[1:33:42] re

[1:33:43] going to sit outside and bark

[1:33:45] and make a mess and stink. That

[1:33:46] that is not a rescue of which

[1:33:47] people would want to come and

[1:33:49] adopt animals from. Um, it

[1:33:49] s

[1:33:51] also not one where people who

[1:33:53] might not have the chance to be

[1:33:55] exposed to cats and dogs can

[1:33:57] have that time. They can go in,

[1:33:59] they can spend time with dogs

[1:34:01] and cats and volunteer and kind

[1:34:02] of just bring the community

[1:34:04] together. I think you saw the

[1:34:06] photos. What we intend to do, I

[1:34:07] mean, even from the pictures,

[1:34:09] is to clean that space up, to

[1:34:10] take a space that

[1:34:10] s not being

[1:34:12] used to not waste the resources

[1:34:14] to build a totally new one, but

[1:34:16] to use what Winston already has

[1:34:17] and to make it something nice

[1:34:19] and to make it something that

[1:34:20] people and animals alike can

[1:34:22] benefit from. And in a time

[1:34:22] where there

[1:34:25] s a 43% increase in

[1:34:27] economical surrenders at

[1:34:28] shelters, this is something

[1:34:30] that the city needs. Um.

[1:34:31] Let me ask you a couple.

[1:34:32] Yeah. Sorry. I

[1:34:32] m gonna keep it

[1:34:33] stolen.

[1:34:34] Are you a current resident of

[1:34:34] Winston-Salem?

[1:34:35] Yes.

[1:34:35] What

[1:34:36] s your address?

[1:34:38] 325 Mendota Drive.

[1:34:40] And in 2025, you formed a

[1:34:42] non-profit corporation for this

[1:34:43] purpose? Yes.

[1:34:44] Are you. Are you.

[1:34:45] Do you currently have

[1:34:47] experience in sheltering rescue

[1:34:48] animals?

[1:34:49] Yes.

[1:34:51] Can you talk about the the

[1:34:53] whether there is a public need

[1:34:55] for more animal shelter space

[1:34:57] in Winston-Salem, for example,

[1:34:59] do you get calls from people

[1:35:00] needing to find places for

[1:35:01] their rescue animals?

[1:35:02] Yes.

[1:35:03] Um, we get hundreds of calls

[1:35:05] and specifically emails. I will

[1:35:07] say cats are infinitely worse

[1:35:09] in the moment than dogs. I will

[1:35:10] give you a timeline, but there

[1:35:12] was a time when animal control

[1:35:13] and humane side of in the same

[1:35:13] building, and we

[1:35:14] ve been very

[1:35:15] limited on resources.

[1:35:18] Since then.

[1:35:20] Sorry. Um, and one just very

[1:35:23] quick fact is that cat math is

[1:35:24] if you have one male and one

[1:35:26] female cat over the course of

[1:35:28] one year, worst case scenario

[1:35:30] can create 400. So when you

[1:35:32] hear cat colonies and you hear

[1:35:34] things like this, it is a much

[1:35:35] bigger issue that

[1:35:35] s going to

[1:35:37] get much bigger over the years.

[1:35:37] We

[1:35:38] re not asking for resources.

[1:35:40] We are trying to give resources

[1:35:44] to the city. We are asking for

[1:35:44] funding. We

[1:35:45] re trying to fund

[1:35:47] ourselves to help this out.

[1:35:48] Councillor Ward five minutes.

[1:35:50] Be.

[1:35:52] Um. Rick Brandt is here. He

[1:35:53] s

[1:35:54] an appraiser with Loftus

[1:35:56] Companies. He has seven slides

[1:35:57] to explain his paired sales

[1:35:59] analysis. On the question of

[1:36:00] whether there is harm to the

[1:36:02] adjoining properties. Uh, we

[1:36:03] ll

[1:36:04] try to do it in five minutes.

[1:36:05] Okay. That

[1:36:05] d be great.

[1:36:06] Thanks.

[1:36:15] Thank you.

[1:36:15] Let

[1:36:16] s see. Do we have. There

[1:36:17] s

[1:36:19] another set of slides for MR.

[1:36:21] Brandt.

[1:36:22] There we go.

[1:36:24] Uh, could you introduce

[1:36:25] yourself and explain your

[1:36:26] qualifications?

[1:36:27] Uh, my name is Rick Brandt. I

[1:36:27] m

[1:36:29] an appraiser here with Loftus

[1:36:30] Appraisal Company in

[1:36:31] Winston-Salem. Our office on

[1:36:34] 6160 Campbell Forest Drive in

[1:36:35] Winston-Salem. I

[1:36:37] m an ma. I,

[1:36:39] uh, Appraisal Institute member.

[1:36:39] Uh, I

[1:36:41] ve been appraising here

[1:36:42] within the city for over 20

[1:36:43] years.

[1:36:46] Thank you. If you

[1:36:46] ll go to.

[1:36:47] And with respect to the

[1:36:49] question of whether there would

[1:36:51] be substantial harm to the

[1:36:52] value of adjoining or adjacent

[1:36:54] properties, if an outdoor

[1:36:56] kennel, an outdoor, an outdoor

[1:36:59] enclosure, uh, if an if an

[1:37:01] outdoor enclosure were approved

[1:37:02] by the special use permit, did

[1:37:04] you do any analysis?

[1:37:05] I did, I did a paired sales

[1:37:09] study of comparable, uh, homes

[1:37:11] located in close proximity to

[1:37:12] kennels. The first one was a

[1:37:14] development called Dorchester,

[1:37:17] uh, in Northern David County.

[1:37:18] Uh, if you look up there on the

[1:37:20] map, uh, you can see the

[1:37:23] location of no goats, no glory.

[1:37:26] Uh, kennel. And, uh, the dot is

[1:37:27] more or less over there.

[1:37:29] Outdoor enclosure. Uh, that

[1:37:32] outdoor enclosure is located,

[1:37:33] uh, very close to the subject

[1:37:35] property. If you go to the next

[1:37:37] slide, I can give you it

[1:37:37] s

[1:37:41] 160ft from the subject property

[1:37:43] to the kennel, uh, to the

[1:37:44] outdoor enclosure of that

[1:37:46] kennel. Uh, the way you do a

[1:37:48] paired sales study is you look

[1:37:50] for other homes that are highly

[1:37:52] similar, that are a further

[1:37:54] distance away, that should not

[1:37:56] be impacted in any way by the

[1:37:58] presence of that outdoor

[1:37:59] kennel. Uh, and in this case, I

[1:38:02] found two homes on that same

[1:38:04] street that were very similar.

[1:38:07] The first one was 400ft away.

[1:38:08] Uh, and the way you proceed

[1:38:10] with the paired sales study is

[1:38:12] just like when you purchase a

[1:38:13] home, you make adjustments for

[1:38:15] all the things that are

[1:38:16] dissimilar between the two

[1:38:18] homes to arrive at a adjusted

[1:38:20] price per square foot, if that

[1:38:22] adjusted price per square foot

[1:38:25] were drastically, um, higher

[1:38:28] than what the subject sold for,

[1:38:29] that would tell you that

[1:38:29] there

[1:38:30] s some impairment with

[1:38:32] the subject that we did not

[1:38:33] consider. In this case, that

[1:38:34] would be the presence of the

[1:38:37] kennel. Uh, in this case, the

[1:38:39] first comparable came in at

[1:38:41] $126 per square foot. The

[1:38:44] subject property sold for 151,

[1:38:46] indicating that there was no

[1:38:48] impairment present. Uh, if you

[1:38:51] go to the next slide, uh,

[1:38:52] that

[1:38:53] s comparable to it was

[1:38:56] located 800ft away. Um, and it

[1:38:59] was a new home. Uh, if you look

[1:39:00] at it, the adjusted price per

[1:39:04] square foot was $119 per square

[1:39:05] foot, as opposed to the

[1:39:08] subject, which sold for 151. So

[1:39:10] again, there is no indication

[1:39:10] that there

[1:39:11] s any detrimental

[1:39:13] condition created by the

[1:39:15] presence of the outdoor, uh,

[1:39:17] dog enclosure. Uh, go to the

[1:39:19] next slide. This is the second

[1:39:21] study I conducted. This is in

[1:39:23] Oak Valley Country Club in

[1:39:26] advance. Uh, if you look at the

[1:39:28] top there, hound housing,

[1:39:30] doggie daycare, uh, has an

[1:39:31] enclosure that

[1:39:31] s directly

[1:39:34] adjacent to, uh, homes in Oak

[1:39:36] Valley Country Club. Uh, the

[1:39:38] subject property, uh, is

[1:39:40] located on the other side of

[1:39:42] the fence from the doggie

[1:39:43] daycare. If you

[1:39:44] ll flip to the

[1:39:47] next slide. Um, there you can

[1:39:47] see that it

[1:39:49] s 650ft from the

[1:39:50] house to the area of the

[1:39:53] enclosure. Uh, there I looked

[1:39:56] at two homes also. Um, after

[1:39:58] adjustments, the first one came

[1:40:01] in at $163.16 as opposed to the

[1:40:04] subject at 164 30. So that

[1:40:06] indicates that it was, um, you

[1:40:08] know, very similar indicated

[1:40:09] price to what it actually sold

[1:40:10] for. And there was no

[1:40:12] detrimental condition there.

[1:40:14] Uh, if you go to comparable

[1:40:17] number two, uh, again, um, that

[1:40:20] one was 2000ft away. Uh, on

[1:40:21] that one, the only thing I

[1:40:23] would note there is that part

[1:40:24] of the reason the adjusted

[1:40:26] sales price is so low is that

[1:40:27] when backed up to the 15th

[1:40:29] fairway, and we use paired

[1:40:31] sales to make adjustments for

[1:40:32] things that have golf views,

[1:40:34] and that required a much larger

[1:40:35] adjustment than the other one.

