Algal Floway Project – Info Session (English version) July 16, 2026

Hi everyone, thanks for being here. Uh welcome to the second public information session for this phase of the Algo Flowway project. Um this is the second of four public sessions the city plans to host to ensure our residents have the opportunity to learn about this exciting project and ask any questions uh they may have. Uh, first I'd like to highlight that we will have this entire presentation translated into Spanish on the Algo Flowway web page in the next few weeks. And uh we will also have a time for questions and answers at the end of this live meeting in which we'll provide um Spanish translation in the chat. a a Spanish trans transcription of the entire Q&A will also be made available online in the in the coming weeks. Uh so first I'd like to introduce our team uh from the city of Durham. We have both myself uh my name is John Baker and my teammate JV Lerido. There he is. Who will assist me and the project team to answer any questions that come up tonight. I'll be presenting tonight with other members of the project team and that includes Alex Nice and Sujit Ekka from Gradient, Eningga Kennedy and Mara Hill, >> hello >> from Planners for Environmental Quality and uh Jose Rodriguez from Site Collaborative uh who will be providing Spanish interpretation and translation where needed tonight. So tonight we'll be talking about Durham's term storm water site identification and evaluation phase of the algo flowway project. We'll kick off by talking about uh algo flowways in general, what they are, what do they look like, how do they work, and why the city wants to build one. We're currently in a fa a new phase of the algo flowway project and we'll talk through what we've accomplished and learned to date. Uh we have identified a preferred site along Ellerby Creek for further evaluation and we will talk about the process for identifying potential sites and some key characteristics that made this location a strong candidate. But we will not be sharing the specific location at this time because we are respecting the uh privacy of the land owner while we complete our due diligence and determine whether the property can meet project needs. Then we'll talk through the next steps and how to keep up to date with what's going on with this project. And we'll finish tonight with a a question and answer session. Please feel free to type your questions into the chat as we present. Uh we'll collect all questions and discuss them at the end of the presentation. This is a public forum and we'd love to hear from you. And so the presentation will take about 30 minutes and then we'll have Q&A for about another 30 minutes and we'll be wrapping up around 8:00 tonight. And Jonathan, might I add before you move forward, when you put your questions and comments into the chat, please add your name uh with them, please. >> Thanks, Inga. >> Okay, to start off, let's talk about what an algo flowway is. So an algo flowway is a pollution control measure that pumps water over a bed of algae to remove nutrients before the water is returned back to its water body. These are specifically designed to reduce nutrient pollution in water. You can see from the photos that they're most often large rectangular structures constructed near water sources. uh the flowway takes up water from the water body, allows it to flow over the bed of algae and then returns it back to the water body with less nutrient pollution after the algae have removed excess nitrogen and phosphorus. So nutrient pollution happens when leaves and yard waste and other things end up in our waterways through rain runoff. They decompose and turn into nitrogen and phosphorus which is natural fertilizer. And when this natural fertil material ends up in our waterways, it fertilizes the fastest growing thing in the water like algae. In this graphic, you can see that the extra nutrients feed the algae, which then shades the water body and blocks out the sun. Less sunlight lowers the amount of oxygen that plants can produce in the water. And with less oxygen, less animals can live in the water. If this cycle continues, it can end up killing even large animals like fish. Uh because this can become such a problem, there are federal and state rules requiring the prevention of nutrient pollution. And so when water has extra nutrients, algae will grow. An algo flowway uses this natural algaal growth to remove the nutrients without causing the negative impacts of an algo bloom like we saw in the last slide. Then the cleaner water is returned to the waterway with less nutrients and the algae is collected and removed every 7 to 14 days. The process of harvesting the algae every seven to 14 days days helps sustain the continuous removal of nutrients. Uh the algae are removed, dried and mixed in piles next to the al algo flowway which can then be converted into compost. And a future goal of this project is to make a plan for the composted material such as connecting with local businesses or organizations and residents that could benefit from using the composted algae. So we've described what an algaflowy is. Uh now we're talking about now why are we talking about um building one in Durham? Falls Lake is used for recreation like boating and fishing as well as a drinking water source for the city of Raleigh. Because it's an important resource, the