 There's one important thing I forgot to talk to you about. I wish I remembered after you walked out. Does it remind me of something? Oh, I know. And I was meeting with my wife. All right. Everybody want water? Yes. I usually do this. I lead my diet. I have taken this account. It's horrible. I don't even want to think about it. Yeah. I have this one. And you want it? No. This is not one. Right. Yes, it's not working right now. I did. It's not working. It's kind of no. I did until last week. Hello, Mr. Mayor. How you doing? I'm sorry. I'm talking to you. It's nasty. You got pale here earlier this afternoon. Really? About 3.30. 20 minutes really fast. Listen, if it'll kill some of the canker worms in my house, I'll be happy. Canker worms. Good evening. We'd like to call the Durham City Council meeting to order. It's 7.01 p.m. on Monday. The 20th. I certainly want to welcome all of you that are with us this evening. We could just take a moment for a solid meditation, please. Thank you. I'm going to ask Councilman Davis if he would lead us in the pledge. Councilman Brown has an excused absence. Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. All right. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Madam Clerk, can you call the roll, please? Mayor Bell. I present. Here, Councilman Davis. Here. Councilman Moffitt. Here. Here. Councilman Brown has an excused absence. We have one ceremony out of you. Is that up front? Thank you. Councilman Brown, Assistant Commander of the Community Services Bureau. Thank you. This proclamation speaks to crime victims' rights weeks. Whereas Americans are the victims of more than 26 million crimes each year, and crime can touch the lives of anyone regardless of age, national origin, race, street, religion, gender, sexual orientation, immigration, or economic status. Whereas many victims face challenges in finding appropriate services, including victims with disabilities, young victims of color, deaf and hard of hearing victims, LGBTQ victims, tribal victims, elder victims, victims with mental illness, immigrant victims, teen victims, victims with limited English proficiency, and others. Whereas the entire community has a role to play in the national theme for 2015, engaging communities and powering victims provides an opportunity to recommit ourselves to extending our reach through a victim-centered approach. Whereas involving survivors, helps victims, service providers, and criminal justice professionals understand the cultural values and expectations of underserved victims who seek assistance and justice. Whereas engaging victims' communities and learning from leaders about their unique needs helps service providers foster a supportive and culturally relevant atmosphere in which victims seek help and healing. Whereas incorporating communities, extending experts, and trusted sources of support. And to help us to fully serve survivors who develop a criminal justice system in response to this truly accessible and appropriate fall victims of crime. Whereas over the past 18 years, the Durham Police Department has made significant strides in providing comprehensive services to crime victims. The origins of a Victim Services Unit in 1997 was a milestone in positioning the agency to better implement and advocate for services that reinforce victims' rights. Whereas with the full word of their community and victims' service providers behind them, survivors will feel endorsed to face their grief, loss, fear, anger, and shame without fear of judgment and will feel understand and worthy of support. Whereas national crime victims' right weeks, which is April 19th through the 25th of 2015, is an opportune time to commit to ensuring that all victims of crime, even those who are challenging to reach or serve, are offered culturally and linguistically accessible and appropriate services in the aftermath of crime. Whereas the City of Durham is hereby dedicated to building partnerships with trusted sources of support, including community leaders, religious groups, schools, and other agencies to better reach and serve all victims of crime, no matter their community. Now, therefore, I, William V. Bilbell, Mayor of the City of Durham, North Carolina, do hereby proclaim the week of April 19th through April 25th, 2015 as Crime Victims' Right Week and reaffirm the City of Durham's commitment to creating a victim service and criminal justice response that assists all victims of crime during Crime Victims' Rights Week and throughout the year to express our sincere gratitude and appreciation for those community members, victim service providers, and criminal justice professionals who committed to improving our response to all victims of crime so that they may find relevant assistance, support, justice, and peace. And witness my hand, Corporal City of Durham, North Carolina. This is the 20th day of April, 2015. I'm going to present this to Lieutenant Brown for any comments that you may have. Thank you. Hello. First, I'd like to thank Councilman Eddie Davis for your inspiring words in attending the banquet yesterday. And I also would like to introduce my staff, those who are here, which is, please stand up often. This is Sergeant Offen. He's the Sergeant over the Unit. And I'd also like to recognize my Deputy Chief, Deputy Chief Marsh. There are several things that we're doing this week for Victims' Rights Week, and I just want to give a couple of things that we've done or that we've planned for. On Wednesday, we're actually kicking off the Start By Believing. It's going to be a forum that we're doing with NCCU on Central's campus, and we're actually doing that or heading that up with a lot of the young student athletes there on campus. And that will actually be Wednesday sometime in the afternoon. On Thursday, we're also doing the Start By Believing campaign, which we're kicking off with the Religious Leaders Coalition Group at the Shepherd House. And those are just to name a few of the things that we're doing. But thank you for this proclamation. Have a great evening. Thank you, sir. Any comments by members of the council? If not, we look for our time. It's about a sitting manager first. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Good evening, everyone. I don't have any priority items this evening, but I would like to take just a brief moment for recognition if I could. As everyone at the day certainly knows and many people in the audience, our General Services Director Joel Reitzer will be retiring at the end of this month. As such, this is Joel's last council meeting with us. And I wanted to take just a moment to wish him well and tell him how much we appreciate the work he's done. Joel has guided any number of just hugely significant projects over the relatively short time he was here for almost six years, including the Durham Convention Center renovation, the Carolina Theater renovation, Durham Bulls Athletic Park renovation, and really many, many others. But I just wanted to say, Joel, thank you. We wish you well. And we appreciate all that you have provided guidance and support to improve Durham and make this a better community. So thank you. Thank you so much. If I might just say a word, I didn't expect this, but I'd really like to say how much I enjoyed. Six years was a long time, Tom. That was a lot, but no, sincerely, I really enjoyed it. This kind of sneaked up on me. I thought this would take a little bit longer, but really our plans fell into place pretty quickly over the last year or so. And so it's with great thanks to all of you for the opportunity to work here in such an important capacity with all of you and with the very competent city staff and general services staff that I had to work with. So I think we've got a few things done, and I really enjoyed it. So thank you very much, and I hope to be in touch with you all in the future. I recognize the city attorney for any... Thank you, Mr. Mayor, no priority items. Likewise, the city clerk. No items, Mr. Mayor. Thank you. Okay, we'll proceed with the agenda, and as usual, the consent agenda is first. If any council member or someone from the public pulls a consent agenda item, we will discuss that towards the end of the meeting. And I'll read the heading. Item one is approval of city council minutes. Item two is housing appeals board appointment. Item three is the Durham city county environmental affairs board appointments. Item four is the mayor's nominee for