[1:40:37] So, uh, you notice the gross

[1:40:38] adjustments are fairly large

[1:40:40] there. But again, it, uh,

[1:40:41] indicated no detrimental

[1:40:42] condition at all for the

[1:40:47] subject.

[1:40:49] And so after doing that

[1:40:51] analysis and you

[1:40:51] re familiar

[1:40:52] with the subject site that we

[1:40:54] have, the application on

[1:40:56] tonight and understanding how

[1:40:58] that site is situated based on

[1:40:59] your analysis of other.

[1:41:01] Sales community.

[1:41:03] What is your conclusion about

[1:41:05] whether the proposed outdoor

[1:41:07] enclosure would substantially

[1:41:09] harm values of adjoining

[1:41:09] property?

[1:41:10] I can

[1:41:11] t find any evidence that

[1:41:14] it would.

[1:41:16] Sir.

[1:41:18] Um, MR. Mayor, those are all of

[1:41:20] our witnesses. If it would help

[1:41:23] the council, uh, at the end of

[1:41:25] the opposition I have, I could

[1:41:27] present a very brief summation

[1:41:28] addressing the evidence on each

[1:41:31] of these factors. Go ahead. You

[1:41:32] would like me to proceed now.

[1:41:37] Thank you. On the factor of

[1:41:38] whether the outdoor enclosure

[1:41:39] would not materially endanger

[1:41:41] the public health or safety if

[1:41:43] located, were proposed and

[1:41:44] developed. According to the

[1:41:46] application and the plan. And

[1:41:48] if the plan is submitted and

[1:41:50] and approved, I would point out

[1:41:51] that it is already zoned

[1:41:53] General Industrial, which the

[1:41:54] staff report points out is the

[1:41:55] most intense industrial

[1:41:57] district allowed in the zoning

[1:41:59] ordinance. There are many, much

[1:42:01] more disruptive uses that this

[1:42:02] property could be put to

[1:42:04] without any additional permits

[1:42:07] from the City council. Uh, as

[1:42:08] you heard from MR. Murphy, the

[1:42:09] use of the outdoor enclosure is

[1:42:11] limited by your ordinance. The

[1:42:11] city

[1:42:13] s ordinance. Um, there

[1:42:13] s

[1:42:15] no evidence that

[1:42:15] s been

[1:42:16] submitted so far that the use

[1:42:18] of the enclosure would produce

[1:42:20] noise of any particular level.

[1:42:22] The ordinance addresses this

[1:42:23] and limits the hours of

[1:42:25] operation from 8 A.M. To 6

[1:42:27] P.M.. And the animals cannot be

[1:42:28] out in the outdoor enclosure

[1:42:31] unattended. Uh, also, with

[1:42:33] respect to public health and

[1:42:35] safety, the udl requires that

[1:42:36] the waste be addressed on a

[1:42:38] daily basis and the outdoor

[1:42:39] enclosure would not actually

[1:42:40] increase the amount of waste

[1:42:42] being generated here, because

[1:42:43] no animals can be housed out

[1:42:49] there. The, uh, there is a

[1:42:50] significant elevation

[1:42:50] difference between the

[1:42:52] adjoining properties, creating

[1:42:55] a natural barrier. The

[1:42:56] applicant applicant has agreed

[1:42:58] to plant additional trees

[1:42:59] between where the outdoor

[1:43:01] enclosure area is and the

[1:43:02] adjacent residential

[1:43:04] properties, which will also

[1:43:07] promote health and safety and

[1:43:12] harmony. As shown on the site,

[1:43:15] plan, uh, this the outdoor

[1:43:16] enclosure will not add

[1:43:19] impervious surface. Um. The

[1:43:20] staff report notes that is not

[1:43:22] expected to generate traffic

[1:43:26] problems. And MISS Dolan, uh,

[1:43:27] testified about the community

[1:43:29] need for this. You just heard

[1:43:30] from Rick Brandt on the

[1:43:32] question of substantial injury

[1:43:34] to the adjoining properties.

[1:43:36] And then as for the location

[1:43:38] and whether the location and

[1:43:39] character of the use, if

[1:43:41] developed according to the

[1:43:42] application and plan submitted,

[1:43:43] would be in harmony with the

[1:43:45] area and in conformity with the

[1:43:49] comprehensive plan. Uh, by law,

[1:43:49] there

[1:43:50] s a presumption that if

[1:43:52] this is available in the Udo

[1:43:54] with a special use permit, it

[1:43:57] is in harmony with the area.

[1:43:58] Also, this is a general

[1:43:59] industrial area. There is

[1:44:01] adjoining, general industrial

[1:44:03] use currently to the north and

[1:44:05] then across Chatham to the

[1:44:07] east. It

[1:44:08] s a two acre site.

[1:44:09] We

[1:44:09] re not trying to squeeze

[1:44:11] this in on a on a small home

[1:44:15] site. There is a natural

[1:44:17] separation which is noted on

[1:44:19] the site plan and in the staff

[1:44:19] report that

[1:44:20] s created by the

[1:44:22] significant difference in

[1:44:23] elevation and the existing

[1:44:27] vegetation buffer. Uh, it will

[1:44:29] not be visible from the street.

[1:44:31] The two additional conditions

[1:44:34] that have been requested and

[1:44:36] agreed to for this permit are

[1:44:38] limitation on the size of the

[1:44:39] sign, and also the three

[1:44:41] additional trees. I think those

[1:44:43] both would promote harmony of

[1:44:45] this additional enclosure with

[1:44:49] the surrounding area. Uh, and

[1:44:51] then with respect to forward

[1:44:53] 2045, the staff report notes

[1:44:56] that conformity can be found.

[1:44:57] Uh, I would note that the site

[1:44:59] plan shows the addition of

[1:45:01] sidewalks on this site, which

[1:45:03] would enhance pedestrian

[1:45:04] access, at least on this

[1:45:06] particular lot, which is one

[1:45:09] factor, a goal of the

[1:45:11] comprehensive plan it would be

[1:45:12] putting to use a vacant

[1:45:13] property that

[1:45:13] s been long

[1:45:15] vacant, uh, which also would

[1:45:16] promote a goal of the

[1:45:19] comprehensive plan. And I would

[1:45:20] argue that it will improve the

[1:45:21] aesthetic appearance of this

[1:45:23] site. And the comprehensive

[1:45:25] plan also has, as a goal,

[1:45:28] cleaner and more attractive

[1:45:29] neighborhoods. And so I would

[1:45:31] urge the council to find that

[1:45:32] the four factors have been

[1:45:33] proven. Thank you.

[1:45:36] Thank you very much. All right.

[1:45:37] Excuse me. We will now hear

[1:45:38] from the opposition. If you

[1:45:40] would come forward and state

[1:45:41] your name and address. For the

[1:45:43] record, we have a number of

[1:45:45] individuals signed up for.

[1:45:45] Sure.

[1:45:46] If I MAY, before.

[1:45:52] I run out of oxygen. Um, Tony

[1:45:55] Gaines, I live at, uh, 151 West

[1:45:56] End Boulevard. Uh, prior to

[1:46:00] that, I lived at 173 and 175

[1:46:02] West End or, excuse me, 175 and

[1:46:05] 177 West End Boulevard. All of

[1:46:07] those properties are right

[1:46:10] above. I am the houses, right

[1:46:14] above their proposed spot.

[1:46:18] Noise travels, folks. Uh, there

[1:46:21] is a huge embankment, and I bet

[1:46:21] y

[1:46:24] all will improve the

[1:46:26] neighborhood tremendously. But

[1:46:29] noise travels. If there

[1:46:29] s dogs

[1:46:32] there, dogs are going to bark.

[1:46:33] Rescues bark. I

[1:46:34] ve got a

[1:46:35] 90

[1:46:38] pitbull I rescued last year.

[1:46:40] Prior to that, I had a

[1:46:40] 80

[1:46:43] German Shepherd I rescued or

[1:46:45] they rescued me. But sound

[1:46:47] travels and regardless of how

[1:46:49] many employees you have

[1:46:51] handling these dogs, it

[1:46:51] s going

[1:46:54] to be noisy. So yeah, there

[1:46:58] will be noise. You can only

[1:46:59] control. You

[1:46:59] ve been around

[1:47:01] dogs, you understand? So that

[1:47:02] s

[1:47:05] my concern. Yeah, I was really,

[1:47:07] really opposed to the idea of

[1:47:09] dogs being there and making all

[1:47:11] the noise they could make. But

[1:47:13] yeah, I realize that it could

[1:47:16] be a whole lot worse. Uh, Heinz

[1:47:18] dying fishing, for instance,

[1:47:20] has ruined my $80,000 beautiful

[1:47:23] pickup truck with acid rain.

[1:47:23] But that

[1:47:25] s part of doing a

[1:47:27] business in Winston-Salem. Uh,

[1:47:31] so my challenge is that if

[1:47:31] there

[1:47:32] s anything else that

[1:47:35] could be done to buffer the

[1:47:38] noise because the hill is not

[1:47:39] going to stop the noise. I

[1:47:39] don

[1:47:42] t know if a noise reducing

[1:47:45] wall would help, but that

[1:47:45] s my

[1:47:46] concern. I

[1:47:48] ve got two duplexes

[1:47:49] right up on that hill that I

[1:47:52] ran out. I would hate for my

[1:47:55] tenants to say, we can

[1:47:55] t live

[1:47:58] here because of the dog noise.

[1:47:58] So that

[1:48:00] s my concern. And I was

[1:48:02] able to pay my property taxes

[1:48:04] the other day because of my

[1:48:05] tenants. I don

[1:48:06] t want that to

[1:48:08] change. So that

[1:48:09] s about all I

[1:48:09] have to say.

[1:48:10] Thank you. Thank you, MISS

[1:48:19] Gaines. All right, next.

[1:48:20] Hello again.

[1:48:22] I feel like we were just here.