city of Durham is required to comply with state water quality regulations and rules to protect Falls Lake. These rules include a certain amount of investment in pollution control measures like storm water wet ponds or bio retention cells. And an algo flowway is a pollution control measure with a high impact on water quality for relatively less investment than multiple smaller projects. At its core, an algo flowway is an innovative way to reduce pollution in our waterways. With more people moving into Durham and more intense rain patterns, storm water pollution is an increasingly complicated problem. And this project is one way that the city is planning to protect our local water bodies. We're excited about this project because it's a cost-effective way to positively impact our water quality and remain in compliance with the Falls Lake rules. Through feasibility and pilot studies, we have determined that it will be more time and cost efficient to use an algo flowway to comply with the Falls Lake rules for existing development, which includes development areas that existed before more strict storm water control requirements were in place. Um, okay. Now, I'll talk about the current phase of the project that started in April of last year, April of 2025. Um, we are in our second round of searching for and evaluating sites for an algo flowway. And the main goal of the site identification and evaluation phase is to find a site in Durham County and in the Falls Lake WHED. On the map, you can see that the northern part of Durham County is within the Falls Lake WHED, which is shown as the green area. uh and streams and other water bodies in this part of the city and county flow into Falls Lake and the lake is located along the northeast boundary of of Durham County. This phase of the project involves a lot of site evaluation work to make sure that at the end of this project we have a suitable site where we can build an algo flowway. After the site identification and evaluation phase is completed, the city will decide whether to to fund the design and construction of an algo flowway. So the timeline for the next few phases depends on what we find in this site search. Now before we talk about the progress of our work to find a site, I'm going to I'll pass it over to Mara to talk about the results of a community survey for this project. Okay, thank you, John. So, Durham City government is very committed to open and transparent communication and to keeping you informed about projects that will have an impact on your lives one way or another. We've established several different ways of keeping you updated on the Algo Flowway project, such as the project website, social media pages, and public meetings. But we thought we needed to check in from time to time to find out whether we are meeting our commitments and where we could improve. So in February of this year, we created a survey and we kept it open for about three and a half months. This is what um our analysis showed us about that survey. First, we were pleased to find out that nearly 75% of you knew or were familiar with the project. Um, those respondents who said they had heard of the project found about out about it through social media, the web page, and through community groups that they belong to. Uh, the people who responded lived in a few different areas of Durham with definite interest coming from, not surprisingly, Falls Lake and Ellerby Creek. You'll hear more about those reasons later. The environmental concerns here in Durham pretty much mirror what we see in other parts of the country. People are concerned about water pollution, the loss of trees and green space, uh too much growth in development, noise pollution, and of course, we hear about climate change. So when asked specifically about the concerns related to Durham's water quality, we heard some more targeted and specific responses and these can help us with sighting and design decisions to come in the future. Again, there were development concerns uh concerns over safe recreational use, sewer spills, storm water runoff, and specifically the water quality in Falls Lake and Elerby Creek. We even heard from a few people that there were some odor problems detected at Elbury Creek. We want to let you know that we have a team that investigates pollution complaints like sewer spills within the city and we even have a hotline that you can call to report storm water pollution concerns. Finally, you can always visit our state of the streams web pages for information about wersheds in the city. And I'm going to put some links in the chat or I already have and now I'm going to send those to you so that you can keep up on your own and please give us feedback so we know that we're telling you the things that you need to know. Okay. Um, your concerns about the Algo flowway as an approach to water quality improvement included things like cost, loss of trees and green space again and odor. And again, these things will help inform us as we make plans to move forward in implementing the project. Regarding cost, it's going to be very expensive to comply with the false lake rules. Anyway, over the long term, an algo flowway is less costly than other types of measures for removing nutrients. There was also some concern expressed about how effective an algo flowway would be. We've already conducted a successful pilot study and believe that this technology will be effective at removing the nutrients that would normally reach Fall Lake Falls Lake. Finally, we asked whether you supported the project. 