appointment to the passenger vehicle for hire commission, which is created due to a vacancy. Item six is renewal of the Durham city county interlocal cooperation agreement for planning. Item seven is administrative interpretation of Newst, Jordan Lake protected area. Item eight is interlocal agreement reauthorized in the Durham Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Commission. Item nine is Austin Avenue bridge replacement municipal agreement. Item 10 is the second amendment to the Hillendale golf course management agreement between the city of Durham and Amarizel golf LLC. Item 11 is twin lakes park site improvements contract with DW ward construction company Inc. Item 12 is change order to address modifications to the masonry scope of work for 400 Cleveland street, roof and interval renovations contract with LA Downing and Sun Inc. Item 13 is utility extension agreement. Water only with pristine G Jones individual to serve 7817 Farrington Mill Road. I was 1416 and 25 through 29 items that can be found on the general business agenda. It's about caring and taking a motion for the approval of consent agenda items. The property moves in second. All in favor of the motion indicate by saying aye. Aye. Those opposed the motion passes unanimously. We move to the general business agenda public hearings. Item 14 is a zoning map change for south side east phase two and three Z 14 000034. Thank you. Mr. Mayor members of council pat young with the planning department. Before I introduce the case I can first certify for the record that all public caring items before you tonight. Have been advertised in accordance with the provisions of law and their affidavits to that effect on file with the planning department. Excuse me. The case as the mayor said is the 14 000034 south side east phases two and three. Its request to change the zoning map designation of 10.7 acres located at two point sienna drive. From its current zoning map designation of planned development residential or PDR 5.1 to 0. To the requested designation of residential urban multi family also known as RUM with the development plan which would allow for the development of 250 residential units. This application also includes a request for parking reduction. This request proposes to provide 1.2 parking spaces per unit rather than the standard requirement of two spaces per unit and that would be approved if this item is approved. The parking reduction request has been reviewed by city staff which has found the applicant has provided sufficient information to support their request and this information is included in your staff report for this item in detail. The development plan does include commitments greater than the ordinance standards which includes a provision of a bus stop or shelter along with several other text and graphic commitments identified in detail in your staff report. The staff determines this request is consistent with the comprehensive plan and other adopted plans and policies and the planning commission recommended approval of this item at its March 10th meeting by about 12 to 0. I'll be happy to take any questions. This is a public hearing. The public hearing is open. You've heard the staff report. I would ask other comments first by members of the council questions. I don't have anyone to sign up to speak for the signing. I recognize councilman Katani. Yeah, I'm having a little trouble with my agenda, but I appreciate the additional responses to some of the questions we raised at work session. I wasn't completely clear on question or comment the response to question or comment to regarding a bike pedestrian committee comments. So I understand that city department of transportation are in the early design stage of a plan that would include modification of wheelchair ramps, handicapped accessibility and installation of pedestrian push buttons, etc. On Rocksboro Street and Lakewood Mangum, who is paying for those improvements? I saw that there was a plan, but it just says upon approval in the FY 15-16 budget. So that was not clear to me. Well, I'm at the microphone. Reginald Johnson, department of community development. I think when it comes to money, I think I might need to defer to transportation on this particular. Okay. Bill Judge with transportation. Our department has requested it as part of the fiscal year 2016 capital improvement project. And it is in the funded capital improvement project portion of the budget. Okay. And thank you. Does the same apply to the pedestrian signals on the corners of the intersection of Rocksboro Street, Lakewood and Mangum Rocksboro connector? Yes, it would all both those items one and two would all be in that request. Any of those jointly funded with the state or those all 100% city, do you recall? They would be primarily 100% city. There may be some reimbursement for some of the signal work with the state, but primary. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much. You're welcome. Thank you. We're going to ask Councilman Moffitt. There's a question for Mr. Young. In the memo that Councilmember Katati was referencing, the third one had to do with a bike maintenance repair station. And the response was, have you seen this memo, Mr. Young? I have, Councilman Moffitt. Okay. So it says that MBS will commit the installation of the bike maintenance repair station, but believes it'll be better discussed during review and site plan approval process. But they could offer a commitment to install such a station without having to commit to the location of it. Is that correct? That is correct. We based on consultation with our colleagues in transportation. We'd ask that they consider if such a commitment is made, that it be clearly identified that this be done on their site, not in a specific location on their site, but not in the public right of way. So there wouldn't be implied maintenance responsibility by the public. Right. Okay. Is the applicant present? How are you doing? So the question I have then is, would you go ahead, since you said MBS will commit to installation of bike maintenance and repair station, then is that, are you proffering that commitment tonight? Yes, we are. Okay. And then, so you'll work it out with staff. Work out the location on a later date. Right, okay. But you'll work out the wording with staff in keeping with Mr. Young's request to be located on the property that's being rezoned rather than the public right of way. Yes, we will. Although there might be a better location on the site we've just developed, given some location issues. But again, I would be totally at the planning department's jurisdiction and discretion. Mr. Young, would it meet your concerns if it were on either phase one or phase two? I believe that would certainly be acceptable. Just the applicant clearly stipulates that, which I believe he just did. Great. Thank you. Thank you so much. May I ask other questions? Anyone else in the public that would like to speak, did not sign up to speak on this item? I'm sorry. No, no, it's quite right. I just want to take a moment and thank Mr. Johnson for the memo and the thorough response to the concerns that were raised. Given it's expedited and we didn't have time to send it back, it was extremely helpful. Thank you. Other comments, questions from the public? Let the director feel like no one in the public desire to speak on this item. I would encourage the public to be closed, as a matter of fact, before the council. Second. It's been prompted to move in the second. All in favor of the motion. Indicate by saying aye. Aye. Those opposed. The motion passes unanimously. And we move to item 15. Street closing. Consistency statement. I move the consistency statement on number 14. You guys are good. Great. All in favor of the motion. They're kept by saying aye. Aye. Those opposed. The motion passes unanimously. Move to item 15. Street closing. Shadowing Street. Street closing 14-0-0-0-12. Matterhorn Road. Street closing 14-0-0-0-13. Congress Place. Street closing 14-0-0-0-14. Kennedon Drive. Street closing 14-0-0-0-15. And Jean DeClaire Drive. Street closing 14-0-0-1-6. Thank you. Pat Young again with the planning department, members of council. This item, as the mayor just outlined, is a request by Hendrick Automotive Group to close approximately 5,800 linear feet of five different public streets, which the mayor just outlined that are detailed and attachment for of your staff report. This is within the former Kennington Heights subdivision, which is now located on a property under the control of Hendrick Automotive Group. And this request is approved. These right-of-ways would be recombined with adjacent properties and incorporated into proposed auto sales and associated uses approved under recent actions by council associated with zoning and annexation of this property. Thank you. And I'll be happy to take any questions. You've heard the staff report. The public hearing is open. Again, we'll ask first of the questions, comments by members of council. Is there anyone in the audience who would like to speak on the side and the side in the middle of public hearing? Let the record reflect that no one in the audience has to speak on the side. I will declare the public hearing as opposed to matter of fact for council. Second. The property moved in second. I'm sorry. All in favor of motion to make a decision. Aye. Aye. Those opposed, the motion passes unanimously. I moved item 16, which is a public hearing on the approval of the draft 2015-2020 consolidated plan, 2015-2016 annual action plan and 2015-2020 analysis of impediments. Mr. Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem, members of city council, this public hearing is a required public hearing by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, and I'll turn it over to Ms. Will McKonyers, federal programs coordinator for the particulars. Good evening, Mayor Bell and members of council. One more Konyers, Department of Community Development. The purpose of this public hearing is to receive citizen comments on the draft 2015-2020 consolidated plan and the 2015-2016 annual actions plan and the 2015-2020 analysis of impediments. The consolidated plan slash annual action plan specifies how the city will address the housing community development needs for the next five years through the use of community development block grant funds, home funds, ESG and recently added housing opportunities for people with public aid. For FY 15-16, the city expects to receive $1,807,500 in community development block grant funds, $776,323 in home funds, consortium funds, $160,046 in ESG funds and $282,282,000 and $6 in HOPLA funds from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The draft consolidated plan and annual action plan and analysis of impediments were made available for public review beginning March 19th, 2015 through April 20th, 2015. The plans and the AI were developed with the assistance of urban design ventures of Homestead, Pennsylvania. Notice of this meeting was advertised in the Herald Sun, the Carolina Times, K-Pass and newspapers and also via a general listserv. As a recipient of CDBG, HOME, ESG and HOPLA funds, the city is required to hold at least two public hearings. The first public hearing was held on October 6th, 2014. The consolidated plan must be electronically submitted to the Department of Housing and Urban Development by May 15th. A summary of comments from this public hearing will be included in the consolidated plan. Thank you. You've heard the staff report on what's been requested this evening. I'm going to ask so that we do have one person that has signed up to speak on this item. Is there anyone else that wants to speak on this item? This is a public hearing. If you haven't signed up. If you could just come forth and back, if you don't mind. Is there anyone else that wants to speak? In that case, let me ask in the comments about the staff. I mean, council before we hear the public comments. I have questions, but I can wait. Okay. In that case, Ms. Edith Thompson and the young lady who, if you can come forth also. You have three minutes initially on this. Good evening. Good evening. To the honorable mayor and distinguished members of the city council, my name is Edith Thompson and I'm the Executive Director of Rebuild Durham. Thank you for this opportunity to address you concerning item 16, the city of Durham's analysis of impediments and consolidated play. First, I'd like to commend the staff for their efforts in this difficult and tedious job of identifying the impediments to fair housing in the city and county of Durham. I have closely read the documents and conclusions and agree with the overarching message that is the need for affordable housing, both in and outside of the city limits. As a 25-year veteran of civil rights advocacy, focusing on housing and the former housing chair of the National NAACP's Board of Directors, I'm very familiar with the process we're undertaking and the anticipated outcomes. Rebuild Durham has stood steadfast in its mission to provide affordable housing options to elderly residents, disabled individuals, returning veterans. Our goals are strategically aligned with the AI and the city's consolidated plan. Therefore, I stand this evening to pledge our support towards assisting the city in reaching the goals of increasing access to affordable housing in and outside of the city, educating the community on the protections and rights associated with fair housing and fair lending, working with the city to lessen the unintended impacts associated with efforts to eliminate concentrations and areas of poverty and lack of opportunity. Finally, Rebuild Durham joins the city in its obligation to affirmatively further fair housing by dedicating our time and resources to assist in the mission of fair housing education, equal opportunity, and affordable stabilization. We respectfully submit the Board of Directors, Rebuild Durham. I thank you. Ms. Thompson, you can leave your marks with the clerk if you like. I'd like to recognize Ms. Rebecca Harvard Barnes. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor Bell. Thank you, council members. My name is Rebecca Harvard Barnes. I work with Habitat for Humanity of Durham. And I come not as well-prepared colleague. I thank her for her words of wisdom. But I'm here to say that Habitat is proud to be an affordable housing agency in Durham and that Habitat works because of our partnerships with all people and our partnerships with the city. You all have been a very important partner to Habitat for 30 years. Since you, Mayor Bell, declared the fight against poverty last February, Habitat has sold 11 homes within three blocks of Joe Steiner, which is at the corridor of Driver Street and Anger Avenue, as you all know. 10 more homes are now being built by Habitat in that area. But Habitat would like to do more. The City Small Projects and Neighborhood Revitalization Fund will allow Habitat for Humanity of Durham to do more and to serve more families in Northeast Central Durham. That's really all I have to say. I want to thank you all. I have one question. We do appreciate the work that you're doing, particularly over in that area. You don't have to tell us now. Could you give back and tell us how many residents of Norfolk Central Durham occupy in the houses that you... We can, absolutely. And I actually have some information I can tell you right this minute about how the first two houses Habitat ever built in Durham were on Anger Avenue and that currently in these last 10 homes that were built in that corridor, the three miles within Joe's Diner, three current residents of Habitat homes were residents in Northeast Central Durham. So, and I can get you more information because there are more. That would be helpful. As you probably know, one of the concerns that some residents had raised is that they like the work that you guys are doing, but they also like to hear that more of the residents that are in the neighborhood are able to take advantage of the homes you're building. And we appreciate and respect that and we're working with those folks and we're working with the residents, our Family Services Department and our Community Development Department are working really hard to try to make that happen. All right, thank you. Your support would help us make that happen. Thank you. The other persons that want to speak if not, I'd like to recognize Councilman Gutarty and Councilman Schultz. Great. So, I just on the fourth page or the last page of Attachment 9 funding recommendation, I was hoping for some clarification on items 1920 and 21. Could you say that again, which document? Sorry, it's number 9 Attachment 8 F funding recommendations. It's the very last attachment and the fourth page on that. Is there a staff person? Original. So, Reginald, I can see in essentially the fourth column