[1:48:23] Um, yeah. My name is Chris

[1:48:25] Krajewski. I live at 811 North

[1:48:26] Spring Street. Um, I

[1:48:27] m the

[1:48:28] building. I

[1:48:29] m the residence

[1:48:31] directly behind. Um, the the

[1:48:34] Chatham building. Um, the

[1:48:36] pictures that were shown that

[1:48:36] I

[1:48:37] m going off script here, the

[1:48:37] pictures that were shown

[1:48:40] earlier, full summer, all the

[1:48:42] greens there, uh, during the,

[1:48:44] uh, during the winter season,

[1:48:45] all that green is gone. We have

[1:48:47] a direct shot. You know, our

[1:48:48] our yard is the one that backs

[1:48:52] right up to, um, that lot. Um,

[1:48:54] and I understand MR. Mosley has

[1:48:55] been trying to unload this

[1:48:56] property for a long time, and

[1:48:57] I. And I do feel for him, and

[1:48:58] it does sound like the

[1:49:00] proponents made a great case.

[1:49:01] And I think if it does go

[1:49:01] through, I think they

[1:49:01] re going

[1:49:04] to do the right thing. That

[1:49:06] being said, sound travels as

[1:49:08] much as I want to. As much as I

[1:49:10] want to support this. Um, this

[1:49:11] is the second time that I

[1:49:11] ve

[1:49:14] been here. Um, pushing back

[1:49:16] against a dog kennel in 2010,

[1:49:19] Carolina Pet Place wanted the

[1:49:20] same exact thing, but. But in

[1:49:22] the building next door, um, an

[1:49:23] indoor kennel with an outdoor

[1:49:25] dog space. During the day. At

[1:49:26] the time, my daughter and I

[1:49:28] went to the Clemens location,

[1:49:30] parked about as far away from

[1:49:31] the building is where we

[1:49:32] thought our house was was, and

[1:49:34] we could hear dogs inside very

[1:49:38] clearly from that distance. Um,

[1:49:39] we as a neighborhood voiced our

[1:49:41] opposition, uh, right here in

[1:49:44] this room. And, um, the council

[1:49:45] sided with us, and and the

[1:49:46] planning board denied their

[1:49:49] proposal. Um, the argument

[1:49:51] against this kennel is the same

[1:49:53] as it was against that kennel.

[1:49:55] Uh, the proposed site is

[1:49:57] surrounded by homes, many like

[1:49:59] ours, in the historic West End.

[1:50:00] And part of the ambiance of

[1:50:02] that neighborhood is the

[1:50:04] peacefulness we have in living

[1:50:05] in the shadow of a bustling

[1:50:07] downtown, but not in it. And a

[1:50:09] dog kennel is simply not a good

[1:50:10] fit. Even in an area zoned for

[1:50:12] commercial use. We

[1:50:13] re fine with

[1:50:15] the white noise. Hum. I don

[1:50:15] t

[1:50:16] get the acid rain, but we do

[1:50:18] get the white noise hum of the

[1:50:19] machinery from a Heinz dine

[1:50:21] finishing plant. Um, and that

[1:50:22] s

[1:50:23] fine because it is sort of

[1:50:25] white noise, but dogs barking

[1:50:28] is not that. Um, I just feel

[1:50:28] like it

[1:50:29] s going to create

[1:50:30] tremendous noise pollution. Not

[1:50:32] to I, not to mention the smell.

[1:50:33] I think you made a good case

[1:50:34] that that

[1:50:35] s not going to be the

[1:50:36] worst part, but it

[1:50:37] s just as

[1:50:39] far as being conducive to

[1:50:40] living, to residential living

[1:50:42] in this, you know, peaceful

[1:50:44] enclave that is the West End.

[1:50:45] Um, and it

[1:50:46] s hard to say. You

[1:50:48] know, I do take a little bit of

[1:50:52] umbrage on the the fact that it

[1:50:52] didn

[1:50:54] t show property values

[1:50:55] dropping in those certain

[1:50:57] cases, but it

[1:50:58] s hard to put a

[1:51:00] price on quality of life, and

[1:51:01] it

[1:51:02] s hard to put the burden on

[1:51:04] us to prove after the fact that

[1:51:06] it did. In fact, drop our house

[1:51:08] prices, prices, because it

[1:51:09] feels like that kennel is much

[1:51:12] closer than the ones in the um,

[1:51:17] in the examples. Um, so why is.

[1:51:17] It.

[1:51:18] Is, you know, here we go again.

[1:51:20] I, we were just here we, you

[1:51:22] know, you guys opposed a

[1:51:23] nightclub that was proposed at

[1:51:25] the same place due to the noise

[1:51:27] it would create the noise that

[1:51:29] goes straight at us, rises up

[1:51:30] the hill. So whether it

[1:51:30] s cars,

[1:51:32] people, music or dogs barking,

[1:51:33] and it just feels like there

[1:51:35] are other industrial sites in

[1:51:36] Winston that don

[1:51:37] t back up to,

[1:51:39] uh, residential neighborhoods

[1:51:41] with families, some with babies

[1:51:42] and young children. Um, some of

[1:51:43] the young families up on West

[1:51:46] End Boulevard and many of whom,

[1:51:48] like us that have dogs, will no

[1:51:50] doubt join in the barking. If

[1:51:50] there

[1:51:51] s barking out, hear my

[1:51:53] dogs barking inside or barking

[1:51:55] out in the backyard. Um, it

[1:51:56] just feels like it will be

[1:51:58] relentless at some point. And

[1:51:59] we spent a lot of time in our

[1:52:01] backyard year round. It just

[1:52:01] feels like it would be

[1:52:03] detrimental to our home life.

[1:52:05] So I respectfully ask that you

[1:52:06] please protect the integrity of

[1:52:09] this historic neighborhood. Um,

[1:52:11] as it was in Winston-Salem,

[1:52:13] Council has done in prior cases

[1:52:15] and deny this proposal. Thank

[1:52:15] you.

[1:52:26] Cynthia Kelly.

[1:52:29] My name is Cynthia Kelly. I own

[1:52:31] three residential properties in

[1:52:32] the immediate area of the

[1:52:34] proposed commercial dog kennel,

[1:52:37] two of them directly adjoin the

[1:52:39] proposed kennel kennel property

[1:52:41] along the rear property lines,

[1:52:43] and the third is approximately

[1:52:46] 300 yards down the hill. Uh, of

[1:52:46] course, it

[1:52:47] s the historic

[1:52:49] neighborhood of West End. I

[1:52:50] m

[1:52:51] not opposed to progress or

[1:52:53] development. I welcome thought

[1:52:54] development, thoughtful

[1:52:56] development. I

[1:52:57] m undoubtedly a

[1:52:58] bigger supporter of small

[1:53:01] businesses and also animals.

[1:53:02] She gave a great animal

[1:53:03] testimony. I

[1:53:04] m simply asking

[1:53:05] that the development occur in a

[1:53:07] way that is responsible and

[1:53:10] sustainable for all parties. My

[1:53:14] noise concern is that we don

[1:53:14] t

[1:53:15] know what the noise is going to

[1:53:15] be, which they

[1:53:17] ve mentioned.

[1:53:19] Um, that that picture showed a

[1:53:22] lot of kudzu on that hill.

[1:53:24] Faith Kaufman, who sent you all

[1:53:29] a letter, sold me to, um, empty

[1:53:31] lots. And when you look at that

[1:53:33] kudzu, the reason why there

[1:53:33] s

[1:53:34] so much kudzu is because some

[1:53:34] of that we

[1:53:35] re about to clear,

[1:53:35] we

[1:53:37] ve had it surveyed. We

[1:53:37] ve

[1:53:38] got an engineer coming in. I

[1:53:39] m

[1:53:41] building, uh, two residential

[1:53:43] homes on those properties

[1:53:45] because we need housing. And

[1:53:47] part of that engineering

[1:53:49] includes changing the elevation

[1:53:51] on that. So some of their

[1:53:53] argument about elevation will

[1:53:56] be irrelevant over the next

[1:53:58] series of months as we start

[1:54:00] developing those properties.

[1:54:02] And so those properties too,

[1:54:04] will be looking directly at

[1:54:06] that, at that building. Uh, one

[1:54:08] of the buildings will be in the

[1:54:09] two of them will be in the

[1:54:11] historic overlay. One will be

[1:54:13] on 819 with West seventh

[1:54:14] Street, which will be a

[1:54:16] triplex. And as you know, the

[1:54:18] plans for historic overlay are

[1:54:20] extreme. We want to make sure

[1:54:22] in our peers want to make sure

[1:54:23] that it aligns with the

[1:54:25] community and the regulations

[1:54:27] that have already been said.

[1:54:31] And so if the barking, the odor

[1:54:33] waste, and I know you all

[1:54:34] mentioned runoff wasn

[1:54:34] t going

[1:54:36] to be a problem, we

[1:54:37] ve all

[1:54:38] walked outside of an apartment

[1:54:39] complex or been in a park where

[1:54:40] you could, gosh, I smell dog.

[1:54:41] And that

[1:54:42] s not even a kennel.

[1:54:42] That

[1:54:43] s just where people are

[1:54:45] walking their dogs and they so

[1:54:47] happen to relieve themselves.

[1:54:48] So there will definitely be

[1:54:50] those things. Other North

[1:54:51] Carolina communities recognize

[1:54:54] this concern. Wake County

[1:54:56] specifically identifies noise,

[1:55:00] odor, insects and traffic as

[1:55:01] potential impacts associated

[1:55:04] with kennels, and they require

[1:55:05] a setback to be of at least

[1:55:09] 100ft, not the 50ft that you

[1:55:12] all have been describing.

[1:55:15] Excuse me. Um, I noticed the

[1:55:18] housing prices on this sheet.

