 Good evening. We'd like to call the Durham City Council meeting to order at 7 p.m. February 1st, Monday and certainly want to welcome all of you that are here with us this evening. If we could just take a moment for silent meditation, please. Davis, who in turn will recognize tonight by Matt Gross Close, who is the senior executive director for the Durham area scouting program. So, Matt, Madam Clerk, would you call her old, please? Mayor Bell, Mayor Pro Tim Cole McFadden, Councilmember Davis, Councilmember Johnson, Councilmember Moffitt, Councilmember Reese, and Councilmember Shul. Thank you. It is my distinct pleasure and it's always an honor to have an opportunity to present a proclamation recognizing any individuals or organizations. Tonight is sort of a special, special night and I'd like to ask if Damian Elliot Bynum, if you would join me along with Carolyn Hinton, as most if not all of you know. Unfortunately, in the past months or so, we've lost a very distinguished individual in this community and I dare say she hasn't touched many people in this community and in fact she was sort of named the Mother Teresa of Durham and I'm sure you know I'm speaking about the late Dr. Sharon Elliot Bynum. Many of us had an opportunity to attend the home going ceremony for Dr. Bynum and I guess some of us were at the 20th anniversary celebration, just probably a month or two before she passed, but tonight what we'd like to do is present a special proclamation and I won't read all of it, but the gist of it is that whereas Dr. Sharon Elliot Bynum, a native of Durham, was born January 5th, 1957 to the late Joe, and it's still Elliot and blessed with two children, Ebony and Damien, Damien's here and one grandson, Amar, where she was a trailblazing public health advocate who believed in comprehensively addressing the social determinants of health to effectively improve the lives of underserved and underrepresented individuals, whereas Dr. Bynum had a long history of attracting students, volunteers, health care providers, and professionals from other diverse sectors to join in her mission to help people in need, whereas she along with her sister, the late Pat Amici, founded CARE, Inc., case management of AIDS and addiction through resources and education, was founded in 1995 and was registered with the North Carolina Secretary of State in March of 1996, whereas CARE, Inc. primarily addresses five health disparities with the highest mortality rates in the Durham County area, which are cancer, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, obesity, and HIV AIDS, whereas Dr. Bynum completed her elementary and secondary education in Durham Public Schools, her post secondary education in nursing, counseling, theology, including degrees in nursing from Durham Technical Institute, Watch School of Nursing and North Carolina Central University. She also received a master's doctorate in counseling and a PhD in theology from Victory International College, whereas Dr. Sharon Elliott Bynum was a loving and caring person who believed that knowing what to do is not enough, people need to be supported and to be healthy, and now, therefore, I will be billed billed Mayor of the City of Durham, North Carolina. Do you ever hear about proclaiming January 19th, 2016, as Dr. Sharon Elliott Bynum Day in Durham, and you will recognize this day annually and hear by urge all citizens to take special note of this observance. We wanted to remember if Dr. Sharon Elliott Bynum, for a sense of civility, for being a great leader and truly a woman with great compassion in public health and providing a safety net, that encompassed people's social, emotional, financial, and psychological situations. I witness my hand in Corporate City of Durham, North Carolina, this is the first day of February, 2016, and I'm going to present this to Dr. Bynum's sister, Carolyn Hinton, and her son, and for any comments that you may have. To the Honorable Mayor Bale and his Jason Board members, we thank you so much for this honor for my sister. It was a great loss to our family and to the community, but we appreciate having the opportunity to continue her legacy and to continue to help persons who are in need. So we thank you. As Councilor Rees for comments followed by the Mayor Pro Tem and other Council members. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor, I don't know if you know this or remember, but last year I ran for City Council, worked out pretty well, but I can't tell you how many people wanted to talk to me as I went around the city about the need in our community for more recreational programs for our youth. And in addition to that, people came and talked to me time and again to make sure that we, as members of the City Council, took it upon ourselves to make sure that the Houlton Career and Resource Center lived up to its full potential as a place where the people of Durham and especially our young people would want to come and take advantage of the programs and facilities there. That's why I'm so excited about something that started today. Durham Parks and Recreation has taken a huge couple of steps in that direction. As of today, the Fitness Center and the Open Gym and Computer Lab at the Houlton Center will be available to all residents of the City of Durham completely free of charge. In beginning March 1st, one month from now, almost all of the programs and activities at the Houlton Center will also be free to the people of this city. So I want to say congratulations and thank you to the Director of Parks and Rec, Rhonda Parker, for her and her hard-working staff who found a way to make this work for the people of the city. Also want to thank Deputy City Manager of