City Council - Regular Meeting

It's 5:00. Um, good evening everyone. I'd like to welcome you to the March 2nd, 2026 city council work session. And I ask that everyone please silence all electronic devices. I'm looking to make sure mine are. I think and first up I'd like to recognize rail division director Jason.

Okay. Well, thank you, mayor, and thank you. Thank you, mayor, members of council for inviting us uh back to give an update on rail activities here in this in the city and uh throughout North Carolina. It's a pleasure to be with you. Uh that you have some great partnerships with the community uh with some of your businesses, your sports teams, uh and some other great things going on. So, I'll go into some level detail on that as we get to the presentation. Uh just a quick uh just for folks that are not as familiar with the passenger rail system in North Carolina. This is our current service map. We operate daily service uh between Raleigh and Charlotte uh for the uh what we call the Pedmont service. And then we also operate a service called the Carolinian which operates daily between Charlotte and uh and New York City in both directions and Burlington is a stop on both those services. um that ser those services are overlaid across na Amtrak's national system map. So they also operate four trains uh through various part parts of North Carolina servicing uh the northeast the Chicago region uh all the way down to Louisiana uh Atlanta and Florida uh all through uh the state and then there's connecting motor coach service in eastern part of the state. We call this the starter kit of passenger rail North Carolina. Uh we have a bigger vision than this going forward, but it is a great placeh to start from and we're seeing very bright ridership as a result of the system. I do like to just talk about the kind of service that we provide for those that uh when they hear about a pass train may not know exactly what kind of faster train I'm talking about. Uh the state uh works with Amtrak to provide what's called inner city passenger rail service. And this service basically it connects this the centers of our cities and our towns across our state and across the region uh together. The trip lengths are usually longer uh and so you have things like baggage and food service on our trains that you wouldn't have for instance on a very short distance commuter train. That's

different than commuter rail. A lot of folks have heard the term commuter rail before. That's usually a shorter distance train that's connecting uh suburban areas to a major urban core. And typically those services historically have operated in peak hour traffic uh time frames to alleviate um workers that were coming into a major business district from outside the city. Uh shorter trip durations. Typically those stations might be closer space together, but really the goal of those systems was to deliver a worker to you know the the job site. And then lastly is light rail. Uh many of you probably have heard of light rail, but light rail is a fully separate system from the national railroad network. So this is a a rail system in a city or uh in our community where the system is dedicated specifically to getting people around that city, even shorter distances between stations, usually lots of trains that don't share tracks of freight trains that don't share tracks with inner city trains. Uh the only place in North Carolina that currently exists is is in Charlotte. So in our inner city passenger service has been operating for uh since 1990. So so 35 years now uh and has experienced its greatest uh level of ridership um in the last few years. 59% higher than uh 2019. So the year before the pandemic uh we we've seen a 59% increase of ridership. So folks are using the train more than ever. Uh and they're using it more than ever in Burlington. So that's a that's a part of my what I'm going to talk about here in a little bit. But one of the important things I want to bring to your attention is just how where Burlington sits sort of in the state map and where we on the east coast map. Burlington is on that segment between Greensboro and Raleigh that will that ultimately will connect all of the uh inner city passenger rail services in the state. Man, some of you may have heard that we're looking at Asheville as

a major destination for passenger rail uh as well as uh places like Wilmington, uh Winston Salem, uh Fagetville, uh and then all the way to Atlanta through for some of our services and then more services over big project we're doing called the S-line which will in which will increase the number of trains that we are offering between North Carolina, Virginia and the Northeast. So all that is going on at the same time, but the key thing for this region is that all of those services have to come through this area here. So what that means is as we develop the system, there'll be more trains coming through Burlington that will go to more destinations that Burlington citizens want to get to. So we're going to focus a little bit here on Burlington. Uh so as I mentioned, there is record wrership in Burlington. We've seen from the fiscal year 25 which was from uh July of of 24th to to uh June of 25 uh compared against the same period in uh from um uh June July of 23 to July to June of 24 we've seen 13% increase in in ridership at Burlington station. That's actually the second highest ridership increase on the entire route. The only other station that had higher ridership increase was Salsbury. Um but uh really shows that uh the things that we're doing working with the community are are are paying off and folks are are getting on the train board the network here. Um so the station as I mentioned from the previous map is actually on two of our our our developing routes the two are FRA corridor ID routes. One of those is the Raleigh to Winston Salem route and the other is the Charlotte to DC route. So we're developing both of those uh corridors. Uh and both of those corridors go right through here. Uh, one thing I did mention about the map and I'll just go back to it just real quick. Um, just for context purposes, um, many of the routes that you see like Winston Salem to Asheville to Wilmington uh,

even available, we're looking at three round trips uh, for most of those routes and that would be the predominance of the service we provide for the center city service. Um, and that is um, and so the coral you're on is actually seeing a lot more service because of because it's the core route. It is literally the route that carry trains not just within North Carolina but the entire along the entire east coast. Um we are also expanding our our collaboration with uh your local transit uh system link as well as uh park which is the Pedmont area um rapid transit um system and Elon University's uh system as well. So there's there's some intentionality here with working with those trans systems so that there's good connections between the train service as well as the ser the trans services that service your community. We've also been partnering with the Burlington soft uh and uh we are branding the seventh inning stretch for the 2020 that we did for the 2025 season. Uh very exciting to do that. Uh we've we've um noted that, you know, getting getting them out in front of uh sports fans uh whether they're minor league baseball or uh and even at some of the major league events that happen uh has been a great partnership and um so it's been great to do that here. And then we also have a uh another uh sort of branding campaign with that's called Elra by Rail that's working with some of the brew the the local and uh micro brew companies are all along the route uh working with some of the companies right here in Burlington um that are proximity to the station and this is this has uh from a social media standpoint this has been one of our biggest successes uh so we've been very excited to do that and put Bington on the map uh for businesses here. So, we did we started last year a major public engagement uh program uh with communities all up and down the corridor. And really the goal of the of this of this engagement was to plan for

our future service expansions and schedule changes. Um and I'll talk a little bit more about that as I get through the presentation. Uh but we wanted to understand the customer needs and wants. Those are the f those are the users of the train. And we also wanted to understand the stakeholder needs and wants folks like you guys and the folks that maybe we haven't maybe attracted to the train yet and then improve the collaboration overall uh with partners up and down the line. And so this is sort of the timeline of of what we've been doing with uh with our public engagement pro process. We developed an educational video in May of 2025. This was an important tool because the development and understanding how trains operate and and how but the limitations on on those services um is uh is is not really intuitive. Uh there's a lot of complexity to actually running a train service and and and and helping people understand especially on a freight railroad environment where you've got lots of freight trains that you're working with as well as pass trains. You know, how does what is the railroad's role and what are they looking at when they're when we're developing their schedule. We did an online survey and inerson open houses between May and June of 2025. Uh we've just uh finished the draft report and we're doing our stakeholder engagement now and then we expect to issue the final report in spring 2026. So the draft report has already been provided to staff um with the city. So just some details on this engagement effort. Uh who answered the survey? We had about 268 uh survey respondents. Um about uh 46% of them were non-riders and then uh 54% were riders of the train service. Uh we actually held we had four in-person events across the state. One of them was here held here in Burlington on May 27th and had been participation for that. Uh for that event we had sent invitations May uh 9th through 14th by direct email through via press releases and also social media. So we we got the word out

that way. And that's a picture from one of our events. And that is the one in case. Um so uh how far are people riding? Um so you know kind of consistent with what I was talking about with inner city passenger rails that the mode really favors folks that are going longer longer distances. Short distances people might jump on a car but if they're going longer distances uh the train becomes a very effective and productive tool for them. uh instead of staring on a windshield, you might actually get some work done or get a nap or or come back from a place where you shouldn't be driving um you know and stuff like that. So there's a there's a lot of opportunity for these longer trips to work well. So from the respondents, you know, there's only about 13% that said they were really going these short distances and about 87% that were going uh longer distance. So 35 miles are great uh larger. And the and the graphic at the bottom just shows you kind of where those station distances are and where Burlington sits in between them. So um just for context purposes, we also asked um you know from one of the survey questions, well what was your interest? Is it stopping at more stations or faster travel times? Um again consistent with inner city passenger rail service uh the majority of respondents were really looking at trying to get over get their trip done as fast as possible so they get on. Um there was still a constituency that really was looking at at more stops, you know, doing stopping more stations. Um and so one of the things that we're going to look at and be challenged with is how do we balance between those two uh needs right now? How do we how do we provide services that sort of meet both those areas so that the community all the communities up and down the line feel feel supported? Yes. Um so when do people want to travel? Now this is an interesting graphic. It's a little bit complex, but you can kind of see along the bottom there um the number of responses were um with that that large number like 451. Um and then um so you had an initial trip and then you had basically return trips.