[1:55:18] We

[1:55:20] re not 650ft from the

[1:55:21] kennel. We

[1:55:22] re one foot from

[1:55:24] their property line. So I don

[1:55:24] t

[1:55:24] know that that

[1:55:25] s relevant

[1:55:26] either. If he doesn

[1:55:27] t have an

[1:55:29] example of a property. That

[1:55:29] s

[1:55:32] right adjacent, and I have to

[1:55:33] right adjacent to that

[1:55:37] particular property line. So I

[1:55:38] don

[1:55:39] t believe homeowners should

[1:55:40] effectively become the

[1:55:43] monitoring. Excuse me. And the

[1:55:44] enforcement system for

[1:55:46] commercial operation. The

[1:55:47] better approach is to determine

[1:55:50] compatibility before the use is

[1:55:52] established. There should be

[1:55:55] clear, objective, site specific

[1:55:57] evidence regarding this noise,

[1:55:59] including relevant distance,

[1:56:03] including relevant elevation

[1:56:05] and also naming. Not only that,

[1:56:09] the dogs will be attended. All

[1:56:10] dogs that are attended still

[1:56:11] bark, so the unattended dog

[1:56:20] park to me is also irrelevant.

[1:56:21] But that being said, I

[1:56:24] respectfully ask that you deny

[1:56:26] or at minimum defer approval

[1:56:28] until these site specific

[1:56:30] issues are independently

[1:56:31] evaluated and made part of the

[1:56:33] record.

[1:56:58] Thank you, Frank fry. MR.

[1:56:58] Mayor.

[1:57:00] Mayor Pro Tem and council

[1:57:03] members. My name is Frank fry.

[1:57:07] I live at 850 Chatham Road and,

[1:57:10] uh. Initially I

[1:57:11] d like to say

[1:57:14] to MR. Sanders and his son, Ben

[1:57:15] that I

[1:57:16] m not always against

[1:57:19] you, you know, but seems like

[1:57:27] was here last AUGUST and my

[1:57:28] concerns have already been

[1:57:33] stated. But Chris, the first

[1:57:36] speaker or second, actually, it

[1:57:40] turned out. But I just want to

[1:57:43] give a little background on the

[1:57:45] the West End, the the Crystal

[1:57:48] tower is part of it, which had

[1:57:50] a resurgence back in around

[1:57:54] 1973. It was pretty much on the

[1:57:57] on the ropes. There were three

[1:57:58] major houses that were brought

[1:58:03] in from one from where? Uh, 500

[1:58:04] West fifth Street is now, the

[1:58:09] old in a gone another from

[1:58:13] where wsj s used to be on fifth

[1:58:18] Street as well. And the third

[1:58:20] was actually beside on the

[1:58:23] underground lot as well. But

[1:58:27] tremendous amount of city

[1:58:28] involvement in that

[1:58:31] neighborhood. And to bring it

[1:58:34] around. And it

[1:58:35] s got many

[1:58:40] challenges. Uh, noise being the

[1:58:45] primary one and this, this all

[1:58:46] the houses up on Western

[1:58:50] Boulevard in a different manner

[1:58:53] than the houses that have been

[1:58:55] talked about, that are close to

[1:58:57] other kennels. These houses has

[1:59:02] been stated before, 40ft high,

[1:59:07] overlooking the dog park. So or

[1:59:11] dog kennel run, whatever it is,

[1:59:12] opportunity to bark is what it

[1:59:17] is. So these these neighbors

[1:59:19] are looking down on it, which

[1:59:24] makes it much different than.

[1:59:27] The examples the appraiser used.

[1:59:33] Uh, the attorney asked that the

[1:59:36] planning staff report be

[1:59:37] entered in as evidence that

[1:59:39] this is not a not a harmful

[1:59:41] thing. Uh, it

[1:59:42] s looking through

[1:59:44] the, the report and there are

[1:59:46] several things that I, you

[1:59:56] know, just being picky. Um. Uh,

[1:59:56] let

[2:00:01] s see. The large trees that

[2:00:09] are going to be planted. For

[2:00:23] this, um. What I

[2:00:24] d like to say

[2:00:27] about Chatham Road, I own the

[2:00:31] building that we were in. Now,

[2:00:34] since 2001. And in that time

[2:00:41] period. Especially in 2001,

[2:00:43] next door to our property was

[2:00:45] the old Chatham manufacturing

[2:00:47] mill. It

[2:00:49] s now apartments which

[2:00:52] are, you know, really nice. So

[2:00:54] that that changed from an

[2:00:57] underutilized building that the

[2:01:00] the roof was collapsing and it

[2:01:04] was pretty much it was sort of

[2:01:05] nip and tuck whether it would

[2:01:07] just survive or not. And now

[2:01:07] it

[2:01:09] s contributing member to the

[2:01:13] neighborhood and to the city on

[2:01:16] the. No. On the noise issue, I

[2:01:20] looked up dog barks compared to

[2:01:23] a Harley Davidson. And they

[2:01:23] re

[2:01:26] about equal for a standard

[2:01:29] Harley Davidson at idle and a

[2:01:32] Harley Davidson accelerating or

[2:01:36] going at road speed. So you can

[2:01:40] imagine. That that

[2:01:42] s a noise

[2:01:44] that people could really not be

[2:01:51] happy with. There are 224 cars,

[2:01:52] I believe. Was the estimate the

[2:01:56] planning staff thought for this

[2:02:00] increase. Um, over the past two

[2:02:01] and a half years, I

[2:02:02] ve walked

[2:02:06] that strip of Chatham past by

[2:02:09] this building a thousand times

[2:02:10] in one direction, a thousand

[2:02:14] times in another. At eight in

[2:02:14] the morning. It

[2:02:16] s beautifully

[2:02:21] quiet. Sundays, Saturdays it

[2:02:22] s

[2:02:24] quiet. It won

[2:02:27] t be quiet in the

[2:02:30] future if this goes through and

[2:02:31] they

[2:02:32] re residential, there are

[2:02:35] a couple of watts on Chatham.

[2:02:37] There was a duplex that was

[2:02:38] torn down, and it

[2:02:39] s now part of

[2:02:41] the Parks Family Trust. They

[2:02:44] plan to put another residential

[2:02:45] building on that. There

[2:02:46] s

[2:02:48] another house just up the

[2:02:48] street from that. That

[2:02:49] s I

[2:02:52] think comes up in SEPTEMBER to

[2:02:54] be torn down and a new

[2:02:58] structure put up. So there is a

[2:03:00] a trend in that area towards

[2:03:03] residential, not towards

[2:03:07] industrial. And sad to say, I

[2:03:07] didn

[2:03:09] t get involved in the

[2:03:11] comprehensive plan. The last

[2:03:15] one, 2011, I think, he said.

[2:03:19] But the industrial use that is

[2:03:23] there currently should have had

[2:03:26] a good look. You know, it

[2:03:28] s a.

[2:03:32] The highest form. Lots, lots of

[2:03:35] negative things can go in site

[2:03:37] would prohibit a lot of that.

[2:03:43] But. I think the comprehensive

[2:03:47] plan was a little off in that

[2:03:48] same area that I walk with my

[2:03:51] dog, which is uh, goes up

[2:03:55] through Jackson Park, which I

[2:03:56] Think there

[2:03:57] s a plan to get rid

[2:04:00] of the park and make little

[2:04:02] boutiques or something there. I

[2:04:02] don

[2:04:05] t know, but there are about

[2:04:10] 40 acres of developable land in

[2:04:12] that area, which is a lot of

[2:04:14] land, a lot of opportunity for

[2:04:18] housing or mixed use or

[2:04:20] something. That land has been

[2:04:24] intentionally held for. Ever

[2:04:26] since Marshall Street was

[2:04:31] expanded. So I feel like I feel

[2:04:33] like that area is on the verge

[2:04:35] of being something better than

[2:04:38] it is now. And I think this

[2:04:40] would be a setback. And I thank

[2:04:42] you for your time.

[2:04:43] Thank you, MR. Friar. All

[2:04:44] right. We

[2:04:45] ll now go back to the

[2:04:46] proponents. You have three

[2:04:48] minutes or so for any rebuttal

[2:04:48] you

[2:04:55] d like to present.

[2:04:57] Well, just with respect to the

[2:04:59] note in the staff report about

[2:05:01] traffic that was looking at a

[2:05:03] change from a church used to a

[2:05:06] kennel, use the actual analysis

[2:05:08] that would be relevant would be

[2:05:10] the traffic difference between

[2:05:12] an indoor kennel use and one

[2:05:14] with an outdoor enclosure.

[2:05:16] Because this is already zoned

[2:05:19] as general industrial. Um, Rick

[2:05:22] Brandt did present to parent

[2:05:24] sales showing properties

[2:05:27] adjacent to kennels that have

[2:05:29] outdoor enclosures so that that

[2:05:31] is directly relevant. And I

[2:05:33] would ask for his slides and

[2:05:34] also Luke Dickie slides to be

[2:05:37] included in the evidence for

[2:05:40] this case. The question before

[2:05:41] the council is a little

[2:05:44] different than with a rezoning.

[2:05:46] Special use permit has to be

[2:05:50] based on competent material

[2:05:53] evidence, including expert

[2:05:54] evidence on the question of

[2:05:55] value and also question of

[2:05:57] traffic for that matter. Um, to

[2:05:59] prove the factors. And then the

[2:06:00] question for y

[2:06:02] all is whether

[2:06:03] that evidence has been

[2:06:06] presented. Um, this is not and

[2:06:06] I

[2:06:06] m I

[2:06:07] m telling you things

[2:06:08] you

[2:06:10] ve already known and

[2:06:11] studied. It

[2:06:12] s a quasi judicial

[2:06:12] hearing. It

[2:06:14] s not a question of

[2:06:15] legislative discretion tonight.

[2:06:16] It

[2:06:17] s a question of judging the

[2:06:19] evidence before you on the

[2:06:21] factors in the ordinance that

[2:06:23] the city has already enacted.

[2:06:23] We

[2:06:24] ve presented competent

[2:06:27] evidence on each one of those.