what was requested and then in the fifth column what is being recommended and then the notes in the last column. I just wanted to clarify what the recommended amount is funding and I know you sent some additional responses but I got it late and didn't have much time to look at it. So, for DCLT there is no funding recommended for the two duplexes, is that correct? That is correct. So, for Habitat for Humanity between 20 and 21 I see fully funding of the Acquisition and Construction Rehab and that's for 11 lots in Southwest Central Durham, right? That's correct. So then in 21 it's not quite half a little more than half is being recommended per second mortgage loans and acquisitions so that 583,000 essentially. How many second mortgage loans and lots is that actually covering? That's 20 second mortgages for 20 units and acquisitions for 10 lots. So the notes does correspond to the recommended amount? Yes. Well, about the essentially why we want to give them half and what additional number of second mortgages and lots could be funded if we had additional funding? So I don't know the, can't recall the total in terms of the application but what I will share with you is the comments from the reviewers of the application. So there were two issues. One was that the amount, the proposal involved land banking and one of the concerns that the reviewers had was that we're going to be moving land from one land bank to another land bank and that really did not make a whole lot of sense being that they already the land is in the land bank and then the other issue was one of capacity because the question is if they received all of that could they move it quite frankly and from what was shared in the application based on what the reviewers said with all of what we awarding them there was a capacity challenge. Okay. I appreciate that. So the 22nd mortgages does that correspond to essentially these 21 lots or 20 lots or is it are the mortgages actually going to other lots that have already been purchased in or under construction? Do you know what I mean? Yes. It's not assigned. Do we have a sense of whether it's these same 20 or if it's others? Let me confirm. Okay. I mean I'm not objecting to it I was just trying to get a better sense. Based on my understanding they could be referred to the same lot but they're not identified that's up to Habitat for Humanity and there are some lots that they are already working on that they could this money could be applied for. So I'll say I understand the capacity concerns and I think for the number of lots under construction that makes sense. If it's second mortgage loans I don't want us to be behind the curve on that if you know what I mean. I mean when we know that they're that funding is essential to get people in homes as they're constructed so if you can just keep a surprise. Okay. We'll keep your prize on that. Thank you. But this is consistent with the work that they've been doing. This is not a we don't think it's an overly ambitious number or under underestimated number. In addition there's funding in the current cycle that is also contributing to those. That is correct. Oh, that was it. Thank you Mr. Schuyl. Thank you Mr. Mayor. First of all Reginald, thank you for the answers to my questions that I sent and I didn't get them until late in the day and I was running so I haven't had a chance to really digest them. That's not your fault. I didn't give them to you until over the weekend. But then again it was 400 pages to read it so that's my excuse. And I have had a chance to read through some of your responses but not all thoroughly so let me just if you don't mind let me ask a few of the questions and then again if that's okay. Just if you could describe I just wasn't really familiar at all with the runaway and homeless youth situation and this is my third question on page 12 and the last paragraph is a reference to the runaway and homeless youth program grant and but apparently there's no program and I ask what the situation with this was. I haven't really had a chance to digest your answer so would you mind just kind of going over that a little bit. So in 2010 the federal runaway and homeless youth funding that was awarded to an organization that organization was not able to obtain the proper license required to operate the facility so the program never became operational and the organization had to turn to basically they could not use the money so the money was not what's turned back in. Is that money available to us in the future or was that a I mean it seems like that would be great if we could have that money and have it work with an organization that was able to carry it out and was wondering is there a future availability of those funds. So I would have to check to see if there's those funds are continuing not the specific funds but the program. I'm pretty sure that the money looking at the years the money is not available now. Right okay but you're saying that program may still be around and there may be some potential funds. I would know I would have to check to be honest with you. The I was just the chart on page 85 I just wanted to comment because you explained it the figures for the number of workers and the number of jobs that there was such a disparate there was such a great distance between those and you all identified in your answer that this measures calculated by the census compares a number of jobs a number of workers are associated to a particular business sector it's just it's such a great discrepancy it so I had I guess I have to confess to some confusion still even after reading your answer about it you know and I was wondering if you had any other comments on that or what I will do is turn it over to our consultant page 85 there's a chart of the figures of the number of workers and the number of jobs. Councilman Walt Haglin from Urban Design Ventures yes there is more jobs and there are workers in the city that's due to the fact that you have some very large employers the hospitals the universities etc they're located in Durham and there's a lot of people coming from outside the county and the city that are working in Durham so that is the difference in the jobs and we're in migration but we're in migration for jobs yeah I'm going to just say that I'm skeptical of that distance between the number of jobs and the number of workers I believe you that it's in the census report I understand the explanation I just would love our Office of Economic and Workforce Development to take a look at it and I'd love to ask Kevin at some point but anyway thank you I appreciate that in the in the discussion of the continuum of care there's very little mention of the Durham rescue mission this is an important Durham institution it serves a lot of people but they're not they're very little about them in here and I was wondering if you could just give a little more about how the city relates to the rescue mission in terms of the work described here I've had a chance to read through this once I'm sorry I haven't really had a chance to digest it yet I'll be glad to so the first thing I would share that the Durham rescue mission is a part of the continuum of care the continuum of care is composed of all the organizations and entities that work to end homelessness within Durham and the continuum of care has a lead agency the lead policymaking body called the Homeless Services Advisory Committee and the staff to that body the lead agency or the collaborative applicant is the community development department so our charge in that structure is coming from HUD and our goal is to prepare a collaborative application made up of all of the work that goes on that we have to submit to HUD that's evaluated with the other 500 COCs in the country one of the things that we have to do is that we have to report on all work regardless to where the funding source comes from or whether it's federal so if someone such as the rescue mission is using their own funds of private money but they're impacting homelessness we have to include them but also they are supposed to register with the HMIS system which is the data system but our Durham rescue mission is elected not to do that and from HUD on that piece when we are evaluated that does not bode well as for the community for the collaborative application and we've had to deal with that over the last few years and it's a mark against us when we submit yes it is and you all have tried to