So, the initial trip, a lot of folks want to leave in the morning time between well, it's pretty balanced between 9:00 a.m. and 12:00 p.m. And a lot of folks want to uh return to their to their destination between 3:00 p.m. and really after 6:00 p.m. Um so when we juxtapose this against what we actually see in writership um you know it it shows that right now you know this we need to develop schedules that really kind of balance this um this type of uh service period um while we while in the data itself we're seeing most people getting off off of trains in the middle of the day. So um so so clearly another place for us to look at you know balancing the the various needs for the folks that are responding the survey and those that are riding the train today. All right. Um couple more details. The most important amenity on the train surprise surprise is Wi-Fi. Uh folks want to do productive things on the train and so we actually have worked really hard uh with our service to to really get good good Wi-Fi service on the train. is provided with the ticket price free of charge um to those folks riding the train, but they're also interested in uh new more expanded um uh food and beverage options. So, we're actually looking at adding some food and beverage options on our the Carolinian train. We have full food service. It's cafe service, but the Pedmont, it's um really self-service. It's really limited. Um, we're looking at bringing in a cafe type service to the Petemont so that we can kind of uh continue to provide more amenities to folks. Other things that folks are interested in is u business class service in a premium class versus a just a standard coach class service. Um, the ability to bring your bike um expanded opportunities to do that. Um, check baggage u lesser. And then of course pets uh was sort of the

last one. We do actually the Amtrak does allow pets but usually small pets. Uh so um that continues to be an an interest for folks. All right. And then uh service preferences. Um so why do people pick the train? Well, it they really pick it for convenience. Um so if the station is in proximity to them, if the travel time is is is reasonable and if they uh can be productive while they're while they're traveling, uh those things really play well to the road. You also see here the comfort of the service. And if you've been on one of our trains versus an airplane, the amount of space that you get without a seat belt and just basically get up and walk around the train, that's that is a um amenity that you cannot really get on any other mode of transportation. The cost is very reasonable. The cost the current cost around $30 to go from Raleigh to Charlotte and less if you're going for a shorter distance train. So that's very affordable for a wide range of of demographics and uh and backgrounds. And then of course other things like the sustainability of of the service uh the speed of the service as well. So what else do people want? We actually got 870 open-ended comments uh as part of our surveys. Um so as you can imagine a lot of people want to increase train frequency and improve our schedules. So they want shorter schedules and more trains. Um, they want to improve uh our on-time performance, which is something that we work literally daily on uh and trying to get in and out of uh the way the freight trains. Uh, and part of the way we're tackling that is through some some pretty uh significant capacity projects we're going to be doing uh soon. Uh, one of those capacity projects is actually um just between here and Elon. We're going to add up some more P places for trains to pass each other um which will enable us to run the trains more on time and also more trains and then enhancing connectivity local transit like I've talked about before working with those transit partners in the area. Um some people commented they wanted every train to stop at all

stations. That was certainly something we noted. Um the Charlotte Gateway station is another uh important thing uh where the train stops in Charlotte is important to a lot of folks. And then keeping prices affordable. folks really want to see this continue to be something they have access to. Um, and uh, one of the things that we've done for a very long time is is use a pricing structure that is fixed. Uh, some train services use very dynamic pricing kind of like the airlines do for buying those, but on this quarter between Charlotte, we use more of a fixed price uh, um, sort of uh, rate schedule. That way, a college student who needs to go on this train at this particular time and they want to book their ticket like 20 minutes before the train leaves is not going to pay really really high price for it. So, that's that's been part of what we've been we've been doing. All right. Future service changes. Um, so we have a big program we're working with Northfor Southern and North Carolina River Company on called CAT feed which is uh Carolinian and Pedmont passenger freight improvements. Um, collectively we want a grant uh to make these several improvements between Greensboro and Raleigh and that will allow us to unlock capacity that leads to more trains. So I mentioned an additional passing location between Burlington and Elon. Uh we're also looking at um a pass passing locations uh on the eastern part of the quarter um around Hillsboro uh and between Dur and Kerry as well. Uh and so those improvements in addition to some rail upgrades and some curve uh realignments for ease easements uh will allow us to add several more. Um that work is anticipated to be completed in the next two to three years. So that's a major element that will lead to more trains. Um we're also working with uh the railroad companies on what's called capacity modeling. Uh the railroads require us to do a detailed analysis of how a proposed passenger schedule will

interact with the freight trains and as part of that process they uh dictate when those trains can run on what schedule they can run. Uh and so that is a process that we'll be engaging with with the railroads to to as we work to um build out the capacity and it also leads to what other projects have to be built to add more trains. Um under I mentioned before their quarter ID program um will provide more trains to more places. In the case of Burlington, we're talking about Asheville, we're talking about Winston Salem, we're talking about ultimately to Atlanta. Um, and then to the eastern part of the state, uh, Wilmington, Fateville, Greenville, and, uh, other places we develop out the system. One thing we are definitely going to do as we continue to roll out this is continue to communicate with the with the communities um, um, the schedules that we will be developing. Um, so that is part of our commitment as part of this process. Uh, we're going to continually improve our onboard services. We have some major equipment upgrades coming. Uh, if you've ridden our trains, we have great trains. Um, they are classic trains. Um, they've been around a long time. Uh, since they originally built in the 1950s and60s. Uh, so we are going to get at least a few more years out of them. And then you're going to see the train sets that you see at the bottom of the screen. um which is much more if you've any you've been to Europe or to places where they have uh really nice trains that is what we're bringing to North Carolina. And we're actually building them in North Carolina in Lexington. We actually landed the manufacturing facility that's building these trains. Um there's only two locations in the country in North Carolina has has one. They'll be delivered between 2027 and 2032. And then uh train schedule insights. What we are, this is something we will eventually be talking with the railroads about is like one of these trains going to run. And I I mentioned uh the dynamic

between, you know, having to balance uh people's need to really get over the railroad faster so they can get to their destination faster, but also having more stops. Um, we're going to be looking at a complete schedule change at some point, you know, over the next few years that will allow us to have to kind of try to meet both those things so that uh so that local service trains have some trains at the at the times that are that are being asked of us as well as some express trains that allow the the longer trips to get over faster. And uh that brings me to the end of my presentation. Thank you. Thank you. wondering if there are questions, comments.

I have one question, but it's more so for Bob. Um, last year, wasn't there talk about us losing a laws here?

So, yeah, last so it was actually in 2023, we we re we adjusted the schedules actually. So we um so one of the one of the early morning trains became an express and so we repositioned the trains that were serving Burlington um so they were more so they were favoring more midday service. Um those were the highest higher ridership you know times a day and they continue to show that as as we're seeing that you guys were the second highest increase in ridership. Um but as we develop the schedules going forward, we're trying to look to see if we can bring back some morning service uh to replace that while we're still having express service. So that's part of our goal of this process morning service people going to Elon University. Yes, sir.

Yes, sir. That's good to know. Thank you. Yes, sir. Yeah, sure. I want frequent rider um and share the same pain points of the lack of some of the service options. Um Raleigh is a frequent destination for meetings and other things. It's convenient more so than driving through Russia.

Absolutely. But it would be very helpful uh to have those express trains actually stop here. You know, the actual time savings only seems to be 10 or 15 minutes on the whole route. doesn't seem like that much of a savings compared to the fact that our community's cut off that train. So, I'd love to see what it would take to to bring that back. I know uh it's my understanding from talking to that folks are stationed that all of the NC dot own stations were the ones that got caught from that express service and the next

um those are the NCOT uh we staff those those those uh train stations with contract staff that's correct um but uh there wasn't anything specific about you know but there being the NC doc stage or not. It was looking at the um particular who was riding the train at the particular time of day that was that was leading to that decision at the time. But as I mentioned, we're looking at restoring trying to do really balance this so that we provide both types of services in the future. Will that take the new train sets to bring back or could that happen before?

Well, it really depends on those. We're trying to get those capacity projects done, but when those capacity projects are done, we can we can adjust the schedule. That sounds like 27 A through 32. So I think the capacity program uh will be done two to three years and so that so um I think that puts us more like the 2028 2029. Yeah. Anything else? Thank you. Thank you.

Okay. Um, next we have storm water updates and want to recognize assistant water resources director Aar. Thank you for having us today. Um, I want to also introduce Jennifer and Maya with Rock Tel. Um, you've seen Maya a few times. Jennifer. Um, so we came back today to answer some um remaining questions about the storm water imposs area fee. Um, I know last last time we came and gave an update, there were some outstanding questions. So, we're back today to address those questions and um address any further questions there may be.