[2:06:29] Um, and I think this will be a

[2:06:30] way of improving the

[2:06:32] neighborhood and performing a

[2:06:34] service for the community. And

[2:06:36] I would urge you to please, uh,

[2:06:38] approve the permit. Thank you.

[2:06:41] Thank you. Sir. The. Yes, sir.

[2:06:41] If you

[2:06:43] d like to add to that.

[2:06:45] Yes, sir. 11 seconds. MAY I use

[2:06:47] it? Absolutely. My name is

[2:06:49] Sanders Mosley. I have.

[2:06:52] Owned the building since 1994.

[2:06:55] Uh, we had a distribution

[2:06:57] company for medical uniforms

[2:07:00] that went out of business. We

[2:07:03] have since rented to a number

[2:07:06] of places of business. Excuse

[2:07:07] me. I

[2:07:08] m looking at the clock

[2:07:11] closely. The way it is

[2:07:15] currently zoned. I have had two

[2:07:19] unsolicited inquiries since I

[2:07:20] m

[2:07:23] into this contract for trucking

[2:07:25] distribution companies, and

[2:07:29] they can truck into and out of

[2:07:32] there 24 hours a day with no

[2:07:34] additional zoning. And those

[2:07:37] tractor trailers wanted to park

[2:07:41] in the back lot. And there is

[2:07:43] nothing in the zoning, is my

[2:07:45] understanding, that would

[2:07:48] prohibit them from doing that.

[2:07:50] So in my opinion, this is a

[2:07:53] good neighbor use of my

[2:07:54] property.

[2:07:56] Thank you. Thank you, MISTER

[2:08:00] Mosley. All right. Thank you.

[2:08:01] Would the opposition. I

[2:08:02] d like

[2:08:03] to have three minutes of

[2:08:07] rebuttal.

[2:08:09] One second.

[2:08:10] Yes. If you give your name and

[2:08:13] address for the record, please.

[2:08:14] Hi.

[2:08:17] My name is Sophia Nazareth. I

[2:08:19] live at 816 West eighth Street,

[2:08:22] which is in 500ft of the back

[2:08:23] lot, where they

[2:08:23] re going to

[2:08:27] have their outdoor kennel. Um,

[2:08:28] I have a dog. I

[2:08:29] m not anti

[2:08:32] animal or anti rescue at all.

[2:08:35] Um, but I am a little bit

[2:08:37] concerned about this changing

[2:08:39] the amount of noise in the

[2:08:41] neighborhood. And I don

[2:08:41] t think

[2:08:43] that was addressed like

[2:08:46] adequately to me. Um, we all

[2:08:49] know that amplifiers glide up,

[2:08:53] noise travels up. Um, one dog

[2:08:55] barks in our neighborhood. All

[2:08:56] the dogs start barking in our

[2:08:59] neighborhood. We have on eighth

[2:09:00] Street, where I am two

[2:09:03] industrial companies. They both

[2:09:05] are pretty quiet. So it

[2:09:05] s not

[2:09:07] that we do not live with

[2:09:09] industry. We do. And it gets

[2:09:12] along fine with us. Um, I think

[2:09:14] this is different. So I would

[2:09:16] just recommend that without

[2:09:18] really understanding how the

[2:09:23] sound will travel, that it we

[2:09:24] don

[2:09:24] t want to have to be

[2:09:30] calling for animal noises every

[2:09:32] day because dogs are barking.

[2:09:33] And I do fear that that would

[2:09:35] be what happens. We have all

[2:09:36] these dogs barking. It

[2:09:37] s 15

[2:09:39] minutes. After 15 minutes. You

[2:09:42] can call for a violation of

[2:09:46] noise. I think that that is

[2:09:47] possibly what would happen

[2:09:49] here. All right. Thank you.

[2:09:51] Thank you. Anyone else? Yes,

[2:09:51] ma

[2:09:58] am.

[2:10:00] Understanding that this is what

[2:10:02] you are calling a quasi

[2:10:04] judicial process and rebuttal

[2:10:06] to the argument. I

[2:10:06] d like to

[2:10:07] name three things that were

[2:10:10] irrelevant to this argument.

[2:10:11] One was the elevation. Because

[2:10:13] the elevation will change

[2:10:14] within the next 12 months. Once

[2:10:17] I get my engineering. Um,

[2:10:20] redrawn to, that means that the

[2:10:21] noise that he

[2:10:21] s talking about

[2:10:24] is going to change. And then

[2:10:28] the third thing is going to be

[2:10:30] the the runoff of the water

[2:10:32] will then also impact the

[2:10:34] neighboring, uh, apartments and

[2:10:36] also houses that are going to

[2:10:44] be built in the area.

[2:10:45] Thank you. Anyone else for the

[2:10:48] opposition? All right. Seeing

[2:10:49] no one, I

[2:10:50] ll declare the public

[2:10:52] hearing closed and would

[2:10:58] recognize Councilmember Hall.

[2:11:02] Thank you. Mayor Jones. Uh,

[2:11:03] thank you for everybody

[2:11:04] tonight. Thank you to my

[2:11:06] colleagues pressing through,

[2:11:11] um, with this hearing. Um, we

[2:11:12] heard a lot of concerns

[2:11:14] tonight. Um, from the

[2:11:16] proponents and the opponents of

[2:11:20] this, uh, special use permit.

[2:11:23] And I would just like to state

[2:11:27] that I would hope that, um, if

[2:11:30] this is approved tonight, that

[2:11:32] the proponents would as best as

[2:11:35] possible, um, remember all of

[2:11:37] the concerns that were lifted

[2:11:41] tonight, particularly from the

[2:11:44] opponents, as best they can and

[2:11:46] consider these concerns moving

[2:11:48] forward with any possible

[2:11:53] development on the site. Um,

[2:11:54] and just for clarity, since

[2:11:59] this is a, um, quasi quasi

[2:12:02] judicial act. Um, I am

[2:12:06] confirming, uh, the four

[2:12:10] findings of fact for granting a

[2:12:14] special use permit. Um, and

[2:12:17] Mayor Jones, if, um, if I am

[2:12:18] incorrect, I would like for

[2:12:21] Director Murphy to say no,

[2:12:21] you

[2:12:22] re not right. If that is

[2:12:26] the case. Um, for findings of

[2:12:30] fact, um, that staff in

[2:12:32] particular, um, also went

[2:12:34] through. And their report is,

[2:12:37] um, public health and safety

[2:12:39] that, um, the use will not

[2:12:42] materially endanger the public

[2:12:45] health or safety if located

[2:12:46] where the proposed and

[2:12:51] developed, um, and developed um

[2:12:54] application plan as submitted

[2:12:55] and approved. I think we do

[2:12:57] have a slide for that. Um, but

[2:12:58] I want to make sure that that

[2:13:02] is the case. And then also the

[2:13:04] other finding of fact, um, that

[2:13:06] we were to be listening for

[2:13:09] tonight was that this use meets

[2:13:11] all required conditions and

[2:13:12] specifications, and that would

[2:13:14] be in alignment to just

[2:13:15] essentially ordinance

[2:13:19] compliance. And then the other

[2:13:21] thing, um, the for the other

[2:13:24] finding effect, um, would be

[2:13:26] that this use as presented will

[2:13:29] not substantially, um, endure

[2:13:31] the value of adjoining or

[2:13:33] abutting property value. So

[2:13:33] basically we

[2:13:34] re talking about

[2:13:37] property values not being, um,

[2:13:41] endangered. And then the other,

[2:13:43] um, finding of fact that the

[2:13:44] location and the character of

[2:13:46] the proposed use, if it

[2:13:47] s

[2:13:48] developed according to the

[2:13:50] application and the plan that

[2:13:53] was submitted, um, would be in

[2:13:55] harmony with the area and then

[2:13:58] also to be in conformity with

[2:14:02] the for 2045.

[2:14:03] Councilmember Hall, I

[2:14:04] m.

[2:14:05] Sorry, Councilmember Hall, I

[2:14:07] will say that as to findings

[2:14:10] one, two, and four, that is the

[2:14:12] fact that is what staff

[2:14:15] believes, that those three

[2:14:18] findings have been met in

[2:14:22] regards to, um, this project

[2:14:23] staff does not have the

[2:14:26] technical expertise to address,

[2:14:27] uh, finding number three,

[2:14:29] dealing with property values.

[2:14:30] Uh, that

[2:14:31] s something that you

[2:14:32] have to, uh, you know, again,

[2:14:34] the whole thing is based on the

[2:14:37] hearing staff put forward our

[2:14:38] thoughts on the three findings,

[2:14:39] but you have to make an

[2:14:41] independent decision related to

[2:14:42] the property values based on

[2:14:44] what you heard. As far as the

[2:14:45] testimony was tonight.

[2:14:47] Thank you. I appreciate that.

[2:14:49] So let that be noted. For the

[2:14:53] record. Um, and with that, uh,

[2:14:55] and everything that I heard

[2:14:57] tonight and based off of those

[2:15:00] findings, I moved that based

[2:15:01] upon the application, the

[2:15:03] testimony and the evidence

[2:15:05] presented at this public

[2:15:07] hearing. That one the City

[2:15:09] Council affirmed the four

[2:15:11] findings as required by section

[2:15:16] 3.2.13 e6a of the Unified

[2:15:20] Development Ordinances, and two.

[2:15:21] The City Council approved the

[2:15:23] site plan that is included with

[2:15:25] the Special Use Permit request,

[2:15:27] along with the conditions

[2:15:29] included in the Special Use

[2:15:32] Permit and Staff Report, and

[2:15:35] three the City Council approved

[2:15:39] w-3, six, seven, six and issued

[2:15:41] a special use permit to

[2:15:44] Concrete Supply Company, llc

[2:15:48] for establishment of an indoor

[2:15:51] enclosure for outdoor enclosure

[2:15:56] for a kennel, indoor use in g-1

[2:16:01] zoning district. Yes city.