get them to join the HMIS data system yes we have and remember the leadership of the Homeless Services Advisory Committee is talking and had been in dialogue with the Durham rescue mission on that point and no luck can I make a comment on that because I read your question I read your response I can't say what's behind them not participating but since Reverend Mills has started the program he's been pretty adamant about not wanting to receive local dollars federal dollars to run his program and I suspect that might be a part of that he won't ask me any money for the reluctance to receive federal dollars and local dollars for his program might also be part of the reluctance to give information to those agencies I don't know but I suspect that's close to it notwithstanding he does a great job most definitely most definitely okay thank you and then on the question on my question was about the in-depth review of the mortgage lending practices and and I wondered if you could describe what you would like to have happen on this this would be last question Reginald well I'm going to just say a little bit and then turn it over to our consultant but it suggested that the city engage in services of outside independent agents consulting agency a private research firm to conduct an in-depth review of mortgage lending practices in the local banks and financial institutions to further this particular point we need some more analysis and more data and that's what this is positing that that's what we need to move forward on this particular point I have not as department department has not requested any funding at this time for a study of that nature and I'll let our consultant elaborate a little bit more on it in reviewing the data from the Humda data which is the the home mortgage disclosure act every financial institution that provides more than five mortgages has to report this to the federal government what we've found is that there appears to be and I say appears to be a discrepancy in the amount of funds that are generated and approved based on race the only way that you can really get involved in the data and to understand the data and to see if there's a pattern of discrimination is to actually do interviews of individuals who have applied to do testing etc one of the things that we suggested is that the department contact the university for the possibility of a graduate study I know that the graduate students have participated with the department in the city in the past such as the NRSA project that they did for southside which was excellent and to see if they could cooperate with the city and have this as a project thank you it does seem really important for us to figure out a way to do that if indeed there are these racial discrepancies in as you all are yes you've found preliminary indications that our private lenders that there's a racial discrepancy yes it's it appears that there's a discrepancy and the only way that we will know is to have really in-depth analysis this is not just for the city of Durham this is nationally the same situation has occurred thank you and so I hope that we'll be able to try to figure out a way to do that and I know I know you all will work on it I think maybe we would have some conversation with the folks who are working in fair housing in relations that might be a better place for that to happen than in community development we'll follow up on that I don't have any other questions but I do just have a couple more comments I was really glad in the report first of all it's a mammoth report way to go a lot of information a lot to absorb I was glad to see the rental rehabilitation was such a prominent part of the strategy going forward and I think that you all have done a great job this year bringing us the rental rehabilitation projects that we did with Penny and that preserving affordability is a lot cheaper than building new and you all did a great job this year with that and I hope we'll continue to look for opportunities there and so I was appreciative of that on page 99 it's cited that we need 72 more beds in Durham for permanent supportive housing for disabled homeless people and what strikes me about that and I've seen that before this seems like a realizable goal there are a lot of these goals that seem very, very difficult and distant I hope that our community as a whole will take note of this number and it seems like something we ought to be able to do and 72 more beds for homeless people with disabilities is not an insurmountable number and so I hope we can do that I was appreciative on page 100 that the report cited the hit that our homeless population is taking because of North Carolina's decision not to expand Medicare as more and more states are doing this we're being left behind we're paying our tax dollars to Washington just like everybody else expanding Medicare would be paid for by the return of these federal tax dollars and I was glad to see that this report paid attention to that decision by the General Assembly because I agree with that very much this is just a typo I think on page 113 track 10.01 is mentioned being in Southeast Central Durham so it's a Northeast Central Durham I just believe that's typo there in the analysis of impediments it was good to read on page 16 that the dissimilarity index is lower across the board in 2010 that it wasn't 2000 indicating that as a report says that Durham is more integrated in terms of housing patterns that it was a decade ago and I was really I was really interested in to read that I didn't know that and so it was interesting to read that statistically shown statistically I do think though it's daunting to read it 26% of our households are living on less than $25,000 per year yes the median value of a home has gone from $126,000 $179,000 a decade median monthly rent has gone from $657,000 to $787,000 in a decade 59% of our renters were housing burden this is a large percentage and I worry especially as the real estate values continue to escalate that we are pricing people more and more out of the market and market forces are large and I appreciate the good job you all are doing to try to to preserve as much affordability as we can the figures were they weren't they were there are some great things in this report in terms of things we are doing but there are also some things that are worrisome just my final comment I was interviewed by the consultants for this report as the liaison of the housing authority they did a great job on the notes I thought that they reported I really appreciate reading the index of the conversation the conversations and the appendix it mentions that I said it's an idea and I hope we can do it but I just wanted to set that record straight here in the minutes I'm not asking for any change in the report but I did want to mention that so anyway basically I thought the report covered just a tremendous amount of ground in a way that was extremely informative a little too much reading but I appreciated very much the work you all did and thank you thank you can I ask the mayor for a pen? is there a I'm sorry you're not having problems with this is there some place in your office where you have housed all the applications for monies yes and we do have a period that we retain them I have to look at Ms. Congress for the period that we require to retain documents five years but I'm not interested in going back that far I'm just interested in seeing if there were any persons who are new who are trying to access money I know that we tend to give money to the same groups and so I'm just wondering where others have fallen off because obviously they are not meeting any of the requirements or are getting pretty low scores so I'd just like to find out who they are and where they need to sort of shore up their applications we have had some technical assistance workshops and we will be having more on two sides on the entitlement side and the COC could you let me know so I could help recruit people to come to those I know someone who works with HUD even raised the question to me about the same people getting you know and that's okay as long as others understand what the politics are what the process is and know how to get into this network clearly there is a network in place and they haven't been able to break that so I just want to see that so I can perhaps have see what we can do to help and people have come to our trainings that we have had one of the