Go to start. You'll see the outline of our presentation here and we're going to bounce back and forth. So, I apologize for you the ping pong ball that'll be going on over here, but we do intend to address the questions that you asked at the last session uh through these particular topics. We're going to start with some definitions just to make sure everybody's on the same page. Um the imperous surface is that surface that prevents the storm water from being absorbed to the ground. So it acts like a slideous area acts like a the playground slide where the water shoots into your storm drain as opposed to the sponge that you would have from your green space. green space will absorb all of that water whereas the impervious surface shoots it off um and causes some somewhat of a capacity problem. Your impervious service is your sidewalk, your rooftops for houses or structures um your parking lots, your driveways that are packed gravel or paved um and it does put a burden on your drainage system throughout the city. The industry standard for storm water is to calculate an ERU or an estimated res residential unit. We have done that for the city of Burlington and confirmed that number back in 2024. And your average residential parcel contains 2,950 square ft of impervious surface. That's different for every community. And so that's the number that's been calculated for Burlington. Your single family residential parcels are these single family homes, your duplexes, your non-s single family of your multif family, commercial, industrial, and all of those other types of uses.

We talked last time about the demographics within your system. You currently have about 17,800 single family residential accounts, which is 88% of your build accounts. they only comprise 32% of your impervious area. The 2500 that are your non-s single family comprise 68% of your impervious area and currently they're all paying the same fee. We did um

Y question. So, in um June of last year, we sent out 2500 letters to notify our non- single family residential properties that um we are looking into changing the fee structure. Um not to say that we are, but just to say that we may we're looking into it. Um out of the 2500 letters mailed, we received 16 responses. Um, and the themes of those responses ranged from when is the public comment period because they were interested in voicing their opinion. Um, the in we had five that were concerned with the increased monthly bill. Um, or they were asking if there's going to be a credit program. Um, four requesting clarity on calculation um and the timeline of the of the proposed change. um and then two asking about nonprofits and churches and how this will impact um those entities. And then one appeared before city council on the 17th of February during a public comment period as well. So our current rate structure um our revenue is budgeted for 1.97 million. Um customers like Maya said are paying $7 a month um in per storm water fee and that does not vary between non- single family residential. Um so our large impervious areas are paying $7 a month as our residential properties are paid. The services that we currently provide um are we have an 8020 cost share program which I'll actually talk a little bit more in detail in my presentation. Um that 8020 cost share program uh the city will fund 80% of a storm water project um with the resident paying the additional 20% um for a storm water improvement project

on private property. Uh we also maintain Lake KAC sediment ponds um to protect our drinking water source. Um 1.2 million of capital improvements is budgeted. Um we also maintain repair stream buffers. Um we maintain and repair city-owned storm water control measures. Um and a a big portion of our time is spent on making sure that the city is compliant with our um NPDS permit, our storm water permit for the city. Um and that it compliance includes six minimum control measures or six subprograms, what I like to call them. Um we currently have one watershed study underway. Uh we do dry weather screening, which is when we're going out into the streams and checking for any pollutants. Um street sweeping, drainage and flooding response to the community, which takes up a lot of staff time. Um and we currently have three full-time employees and one part-time employee. Um all right. So, uh, none of this is, uh, new information this time around, but as a reminder, the the proposed, uh, rate structure that we, uh, are bringing to you includes continuing charging those single family residential properties $7 a month, um, as they're as they're currently charged, and that's a a flat rate for all of properties in that single family residential class. Uh the non-s single family residential properties though uh will will be charged $7 a month per eru of impervious area. So that uh becomes the billing unit and it establishes um equity between the the different

property classes as we're billing those non-s single family properties proportional to the amount of impervious area that they have. Um the proposal for the city does include a phase in over five years and that's to um help blunt that impact of making the switch especially for some of those larger properties. Uh and it does include a cap on uh every property would be build no more than 100 erus. So another uh mechanism to kind of manage the impact of making the shift at this point uh with this conversion what we're looking at from a revenue standpoint is kind of a a slight adjustment in the first year probably 75 uh000 to $100,000 increase but then um additional revenue over the remaining four years at about uh 500,000 a year and I think on the Next slide, we will see that breakdown um between the non single family residential properties on the first row of this table and the single family residential properties on the second row. So, if we're if we're talking about keeping that $7 rate over this period of time, then all of that revenue growth comes from the non-S single family side as we phase in um those uh those u charges. Um, so eventually we're working up to um just over four million in revenue um by FY 2031. And uh yes, we can go to the next slide. And I I do I know this is kind of a lot of numbers to look at, but I did want to share um some sample kind of property impacts

so that you can see both the phase in um as well as the cap. So I'll just I'll kind of do this in two chunks. The first three rows here on this table show a non-s single family residential, you know, sample property uh of a certain amount of impervious area measured in erus and all of those are under the 100 eru cap. So essentially in each of the next five years, their fee is increasing 20% at a time until they get to that ultimate rate in year five. um the the sample properties in the bottom two rows of this table or over the cap. Um so even though their impervious area um differs, they both end up being charged that 100 ERU uh maximum again 20% at a time over a period of 5 years. Um, and I think then email, I'll let you talk a little bit more about the proposed level of service under the higher revenue. So, um, I mentioned what we're currently providing services before. Um, and what would we be providing if we did create or generate this revenue? Um, we currently have some capital improvement projects that are we're still looking for ways to fund these projects. Um, one of those is the Ireland Main Street Stormwater Improvement Project. Um that cost estimate is just over $7 million. Um and and what that is is a major storm water diversion um to get storm water infrastructure out off the private property and putting it into the rightway um because we are having it is old infrastructure is failing in a lot of areas um and causing some residents some um headaches. um Chandler Avenue storm water improvements um and Virginia Avenue culvert replacement and stream

stabilization. Um both of those expected to be um heavy expenditures for the storm water division. Um we're in the currently in the planning phase of Virginia Avenue um and waiting to uh find funding for that but we have a culvert failing under Virginia Avenue. Is Virginia Avenue still closed at that culvert? Yes. Okay. That's been closed for a while. Yeah. Yeah. Uh not I don't think it's been over a year, but it's been a while. We're coming up on it. Yeah.

Um and we currently have the 8020 cost share program, but in my next presentation, I'll talk about a potential enhancement to that program. Um but I know one thing that I can mention is um right now we uh we budget 50 to 75,000 for our cost share program. Um, and when you look at the cost of a stormwater improvement project, that's really like one project, two projects maybe if we're lucky. Um, so it would enable us to uh increase the amount of budgeted funds for the cautionary program. Um, we would hire additional staff. Uh, these staff would uh we would also have equipment. Um so instead of just being reactive as a storm water division, we would actually be proactive um and do maintenance on our infrastructure. Um wershed studies. So we do need more wershed studies in the city. We um I think that's part of being proactive instead of reactive. Uh it really gives us a good sense of of how the whole wershed or drainage area is working together and what improvements need to be made. Um, so yeah, that's those are our proposed levels of service. Was I taking this one?

So here, one of the questions we had um was how does this fee compare to other municipalities? Um, and here's an example of some surrounding municipalities or similar in population um, and what their their storm water fees look like. Um and going with an equivalent residential unit is pretty standard now in the storm water world. Um however having a cap is not standard. So a lot of these municipalities do have that eru rate structure but they do not have a cap and they did not do a phase in. So we are proposing to have that cap to help um minimize the impacts of of this fee. Um some of them are tiered. Um I I know when we looked at doing a tiered option that it it was uh administratively heavy. Um so we we stayed away from that the tiered option for us.

Do you mind if I just two more little things um two more caveats that I think are really important as you're looking at peer communities. One is that these are last year's rates, right? Not next year's rates. So this may change uh in the coming months. The other thing is that everyone has a different level of service driven by their own objectives and priorities and so on. And so um this is really great information to have but please take it with that context. So right now so what is the storm water um division required to do? What are residents required to do? What are developers required to do? Um so as part of our ordinance um we do have in the UDEO um we require developments that are over 24% impervious to have a storm water control measure. Um however that is that was written into the ordinance in 2007. So any development prior to 2007 were they were not required to have that storm water control measure. And those are the areas that we're really seeing issues um as far as flooding. Those are those areas that downstream or upstream from them may be a large development but it predated our storm water regulations. So they don't have a storm water fence on the property. Um city our city standard is u meets the state standard for storm water requirements. Um the ordinance requires the STM or storm water control measure controls the uh one-year 24-hour storm event which is actually it's very minimal um what that's controlling. Uh so there's a lot of a lot of runoff still coming from these developments. Um I I already said the ordinance was initially approved in 2007. Um, so it's very rare for a development to construct

an SEM after if they're already grandfathered in. Um, so the this program would have a credit attached to it. So it would have provide some incentive for some of these properties to implement some type of homework. Um, right now we are required to inspect these SCMs even the private privately owned which we have over 300. um our small staff is expected to um and inspect these SCMs um within a five-year period.