Ferguson and, of course, our City Manager, Tom Bonfield for seeing this through. And I'm really excited to see what the future holds for the Houlton Center and for the people of this city. Thank you. Thank you, Charlie. Recognize the Mayor Pro Tem. I want to yield to Mr. Schuyl, since he chairs the Finance Committee, to talk about the Earned Income Tax Credit. The, as many of you all know, this is the period when people are filing, as we all know, when you're filing for your taxes or for your refund. And one of the ways in which people who are working, but who are making below a certain income level, can put some money in their pocket is to file for the Earned Income Tax Credit. The Earned Income Tax Credit is a federal tax credit, and we have centers throughout Durham, several different ones, where people can go and get free help to file for their taxes. One that Mayor Pro Tem and the Mayor spoke the other day and was, is at Shepherd House, which is the corner of Driver and Main Street. And there is free tax help, both in English and in Spanish, every other Wednesday night. And that is what's called a viticide. And that's run by reinvestment partners. And they also have another one at Northgate Shopping Center, which operates many more times than that. There are others throughout the city that other great organizations are running as well. But please spread the word, because this is a way in which hardworking people are able to put a little extra money in their pocket, and or sometimes a substantial amount of extra money. So please spread the word, this tax help is free. And it's important that we in Durham are able to access it as much of it as we can for the people that live here. So thank you, Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem. Thank you. So I do have something. But this is to thank the city manager again for rallying resources to help the students at Lakeview School. It has made a difference. And things are getting so much better. So I thank you, sir, for what you did to make that happen. There are other announcements by you know, the council members of not recognize the city manager for prior items. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of council. Good evening, everyone. Three priority items and then a follow up comment. For the priority items this evening agenda item number four, the adoption resolution requesting a deed of partial release for certain premises related to an installment purchase contract with new Durham Corporation related matters request this item be deferred to the February 4th work session. Agenda item number eight proposed sale of the North parking garage by upset bid pursuant to NCGS 160 a dash 269 also request this item be deferred to the February 4th 2016 work session. And then agenda item number 10 water only utility extension agreement with C and D associates south LLC to serve 8201 Farrington Mill Road. This item is being referred back to the administration and the public works department and did want to follow up just briefly on council member Reese's comments about the Holton programming. Thank you very much for your comments. Council member Reese, we are very indeed pleased to put forth this proposal for the pilot program for the the free services at at the Holton Career and Resource Center. While for many years the parks and recreation department has offered some free programming and all of its recreation centers also has had a program fee waiver process in some situations. We do think this targeted pilot program at at Holton is going to give us an excellent opportunity to see if participation levels can increase by offering majority of the parks and recreation services at no cost. And there is no definite time for the conclusion of the pilot, but we certainly are going to be monitoring on a regular basis. And if it appears that we are seeing a the uptick in attendance at the recreation center that that we would hope that this pilot program promises it is something that we certainly would be considering for other recreation centers in the future. So thank you to the mayor and council for your support. They obviously nothing is free. Somebody is paying costs associated with it. But in this case, it just won't be paid for by the participants and almost all of those programs at the Holton Career and Resource Center. So I wanted to make that announcement. But thank you very much. Thank you. You've heard the managers prior to items entertain the motion. For property moving second, Madam Clerk, we open the vote. Close vote. It passes seven is zero. I recognize city attorney for any prior times. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. No priority. Likewise, city clerk. No items, Mr. Mayor. We'll move the agenda. First item being the consent agenda. Cousin agenda items may be approved a single vote. If one is removed by any member of the council, the public, we'll discuss that later in the generous normal. I'll just read the heading of each consent agenda item. Item one is approved city council minutes. Item two is FY 2015 2016 emergency solutions grant in the city. General fund housing for a new whole being suffered simply contract rapid rehousing services. Item three is emergency telephone consoles at Durham Sheriff's Office. Item four has been referred back. Item five is contract for collection agent services. Item six is December 2015 bid report. Item seven is state contract purchase replacement vehicles for the part Durham Police Department. Item eight is also referred back. FY item nine is FY 2015 2016 contract between the city of Durham and the Center for Documentary Service Studies. Item 10, I want to, let me pull item nine, please. Item 10 is water only