43% of the respondents said yes and 57 said no. Uh some respondents mentioned that they would prefer that we focus more on pollution prevention. Um to reassure you that is always a goal and it's something that we talk about constantly within the field of storm water management with regulators, industrial businesses, homeowners, etc. So people can be assured that we do prioritize prevention whenever practical. Respondents also question again how much we knew about this technology and whether it would work here. So we've done the research and as I said conducted a pilot at Falls Lake and we think this technology can be highly effective for managing the nutrients in Falls Lake. Similarly, we've looked at other facilities of this type uh in terms of odor and uh the disposal of the algae and we found that the um odor can be controlled. Uh it really doesn't generate a lot of odor and the uh algae can be composted for reuse as John mentioned before. We believe both of these things can be managed without impacting nearby homes and businesses. So, in short, want to assure you that we are committed to continuing to keep you informed on the progress while we're in the site evaluation phase, and you can learn more about everything we've discussed on that um on that project website. We'll also continue to check in with you to ensure you're getting the information that you seek. Now, Alex Nice with Gradient will talk about some of the work we've done so far and what we've learned. Thank you. Thanks, Mara. Uh, now we'll review some of the progress we've made on the project. And since our last info session, we worked on identifying, screening, and prioritizing potential sites for an algoflowy system. The project team used a science-based and step-by-step approach to find the best locations for an algoy system. We started by reviewing water quality and flow information to narrow search areas. And for there we used maps and available data to identify possible locations. We also reached out to local land owners to further screen sites and then selected and evaluated the candidate sites. Finally, we scored and ranked those sites using a consistent set of criteria to move forward with the sites that made the most sense. The process was designed to systematically identify the most suitable sites for an agopul system within Falls Lake in Durham County. And over the next few slides, we'll walk through each of these steps in a little more detail. The Dur Durham community values preserving and restoring the water quality of its streams, rivers, and lakes. An algo flowy system works best on waters with high nutrient related pollution. So the first step was to identify water bodies in the Falls Lake in Durham County having water quality and flow that will make a flowy system most effective. To do this, the project team reviewed water quality and flow data from more than 40 monitoring stations operated by the city of Durham, state of North Carolina, and the US Geological Survey. The drainage areas and water bodies assessed included the Eno River, Panther Creek, Erby Creek, Lick Creek, Little Lick Creek, Lake Mickey, Little Reservoir, and of course, Falls Lake. So based on review of the water quality and flow data, the team identified three primary search areas as suitable for an algo flowy system. As shown on this map, these are Ellerby Creek from downstream of East Cub Boulevard to its confluence with Falls Lake, the land surrounding Lake Mickey and the land land surrounding Lake Little River Reservoir. Within these areas, the project team searched for potential sites using available maps and desktop information. We prioritized sites that were city or county owned, had mild slopes, and fell outside the regulated flood planes and documented wetlands. Understanding that the community values conserving green space, the team also favored sites with low impact of land resources. And while no noise and odor have not been issues at existing algoate facilities, sites located away from residential areas were preferred as well. The desktop search identified 31 potential sites across uh these three search areas. While we preferred sites owned by the city or county, some of the potential sites we found were privately owned. We reached out to those land owners to find out if they were interested in selling their property to the city and if so to get permission to evaluate their site in person. We did this in steps. First we sent letters, then we followed up with phone calls and in some cases we met with land owners face to face to talk about the project and answer their questions. These conversations helped us narrow down the sites since some owners wanted to move forward while others did not. During the site identification and priorization process, we also talked with state environmental regulators about the project. Our discussion centered around the rules and the permits that could shape what's feasible and how the system gets designed. We discussed the amount of water that could be withdrawn while also safeguarding water resources. We also discussed how and where to design the water intakes in order to protect fish and wildlife as well as to minimize impacts to stream and lake riparian