Okay, great. So, one of the questions you all had um last time we were uh here talking about this subject was uh how a credit policy might fit into the proposal. Um, so we have uh compiled with Amy and staff's help compiled a list of those permitted storm water control measures. There are 377 of them in the city. Uh, and we sort of talked through the process uh of of receiving those annual um reports and going out and doing inspections and what that means for sort of staff time and resources. Um what it means uh from a compliance standpoint is that by the deadline every year about 90% of uh those SEMs have their owners have their paperwork in and they have shown um that they're still you know well functioning and and in compliance with those requirements. uh with some additional effort from staff to chase down others, another 8% um ultimately achieve compliance uh for the year within a couple of months, right? Um this does take uh some a good deal of effort, but it's it's for a good cause. Ultimately, the city kind of needs those uh control measures to be functioning and in place uh in an ongoing way. Uh for those that don't the small number that don't get their paperwork in um after kind of repeated attempts um there there are enforcement mechanisms in place and ultimately uh notice of violation penalties um to to manage that and and try to get that uh dealt with in a timely fashion. Uh so we're so just taking a step back, we're talking about a credit policy, which is a way to um recognize when

individual property owners kind of take action to mitigate their own um impact on the system. And having a storm control measure is the key way that that that can happen. And so we kind of use this as the foundation for thinking through the way a way um a credit policy a credit program could work that sort of leverages all those existing data points and processes um that that staff are are doing on a regular basis. Um a couple of kind of related considerations. Um, of course, the goal is to have uh to be able to offer a reduced fee for compliance with uh with SEM requirements and ongoing maintenance and demonstration of that ongoing maintenance and functionality. Um, but there is administrative burden as I mentioned on the um storm water staff side. There's also a a hopefully smaller but uh relevant um level of effort on the billing side if we're going to talk about sort of adjusting people's bills up and down as they are compliant with this program or not. Um so to that end um our our proposal on the credit uh front is to have sort of an annual cut off for credit eligibility that aligns with the SCM um compliance requirements. So once a year, you know, 90% of folks have their stuff in, they can be eligible for the credit. For those that don't, I'm sorry you missed it this year. Um hopefully that's extra incentive also to kind of reduce the workload to chase down the the remainder there. Um there is a revenue impact of course for offering credits and we've looked through all of the um all of the properties in the city and all of the ones associated with those 377 SCMs. um we uh we have found that 8 to 10% of

the impervious area is on those parcels with storm water control measures. As we talk about um reducing individual properties fees by a by a portion want to keep in mind that there's sort of a relative impact there and if we can go to the next slide I think when I say a portion I will um kind of share that developing a credit policy is an art and a science. um it is you know relevant what the sort of industry standards are and so we have the um the maximum credit allowed for this same set of peer communities here as you can see it kind of ranges uh from 25 to 40% uh I will say as a as a general rule most communities uh don't go in with like a a proactive approach they ask people to apply for credit. So, I think what we're talking about here is more um customer friendly in that way. Um many of these communities also have uh higher uh strongware standards associated with those credits. So, the one-year storm is um it's appropriate for Burlington, but it's on the lower side of what some of these others require to get credit. Um, so we have uh yet to pin down a number, but I would expect it to be proposed at less than 50% uh of a of a property fee. So I think that is it for credits and my talk about appeals, but appeal is is always a good vehicle to have for your customers. And we would propose that you have something on your website that's obvious and easy for your customers to achieve a connection with staff members to request

that their impervious area be measured. Again, um appeals would be heard by staff. Um this would be included in your ordinance so that it's very clear as to who is the decision maker for any appeal. And if appropriate, if there is a requirement for an adjustment to the fee, we would recommend that that be a perspective, not a retroactive adjustment. So that the customer is trying to be um we're asking the customer to be aware of what's going on rather than well, you know, it's been there for 20 years and now you want me to, you know, no, let let's let the customer take their um responsibility and request that it be remeed. Um and again all the forms would be very visible on your website and easily accessible for those for your customers. And the last piece would be the education outreach. We stand here ready to help um to assist your PI staff um with anything that is necessary moving forward through this process. Um to continue making sure that your customers are aware of this proposal and the impacts that it may have. we can take we would ask you providing input. Let's have a conversation about it. Uh talk about the things that are important to you now. Any further questions that you might have that we can answer for you.

Thank you. I do have a question from our last city council meeting. The gentleman who came from a church. Um, and I'll just own that that is the field I work in and know that many churches are struggling financially. And so when when uh a church with a dwindling congregation and dwindling finances is, you know, approaches that $700 a month fee. Uh what what are the possibilities? I mean, I I see the credit. Um, I see appeal, although appeal probably isn't appropriate, but credit might be. What are the possibilities to alleviate that $700 a month fee for a congregation that that really wouldn't be able to pay it? I mean, that would be the end of that congregation. Not that one necessarily, but some

I you um so we can't uh spell out or or call out any one particular um customer um as a as a group. Um but we I I think we can explore some options as far as um maybe we do look at at tiered systems or maybe uh we look at a uh different er anymore but a different maybe a different equation um where we we get that. So I mean there there are options we just can't say like well this is a special group so we can't you know right completely understand

but we can absolutely look in the would be willing to work with an entity to to explore this option. Absolutely. Okay.

And I I think I'll just add you mentioned the credit program. I think that's the the easiest and most sort of appropriate entry point into trying to get a fee reduced. So we can I think work with the any customer who wants to figure out how they may be able to implement some um manageable form control measures on a property. I have a couple questions just to make sure I understand what we're saying here. So, uh, we have 17,000 single family residences and 2500 businesses. There are 377 storm control measures on that 20,000 properties, right?

For 377, those are the only people eligible for a credit, right? Not necessarily. If if they if someone implements an est then yes, right? You build one. But but we've got 377 where we sit today, right? So everybody else is not getting a credit, right? Unless they can justify it. Okay. And then the appeal is not going to save you money generally, right? Because the appeal is y'all measured it wrong. It's it's not a way to reduce your bill. It's an argument that we measured it wrong. Okay.

Right. So, I think we need to be realistic that whatever we decide applies to just about 20,000 either people or businesses. And if we start to say that any one business or person is different, we're screwed. That's a bad idea. Legally, they'll tell you that's a bad idea. And so, this is not a tax. This is a fee.

Correct. Correct. And therefore you cannot you know class them by way of oh this is a nonprofit and it's based upon what the fact that they have paved over the roof line or whatever is impervious surface. So when you turn around and say to me oh we try to do with credit. So you're saying the same church here that can't afford you know to pay the monthly but oh they're going to turn around and implement some sort of control measure. And they're going to get a credit for that. Is that what you're saying? That's a way to get a credit.

Yeah. And and I'm I'm I'm not saying that's a a free option or a a you know, I'm not making a value judge. I'm saying based on the proposal, uh I agree we have to treat all of the non single family residential properties the same. And the the way that uh a property could reduce their fee is by taking individual action to reduce their runoff through a storm water control measure. Um which it cost money. Sure. If you don't have one already. Okay. That was my question. So what would like let's say a 50 ERU who's not actually meeting at the 100

like those last two brackets. What would it cost just an estimate for them to be able to add that um measure to control the storm water? What are we looking at?

Uh I I can't it's such a broad range um because there's so many different types of of storm water control measures. Um but we're also not only saying it has to be a stormwater control measure, it can also be green infrastructure. um which is some of the the it opens up more possibilities um that are cheaper than like a storm water pond for example um because not all properties even have enough space to put in a properly sized storm water control measure. Um, so there's other options beyond an actual storm water device. Um, is is what I would I I would say with that, but as far as cost goes, there's just so many options. Um, we can kind of give you an average that next time you come in.