utility extension agreement with CND, associate south LSC to serve 8201 Farrington Mill Road. That's items referred back also. Item 13 some 20 items that can be found on general businesses, general public hearings. And item 22 is an agreement with research triangle foundation to support Delta Alliance Paris service. Entertain a motion on the consent agenda item. It's been properly moved. Second. Madam clerk, will you open the vote? You close the vote. Passes seven to zero. We move to item on the general business, general public hearings. Item 13 street closings, Coventry Road street closed to 150006. Good evening, Steve Medlin with the Durham City County Planning Department. I would like to first certify that all required public notice for all planning items this evening has been carried out in compliance with both the North Carolina General Statutes and the unified development ordinance and affidavits to this fact are part of the case files. Street closing case SC 15-6 is a request by Stacy Burkart to close in approximately 3 or 431 linear foot portion of Coventry Road, which is south of Dober Road. The right away is publicly dedicated and an unimproved at this point. The property is bordered by property owned by Miss Burkart and Mary and Russell Bairncher. If the request is approved, the right away is proposed to be recombined with Miss Burkart's property. The adjacent area is zoned RS 10 and is located in the suburban tier. No service impacts have been identified during the review of this application. Staff is recommending approval of this three closing, and I'll be happy to answer any questions that you may have. Thank you. This is a public hearing matter. Considered public hearing to be open. First ask whether questions by Council of Staff. If not, we have one person to sign up to speak, Miss Stacy Burkart. You go to the podium to the right. You have three minutes. And while she's coming as anyone else that wants to speak on this item, this being a public hearing. Thank you. Council Stacy Burkart. I appreciate that staff is endorsing this proposal. And I just wanted to reiterate that for me personally, our piece of property is the only one that is was completely landlocked. And we have to utilize this country road as our driveway, because Third Fort Creek cuts all the way across the front of our property, even though we are Dover Road. With the recombination, we've taken out all the other lots that would have been on Coventry Road. It's a partial closing because of at the other end is Hope Valley Road, and there's a driveway off of that, and they actually use Coventry Road as their address, so we cannot close their address and change their address. But this is really just for us to be able to take care and maintain the driveway as our own instead of getting approval from engineering every time. There's also Duke Power main line there, and it's a heavily wooded area, and it also needs maintenance on a routine basis that we're starting to worry about some dead trees and things, and we don't have to get approval from the city to take care of that. If you have any questions for me also, I'd be happy to take them. Me first recognize Councilman Moffitt. I don't know if you have a question for her to say. Okay. Thank you, Steve. I was just curious, typically when we do a street closing, the property, the property that is freed up is usually split between two adjacent or the all the adjacent landowners. I was wondering what was different about this one. Statute does make provision that typically right away and split equally among the adjacent property owners, unless there is an agreement between the property owners for a different distribution, which is the case tonight. Okay. Is that your question? I'm wait. Okay, that's fine. That's good. Thank you. You don't have when I have further questions. Again, is anyone else who wants to speak on this item to be in a public hearing? If not, the director reflected no one else has to speak on this item. I'll be closed. I'm asking for the council. It's been proper movement second round clerk. We will close the vote. It passes seven and zero. Move to item 14 historic properties, local review criteria, consolidation and update. Good evening. I'm Lisa Miller with the City County Planning Department. Just to reintroduce you to this project, it is an undertaking that the Planning Department has taken in conjunction with the Historic Preservation Commission to make modifications to and consolidate the review criteria that are used for review of modifications to all of our historic properties that are locally designated local landmarks and local districts. The basic changes are consolidating those into a single document, updating that language and differentiating between contributing and non contributing structures. We're also trying to establish clear criteria for how projects in the right of way are dealt with, include criteria for how cemeteries and archeological sites are dealt with, separate criteria for how local landmarks are dealt with, and then the associated items 15 through 20, which we'll get to later, are updates to the preservation plans to reflect those things. I'd be happy to go into more detail or answer questions as necessary. Again, this is a public hearing item. You've heard the staff comments. I would ask first all the questions, comments by members of the council. Recognize Councilman Shewell. I have questions, but I think I'd rather wait until after the comments if there are any. Thank you. Are there any other comments by members of the council? Let me ask, does anyone in the public want to speak on this item? I'd like to reflect that no one in the public has to speak on this item. I'll bring it back before the council before I close the public hearing. Recognize Councilman Shewell. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Hi, Lisa. So this was a big document and good job. I mean, I think that it really, if I was someone who was considering some kind of adaptive reuse or renovation, or, you know, I think that that would have clear guidance, which I think is really important. And I did feel like it was written very clearly. And so congratulations, because there was a lot of a lot of stuff in it. And I think you did it well. And of course, you know, just being having the ability to preserve these historic assets is what makes us unique. It's, you know, I heard Jeff Durham from downtown Durham Inc. The other day said it what it's what keeps us from being a downtown in a box. And I thought that was a great metaphor. You know, it is what gives us our uniqueness and our ability to do this and do this well. And I appreciated the language in here that you're trying to balance the benefits of preservation with considerations of economy and livability. Because I know that balance is hard to strike and I appreciate the ambition that the staff and the Historic Preservation Commission put into this to try to balance those things. The new structures. Could you talk a little bit about that? You have a discussion of it on page 48. But I wasn't really, you know, so what's new about what we're doing about new structures? So in addition to the overall way that structures are classified and called out in the document, as you know, we have contributing properties that are generally considered historic, non contributing properties that are newer and not historic or not historic yet. The way that the page number you called out is dealing with the primarily residential districts rather than downtown. For those districts currently, the criteria have a couple of items where they talk specifically about big picture new construction kind of items. They don't call out clearly whether the Secretary of the Interior Standards apply or not, which is one of the things that we've done with this document is to remove the reference to the Secretary of Interior Standards and make sure to base both our landmark and contributing structure standards very tightly on the Secretary's standards, but applied in a way that's very term specific. So the new structure standards takes the big picture items from the current documents calls out that those just apply for new structures within the residential district focuses on items like scale, height, massing, the things that really have the opportunity to detract from the overall character of the historic district. So we want to make sure that those things are protected in the big picture items. But then the criteria for new structures go into less prescriptive work for architectural style. You don't have to match the architectural styles of the district. You have more flexibility to build something that is a contemporary architecture or that it can reflect, you know, some of the parts and pieces from historic architecture as well. So how would that, you know, when I think about the controversy over in Oakwood in Raleigh this year, or last year where there was a new structure and there was a lot of controversy about whether or not that should be allowed in historic district, I wonder how these new criteria would speak to that. How would that be evaluated under these new criteria? Sure. For my recollection of that particular structure, and then also just kind of speaking in general, to take a modern structure that is that structure was placed similarly on the lot to other properties in Oakwood. There, the scale of it, the height of it was similar. The architectural style is what was contemporary about it. The pattern of windows, the roof line, things like that, which do have a significant impact on the style of a structure. But one of the things that you'll notice as you go through many of our historic districts, and Moorhead Hill is a great example, there's a very large variety of architectural styles within that district. And I think you'd be hard pressed to find somebody who says that that is a detriment to the district. So allowing people to create their own architectural expression, but still maintaining, like I said, those kind of big picture design questions, keeping those in line with a sort of historic development pattern. Thank you. That was a good explanation. Could you talk about the main differences between the criteria for the residential and the residential districts versus the downtown district? I can try. They are very different. And they're different currently. So one of the things that we looked at our starting point for revising the criteria was taking all of them for our seven different districts, and looking at what we had in place, what were the issues, what were the commonalities between the different districts because we knew we were trying to consolidate into a single document. The downtown criteria were laid out in a either you're creating infill or new sort of big block development. Or you're doing renovation. And that sort of structure is one that that we didn't, it left a lot of holes in terms of projects where we didn't feel like the criteria particularly addressed adequately. To contrast the residential districts, almost all of them had, all of them have almost identical language. There are very minor points where there's differences, which ended up causing confusion actually for both folks on the commission and for applicants who are applying to multiple for for approvals in multiple districts. So the residential criteria are, they are more stringent in that you have a more