buffers. Talking with the regulators early was very important as these discussions helped us understand what's allowed and to make sure environmental concerns are being handled right from the start. Following the landowner outreach efforts and further review of available information, we narrowed the 31 potential sites down to nine candidate sites for more detailed evaluation and prioritization. The approximate locations of the nine candidate sites are shown on this map. As you can see, there are four sites on Ellerby Creek, two at Little River Reservoir, and three being considered at Lake Mickey. The detailed evaluation for the nine candidate sites involved several activities. We conducted site visits and developed conceptual layouts of algoflowy systems for each of these sites. We also estimated riparian buffers and wetlands and assessed whether protected species might be present. Finally, we developed and applied priorization criteria to score and rank the sites. The site's visits were a critical part of how we evaluated each site. They let us gather information that desktop alone desktop data alone could simply couldn't tell us. Things like unmapped streams or wetlands, visible rock, access issues, water intake challenges, the forest resources on the site, and signs of shallow groundwater. Just as important, being on the ground let us see environmental resources at each site firsthand. We then factored that into our prioritization with a focus on minimizing impacts to green space, land, and water resources that are valued by the Durham community. For each candidate site, we developed a conceptual layout. These layouts helped us to better understand the site constraints and estimate a feasible design. Each layout shows the approximate sizes of potential ago systems along with the locations of their key parts. Those parts include piping, pumps, and access roads. Uh on this figure, you can see where the water is pumped from the water body, passes over the flowway, and then returns back to the same water body downstream. The layouts also mapped out the site conditions we needed to account for such as stream and wetland buffers. These layouts were critical for developing the information needed to assign values and scores for the priorization criteria which we'll discuss next. Once we had gathered all the information including conducting the site visits, we developed and applied our site prioritization criteria. In total, we created 31 criteria covering five CA main categories including water source, site design, environmental factors, water and pump, water pump and intake considerations, and land use and access. Some of the key criteria are listed on this slide. As before, we built community values into these criteria, including protecting and preserving land, water, and ecosystem resources and keeping a reasonable distance from residential areas to address concerns like odor or noise noise. Each of the 31 criteria was given a score and a waiting for every site. We then tallied those scores to produce a total score or rank for each site. Based on the site identification and priorization effort, we selected one top ranked site to carry forward into further engineering analysis and environmental assessment. And we're keeping several other highly ranked sites under consideration as well. We'll discuss the selected sites next. site we've selected to move forward into further engineering and analysis and environmental assessment is a privately owned property along Ellerby Creek near Hamlin Road. Several factors earned this site its higher ranking. First, water quality is ideal. Nutrient concentrations are higher here which makes the algo flowway more effective and also gives us a greater opportunity to improve a waterway that Durham citizens value. The site also has steady stream flow and we don't anticipate any wetland impacts from in from installing the flowway. It faces south which is good for algo growth though there will be some shading from trees on nearby parcels. Some clearing will be needed but compared to the other sites we evaluated the forest resources here were much less mature. The site does come with a few challenges though. Chief among them is designing an intake along the shallow stream. As John mentioned before, because this property is privately owned, we can't share its exact location today. We want to respect the owner's privacy. Durham does not currently own the site, and we are continuing discussions with the property owner while completing our due diligence to verify whether the site can meet the project's needs. Additional information will be provided as the evaluation process moves forward. Beyond Elby Creek site, we are also considering other highly ranked sites at Lake Mickey and Little River Reservoir. Sighting the flowway at one of the lakes offers real advantages. We could build on city own land and installing the intake is less challenging in deeper water than in the shallower creeks. Both lakes are also drinking water sources. So any water quality improvement is an added benefit. The main draw drawback is the water quality itself. The lakes have lower nutrient concentrations than Ellerby Creek which makes the algo flowway less effective and potentially less costefficient. Despite these trade-offs, both the lake sites remain under active consideration. Our next steps for the engineering evaluation and