things I've encouraged for is to consider partnering with those who have to engage with that have been applied before and that can be a possibility as well one of the things as an entity and also an entity community development that monitors others we really need people who understand the processes and the criteria that we are evaluated by because it is it is significant. Now let me ask you this is it as difficult to get penny housing money as it is to get regular CDBG money are we using some the same criteria that seems to be a barrier to some folks who are trying to to access and you can come back with that at a later date if you want to because I know a time is fleeting and people want to go. I would just say that we spend some time crafting our guidelines and the application process and so we do run them simultaneously for a time when we open up in the fall but one of the things that is important and the criteria that we evaluate is outlined leveraging is important your capacity all those types of things are laid out in the criteria that we advertise. And I understand that and you know nonprofits have been around forever are always going to have a jump on that I'm just trying to figure out how we can help some other people. Well that is something that Mayor Pro Tem that we are is important to us and that's the reason that you and I share with you that we are interested in having technical assistance workshops on both the entitlement side as well as the COC. Well I would appreciate it and I'm sure some of the other non-profits would. Thank you. We constantly each year hear about CDBG funding whether it's going to be there or not going to be there. The 2.2 plus million we get this year how does it compare with what we got last year or was it down or more of the same what? Ms. Conyers will respond specifically to that. With respect to 2014-2015 the current fiscal year that we're in we receive one million seven hundred ninety five thousand five hundred and eight dollars so we had a slight increase from what we're expecting for 1516 as it relates to CDBG dollars for the home this year we receive eight hundred thirty one thousand nine hundred and nine dollars so there will be a decreasing home funds for 1516 with respect to ESG we receive one hundred forty seven thousand three hundred and fifty seven dollars for the current fiscal year our current allocation for 1516 will be slightly more than that which is about 60,000 and of course this is 1516 will be our first year for HOPLA funds we'll get back to home again say that again the home funds the home funds there's going to be a decrease for 1516 what was the amount for for our current year eight hundred thirty one thousand nine hundred and nine dollars so the agenda item says to adopt the home amount one million two hundred and fifty thousand that includes program income approximately that home figure is going to be about seven hundred and seventy six dollars the additional money is the program income just for the public's sake what determines whether we're up or down in these funding the Department of Housing and Urban Development I understand that but it's something we do more of anything it's based on a formula allocation and then you have additional grantees that are being added to that formula allocation so then there for home for instance of course we all know that the scrutiny that the home program is under so if you add additional grantees nationwide it is going to decrease the amount of funding additional grantees and what is the driving force is the overall budget so if there's less home dollars there's less home dollars to be allocated toward all the grantees but it sounds like we've been pretty fortunate in what we've been able to get considered a competitive nature of this funding source better than we had expected when we had these conversations about two or three years ago yes thank you let me ask Councilman Contatti it might be helpful to have that in a little table format because I know Councilman Brown will be missing this information okay again this is a public hearing and I would ask is that anyone else who wants to speak on this item if not let the record reflect anyone else asked to speak public hearing to be closed as a matter of fact for the council I would accept the comments and move the item for all the motions and all the motions everything moved and second all in favor of the motion indicate by saying aye those opposed the motion passes unanimously we move to item 25 which is the zoning map chain Sutton station Z1400025 thank you Mr. Mayor members of council Pat Young again with the planning department the case before you Sutton station Z1400025 is a request to change the zoning designation of 15.94 acres at 5800 Fayetteville road from its existing zoning map designation of office institutional to mixed use or MU with a development plan as you're probably aware this is an existing office and retail development the request if approved would not allow for any increased building square footage but would permit additional retail uses as the current zoning designation does not allow for restricts additional retail uses the development plan associated with this request is detailed in your staff report this does include commitments greater than ordinance standards which includes limitation on additional vehicle trips and the provision of a bus stop or shelter at the location staff determines that this request is consistent with the comprehensive plan and other adopted policies and ordinances and the planning commission at their March 10th meeting recommended approval of what a vote of 12-0 I'll be happy to take any questions this is public hearing the public hearing is open the council likewise is there anyone in the public that wants to speak on this item I know we've got to develop the council market did you have a comment I had a question on this for staff first which just is that the bicycle pedestrian advisory commission had a series of recommendations can you just tell me the status of those recommendations let me grab my staff report if you wouldn't mind I'll have the applicant address what they believe has been addressed and then I'll try to confirm that Mayor Bell, members of the council run Horvath Horvath Associates thank you for the time this evening before I jump into your answer Don Sutton station was a project that we got approved in the mid 90s the zoning ordinance back then allowed O&I development office and institutional to have up to 49% of retail retail uses and Sutton station we kind of commenced our client to go into the first true mixed use project it has retail it has office and it has residential and with the adoption of the UDO in 2006 the clarification of 49% retail or minority retail came a little blurrier and as time's gone we really needed to keep it viable by having at least half of it are there about retail half office and not having to ask for special exemptions every time a new tenant came in and out hence we looked at the mixed use zoning and that's why we bring it to you tonight the bike pad did have some request in fact some of the additional bike racks they would ask about have already been put in because we found a need for them with a couple of the restaurant that have recently gone in I believe we're handling all their comments including the proper signage of the American tobacco trail I hope that answers your question Dawn and Council if you have any questions I'll be here thank you I was going to ask Council Member Moffitt is that I'm just waiting for Mr. Young Council Member Moffitt if you look at the last round of comments from 1223 attachment 7 we believe I was just consulting transportation I mean we believe that they've been substantially addressed that there are slight variations in what committed on the 1 and 8 addresses and those have been made to the satisfaction of TTA or excuse me go triangle on transportation staff and condition 7 was refined to reflect the comments okay other questions by Council anyone in the public who wants to speak or else who doesn't let the record reflect and no one else has to speak I'll declare the public and be closed before the Council moved the item second been properly moved in second all in favor of the motion indicate by saying aye those opposed the motion passes unanimously we'll move to item 26 I'm sorry that's right so we probably moved in the second all in favor of the motion indicate