consistent context to begin with. In downtown you have a widely varied context and we think that that's one of the things that really makes that a rich district. And so recognizing that and allowing for that diversity is something that we wanted to make sure could continue to happen in downtown. Whereas in our residential districts, we do have a lot more similarities with the particularly with those sort of big picture items. But then even within some of the architectural style elements. So the downtown criteria are much more flexible in terms of what they allow. And that's also in part kind of trying to keep in mind that Durham is redeveloping and there are these big projects that happen. How can we balance making sure that we're we're sensitively rehabilitating and an infill building with our historic district, but making sure that we can allow that development to happen. Thank you. You know, we had some discussion and we've been having some discussion about the Fayetteville Street corridor, which will which includes the Fayetteville historic Fayetteville Street historic district. And there's a lot of concern in the community and members of the council that that that corridor be improved in the gateway to North Carolina Central be everything that we all want it to be. And I wondered how you thought that the historic the criteria and the the historic district itself would speak to that. You know what difficulties might it create. There are people who own buildings in the district and you you speak to this at some point about the not just in that district, but in others about how people have limited economic means and how they will be dealt with in a process like this. So I just wondered if you could speak to the Fayetteville Street historic district in particular and how it might affect the rehabilitation of the corridor. Sure. I think that in being an important gateway to central that establishing the historic district and trying to preserve the character and the history of what has been built there, I think is very much in line with that. I think that having standards in place that as people try and make modifications to their property that they're done in a sensitive manner is also important. But you're right, it does create it can create economic hardship for folks. And I think that's one of the things that is identified in the Fayetteville Street preservation plan, among other preservation plans as an important recognition and a potential policy direction to try and figure out ways around that that I don't think that we've necessarily done well. We've done a lot of trying to coordinate with community development and neighborhood improvement services to identify whether there are resources available to folks that we can direct them towards and then sort of helping people work through in their code issues and things like that, trying to streamline the approval process as much as possible by working with NIS. That's been the extent of what we've been able to sort of accomplish on that front, but certainly recognize that it's an area of concern. We're open to ways to better address that absolutely. Thank you. I mean, I think we all need to give that some thoughtful consideration, not just you all, but all of us, because I do think that those can be competing objectives. And we need to, they're both important, but we need to figure it out. In the demolition by neglect, if fines are levied and they do no good, in other words, the neglect is not remedied, what are the steps that ensue? Have my ordinance in front of me. So we have a process where we levy fine. So he doesn't he doesn't always say the right thing, Lisa. If you are found to be in a condition of demolition by neglect, and you do not remedy it, then it is a court matter. Yeah. So and so that's something that you all pursue. Or does that pursue by NIS? How does that work? And how does it relate to this? Steve Madeleine with the playing department. To be honest, with you, Council Member, we've never actually carried it to the extent of judicial hearing. But typically what we found is that whenever we have investigated for demolition by neglect, in those cases, where demolition is potentially present, the property owner typically will try to work with NIS and the department staff to do that situation. Thank you. I appreciate it. And then, you know, this is a very complete document. You've got an appendix on the new granite curb procedures. Yes. Thank you to the Public Works Department. You talked about the first thing that you would look at there is whether or not the curb is within the historic preservation district, and then these would kick in. So I'm assuming there's granite curves all over the city that are outside that. Is this process also to be followed similarly outside that or not to my knowledge? We had some extensive conversations with the folks in public works to talk through as it came up related to a couple of particular cases. And essentially, we were trying to find common ground where we could we recognize the difficulties that come with trying to preserve that granite curve and that sometimes it's not possible or or it is possible but with great expense. And they recognize that if it is possible without great additional expense, then that's what we want to be prioritizing. And this was sort of the in our historic districts, the right of way is part of the district. The city's responsibility for things within the right of way is part of the contribution to the overall character. This was a place where we came to this sort of resolution regarding a process for retaining those as much as possible. If I'm sure there, they would take direction from the city council if