environmental assessment begin with further site investigations. These include geote a geotechnical investigation primarily to determine the extent and depth of underground rock along with a boundary and stream survey and additional environmental and natural resource assessments. That work covers more detailed field assessments for wetlands and buffers for threatened and endangered species and cultural resources. From there, the evaluation will advance to a more detailed preliminary conceptual design, including the sizing and specific placement of algo parts that we discussed before. We'll also estimate and compare the cost effectiveness of nutrient removal by an algo at this site against other storm water treatment methods such as storm water wetlands and bio retention devices. We look forward to reporting back on our progress on these evaluations at the next information session. And now I'll hand it back to John to review the project timeline. Uh thanks Alex. So this is the timeline with major tasks for the project. Um the project started in April of 2025 as I mentioned and we were expecting to finish this phase in March of 2027. Um but due to some delays it is anticipated to be completed by June of 2027. Um the site search and evaluation process is anticipated to finish by the end of this year 2026. And we will have public communication through our website and social media accounts. And there will be two more public meetings to update the the public about the project. We'll have one in person and one more virtual. uh the site evaluation, site planning and the cost and schedule estimates um are in process and they will be done in this second year of of the project. Um and the final report for this phase uh should be available after June of 2027. We appreciate your time tonight. Uh to continue staying up to date with this project, you can follow our Durham Stormwater social media accounts on Instagram and Facebook uh Durham H2O and visit the project web page and look out for announcements of our next public information sessions. We plan to hold uh two more sessions as I mentioned for this site identific identification phase of the project. It's our priority that our residents have access to this information throughout this project and this recorded presentation will also be available through the city's YouTube channel in the coming weeks. Um, so now we've reserved time to hear from you. Um, I can see there's there's several questions in the chat already, but please type your questions into the chat. And we have a translator who is available for Spanish translation. And I I just want to apologize for some of the timing of the slides when Mara was was speaking. Uh so if we if anyone would like to go back and look at those, we can we can do that. Um and I'll turn it over to Eningga who's going to moderate our chat for us. >> Thanks, Jonathan. And and thank you for listening in and submitting your comments. There are several comments related to uh that are related. So we won't uh necessarily read all of them um uh as they occurred. One thing that I do want to re-emphasize uh before we go into some of the uh other comments is that John mentioned the meeting will be uploaded to the website soon. So there were a couple of of uh questions about whether the uh this meeting recording will be added and so that answer is yes. uh that will be uh the first question uh is John is what alternatives to the algo flow way were considered and then there were other questions uh related to that that uh suggested that biotention ponds bio retention ponds are proven viable ways of dealing with um excess storm water. Uh were was that a consideration? But basically there were questions about what alternatives to the algo flowway uh process were considered. >> Yeah. So I will say that the Algo flowway project is in in addition to many of the traditional storm water control measures that um the city has has um built and we'll continue to to look at those projects like you know storm water wet detention ponds and bio retention uh areas and constructed wetlands and those kinds of things. So we this this project is not meant to replace those uh those types of project. We will continue to look um at areas where bio retention um or other traditional SCMs um can be employed or constructed um regarding so this algo flowway is sort of a way for us to think outside of of the box. It's it's an innovative technology and the falls lake rules are are going to be very expensive to comply with and so um this algo flowway is a a big is a piece of that pie to help us comply with the false lake rules. Um this this project is related to the existing development rules in the falls lake uh rules. Um so other technologies we we did look at another technology um by a company called Aqualutions. It was uh a propri proprietary uh technology and so we we couldn't get the details enough details on it. Um you know and so the the algo flowway was was the one that we landed on for this more innovative approach. Okay. All right. There were a couple uh several questions or a couple of questions about the the US Army Corps of Engineers and um wanting you to describe the impacts to federal lands and the design level of how much land will be utilized and also what the coordination has been with the uh core of engineers. >> Yes. So we had a lot of discussions with the US Army Corps