by saying aye those opposed the motion passes unanimously and Hamilton Center to a 140006. Thank you Mr. Mayor, members of council again Pat Young with the Planning Department. This case Hamilton Center to a 140006 the applicant is whorebath associates location is 70 10 highway 751 which is that that roads intersection with NC highway 54 the southwest quadrant and the request is to change 5.02 acre parcel from its current a future land use map designation of office to commercial and staff recommends approval this request based on compliance with the four criteria for conference of plan amendment requests in the unified development ordinance and at its March 10th excuse me February 10th meeting the Planning Commission recommended approval by a vote of 12 to 0 I'll be happy to take any questions public hearing is open questions by members of the council we have Mr. Harvard and anyone else that wants to be going to sign it just I'll be here to answer any questions and give a little bit of a brief on the actual zoning case thank you any other questions not clear to public hearing be closed I'm expert matters about for the council second been probably moving a second all in favor of motion indicate by CNI those opposed motion passes unanimously and we move to item 27 zoning map change Hamilton Center to Z 1400021 thank you again Mr. Mayor members of council Pat Young with the Planning Department this case is the companion to the plan amendment case you just heard same property 7010 NC 751 highway and the request here is to change the zoning map designation from office institutional or oh I to commercial general the development plan to allow up to 40,000 square feet of retail and restaurant uses this case is similar in some regards the Sutton station case you heard earlier this evening and that it's a developed site which this action would allow retail development a site that's currently restricted primarily to office and institutional uses the development plan associated with request does have several commitments in excess of ordinance standards including commitment to construct a concrete pad or bus shelter and bus shelter if required by data and TTA at the time of site plan staff determines this request is consistent with the comprehensive plan and other adopted policies and ordinances and planning Commission recommended approval at its February 10th meeting by a vote of 12 to 0 to be happy to take any questions questions come as members of council again recognize Mr. Horvath and is anyone else that wants to speak on the sign not thank you mayor members of council I'll be very brief this is the same developer same owner same problem if you've noticed out there is a number of smaller buildings we actually tried to bring us in under neighborhood commercial to keep the intensity down unfortunately when you add all the buildings up it's over the maximum allowed square footage neighborhood commercial so we had to slide into the general commercial but we do have a limit again about the 50 percent mark on retail and the remainder has to be office anything we're missing in this one is the residential I asked for your support tonight thank you other other comments have not let the record flick no one else asked to comment from the public the public and be closed matter for the council move the item second improperly moved and second all in favor of the motion and kept by saying aye those opposed the motion passes moved to adopt a consistency statement improperly moved and second all in favor of the motion and kept by saying aye those opposed and the motion passes unanimously and run let me say I obviously I shouldn't say obviously I live not too far from southern station but it's really been a great development what I've seen well kept and looks like you get to participation so I appreciate that I'll pass that on to mr. McGee thank you recognize councilman yeah I before I forgot I just wanted to appreciate several applicants on the agenda tonight that deferred from two weeks ago and we do appreciate it my daughter was very happy item 28 kate eight comprehensive plan amendment highway 54 residential a 14 0 0 0 0 0 5 thank you mr. mayor members of council pat young again with the planning department this case highway 54 residential a 14 0 0 0 0 5 is an application by hopper communities for a future land use map amendment a comprehensive plan amendment to the future land use map for four parcels of land approximately 21.72 acres at the north side of NC highway 54 the addresses are 14 13 14 29 14 31 and 15 0 1 at at NC 54's intersection with the Revere Road the request is to change the future land use map designation from its current designation of office to medium high density residential staff recommends approval based on compliance with the four criteria for plan amendments found in the Durham UDO and planning commission recommended approval at its February 10th 2015 meeting by a vote of 12 to 0 I'll be happy to take any questions let me ask you there are questions by members of the council on this item I have a couple of questions and I guess it pretty much relates with just highway 54 in that section of town I mean we're seeing a proliferation of apartments on that area and I'd like somebody to speak to the sense behind the planning department's thought that this is the right direction for this going especially if you're the fact that some point in time I assume we're still going to be widening highway 54 Mr. Mayor the I'll speak to that and I might ask Mr. Judge to add to my comments obviously as you I think alluded to one of the key concerns out in this area is the volume of traffic and the level of service of traffic and so we looked at that issue very closely and there's a companion zoning map case that makes several accommodations to reflect including additional right-of-way dedication to try to ensure that that that condition can be mitigated through improvement of 54 in the future another issue we looked at in the staff report is that the office designation particularly in this part of town appears to be there appears to be higher lesser demand for office than we anticipated when we did the comprehensive plan in the mid 2000s and there's a much higher demand for multifamily residential and as you alluded to that there certainly is as long as I think the the conclusion was as long as the transportation impacts can be mitigated or addressed the high demand for multifamily residential is supportable in this area because of the good transportation access and proximity to shopping and employment going to speak Sharon the morning yeah I would basically just repeat most of what Pat just indicated in the companion zoning case it's actually a slight decrease in potential traffic generation from the office to the multifamily so looking at the impact while certainly NC 54 is has its capacity issues there is a future TIP project although currently it's not in the draft step the widen this section so it may be a number of years before before that project is complete I guess that's what I'm questioning because we have one two well we've got a development that's already approved that hasn't done anything other than clear to land and put a sign up and another proposal for another change for office right on the corner 54 and Barbie and how are you taking that in consideration if suddenly all these developments come to fruition and we still haven't widened how we fit to four in terms of the traffic the applicant did prepare a traffic impact analysis with this rezoning request that looked at the peak hour of the adjacent intersections and they were able to document that with both this development and those existing approved developments that they would function or operate at an adequate level of service or in the peak hour and beyond that and making that comprehensive plan determination we did also look at the existing approved developments across the street as well as adjacent to the site it did not take into account any other cases that may be submitted or come before this board in the future but just those that have already been approved well I mean are we reaching a point where because you haven't got too much land to develop along 54 what's being proposed but do we reach a point where we say we're not going to do any more given what's already on the books and we still haven't gotten 50 who are widened yeah so certainly Mr. Mayor the the comprehensive plan has