there was a desire to do this elsewhere, they've got a process in place, but it's just established for historic districts. Now, thank you. My last question is regard sustainability, which you mentioned in the memo. But I couldn't find it. I couldn't find a specific reference. So I assume what that meant was people who are making alterations to a historic structure to keep to make it a more sustainable structure. There is some consideration of that given. Does that mean, for example, solar panels? What does that mean? So you won't find any criteria that specifically address sustainability. Essentially, it was one of the considerations that we brought to the table as we were reviewing the criteria and as we were modifying them. And as we were trying to determine what amount of flexibility and where the most important aspects of a given structure were to preserve us in the closer to their original form. So some of the language in the criteria about how things like solar panels can be placed has been modified. It used to be it had to be on the rear roof. Now, there's language about minimizing visibility to the greatest extent possible. We did look at certainly orientation of a new structure has impact on the ability to collect solar. That was a direction that we felt like was beyond what was appropriate for the historic district that there were aspects of the orientation and placement of structures that that was important enough to continue in the development of the historic district to keep with that character. So that was something that we backed off of. Okay, well, I really appreciate it. I think it's a lot of really good work. And I do think that's so hard to strike the balance. And I hope that you and the commission members themselves will continue to try to think about the balance. We do need to strike on issues of sustainability, new structures and their design where we want really great new architecture, even in his old historic districts. The the fact that some people are going to have an economic difficulty, fixing up their structures that we might want fixed up, and these other and these other issues of balance, but but I thought you did a really good job of of addressing that in here. And so I appreciate it. So thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. You're welcome. Let me ask this a minute. Let me ask the other comments from council members on this item. I have to have another point I want to make on the site of the comments I can ask the mayor pro jam. Part of the Federal Street preservation plan, there's a separate item, but there's somebody who needs to speak on it. So since it's been brought up, could they speak now so they can go? Let me do it this way because this is the public hearing. Yes, sir. And that is a separate item. We need to deal with this one first. So are there other comments relative to this item? Does anyone else who wants to speak on this item? If not, let the record reflect no one else has to speak on this particular item. I'll declare public and be closed matters back before the council. Proper move in second, Madam Clerk, you open the vote. You close the vote. It has to seven going back to the mayor proteins point. I was going to speak to that. Let me ask are the persons here that here to speak on the downtown during preservation plan update? Is there anyone here to speak on the Cleveland Street and Holloway Street preservation plan update? Can I interrupt for just a moment? Sure. We also have a consistency statement as part of my deal with that too. I'm trying to find as anybody else wants to speak to these other items. Okay, entertaining motion on the consistency statement. It's been properly moved in second. Madam Clerk, we open the vote. Close the vote. It passes seven as you. So let's move item 17, which is the favorable street preservation plan update next. And then we'll get back in order with the Cleveland Street and downtown Durham. Just as brief introduction, each one of these preservation plans we have six of them has been slightly modified from its previously adopted state to take out the previous set of review criteria that were being used and to reference this new document that's you all just adopted. There's been other minor revisions to the text itself to try and update where they're out of date references or buildings that had been demolished, things like that. And we also went through and did a review of each of the structures in the district to determine whether it seemed appropriate to change the contributing or non contributing status of that structure. Overall, in all seven districts, there were, I believe, 18 changes to that. So if you have any particular questions about that, I can answer them. Other comments by members of the council on this item. If not, I'd like to recognize Dr. Deborah Sanders White, Chancellor and CCU for comments. You have three minutes. Mr. Mayor, members of the council, thank you very much for this opportunity to speak before you. A lot of what I wanted to say has already been said, but I think it's important that I exercise this opportunity in this voice before you to talk about North Carolina Central University. As we look to grow and expand our footprint within our community, it is important that the redevelopment of Fayetteville Street occurs. We are in favor of the staff recommendations to the council to update the plan, allowing a change in criteria. Wanting an inviting gateway to our historic university. And if I can borrow from the Fayetteville Preservation Plan of August 2000, the words, one that preserves the integrity and cultural significance of Durham's historical assets are important to the survival and the growth of our