[2:16:02] Is there a second to that

[2:16:03] motion?

[2:16:05] Just a moment. Um, Mayor Jones,

[2:16:05] I believe.

[2:16:05] Just minute.

[2:16:06] Councilor. Yes, sir.

[2:16:08] Just a minute. Have you

[2:16:10] finished your total motion?

[2:16:10] Yes. Is there a problem with

[2:16:11] the motion?

[2:16:13] Yes, sir. Yes, sir.

[2:16:13] Um, I just wanted.

[2:16:15] To correct that. I believe that

[2:16:16] we, um, that it

[2:16:17] s, um, three

[2:16:19] six, nine one.

[2:16:21] Um. And I think you said. Three

[2:16:23] seven something. I apologize

[2:16:25] for that. And then, um, there

[2:16:26] was something.

[2:16:29] Related to an llc.

[2:16:31] A concrete company. I don

[2:16:31] t

[2:16:31] think that

[2:16:33] s a part of the

[2:16:34] issue.

[2:16:36] It sounds like the sample

[2:16:37] motion MAY have been barred

[2:16:38] from the last time we had a

[2:16:39] special use permit, which was

[2:16:41] for expansion of an asphalt and

[2:16:43] concrete plant on Lowry Street.

[2:16:45] The proper case number is w

[2:16:48] 3691, and this would be for an

[2:16:50] outdoor enclosure for a kennel,

[2:16:52] indoor use.

[2:16:52] Yes.

[2:16:53] So if you could just amend your

[2:16:54] motion.

[2:16:56] For to to correct that for the

[2:16:57] record, I.

[2:16:59] Will. And thank you Mayor

[2:17:02] Jones. I move that based upon

[2:17:04] the application, testimony and

[2:17:05] evidence presented at the

[2:17:07] public hearing that one the

[2:17:10] City Council affirmed the four

[2:17:12] findings as required by section

[2:17:17] 3.2.13 e6a of the Unified

[2:17:19] Development Ordinances, and

[2:17:21] two. The City Council approved

[2:17:23] the site plan that is included

[2:17:24] with this special use permit

[2:17:26] request, along with the

[2:17:28] conditions included in the

[2:17:30] Special Use Permit and Staff

[2:17:33] Report, and three the City

[2:17:38] Council approved w dash 3691

[2:17:41] and issue a special use permit

[2:17:44] for establishment of an outdoor

[2:17:47] enclosure for a kennel, indoor

[2:17:51] use in a g one zoning district.

[2:17:52] Very good. Now, is there a

[2:17:54] second? Second. Second by

[2:17:55] Councilmember Clark. Any

[2:17:57] further discussion questions?

[2:18:00] Uh, customer Clark, for the

[2:18:05] record, I do have two dogs.

[2:18:06] I do.

[2:18:08] Have two indoor kennels with

[2:18:10] runs. To the best of my

[2:18:12] knowledge, in the West ward,

[2:18:13] one is behind Duke

[2:18:13] s

[2:18:15] restaurant, which is, I think

[2:18:15] it

[2:18:18] s an adoption type place.

[2:18:20] Uh, I eat at Duke

[2:18:20] s

[2:18:21] periodically. I get my car

[2:18:23] washed next door to that one

[2:18:25] regularly. I have never smelled

[2:18:27] anything, nor I have I. Have I

[2:18:30] ever heard a dog bark there? I

[2:18:32] have another indoor kennel

[2:18:33] which does have an outdoor run

[2:18:37] further out. Country club, uh,

[2:18:38] kind of near where the driving

[2:18:40] range is way out there. I

[2:18:40] ve

[2:18:42] never gotten a complaint on it.

[2:18:45] I have two dog runs at

[2:18:47] Meadowlark School. I used to

[2:18:48] take my dogs there a while

[2:18:49] back. Uh, I

[2:18:50] ve never gotten a

[2:18:52] complaint there about barking.

[2:18:54] I have said on this council for

[2:18:56] 25 years, and I had probably

[2:18:58] count on one hand the number of

[2:18:58] calls I

[2:19:01] ve got on barking dogs.

[2:19:02] Uh, but that

[2:19:04] s not why I would

[2:19:08] like to speak. This property

[2:19:12] has the most broadest, worst

[2:19:17] zoning you can imagine. General

[2:19:20] industrial. You mentioned a

[2:19:22] cement plant, asphalt plants.

[2:19:24] We have a hard time getting

[2:19:26] those cited because they are

[2:19:28] not good neighbors. You could

[2:19:32] have a lot of things, and I

[2:19:34] simply would suggest, be

[2:19:37] careful what you ask for. And I

[2:19:38] will be supporting the motion.

[2:19:40] Very good. Oh, do you have a

[2:19:42] motion to approve this item?

[2:19:43] All those in favor, please

[2:19:44] indicate by voting yes. Anyone

[2:19:51] opposed? Vote no. My computer

[2:19:51] s

[2:20:02] down. The motion passes in

[2:20:04] favor of seven. In favor one

[2:20:05] opposed. Councilmember Burke

[2:20:07] voting no. Thank you very much.

[2:20:10] Councilmember Hall of love

[2:20:12] verbiage. There. All right, so

[2:20:14] now go to the public comment

[2:20:16] period, which is the time that

[2:20:18] the City Council now set aside

[2:20:20] for citizens to voice their

[2:20:21] opinions on matters that are

[2:20:24] germane to city government when

[2:20:25] the comment period is called,

[2:20:26] each speaker will be given

[2:20:27] three minutes for presentation

[2:20:29] and the total amount of the

[2:20:30] public comment period will be

[2:20:32] 30 minutes. Uh, do we have the

[2:20:34] list of speakers?

[2:20:49] Uh.

[2:20:52] Okay. First person signed up as

[2:20:54] Benjamin Gaither. If you would

[2:20:55] please state your name and

[2:20:56] address. For the record, MR.

[2:20:58] Gaither.

[2:20:59] Um.

[2:21:00] Hello, my name is Benjamin

[2:21:04] Gaither. Uh, my address is 281

[2:21:05] Village Creek Circle,

[2:21:08] Winston-Salem. And, uh, I

[2:21:08] m a

[2:21:10] student of Winston-Salem State

[2:21:13] University. Uh, today was the

[2:21:15] first day of classes, and I

[2:21:17] parked my car. I noticed

[2:21:18] something different this

[2:21:21] semester. Uh, Alper. Cameras,

[2:21:24] uh, from Flock Safety, uh, had

[2:21:26] been added to the entrances and

[2:21:29] exits. Uh, so instead of

[2:21:31] studying between classes, I

[2:21:32] chose to write the words that

[2:21:33] you

[2:21:35] re hearing. Now, I

[2:21:35] m not

[2:21:37] here to tell you to remove

[2:21:39] them. I would work with the

[2:21:40] university for something like

[2:21:44] that. Uh, no. I am here to tell

[2:21:47] you what countless Americans

[2:21:49] and listeners Elamites have

[2:21:51] been going through over the

[2:21:54] past year. Right now, you can

[2:21:57] go to the morgue and see where

[2:21:59] the alp is in our community.

[2:22:02] Are. I noticed that many of

[2:22:04] them were placed in parking

[2:22:06] lots, like Hanes Mall or Home

[2:22:09] Depot. Uh, even some in

[2:22:11] apartment complexes or a

[2:22:12] s. And

[2:22:12] I think that

[2:22:13] s a little bit

[2:22:17] messed up. Um, I understand

[2:22:20] that these APIs are paid for by

[2:22:23] private groups and companies.

[2:22:24] Uh, I would not say I

[2:22:25] m against

[2:22:27] the use of cameras to keep

[2:22:30] parking lots peaceful. Uh, what

[2:22:33] I am against is much nearer and

[2:22:37] significantly more irking, um,

[2:22:39] being a computer science major,

[2:22:41] I know a few things about cyber

[2:22:43] security. When you conne a

[2:22:44] device to the internet, you

[2:22:46] allow the ability for your

[2:22:48] device to be hacked by someone

[2:22:51] else. Far cameras have no real

[2:22:54] vulnerabilities and information

[2:22:56] collected from them can be

[2:22:57] shared with other police

[2:23:00] departments across the United

[2:23:01] States with no requirements for

[2:23:05] warrants. This semester, when I

[2:23:07] should be in classes, listening

[2:23:09] to instructors, I will be

[2:23:10] worried about who

[2:23:11] s watching

[2:23:14] me. My peers will worry about

[2:23:15] their license plates being

[2:23:18] misread and police officers

[2:23:20] claiming that they have a

[2:23:23] stolen vehicle. Uh, most

[2:23:25] importantly, everyone will

[2:23:27] wonder what will happen next.

[2:23:29] Uh, axon is currently

[2:23:32] developing Taser armed drones

[2:23:35] that are for active shooters.

[2:23:37] Um, situations on public

[2:23:40] schools. Will my university

[2:23:41] decide to implement these

[2:23:44] measures for our safety? Uh,

[2:23:46] but if Fox decides to track

[2:23:48] more than just cars in the

[2:23:51] future, right. Uh, will my

[2:23:53] university have a choice in

[2:23:57] that? Who watches the watchers

[2:23:58] with a closed circuit

[2:24:00] television camera system? None

[2:24:01] of the cameras.

[2:24:04] Are open to.

[2:24:05] Yeah.

[2:24:15] Uh, Olivia Doyle.

[2:24:16] Hello, y

[2:24:16] all.