Would a storm water control measure or one of those other items that you listed be eligible for the 8020 or one of the other kind of cautions? Unfortunately, not. The way it's written into our drainage policy right now is um only residential properties, single family residential properties are um eligible for the 8 to 20 cost program. Would that be something to consider to create a tool for kind of properties? Yeah, I don't see why. So, if the church wanted to create a storm water control measure and I mean ultimately we're trying to address storm water,

right? and we're trying to make sure that our infrastructure system works. So, anyone who wants to play and help, we pull the rules together to make that for reason. Um, I did want to clarify two points. Earlier, you talked about the amount of impervious surface being like 32% for single family within the entire system and like 68% for non-s single family. And then when we get to our final 5-year tier, um single family is burying 35% of the the fee structure, which that's good to see that we're we're taking out of where it's out of right now and bringing that single family users are going to be paying kind of their equal share. Um, what I do wonder is with having the the 100 unit cap, does that artificially kind of pinch our middle range, our 50 ERU users um by kind of sharing the rest of the cost across those? Like what is what does it look like for our folks who are capped? Is it a couple major properties that are really high ERU and then the rest are kind of in there? It would be helpful to see that distribution. Yes, we can share the more detailed distribution as as a followup. Um, there are 63 I believe customers that are above the cap um to some to some degree. Uh, as far as your your first question or other customers picking up the slack, I would say we've we started this with a how do we take the current rate and transform it uh transform the rate structure to be something more equitable. Um, so we're contrary to a more sort of typical rate. We didn't say we need this much money, how what a rate's going to be. We said we have this rate. How do we transform it to be more equitable? Um, so so right now the

impact of the cap is just reduced revenue. Um, it's it's, you know, not otherwise immediately being recovered from other customers. kind of in the future if rates change, if revenue requirements change, um, and we keep the cap, then there there's a more limited, you know, rate base from which that revenue is recovered and it has to come from somewhere. But if you're proposing the 8020 to fit to something other than single family residences, you're going to need to try to come up with those dollars from Oh, sure. Any any expansion of the program Yeah.

would have to be funded. Well, if ultimately our goal is to incentivize reduction in storm water, the cap does not incentivize those cap users to take advantage of applying some sort measure or something in their property, right? To a degree, it's still a increased cost from what they're paying now,

but it's not kind of the full share. Yeah, I understand what you're saying about the aspect, but I wonder if our ultimate goal is the incentives of the burdens on the system and this water we're dealing with. Um, I really appreciate the list of kind of everything you are doing right now within the department and the the huge effort they have to put out there. So, it makes a lot of sense. We need additional revenue here to tackle these things. I agree with you, mayor. Let's just continue to explore other avenues, other options. And so, as far as tomorrow night's meeting, do you need any I mean any input from us?

Um, well, for tomorrow night, it it really sounds like um we're maybe not in a position to not ready to go. Yeah. And I think maybe we go back, not all the way back to the beginning of the drawing table, but at least go back and address some concerns um and brainstorm, maybe switch around the drainage policy a little bit and maybe that's where we can really start to help some of you know um I don't call out any group, but to help some that would be interested in increasing green Thank you.

Um, traditionally the 8020 cost share program are intended is intended towards uh smaller projects with sideyard ditch or backyard um pipe replacement um on one or two properties. Um so and and part of that this funding goal is to be able to do more of those types of projects or some that that are larger that affect several properties. Um and the notion to expand that to help um some of the commercial or or non-residential to install um um SCM storm water control measures to help offset their fee is a good idea that that affects that revenue stream. So that's we'll have to look at how how could that be implemented and then the other thing to consider is that program will probably how generate a lot of interest and so we'll have to have some sort of prioritization um scheme to to rank those projects to see who gets that uh what will be a limited product money each year. Thank you.

Can you clarify timelinewise as far as implementing the fee and kind of what track we're on right now? Uh I think at this point um we're just trying to come back with the answers to any questions that council has. Um and when council feels comfortable with those answers, I think that's where we're at right now. So um I know we've been talking about this for many years.

Yes. and the issues have not gone away. They've only gotten worse. So, um, mayor and council, I'd like to see us continue to move implementing a fee change fairly timely. Um, I wonder how many aspects as far as kind of changes to the AD20 program or we'll see a reputation on that shortly. Um, but other things as far as guidelines for property owners, guidelines, recommendations, things they can do that would allow them to apply for credit can be a separate addendum to this because that will be an ongoing set of recommendations. Um, and the fee has been implemented over 5 years anyway. Um, so like could we try to keep the feed moving as far as new public hearings, making sure we continue to get feedback and then feed all of that into additional resources, guidelines, things that can be built over the next few years as this continues to roll out. because water continues to be an issue. I mean, can't just keep this can down the road, not actually funding me to deal with. I

mean, I think

I I agree with you. We if we can move forward with fee changes and continue to work on what does how to alleviate some fees in some situations or provide credit or how are the the language we need to use with that? I not to hold up doing the work that needs to be done, but to continue to find ways to make it better. I thought tonight we would have other options already. I guess I was under the impression from the last time we spoke about it, we would have those other fee options tonight. So, that's my hold up because we don't have other options. This is just the same way that we begun last year.

Well, the other options are the credit policy. Yeah, the other option would be the credit policy, not a change in the actual foundational structure. Unless council wants,

wasn't the credit option already available last year? We had talked about a credit but we hadn't had they had developed more details and looked at what other entities had a credit if if they did. We look at the percentages you know that's been adjustment some over the years. I mean you can do that immediately but I don't know that that won't address the long term like 8020 you know down to 60 40 you know that but I don't know that just that won't address the big issues here I think we all agree on the credit that we should the credit can be attached I don't think any of us having that's not a issue right down the fee

you go back to the credit Maybe the parking lot. This one. Uh the next one. That one. Yeah. And that's the maximum credit listed in that column. So, you had said that Burlington agent's credit structure makes sense to be our max% based on the one-year SCM uh requirement. Um, do you have a idea of where our maximum should land based on your current research?

I I think so. We we talked about this some at, you know, with with staff. I think we could certainly kind of look at a multi-tiered structure where a max is more like 50%. Um there just aren't many if any examples of that yet. And the the cost benefit tradeoff. It makes it a little bit hard to assume that folks would go for a a higher level of treatment sort of voluntarily and initially at the outset here. Um but I think as we're talking about the um ways to meet the existing standard uh we're we can sort of build in what another tier of uh credit might look like as well.

I mean I think our credit should reflect the storm water control measure and we don't want to give give away the power that's right for a kind of mediocre measure. So just just curious if you all have any just 50%

other questions comments. Thank you so much. Thank you very much. Um, next we're going to talk about um downtown utilities change order number two. We had a part two part two. I'm not done yet. Okay. So, sorry.

I'll go quick. Okay. So, um, we talked a little bit about the prioritization and the need for prioritization, especially with the 8020 cost share program that we offer. Um, so I'm just going to kind of outline what that program currently looks like. Um, and and how staff are um choosing to fund each application that comes in. Um and then some ideas for moving forward. Uh so a little background. Um the 8020 cost share program evolved from the 50/50 cost share program. Um and but we had $50,000 budgeted each year. Um we had a $10,000 cap on those projects which really limited the types of storm water projects that we could actually implement. Um the average cost of a storm water project that I've dealt with is um just over $47,000. Uh so to have a for the city to have a $10,000 cap um it it we weren't appealing to residents. Um they were still burdened with the majority of that cost. Um so we came to council in 2020 and council decided to change that cost share program to 8020 um where the city pays for 80% and the resident pays for 20%. Um right to Bob's point uh we do that once we did that we had an increase in interest from residents to participate in the program. So, we now have a backlog of applications in the storm water division currently. Um, and one of the reason I'm here is we have no prioritization method right now. Um, we're really just funding projects as

they come in. Um, not necessarily and as budget allows, but not necessarily as the, you know, severity of flooding or property damage or whatever it may be. Um, we don't have a prioritization method. So I come to you today to propose a prioritization method. Um and one another big reason why we should have a prioritization method is so the the the program is equitable. Um again right now it's it's very much so um there's no way of of including um lowincome households. There's no way of of really um scoring these projects. So um need for prioritization. It would maximize public health and safety. Um ensure cost effectiveness uh promote social equity and also achieve environmental goals. Um and and that's the categories that we're proposing in this prioritization methodology. Um would include would include all of these. Oh, sorry. You can watch it if you want. Yeah, I think you've already seen this one. Um, but this is one of our projects, um, proposed projects on Chandler Avenue. Um, and this was not Shen Hall. I will say that it was in May

and that would be and it's not that's a much more expensive. It's a very expensive 50,000 um threshold.