of Engineers during the previous site search project because we were looking at land um owned by owned by the core um adjacent to Falls Lake and through multiple discussions as to whether or not you know something like this could be built on federal land Um the answer the clear answer that we got was no it would not be allowed or permitted to be built on uh federal land. So we are not um we are not ex searching for sites that uh that are federal lands. Um, we have talked to them about a an easement um if the the intake pipe or the effluent pipe um would cross federal lands and that is a possibility. Um but we are we are still trying to explore we are looking at sites that where we don't have to cross any federal land. >> Okay. >> So they for this they they would not be we are trying not to impact them and and we really would would not have the permission to for for building a flowway on federal land. All right. Uh there were a couple of questions about the um amount uh of the water requirements. How much volume of water do you project for uh to evaporation and what is the MGD expectation of um the the process given some of the drought conditions that we currently are under. >> Right. So we are looking at a a range of sizes for the algo flowway. Um anywhere from you know three mill three u million gallons per day up to 10 million gallons per day. Um the the water that is pumped is going to be returned back to the same water body just a little further downstream. And so there's um you know the residence time of the water passing over the flowway is very short. Um I think for our pilot study it was about 12 minutes and so there's not um not much water loss or evaporation in the process and we will be returning the water back to the same water body. Um now during times of drought, you know, we may we may have to uh have a lower flow coming across the water uh across the flowway or maybe half of the flowway is only running. Um it can be the flow rate can be adjusted on on the algo for the algo flowway. Um and you know we would we would talk to regulators about and we have been talking to them about the requirements for um how much could be removed or pumped from a stream uh during you know during different flow flow rates in that stream. Um I don't know if Alex or Sujet have anything to add from gradient about that but is even about the evaporation. >> Yeah, I mean I would just echo what you said that we don't anticipate um uh a large amount of evaporation any different than what you would have already in the water body right because there's you know it's based on area that sort of thing. So um and again the residence time is pretty low and it's you know essentially you know uh you know would be pulling the water out and putting it back in right downstream. Okay. Another question was whether uh any of the previous sites um that were looked at uh during a a previous during an earlier process was considered. >> Definitely. Um we we looked at sites that were within from the pre previous project or site search that were within um the city and county of Durham. Uh and yeah that were only within the falls lake wershed but there were sites from the previous site search um that we looked at again. >> Okay. All right. And then the um another question asks what is the proximity of the proposed algo flowway to the city's sewer outfall from the treatment plant. >> Uh so the oner creek um it is it is downstream. We looked downstream of of the North DM water reclamation facility. Um, so, you know, again, I don't want to say an exact location just because we're, you know, as we mentioned, protecting the privacy of the property owner. And, uh, our real estate division has a has a process to perform due diligence. um to ensure that the the site is viable for a successful project. So um I will say that it is it is down it was between the um North D Water Reclamation Facility and um you know the mouth of Ellerby before it reaches false lake. Okay, there are some questions about the um the effectiveness of an algo flowway in Florida and how successful they are but that that Florida has warmer water and uh the question is if that if there are such good projects why aren't there other um and more algo flowways in North Carolina and other places. >> It's a good question. Um, so you know, we we have been working on this project for a long time. We did a feasibility study. We did a pilot study at at Falls Lake um near I85. And that pilot study ran for a little over a year. So, we were we were running it during, you know, the warmer season, but also during the cooler season. And it is more productive during the summer months. Um, but it, you know, algae is is still growing. Um, and it's less less productive during the colder months. Um but even with that it is still more costefficient um with removing more you know nitrogen and phosphorus uh than other traditional storm water control measures and so I can't really speak to why other places have not uh implemented this from our perspective it is you know we are finding a site has been has And um the the most challenging part um because yeah, we want it to be effective and successful and um it's taken us some time to get here to find a site. So we're we're looking forward to moving forward. >> Okay. There are some questions about the uh Falls Lake rules and credits and uh the questions centered around