[2:24:16] Aren

[2:24:17] t you excited to be going

[2:24:20] home soon? Um. I Doyle, 1/12

[2:24:23] Street. So hideout is here

[2:24:24] because we still have not been

[2:24:25] invited. Well, actually, we

[2:24:26] just got an invitation

[2:24:28] informally earlier today, but

[2:24:28] we haven

[2:24:29] t been invited to

[2:24:30] present our legal defense of

[2:24:31] our proposal to stop local

[2:24:33] cannabis arrests. We are still

[2:24:34] asking for the meeting that

[2:24:36] Mayor Pro Tem Adams, uh,

[2:24:37] promised to get our ordinance

[2:24:38] through the General Government

[2:24:39] Committee. But while we are

[2:24:41] waiting for that, we would like

[2:24:42] to deliver the legal analysis

[2:24:43] that we have received from

[2:24:45] civil rights litigator Jaylen

[2:24:46] Miller of Emancipate North

[2:24:48] Carolina. Attorney Miller has

[2:24:49] concluded, as you should have

[2:24:50] read in her email earlier

[2:24:51] today, that Dillon

[2:24:52] s rule is

[2:24:54] not a reasonable barrier to

[2:24:55] mandatory sign release or

[2:24:56] lowest law enforcement

[2:24:58] priority. Attorney Miller could

[2:24:59] not find an instance in which

[2:25:01] the city engaged with our legal

[2:25:02] argument, supporting these

[2:25:03] proposed policies, but she did

[2:25:06] find two instances where a

[2:25:07] manager paid an attorney.

[2:25:09] French challenged our proposal

[2:25:10] again without responding

[2:25:11] directly to our defense. Using

[2:25:12] North Carolina General Statute

[2:25:15] 58 302 by citing Dillon

[2:25:16] s Rule

[2:25:16] as though Dillon

[2:25:17] s Rule is this

[2:25:19] impenetrable obstacle to

[2:25:20] preventing arrests for

[2:25:21] misdemeanor cannabis. Cannabis

[2:25:23] possession and Winston. It is

[2:25:25] not. In fact, according to her

[2:25:26] analysis, Dillon

[2:25:26] s rule might

[2:25:27] not even apply in North

[2:25:30] Carolina, particularly in this

[2:25:32] instance. So we are asking you

[2:25:33] still to pass two policies

[2:25:35] mandatory sign release and

[2:25:36] lowest level enforcement

[2:25:37] priority for misdemeanor

[2:25:39] possession, because as of right

[2:25:40] now, without those

[2:25:42] decriminalization measures,

[2:25:43] black and Latino residents are

[2:25:45] being stopped and incarcerated

[2:25:46] more often for things like

[2:25:48] this. This is a hemp derived

[2:25:50] blunt that I bought a couple

[2:25:51] hours ago, and Council member

[2:25:52] Clark

[2:25:53] s ward, just across the

[2:25:55] street from a church. And if if

[2:25:56] I take it outside the tube, I

[2:25:57] walk because I know the smell

[2:25:59] gives some people a headache.

[2:26:00] But if I take it outside of the

[2:26:01] tube, I assure you you would

[2:26:02] not be able to tell the

[2:26:03] difference between this and

[2:26:05] illegal cannabis. It

[2:26:06] s a blunt.

[2:26:08] So unless we want to continue

[2:26:09] the racist governance that was

[2:26:10] set up by the likes of City

[2:26:11] Manager, Gold or Mayor

[2:26:13] Cavanaugh, we need to prevent

[2:26:14] the racially disproportionate

[2:26:15] enforcement for possessing

[2:26:17] things that look and smell like

[2:26:19] this. Despite Chief Pence

[2:26:20] claims that the weed in

[2:26:22] Winston-Salem is not mellowing

[2:26:23] people out, I can assure you

[2:26:25] that this blunt is not going to

[2:26:26] make me go on a rampage. In

[2:26:28] fact, this one is labeled as an

[2:26:29] indica strain, and that usually

[2:26:32] just makes me go to sleep. So

[2:26:34] once again, we are asking that

[2:26:35] our ordinance proposal be

[2:26:36] pushed through the General

[2:26:38] Government Committee. I also

[2:26:40] want to follow up with um,

[2:26:41] Councilmember Andrew Bone about

[2:26:42] the meeting that was proposed

[2:26:44] earlier today and formally. And

[2:26:45] we are asking this with the

[2:26:46] understanding that Dillon

[2:26:46] s

[2:26:49] rule is not a barrier to our

[2:26:51] proposed ordinance passage. I

[2:26:51] m

[2:26:54] going to leave a copy, a couple

[2:26:54] copies of Attorney Miller

[2:26:55] s

[2:26:56] analysis, as well as the

[2:26:57] ordinance proposal that we

[2:26:57] ve

[2:26:57] sent y

[2:26:59] all a couple of times,

[2:27:00] just in case you need it to

[2:27:03] read over again. Thank you.

[2:27:04] Thank you. Matthew Mares,

[2:27:17] please.

[2:27:19] Getting sleepy back there. Hey,

[2:27:20] Matthew.

[2:27:21] My name is Matthew Mayers. I

[2:27:24] live at two, 844 Wesleyan Lane.

[2:27:26] I wanted to, um, first of all,

[2:27:27] uh, call out some really

[2:27:28] positive things that have

[2:27:30] happened recently, echoing one

[2:27:31] one thing MR. Pate was talking

[2:27:33] about earlier, the incredible

[2:27:34] response by utilities when the

[2:27:37] water main broke, that was that

[2:27:39] was like superhuman. Um, and,

[2:27:42] uh, another I just have to go

[2:27:43] on record for your amusement

[2:27:44] saying, I

[2:27:45] m so glad the fire

[2:27:47] department is driving their

[2:27:50] SUVs more, um, probably not

[2:27:51] something you expected me to

[2:27:53] say. Driving your suv more

[2:27:55] makes me happy. But if it

[2:27:56] s as

[2:27:57] opposed to driving a big fire

[2:27:57] engine, that

[2:27:58] s a great thing.

[2:27:59] And especially if it

[2:27:59] s less

[2:28:01] than, respond better to, uh,

[2:28:04] emergency situations. But I

[2:28:04] m

[2:28:06] really here to offer kind of

[2:28:07] like a public service

[2:28:09] announcement to you all. Pretty

[2:28:10] soon, I think you

[2:28:10] re going to

[2:28:13] be getting the report on your

[2:28:16] property. Um, evaluation of the

[2:28:17] the state of the property

[2:28:19] inventory for the city. And

[2:28:21] after that, I hope making some

[2:28:22] decisions about how you want to

[2:28:24] improve those properties in

[2:28:26] lots of ways, and I hope,

[2:28:28] including the monitoring and

[2:28:30] efficiency of energy use in

[2:28:32] them. So the public service

[2:28:33] announcement part is to let you

[2:28:35] know that among the tools in

[2:28:37] your in your toolbox going

[2:28:39] forward, on top of things like,

[2:28:40] you know, bond issues and all

[2:28:42] of that, um, if you haven

[2:28:42] t

[2:28:43] seen a couple of a couple of

[2:28:44] weeks ago in Raleigh, they

[2:28:47] passed, uh, Senate Bill 445,

[2:28:48] which was a regulatory reform

[2:28:52] bill, and a part of it, um, was

[2:28:55] to streamline the process of

[2:28:57] letting government and entities

[2:29:00] enter into, uh, guaranteed

[2:29:02] energy savings contracts. And

[2:29:03] if you probably are somewhat

[2:29:05] familiar with those, but again,

[2:29:09] for public record, it allows

[2:29:10] city governments or other

[2:29:12] entities to contract with a

[2:29:14] third party. Um, not have to

[2:29:16] put forth a bunch of cash

[2:29:18] necessarily, and start to see

[2:29:20] savings from, uh, from energy

[2:29:23] efficiency right away. Is it as

[2:29:25] good a deal, not a dollar for

[2:29:25] dollar. But you don

[2:29:26] t have to

[2:29:28] come up with a cash. So in that

[2:29:30] sense, it can be a real unlock

[2:29:33] for moving forward on things.

[2:29:35] Um, and since I have 48

[2:29:35] seconds, I

[2:29:36] ll also mention

[2:29:38] House Bill 162 also passed,

[2:29:40] which means no more parking

[2:29:41] limits, no more parking

[2:29:43] minimums, I should say. Which I

[2:29:43] know that

[2:29:44] s somewhat

[2:29:46] controversial, but think of how

[2:29:47] marvelous that

[2:29:48] s going to be

[2:29:49] for opening up housing in the

[2:29:50] city. I know there will be

[2:29:52] people who are a little upset,

[2:29:55] but this is a good thing for,

[2:29:57] um, improving density and

[2:29:59] fighting against sprawl. So

[2:30:00] hooray for that and I hope you

[2:30:01] have a good night. I think I

[2:30:01] m

[2:30:02] last, so y

[2:30:03] all get to go home.

[2:30:04] Good night.

[2:30:05] Thank you, MR. Mares. Is there

[2:30:07] anyone else who wants to speak

[2:30:08] during the public comment

[2:30:08] period? Yes, ma

[2:30:16] am.

[2:30:20] I have to put my shoes on.

[2:30:21] Hi, all. My name is Marilyn

[2:30:23] Mendiola dela Cruz. I live in

[2:30:24] Mebane and I don

[2:30:25] t have a home

[2:30:26] address. Um, I

[2:30:27] m here because I

[2:30:29] stand in solidarity and in full

[2:30:30] support with hate out

[2:30:32] Winston-Salem fair Justice and

[2:30:33] Safety Act, which I try and

[2:30:35] see, supports a youth policy

[2:30:36] that did decriminalize a small

[2:30:37] amount of marijuana possession

[2:30:39] by minors through sight and

[2:30:41] release, and diversion, while

[2:30:43] keeping criminal penalties for

[2:30:43] selling, trafficking,

[2:30:46] distribution, driving and

[2:30:48] adults supplying marijuana to

[2:30:50] minors. North Carolina General

[2:30:53] statute statute 90-95 currently

[2:30:56] makes possession of schedule

[2:30:58] six controlled substance, a

[2:31:00] class three misdemeanor with

[2:31:01] marijuana penalties increasing

[2:31:03] by quantity. Possession over

[2:31:06] the half one half ounce becomes

[2:31:08] a class one misdemeanor, and

[2:31:10] possession over one and one

[2:31:11] half ounce becomes class one

[2:31:12] felony. We should not treat

[2:31:14] teenagers caught with small

[2:31:15] personal use amount the same

[2:31:16] way that we treat someone

[2:31:18] selling drugs to children. The

[2:31:20] policy should be simple seize

[2:31:22] the substance issue site,

[2:31:24] notify parent guardian when

[2:31:25] appropriate. Connect the young

[2:31:27] person to education,

[2:31:28] assessment, counseling,

[2:31:29] diversion and keep them out of

[2:31:31] detention. Unnecessary and

[2:31:34] unnecessary criminal processing

[2:31:36] the person selling it is a

[2:31:37] different enforcement problem.