some pretty explicit language as I think you're well aware about the capacity issues on NC 54 and I think it would be fair to say Mr. Judge can certainly speak further to this that the most recent developments including this one that you talked about the transportation impact analysis really bring that level of traffic very close to that threshold where you're going to see us start recommending denial of these cases because it will be impossible to mitigate impacts we're not at that point yet but we are very close so I think to your point there unless there's a change in policy we would probably in unless there's some new way that we haven't been able to ascertain to mitigate impacts that probably will reach that threshold in the near future now that's when the traffic is one issue what about the fact that you've got a lot of wooded area that's suddenly going to be transformed with these proposed developments and I know we're talking about the land use plan right now but next plan is getting more specific to what the developer wants to do are we taking any of that in consideration well Mr. Mayor we are to the extent that the ordinance again as I think you're well aware the ordinance has pretty stringent requirements for tree preservation buffers stormwater treatment and other requirements that mitigate the environmental impact of course there are no regulations that would address directly the aesthetic impact of removal of trees but we do have pretty significant site development regulations that would ensure that there's both buffers tree preservation tree replacement street trees and other features that are intended to offset that impact let me ask another question that is related it isn't related specifically but the developments that we have approved I'm asking this are you all getting any interest in you seeing anything happening with the developers that have got the land have got a rezoned for actually any action and I think you know the section that I'm speaking about 54 sure so Mr. Mayor so they're there have what we're observing is that the folks that have recently received zoning approvals are coming in for their site plan which is kind of the second to last step prior to building permit to my the best of my knowledge there hasn't been building permits pulled but you've seen grading out there they have approval to do great tree removal and grading and that they are getting and they're in the process of getting their site plans approved so again typically what that means if the market conditions are sustained that you're you know six months out between before construction that can vary based on the the prerogatives of the developer but that we we have every good reason to believe those will be proceeding in the near future what was the time frame that developers have once they've been given the zoning to get work done so the zoning stays with the land in perpetuity they have once they get a site plan they have four years to go to begin construction and then the building permit has to stay active every six months it's evaluated to ensure it's still active okay are there other questions on the sign let me ask is anyone in the public who wants to speak on this item sir good evening Jared Eden's with Eden's Land Court it's gonna speak briefly to the Lane's amendment and the zoning case I'm here representing my client hopper communities it's going to highlight a few points obviously we feel the density is appropriate for this area given the proximity to highway 40 the South Point retail nearby 54 is also a bus route along the property we did perform a traffic study as part of the project I realize that there's a pending TIP project that may ultimately widen 54 actually between this project and the magic parcel that we rezoned a few months ago when those are developed you will in essence get a lot of that widening on 54 because you'll have a double center turn lane that'll be from this property that connects all the way to Barbie Road when these two projects go into effect and the TIA did include all the background traffic of existing approved projects we are providing bike lane a four-foot bike lane along 54 we're committing we're only going to have one permanent driveway to highway 54 we'll have interconnectivity with that magic parcel in the rear when that connection becomes available with a neighborhood meeting last year we have no opposition that I'm aware of and I guess I do want to profit this I guess this is part of the zoning case technically but due to the 43 additional students as a result of the zoning my client is willing to make a donation of $21,500 to the Durham Public Schools which would be paid prior to the first final plat for this development that's $500 per student I'd be glad to answer any other questions you have thank you other any other questions again is anyone else who wants to speak on this just being a public hearing recognize comes from the school thank you Mr. Mayor and appreciate your raising those concerns I had made a note that we got long-term prop traffic problems in this area regardless of our actions on this we really really do appreciate the proffer of the of the the funds for Durham Public Schools I just want to notice again we've got I believe 320 320 units you know with with with all market rate no affordable nothing affordable and I just really you know we need our our toolkit and our our we need our options to help encourage this and so I know you all are working on it and just want to notice again that we're back in our in our usual situation so anyway thank you Mr. Mayor no further questions on the clear public hearing to be closed and matters of act before the council move the autumn second proper movement second all in favor of the motion then give us an eye those opposed nay nay let's move to the next item item 20 zoning map change highway 54 residential I bought it no mayor Z 14 0 0 0 0 1 8 kind of read from thank you mr. Mayor members of council pat young again with the planning department this case C 14 0 0 0 1 8 is companion case to the plan in the case you just heard highway 54 residential 21.72 acres located at 1413 to 1501 NC highway 54 on the north side of 54 Revere Road the request is to change the zoning map designation from residential suburban 20 office institutional and office institutional the development plan to residential suburban multifamily with a development plan which would allow a maximum of 320 multifamily residential units this development plan is associated with a number of commitments that exceed ordinance standards which include a commitment to housing type apartments or townhouses dedication of right-of-way along NC 54 to accommodate future roadway improvements as mentioned previously a dish installation of a bike lane and other roadway improvements at the site entrances along 54 for the project along with additional other commitments outlined in your staff report and we would ask that the previous proffer made at the previous item be incorporated to this act to this item a staff determines that this request is consistent with the comprehensive plan based on your previous action and other adopted policies and ordinances and planning commission recommended approval at its February 10th meeting by a vote of 12 to 0 I'll be happy to take any questions you've heard these staff report of the questions by members of the council is that anyone in the public who wants to speak on this item let direct reflect on the one in the public wanted to speak on this item I'm going to close the public hearing matters back for the council move the item it's been proper to move the second all in favor of the motion then kept by saying aye those opposed nay nay I'll move the consistency statement second it's been proper to move the second all in favor of the motion and kept by saying aye those opposed nay nay move to the term it's that true at eight recognize council market I was just sitting here a few minutes ago reflecting on how much work we did tonight I mean built serious work in how efficient that we've been and I just want to appreciate all of you for the way that I mean I just been it's been a delight to serve with all of you and I just needed to say that publicly thank you we move adjournment are you including Eugene it's left a record show I'm including you in any other items to come for the council not no of course we're adjourned at 8 20 p.m. thank you thank you without a ball