um more about the credits being allocated by doing this project instead of less dense uh development and that the um and then how do the water credits for this project work since again there's a drought and uh the falls lake is is kind of low at this time. >> Yeah. I mean, the the scope of this project is really tied to the existing development rules. Um and so the other parts of the Falls Lake rules are still have to be um complied with by the city whether it's wastewater or new development. Um you know so the the the Falls Lake rules are being re-evaluated re-examined right now. Um and so this project whether it's an investment or uh uh requirement or it's a you know pounds removed of nitrogen and phosphorus we we think this project will meet both of those um requirements. So, um it it really just depends on on how the falls like rules will be uh re-examined. >> Okay. All right. And then there were questions about the impact on Ellery Creek uh the construction on uh construction impacts and um other impacts relative to uh water flow. >> Yeah. Again, again, we're we are speaking with um regulators at the state and um you know, we will have to comply with all all state and federal rules related to flow requirements uh for a project like this. Um so it will be based on um you know those maximum levels that we can remove from the creek even though it will still go back into the stream. So um we're not removing the water permanently. Um, so yeah, we're going to we're going to comply with with the state and federal rules related to any impacts. >> Okay. Um there was a question about uh the understanding of why Durm is paying for water uh Raleigh's water cleanup um and whether this in fact is the case. Why is it taking place um on the intake side before it enters the Raleigh water system? Um so why I'm not quite understanding the question in >> so I I I I guess there the implication is that uh the the project straddles the uh Raleigh's side of uh uh an area of the lake and um and its water system but also the why Raleigh is not participating I guess is the question >> right um I mean this this again goes back to the falls lake rules it's a state you know um statemandated requirements and that is that is the driver for us exploring this this technology Um because we are required to reduce nutrient pollution coming you know in storm water runoff from Durham uh going into the streams that lead into Falls Lake. Um so we are being we are complying with that and being a good neighbor to um to Raleigh. >> Okay. All right. And the other uh they're not questions, they're comments. And they're com comments about um the uh disturbance of of wildlife habitat and the uh impact on the area's uh habitats and habitat and what it does to uh the area. and uh would like for all of that to be considered that those are certainly issues that we heard in the um in the survey. >> Um and the one last question outside of the comments is who is the lead scientist on the team? Uh so we are I mean I am man I am managing the project on the city side and Alex is managing the project on our consultant team. Um we have uh a subconsultant on the team with hydromeia. Um and they have built these uh these facilities in Florida. Um and so they are you know very very knowledgeable about about the technology. >> Okay. All right. Okay. There are uh comments again coming in about uh the city of Raleigh's uh participation. There are questions about or there are comments about uh recommending the city focus on removal of nitrogen and phosphorus. We are capturing all of these comments and questions and they too will be posted in a in our summary document on the uh web page as we summarize this meeting and all of the content and all of the feedback that we've uh heard. But uh this concludes all of the questions that um have been posted. Okay, looks like maybe >> one last question. Um, how many acres are required? >> Yeah. So, um, and I may have Alex and Sujit step on here, but you know, typically, uh, like a a 10 million gallon per day facility, which would be the largest we could build. The flowway itself requires about four acres and we would need more land for um obviously the the compost area and other parts of the flowway that Alex was talking about. Uh the piping, you know, the the the pump. Uh, so it I don't know, Alex, what for a I guess a 10 MGD or a 6 MGD, we would need 10 acres or more. >> Yeah, I would I would um agree with everything you just said. So I think the the flowway itself is about that 4 acre um area that you need for a 10mgd. Of course we we're looking at different sizes, right? So it may not be that big. Um and then as you said there's other components that go along with uh the flowway itself, you know, the piping, the pump station, um composting areas or you know um polishing ponds. Uh and it also depends on the site uh shape, depends on the site slopes. Um a lot of variables go into it. So it's sort of a sight specific question. Um there's also screening requirements that need to be met uh within this, you know, um adhering to the city of Durham uh land development ordinance. Uh so there's there's room provided for all that. And I would say that, you know, we would be, you know, looking for sites that partials that are that 10 acre or more size to give us the amount of room and flexibility to um, you know, to design what's needed for the flowway