[2:31:38] North Carolina already

[2:31:40] recognizes that youth justice

[2:31:42] can use interventions other

[2:31:43] than incarceration under

[2:31:46] chapter seven seven. Be

[2:31:47] juvenile courts can impose

[2:31:48] counseling, community service,

[2:31:49] substance abuse programming,

[2:31:51] supervision, curfews as

[2:31:52] conditions of juvenile

[2:31:55] dispositions. There is also

[2:31:56] useful historical comparison

[2:31:59] with tobacco. In 1998, the cdc

[2:32:01] documented the 42 states had

[2:32:03] laws prohibiting minors from

[2:32:05] purchasing, possessing, or

[2:32:06] prohibiting selling or

[2:32:07] distribution of tobacco to

[2:32:08] minors. North Carolina

[2:32:10] specifically prohibits minors

[2:32:11] from purchasing tobacco and

[2:32:14] classified the violation as a

[2:32:17] class two misdemeanor. The

[2:32:19] policy lesson is that we can

[2:32:20] regulate youth access and hold

[2:32:21] sellers accountable without

[2:32:23] making criminalization of the

[2:32:25] young person the primary

[2:32:29] intervention. Um, I support

[2:32:32] narrowly written safety focus.

[2:32:37] I support. Sorry, I need

[2:32:40] reading glasses. North Carolina

[2:32:44] general statute. Um. 153a-142

[2:32:46] expressly authorizes counties

[2:32:50] to impose a curfew on anyone 18

[2:32:53] and under 18 in North Carolina,

[2:32:55] law also provides municipal

[2:32:56] authority for juvenile curfews.

[2:32:57] But the curfew has to be

[2:32:59] written around safety, not

[2:33:01] punishment. There should be

[2:33:05] explicit exceptions for work,

[2:33:06] school, religious services,

[2:33:08] organized activities, Medicare,

[2:33:10] medical care, transportation,

[2:33:11] or even coming out to city

[2:33:12] council to be able to speak

[2:33:14] because, you know, it goes

[2:33:18] after nine. Um, and not turning

[2:33:19] ordinary presence in public

[2:33:20] into unnecessary,

[2:33:21] disproportionately racially

[2:33:24] targeted arrest or criminal

[2:33:25] records. Our standards should

[2:33:27] be simple hold adults, dealers,

[2:33:29] traffickers accountable, yada

[2:33:32] yada yada and not putting our

[2:33:33] kids into the criminal justice

[2:33:34] pipeline.

[2:33:36] Thank you.

[2:33:37] Anyone else for the public

[2:33:39] comment? Period.

[2:33:44] I would like to say something.

[2:33:46] Um, my name is Sarah Girard.

[2:33:49] Uh, 216 West Banner Avenue. I

[2:33:52] also came to support hate outs,

[2:33:54] um, initiatives on

[2:33:55] decriminalization. I

[2:33:56] m very

[2:33:58] concerned about our federal

[2:34:00] government and the fact that we

[2:34:03] have both white supremacist and

[2:34:05] white nationalists in office

[2:34:08] right now, and the trickle down

[2:34:11] of that to us. Uh, I finally,

[2:34:15] like I can only I think a lot

[2:34:18] of globally and nationally and

[2:34:20] internationally, but locally is

[2:34:22] the only place I can really

[2:34:26] have enough impact. And. I

[2:34:27] m

[2:34:28] just very concerned about that.

[2:34:33] And I want to try to get

[2:34:35] support from my local officials

[2:34:38] and protecting the community.

[2:34:40] So in things like not

[2:34:44] overpolicing, um, people for

[2:34:47] things that are not really

[2:34:50] crimes, I mean, we, we have

[2:34:51] well, I can we

[2:34:54] ve sorry, i

[2:34:54] m a

[2:34:55] little nervous. I didn

[2:34:56] t put

[2:35:00] anything to speak. So, um, but

[2:35:03] things like, uh, not how are we

[2:35:05] going to protect our citizens

[2:35:07] in general? And with things

[2:35:11] like the, um, Ice raids and ice

[2:35:14] stops there? Um, we

[2:35:15] ve had our

[2:35:16] sheriff say we can

[2:35:16] t do

[2:35:18] anything because this is, you

[2:35:21] know, this is federal, but who

[2:35:24] will protect our citizens when

[2:35:26] you have federal officers doing

[2:35:29] things that are illegal? So I

[2:35:30] just wanted to speak in

[2:35:32] solidarity with hate out. And

[2:35:35] also, um, say that I plan to

[2:35:37] attend meetings more regularly

[2:35:41] because I want to, um, have our

[2:35:43] local officials protecting our

[2:35:45] citizens. Thank you.

[2:35:48] Thank you. And someone else

[2:35:55] wanted to speak.

[2:35:57] Hello? Hello, I

[2:35:58] m Charlotte, I

[2:35:59] live in Greensboro. Although

[2:36:00] some of you will have seen me

[2:36:02] around a fair bit. Uh, Olivia

[2:36:03] already covered everything

[2:36:04] pretty thoroughly, so I just

[2:36:06] want to say that, uh, I also

[2:36:08] stand in solidarity with hate

[2:36:09] out and, uh, support the

[2:36:11] Winston-Salem Fair Justice and

[2:36:12] Public Safety Act.

[2:36:14] Thank you. Thank you very much.

[2:36:15] Anyone else during the public

[2:36:15] comment.

[2:36:18] Period?

[2:36:19] All right. See you then. When

[2:36:19] I

[2:36:21] ll close the public comment

[2:36:22] period. We do have the need to

[2:36:25] go into a closed session. MR..

[2:36:26] Tim Adams has a motion, I

[2:36:28] believe. Councilmember Clark, I

[2:36:29] make a comment before we do

[2:36:31] that brief comment. I was at a

[2:36:32] meeting the other day. I don

[2:36:32] t

[2:36:33] remember which one, but the

[2:36:34] police chief was there and I

[2:36:36] specifically asked the

[2:36:39] question, how many cameras does

[2:36:41] the city, Winston-Salem have?

[2:36:46] And he said none. No, you asked

[2:36:47] it. I asked.

[2:36:48] If.

[2:36:50] But anyway, we both asked it.

[2:36:50] But that

[2:36:53] s what he said. All

[2:36:55] right. The answer was the same.

[2:36:55] All right.

[2:36:57] Thank you.

[2:36:58] All around..

[2:36:59] It must have been different,

[2:37:00] sir. We

[2:37:01] re not talking back and

[2:37:02] forth in the audience. Mayor

[2:37:03] Pro tem.

[2:37:04] Yes. I move.

[2:37:05] For the city council to go into

[2:37:07] closed session pursuant to

[2:37:10] North Carolina General Statute

[2:37:16] 143318.1186 to conduct the City

[2:37:16] Manager

[2:37:17] s annual performance

[2:37:18] evaluation.

[2:37:19] Thank you. Second.

[2:37:20] Second.

[2:37:21] All in favor of the motion,

[2:37:21] please say aye.

[2:37:22] Aye, aye.

[2:37:22] That

[2:37:23] s unanimous. We

[2:37:23] re now

[2:37:27] going in closed session.

[2:37:31] And I took my two big. He could

[2:37:33] have been, uh.

[2:37:34] But the meeting I might have.

[2:37:36] Made this.

[2:37:37] We can

[2:37:38] t talk about.

[2:37:50] Um. Oh, and.

[2:37:51] Then I told myself.

[2:37:53] That I probably should walk

[2:38:36] through. Thank you.

[2:39:52] But I.

[2:40:17] The.

[2:41:58] Yeah.

[2:41:58] That. Let

[2:42:15] s try. The.

[2:42:16] Yeah.

[2:42:30] Okay. Okay. So that. Yeah. But

[2:42:32] they they said they were.

[2:42:33] Yeah. I remember those two

[2:42:33] days. I couldn

[2:42:34] t remember.

[2:42:34] What the.

[2:42:38] Other one was. And I was a. But

[2:42:43] I guess. Yeah, yeah I can get

[2:42:46] my emails out. Yeah. Well thank

[2:42:47] you all for all of you on your

[2:42:49] work. I appreciate it. It

[2:42:49] s

[2:42:51] been a long. Yeah, I

[2:42:52] m sure

[2:42:52] they

[2:42:54] re not all easy. Thank you.

[2:47:46] Exactly. Bye. It

[2:47:48] s so cold. Yes.

[2:47:55] I wish I knew somewhere welcome.

[2:48:01] Is there a motion to end the. I

[2:48:01] moved.

[2:48:04] So moved.

[2:48:06] By Hall. Second by. Yeah. All

[2:48:07] in favor of any closed session,

[2:48:09] please say aye. Aye aye. Motion

[2:48:12] to adjourn. Motion by Mayor Pro

[2:48:13] Tem, seconded by.

[2:48:14] Several.

[2:48:16] Thank you. Going all those in

[2:48:17] favor of the motion to adjourn?

[2:48:19] Say aye. Aye, aye. We

[2:48:19] re

[2:48:30] adjourned.

[2:48:39] Let me ask you a the motion.

Regular Meeting of the Winston-Salem City Council - Aug 17th, 2026

Agenda

Transcript