Oh, yeah. Yeah. uh the proposed prioritization criteria. So what we've included in it is public benefit. Um so that would include things like uh severity of the flooding uh water quality and public safety. Um water quality. So we would uh also score based on maybe it's a stream stabilization project. That would be considered a water quality enhancement because you're reducing the sediment. Um and then public safety. We've had many storebought projects come to us where there is a a public safety concern. Um it may be failing infrastructure but um it this prioritization would which I included in the packet uh would take that into account. Um severity of property damage um so it is it the livable spaces being damaged? Is it the garage? Is it the shed? um really differentiating between the actual severity um and then the frequency of flooding. Are they flooding every time it rains? Are they flooding in the only in the 100year storm event? Um etc. Public utilities. So we'll also evaluate our public utilities and Chamber Avenue is actually a great example where um a lot of the issue actually lies on the public utility side, but it's just such an expensive project we have no way of funding it at the moment. Um but it would look into it would take into account the whether or not public infrastructure is undersized, whether or not um there is public infrastructure there or is there a need and then community and equity. So we would look at underserved communities and household income um as another criteria for the prioritization. Um and we would we're proposing to use the HUD methodology um to identify those areas in the city.

Um we are so something that I am proposing is to tier the funding. So based on the score of these projects either fund 100% of these project 100% of the project instead of just 8020 or 80% or 50% or they don't qualify to even be funded. Um and it would place each application into a category of being high priority, moderate priority or low priority. Um and then each category that I mentioned in the previous slide would be weighted. Um so we have a you know the highest weight is on public safety and health um and the benefit to public good. So um that's also included in the packet for you to review in more detail. So a staff recommendation um would be to adopt um some form of prioritization methodology whether it you know be this one as a base and coming back to you with something different um but the need for prioritization is absolutely there

question my full support. Thank you for coming up. It's something I think is needed and we need to have a priority list and a scoring of of um issues that are happening. Now for the streets that you mentioned earlier was Chandler, Virginia. Was it Virginia? Yeah, Virginia. I think the third one. Morning. Morning.

I automatically thought about the fact of where those areas are. You know, do they have the money to be able to pay that 20%. So, this would be a fair way to make sure that lowincome areas and and you know those homeowners are able to fix the issues. I thought about King Street. I'm not sure what's going on there, but every rain, every heavy rain by the park,

the um Robinson Park, that whole area is like the water is like halfway like to their house. Um so, yeah, those areas, this um formula I think would be very beneficial. questions on back on this uh criteria. Yeah. How could that work? I mean in other words and each project would be evaluated along you take all of those four criteria and then you give points to each one of those. Right. Correct. Okay. Then then I guess in terms of that project, do you have some do you have request now? We do. Yeah.

How many how many would you estimate you'd have? Uh, we probably have six right now. Six. Okay. And if you'd go back, I mean, in other words, are you thinking if you Well, are you thinking retro for this prioritization or are you thinking proact? Well, we haven't promised funding to those applications that we have right now. So, I we go ahead. Yeah, I think we would go ahead and if we do adopt a prioritization, I would run those applications through that.

Okay. Well, the reason I asked if I believe that would make sense, you know what I mean? I mean, I I don't know that I don't know that it would hurt, you know, to do that. Matter of fact, it give you a little more guidance if that you know the project you say and it I'd like to I'd like to see that applied if you can grade one or you know I mean I just like to see how that would work. Absolutely. I have it up here with a couple projects already scored. Okay. And you use the criteria to

score and I can pull that up quickly. Sorry to take up your time. That's a good question. Uh so I I did put in a couple projects that um we know we need um to fund at some point. So this is Gerell Street. Um they had some major storm water infrastructure damage on top. Um and it it was a a case where you know the resident couldn't u necessarily make that 20%. Um so I ran it through and let me see I don't want to move this too much but so for flooding um the options are is it just an arterial street collector street called a sack parking lot and that's going to change the score. the rank over here. But these weights are these are this is weighted the highest for public benefit. Um property damage, uh frequency of flooding, public utilities. So we would really be evaluating our public utilities and how much it's contributing to the issue. And then community and equity. Is it located in a underserved community? Is it not? Um and then also looking at household income. Um, and so this one, just so I didn't change anything, scored at 270, which would put them um in the 8020, but it gives us it gives us a something to look to to be accountable for, you know. So instead of just saying yes or no and this is not really having a reason why um this gives us something to on paper that we can guide it gives us guidelines. That's what I'm trying to say.

So in effect you're really doing that now. That's helpful. that really is just arbitrarily we need to take that out of it setting the criteria to address that issue. And I I think another thing I want to add is the projects that we're funding right now. They're the one since my I've been here and we have funded some they the ones that have made it through to completion have been um residents that can afford it. I mean that's what it comes down to. So it's not, you know, it's not an equitable

and also we've been doing basically it's kind of first come first serve plus we can afford. So um this and we didn't really have a gate. That one's really a lot worse and we ought to move it up. We didn't have that that ability to really did that a couple times. did, but and the folks waiting

the folks waiting um we had to explain to them, well, this this one's, you know, impacting the crawl space of the home, whereas yours is only um yard. This will help um to prioritize all of those with with this structure system. Last question here. Do you need to go ahead and sort of formalize this? I mean, it sounds like to me you're informally doing it. Uh, the actual methodology. Yeah.

Uh, I I think I would need um definitely need council approval because of the 100% funding proposal. Um, and and kind of I would need some guidance on, you know, do we need to bring each project that scores for 100% funding back to council? You know, how do we want to to organize that? the funding cost that we have to you know park but I mean you have I believe later I would think you know this is something we can move forward right

yeah if if everybody's comfortable with this prioritization we ask that it be added to the consent agenda tomorrow or if you still have more questions we can bring that information back maybe you know the next council meeting next year or well actually the next month. Okay. Well, I'm certainly comfortable leaving forward.

Mayor, I have a question. Okay. And I don't want to derail anything tomorrow, but um I have in my head it seems like uh the public infrastructure, public utility contributing factor piece. Um, in my head, I don't feel like that should be part of the go nogo scoring for how bad the problem is. I think that might be a secondary consideration towards how much we pay to help fix it. Right. Right.

The severity of the problem, the public safety issues, blah blah, those are what they are irrespective of whether our undersized culvert is contributing or not. So score the program and then say go and then look at are we contributing to the problem therefore we ought to contribute a higher cost to the solution. So I just want to make sure I understand correctly. So you're proposing like take out that public utility evaluation as part of the scoring. Correct. Do that separately and apply that to the percentage of funding model equation based on we're causing part of the problem. we should pay a higher share of fixing it. That's more science-based and less

it does. The way it's proposed, I don't know if this would address your concern, but um the way it's proposed is if there is public infrastructure that is contributing in any way or being impacted in any way, that project would score higher than another project. So, I don't I don't know if that really addresses your concern or not, but

I mean, if you if you look at your your points there, you could have a project that scores 135, 130, whatever, right? And we would say, okay, it's in the lowest priority, but if we're going to do it, even though our cover is causing majority of the problem, the homeowner is still going to pay 50 cent 50%. Well, only on if it's our if it's our infrastructure that's causing the issue, the city would pay for everything that's on the the public property on the public rideway. Um so if let's say 80% of that project is caused by city infrastructure, we would not include that cost portion of the project into that configuration of 5050 or 8020 whatever it may be. That way the resident is not taking on the any of the costs associated with that infrastructure.

So the criteria will be applied to the 20% you know to come up with a figure of money know when we pay the 80 that's that's a given to it. Yeah. Well, I I didn't understand previously that there was a scenario where we had to fix something anyway and then that impacted the homeowner who may or may not fix their piece. Is that what you said?

You said if it's if it's on public property, we fix 100% of it. Right. Correct. But we have for we have projects for example that um the pro the issue extends into the rightway. So that there's an issue that can be fixed on private property but in order to do something on private property we should probably do something on city property as well. Um so it's not just like a public versus private. There's a lot of these overlapped projects where it does extend into the public right away. the source of the funding for the city to fix its deficiency in the right way. Is this still this same money? Correct.

Correct. And then the bucket of money for this currently is 50 or 75,000 a year. That's a standard line item that we can't increase until we fix the 2A problem. Exactly.

Okay. And that was a point that that Michael brought up is is having a prioritization method to be able to fund some of these projects, especially at 100%. It brings us to another need for a fee change to generate some more revenue. I think I'm okay plug and play and then let's look at it in a year and and see if we can look at real world examples that are that are less money, pun intended, and this is right now to try to make sure we're getting the result we want to get.

Yeah, I think you bring up a good point and I think I'm understanding what this scoring is just for the on private property portion of any project, but the scoring takes into effect factor whether our infrastructure off property is contributing to that. Um and so that the fee structure would be like split based on this algorithm on our property and then work over there. So that makes sense. Um your suggestion works and then this also it's kind of where you draw the line on the score and so we're changing tonight. So yeah,

it's an important enough structure to get in place. I think that that I'm willing to say go, but then let's look again, right? So program that in a year from now or a year after we get going on it, right? And say what are the real world applications and then we'll understand better and I think all central. We need a lot of money to do this. I mean things like Virginia Avenue have been closed for months and residents have been living with yard and things for years. I want to see us be able to move these forward sooner ra. So, this will be on the consent agenda.