system. >> The Thanks. >> Go ahead, John. >> Yeah. No, go ahead. I I want to go back uh I think there's a misunderstanding of uh when you describe the uh backgrounds of the scientists there's a misunderstanding uh based on what I'm reading here in the chat that they may be salespeople for um uh for the algo flowway uh industry and that's not the case they are engineers designing the facility and and Jonathan and other and Alex and Sug if you'd like to jump in. >> Yeah, go ahead. Y >> um Alex and I are located right here in Durham and you know we're consulting engineers. Uh both of us have background in environmental engineering and we are back with a team of specialized utility engineers all located here in the triangle. The person that John mentioned the hydromeia is the you know uh one the one who invented the technology and held the patent for a long time. So we have them as a technical expert. Uh but all of us you know the engineering design team is all located here local in in North Carolina and we are analyzing the data and looking at all the pollutant uh you know concentrations and the temperature in the streams and uh coordinating uh with the city uh with the state agencies and things like that. >> Okay. >> I might add Oh go ahead. But just to add that um you know we it is a multid-disiplinary team. So we have you know Suji and I we focused our expertise storm water and civil engineering site engineering but we also have utility engineers that are looking at the intakes and the pump stations. Uh and we also have environmental scientists that are looking at all of the um you know the streams and wetland impacts if there are any uh looking for at for the threatened endangered species concerns the cultural resources concerns as well. Um and we also have geotechnical engineers too. So it is a multi-disiplinary team as such mentioned um all located with the exception of hydromeia. >> Okay. All right. And there there are questions regarding u security. Will there be fencing and lighting and um access and will there be new roads into the area? So uh talk a little bit about the the security component. >> Yeah, there there will be fencing um around you know around the facility. Um there will be, you know, we'll have uh probably a small building for equipment. Um as you, you know, saw in the slides, um there's there's a tractor that would, you know, remove the the algae. Um and and yeah, there will be an access road into the site. um you know for staff that are ma you know maintaining the flowway but also um for removing the the algae you know on trucks. Um and as far as lighting um security lighting we we haven't really talked too much about that. Um, I could get back to you about what that looks like at other facilities, but um, any of the activity would be done during the daytime. So, there would, you know, my guess is there would not be a a need for a lot of lighting. Um, >> okay. >> Yeah. And we, you know, we may have a building for, um, educational purposes as well. Um so that people can come visit and learn about it and and you know learn about the technology and and the the water quality benefits. Okay. And then the um one additional uh question is related to um the reports. Uh and and and kind of where you are with uh uh capturing some of the uh impacts on wildlife on you know at the site itself. uh what are uh and and whether reports will be available related to those as uh the project is uh the this process the design process is being completed. >> Yes. Um we will have a you know comprehensive report at the end of this phase of the project as I mentioned probably after June 2027. Um and that will be available for the public and that will include you know the engineering analysis the various um environmental assessments um as as well. Um so that will be available when those are completed. Um there was u I think you've answered the question regarding light pollution and uh the next question is what will be done with waste from the scrubber >> right the the the algae the yeah the the the plan would be to to compost that and and it could be done onsite or it could be removed from the site. Um, you know, after the algae's dried out. Um, so there will be, you know, we will, uh, evaluate a plan for that as well. Um, so we are looking into that. Okay, Jonathan, those are the questions and uh like I said, their comments there, but uh those are the primary questions. A lot of them are are uh are related and >> yeah, and I appreciate all the the the questions and the and the comments. Um and you know we will um uh we will respond to to these um in in a written form that can be that will be available in the coming weeks um after this meeting. So hopefully we can address all the the questions and the concerns >> and we'll turn it back over to you to close out. All right. Um well, I appreciate everyone attending uh this public information session. Um the next one is going to be in person. Uh don't have a date yet for that, but um please stay tuned for that and and a location as well. So, um we look forward to meeting some of you in person at the next one. Um and thanks for your feedback and you know interest in this project. Um we are very excited about it and and we think it will help the city um comply with the the Falls Lake rules in a in a cost-effective way. All right. Okay. Thank you. Thank you all. Have a great night.