Um, we can ask if you will add it to the consent agenda tomorrow. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. And just for clarification, there is another example in our packet. The chin is section. Yes, I did. And that's a good example for that you may want to look at because it does include the public infrastructure on it as well. Thank you.

Thank you. Yep. Now, I'm gonna recognize Bob um because Amy Rat is not able to be with us. Um so, Bob, if you would share with us about the downtown utilities.

Uh thanks, Mayor Council. Um with the the downtown uh water and sewer project is um like any water and sewer project as we get into it and start digging we may encounter unforeseen circumstances underground or when the engineers design the project they estimate the quantities of of different work items you know the x number of feet of of pipe are going to be be lined um and and the the pay items based on the on the diameter of pipe that that we expect to be in the ground. Um we may find we've got a 10-in pipe and that wasn't what the map show. So we need to have a pay item for that. So that's um mainly what this um request to approve the change order is. There's a section on the sewer work um that includes some um abandoning additional manholes, aligning a 10-in sewer that we thought was an 8 in um some adjustments to the uh pavement restoration requirements. Um uh increasing some of the unit price quantities for the uh sewer manhole rehab and sewer line repairs and abandoning some services. And then on the water side of the uh project um adding some additional valves and and uh fire service um increase for adjustment with the same type of pavement changes. Um we looked at um where fire patterns were originally planned for replacement and um work with the fire hydrant to to more strategically place those hydrants. we were able to eliminate a few and then some uh a net reduction in cost

due to some changes in in the way things were installed. And so um the changes to both of these uh uh change orders are necessary so that we can pay the contractor for for the work. These were items that were agreed in the field and negotiated with the contractor. Um so um the sewer change is uh an increase of $26,540.92 and the um water increase is 36,52672. um these additional uh funds are all covered by contingency uh funds that we had set aside for the project knowing that we would encounter some of these and then there was also an increase of 15 contract days as a result that was negotiated for so um we'd ask that these be placed on the consent agenda it consent agenda for tomorrow approval

questions concerns It's amazing the number of times that you start taking a hole. It's not where any of the charts say it is. So, thank you. Thank you. Um, next we'll hear from John Vernon, public information specialist about city city advisory boards and commissions. Council, thank you. um coming today to talk about some midterm vacancies and uh midterm vacancies uh usually occur when people move away or resign for various reasons or by elections.

Yeah. But so there were two two that were hit particularly hard by by midterm vacancies and we wanted to go ahead and get those filled before the regular um board of commission appointments which will come to most likely in May for July for for June yeah July 1 appointment but um I submitted the we you know it is increasing you're for the people that are new to this uh city council the application for boards commissions are sort of hard to to round up. So, uh we uh it's it's been an ongoing ongoing issue and we had a decent response from this campaign uh to get some people to sign up for the traffic and reappearance commissions. Um I think I think once we do it for all the boards commissions together, we'll have a more robust response. Um but I think we did have good applicants for this and I am ready to answer any questions about the ones that come to you uh today. This is a new by the way. We instituted software for board commission this year. So this packet will look a little different and hopefully it's clear. I take any feedback that people in the past have an issue with it as well. But uh yeah, so there's a the traffic commission. We have one applicant for two vacancies and they can be considered and the appearance we have four vacancies and three applicants. So however you'd like to proceed, I'm I'm ready to to to do what you want. What we need to do is go ahead and appoint you if you can. You can if you want to or you can just defer to appointing in uh for the next round in May probably May or May or early June before quorums and yeah there's pressure on quorums especially for the tree of parents they want to appoint a a chair and they haven't been able to do that since they haven't had forums since assembly I think for craft commission there just pressures on on getting some more input I

Moving on. I think we I think those commissions we have people willing to do the job. Let's it involve them. Yes. So would you like to you're happy with the traffic commission appointment of Alex? Are those for an interim? They're for an interim.

There's appointment. the there two you if you look on the appointment work sheet there's a one that expires in 2027 actually they both expire 2027 for the fast commission so it's a it's a partial term employment so he'll fill out that seat and then Mr. will be eligible for three more terms. Okay. All right. Next year three well 23 27 128

that's for the traffic for the uh excuse me for the traffic. So it's four vacancies, but you only have three people that applied for the tree appearance. Correct. Yes. I would recommend not appointing the one for 2026. So if you want to do that, okay, I'm good to go. Do you have any preference for the 2028? I was going to ask you if they specify it. Did they?

Uh we it's not part of an application. So I'm sure if they apply, they want to serve. I think it's it's up to you guys to choose out or you can appoint them however you'd like. I I trust your office to manage that. Okay. That's me. I can do the first alphabetically. So, put Merror as the 2028. Does that work? Okay, that works. And then we'll do the other two for Okay. And they would I mean they would be eligible to run again. be appointed again for three initial terms

and we ask that if this slate be considered tomorrow that's I have no objection to that thank you very much thank you and now I recognize executive director of planning and development services Jamie Lawson um with a report from planning and zoning commission Good evening. I'm here with Chad. He's going to present the video text first and then I'll go into the other items.

Good evening. I'm Mayor Council. I'm Chad Meadows. Uh it's great to be with you tonight. We super fast tonight. Real easy stuff. Just some minor clarifications. Um, you know, we uh we normally don't appear in front of you as frequently. So, I'm uh you know, back for the second time obviously our monthly booking. Uh Jamie just um 126. It's our 17th round of amendments. Um and we've got 10 kind of changes, but they're all fairly minor. They're all sort of just clarifications. We have one substantive change that I'll highlight for you in a minute. Um, we've got some adjustments for some of the business district language, some adjustments neighborhoods. I set back calculations. Go ahead.

Uh, yeah, they the uh PNC did hear this back on the 23rd of February and recommended uh unanimous approval. So, uh, and I think it was a record for uh the speediness of of that hearing. I think we were done in about five minutes. Um, okay. So, there's three uh non-residential districts. All of our non-residential districts have a series of uh setback standards for side and rear setbacks. They are basically none unless there are two extenduating conditions whether or not you've got a door or a window and or you are across the street from or next to an O andi zoning district. We are not changing any of the current standards, just rephrasing the language so that it can be more clear. Okay, so that's all we've done with these three zoning districts. Simply restating the standard. No changes substantively. Pocket neighborhoods. We shuffle the language here to try to be more clear in terms of lot configuration, open space, and how porches work. We did have one substantive change for our pocket neighborhoods. And that substantive change is a requirement for the provision of street trees along streets, alleys, or shared driveways within a pocket neighborhood. Currently, uh, a pocket neighborhood might not have to provide street trees, particularly if they're using alleyways or shared driveways. Uh and after thought from the staff, it was decided that we should require street trees in accordance with how we would treat any other street uh in town in terms of the provision of street trees. These things are either in the street rightway or adjacent to a private street right away or Okay, that's it for the substantive change. We've made a couple of adjustments to our setback encroachment tables um with respect to detached garages, carports, and tool sheds. Just clarifying um there's some language in there about with respect to where these things can be located within the rear yard. Of

course, they can be located within the rear yard or sideyard. So, we wanted to just be clear about that. So, there's a couple of strikes uh mostly the phrase within rear yard, but again, no changes to the substance, just how it's expressed. Um, we did adjust or add some clarification about how to calculate density. We've got rules in the rules of measurement section that explain to people how to calculate your yield or your density or your plot size. Um, and the question came up, how do we handle this on parcels that have multiple different zoning con designations and the various densities and plot sizes that might apply? um this uh addition explains that you basically calculate that for each of the individual portions and then add together uh and then round out. So that's how that process works there. Uh and we had a typo uh in one of our definitions. So your equalized staff uh caught that. Um and so you know we're here today to answer any questions about these. If if everything is in order and you're comfortable, then we would suggest this go to public hearing on the 17th of March.

Thank you. Questions, concerns, comments.

Very good. Sounds like we're moving forward as you suggest. Um and in the future, in the near future, we need to talk about the 2025 uh legislative amendments that came to this legislative session last time around. Um, happily not tonight. Not tonight. Thank you.

So, the second item that the planning and zoning commission heard um at their meeting was the was an amendment to an existing conditional resoning and this was associated with the world of Pentecost. Um you've got Hanford Road along the south um boundary and then Cedar Crest Drive along the eastern boundary. Currently um the zoning boundary just matches this middle parcel right here. And the church owns three properties along Cedar Crest, one of the properties along Hanford, and then a property that is at the end of Lawndale um adjacent to the interstate. Uh so the request is to to consolidate all of these parcels under one zoning district. Um the the amenities associated with church go beyond the partial boundaries. So this cleans that up for them in terms of any kind of future development that they may want to do. Um and the project also went in front of the technical review committee. So they've seen this and that would be then attached to the resour. Any questions? So again, this is their original parcel and you can see on this site plan, there are areas that extend beyond the church boundaries right now onto these other parcels. Um so that boundary for the resoning would then encompass this entire area as well as the home that they own on um hunting on Hanford. There is an existing uh billboard that is located at the on the property at the end of London and we're just recognizing

that billboard. There's not going to be any changes proposed um or allowed as part of that. Um and so the the reasonzoning request um identifies all of the use conditions that they are seeking for the property including church, school, daycare, the single family detach that's located along this property here will be subject to the medium density residential standards. Um mention of that billboard and then the development conditions as they move forward with any future development plans. They would need to comply with the unified development ordinance dealing with the landscaping, the parking signage they've recognized as part of this request. Um so there'll be some adjustments for the signage, but anything that would um in terms of new development, new construction would have to go back in front of the technical review committee for their review and approval. So um planning and zoning commission did recommend this resoning amendment unanimously. You'll note just for the record that the future venues designation of this area is sort of split between uh this purple shade of general industrial and the reddish shade of regional commercial. So, we have to recognize that this amendment is not consistent with the future land use designation and that is generally what this slide states. So, we are asking for this item to be placed on the March 17th city council meeting. Um, and if you so inclined, then we will do the proper advertising and noticing for that.

Any questions, concerns? Thanks so much. Thank you. Okay. Um and next I recognize city manager Bob Patterson uh for city council committee appointments.

Um thank you mayor and council. Mr. staff shared various committee appointments with the mayor and council and asked for um y'all to uh provide your ability to serve. And uh the committee appointments are typically recommended to city staff by the mayor once the availability has been determined with the mayor serving on several of those committees as a voting member including the North Carolina Metro mayors PTRC Pedmont Private Regional Council Board of Delegates and Executive Committee and the Pedmont Authority for consultation. Um the responses have been shared with the mayor and the staff is prepared to assist you in formalizing appointments which in addition to tomorrow's consent agenda if you're ready for us to do so. Um you have a slate of appointments and your seats and also your seats with the assignments based on um we we've worked pretty hard on getting this documented. Um I'm hoping that there's no uh no objection to what we've come up with. We I mean we had your input. So anyway, so I think yes, that's good to go forward.

I would like to bring up one thing in all of my years on council before this. Um there's been no formal process of reporting back to the council from these roles. Um, and I think there's a lot of things that go through these committees that would be very helpful for our council to know. Um, I'd love for us to explore what's the best channel to bring some of that information back. I don't think it's a full set of minutes. I don't want to read. Uh but if there's a handful of action items that are just important for the rest of us to know about, I would love for the person sitting on those committee work session and just so we can all weigh in on those. That's good.

Especially since like transportation is so central to all committees and we're splitting that across a number of us just to facilitate that coordination collaboration. Good idea. Thank you.

Other comments? Okay. Then we will hear the city manager report. Okay. Thank you, Mayor and Council. Um the restoration advisory uh board meeting for the Western Electric site. Um that has been previously cancelled and it has been scheduled for April 8th at 6 p.m. at the Senior Center. 6 p.m. Um, Council Member Balt has asked staff at the February 16th work session to look into the space of the main memorial library that's owned by the city um for possible use um of the historic museum and inquired about access to that space and asked us to research what might make that space usable, provide that information back. Um, so, uh, public works director Gary Smith and the building services staff looked at that library space, uh, which is the second floor, um, and recommend, um, that we have a structural engineer do an assessment to determine the type of weight and loading that that can hold. Um, the area is currently not ADA accessible. There is an elevator shaft, but there is no elevator. one example. Um, there is no fire sprinkler system. Um, not 100% certain that that would be required, but it's likely based on the fire department's preliminary investigation was to code.

Is there sprinkler? Um,

I don't believe so. Not a requirement. Um the second floor is unconditioned space. So there there's currently no HVAC system. So that would have to be properly designed and added. Um and the second floor is essentially unfinished. So that would require an interior upfit including electrical, plumbing, sheetrock and paint. There is some electrical but likely some electrical. Um and the county has a significant number of items stored in one section of this area. However, we looked at it. There's nothing that perhaps a safety hazard, but that that material would have to be as well. None of that to say that it's not possible, but there are other certainly some steps that we would need to continue looking.

Yeah. Mark, about those costs. I mean, we're putting a fair amount of money into the Fairmont space to create new square footage, and this is existing square footage category that is not utilized up there for storage and has been a question mark for many years. Um, just curious what some of those costs would be to bring it into use. Sounds expensive.

So, it's a paramount project. So I do think that there the there is a group history museum group that is meeting and maybe you've met with them. Um I I believe there was some conversation with First Christian Union Church of Christ as a possible location as well. I don't know where that is. Um but so I do I mean gathering information for so that they have an opportunity to explore options I think is great.

I know we get asked all the time about what space does the city have for all types of program own for a long time. be helpful to know, right? How do we activate the second part? At what cost? I mean, if we're going to pay a structural engineer some amount of money, I want to know how much sump cost we're going to have in the evaluation before we do the evaluation. Certainly, we can get some proposals to do the assessment.

Yeah. Chunk it out, price it out, tell us what it's going to cost, and we'll make a decision on whether the juice is worth the squeeze. Thank you.

Um and also um I believe it was at the January work session. We had some discussion about if it council read um and so um Rachel and I and staff have uh done some research um and looked at past retreats for what kind of topics were covered and whatnot. Um and we have uh created a list of potential facilitators that could um uh guide that that retreat and had preliminary discussions with a couple of them. Um we would like to uh do a request for proposals and hopefully get at least three firms, three entities for comparison and based on a more defined format. um to ensure that we have a retreat that best that fits your needs. Um and really we probably need some more input from council on what what is the goal? Um what what kind of topics are you looking at? Um, so, um, and I'll follow up with an email, but I'd like that, um, maybe by March 16th that you could send me a list of of three or four topics or, um, and by topics, I mean that might be projects, that might be policy, that could be team building, what are we looking to accomplish? And try to uh, see if there's some consensus there. Um, and that will help us formulate that proposal, request for proposal so we can get a better um feedback from those entities that may do this. We could bring that back April work session. Um, I think that was that.

So, you're going to send us an email to respond to. Okay. Very good. questions, comments. Anything else?

I believe that's everything. I do have a letter that came I I won't read the names that are here, but this was a letter from a city of Burlington resident expressing heartfelt appreciation for the exceptional and professional care received from firefighters of engine company number four when this person experienced um an emergency, a a medical emergency and they responded. And so I just wanted to lift that up that occasionally there are good letters that come um thanking city. Thank you.

And we'll share a little more of that tomorrow. But thank you for sharing. Anything else before we're done?

I am just grateful for the city for stepping in. Um, Comfort Park Plaza had been in the dark for a while. The timing is still, you know, under investigation, but we um do know at least since December and it was you pull up completely dark, like get out of your car trying to get to the food line, the city trans, wherever you're going in that area, it was just dark. And the city was notified on I think Wednesday and by Saturday, I confirmed on Sunday, but I think by even even Friday, the lights were um restored. They contacted the property manager and he went ahead and had contractors out there to fix the work by Friday. So, I just want to say thank you for stepping up and making sure that that property owner did have those lights restored and that you know our safety measures are in place for those shopping at that compartment plaza area. So it basically has to support

code enforcement officer Chris Marlo and one of his inspectors officer were in contact with the the property manager on another issue so it was timely and they were able to get get

other comments. Uh I'll be headed to National League of Cities the middle of this month. I appreciate staff's been working on some of the legislative agenda items with our our lobbyist. Um so we'll be having some meetings on their Hill Day on March 18th. Um if there's any other specific concerns, questions you all have, policies that you want me to bring up while I'm up there, please let us know and we'll add it to our packet. I hope we have time with some of our members up there. Otherwise, at least their legislative staff. They usually space. Awesome. Always love bringing back some some feedback and things from sessions at National City. So, look forward to some notes and

um we may want to recognize Daniel. Daniel Thank you for being here tonight. Thank you. Sorry, I kind of snuck in my se, but I saw waste water on the agenda and I thought, well, we're talking about that everywhere we go. So, let me know what time DC

Well, thank you all. We will see you tomorrow. I don't think I had to go