institution. Approval of this plan will allow greater latitude for property owners, compliance for property upgrades, which will ultimately beautify the quarter and be attractive to our prospective students and their families, thus fostering growth for North Carolina Central University. Further, we encourage the city to invest in the necessary streetscapes and landscapes necessary to highlight this quarter. Our research indicates that a city's investment in this quarter will significantly impact our growth as the number one reason why students do not select North Carolina Central University is environment. And when we tease that data back, we determine that that environment, that approach to our campus contributes to the overall environment. Now, I'm excited about the prospects of changing Fayetteville Street. As you know, the university is very much tied to this improvement. We have reallocated our own resources to help in this improvement. And we look forward to a stronger partnership with the city. Mr. Mayor, that concludes my remarks. Thank you. Let me recognize Norman Glenn comments and you have three minutes on the side. Mr. Mayor, members of the council and others. Good evening. Like the young lady that just spoke, some of my concerns has already been addressed, but more broadly. So I'm going to be a little bit more detailed with my concerns. My name is Norman Glenn. I'm here to represent my brother-in-law, General Williams, and my sister, Mary Williams, that owns property at 1603 Fayetteville Street. They had very much wanted to attend the meeting tonight, but they live in Germantown, Maryland. And of course, General Williams is in frail health at the moment and he was not able to make the trip. So they asked me to come in, receive comments and speak on their behalf. My specific concerns are is that it seems that the progress of the renovation in the Fayetteville Street historic district is very slow. There there are houses that's been vacant, partially boarded up under construction for years. My question, one of my questions are, are the same code violations time frame in effect for houses that's outside of the historic district as opposed to houses within the district? Because my opinion is that if there are some of the violations outside of the historic district, they would be required to bring those units up to code much faster than the houses that's in the Fayetteville Street corridor. My brother-in-law and sister have been very diligent in making sure that their property, which was built some 80 years ago, conforms to all of the codes, all of the guidelines, and is kept up in very good condition. But then you have property right next door to it. That's, you know, just far from being maintained. There is no effort to maintain it. And you can go in that five block area from from the library down to Lawson Street. And there's a number of houses that's in dire need of repair. So my question is, is the same urgency in that area to make sure houses are brought up to code as houses in areas that's not part of the historic district? Is there a time frame given to bring these houses up to a certain standard that's in that area? And I do have some other questions that I would I'm going to allow you some more time. But I what I wanted to say is, if you have written remarks, you could also leave them with the staff before we leave, so we can make sure address them. We'll try to get that response to send me a question. Same thing if you met him, Chairman, Chancellor, if you'd like to leave your written remarks, we'd appreciate it. Can you add two more minutes to his remarks? Thank you, sir. Sure. There's been some speak of there's there are six items, six updated items that involves this historic district. I would like a copy of those updated items and and what's what's being updated. Another concern that there was an article in the Durham Morning Herald on January the 22nd that spoke to NCCU and the state and arrested in purchasing property in the surrounding area. That being the case, and I don't know who would elaborate on that. Does that mean that the state and North Carolina Central may possibly be interested in purchasing property that's in the Fed for Street Historic District? And if so, how is that going to affect the property owners in that in that district? So those those are just a couple of concerns. But the major concern is there's there does not seem to be any urgency in requiring property owners to go in and bring that those properties up to a standard that would enhance the corridor to NCCU and also the Fed for Street Preservation area as a whole. All right. Thank you, Mr. Glenn. Thank you, sir. Mr. Manager, can you have someone responding to this question? The point about NCCU and state need to talk to the Chancellor. Mr. Glenn, Mr. Glenn. I have to defer to staff. I don't think there's any distinction as it relates to historic properties in terms of the code enforcement sequence. That's correct. And coincidentally, the staff did provide a report to the council just at the last work session on the status of code enforcement activities in and around the Fayetteville Street corridor and NCCU. And if we could get your contact information, I'd be glad to share that with you. It has all the details and I will answer many of the questions that you've raised. Council over the last several months has raised that as a matter of importance. And that's why the staff presented a report on the activities that we have been working on, not completed, but continue to work on. And I do believe that some of the changes that are proposed in the Fayetteville Street preservation plan may well help support some of the improvement along that corridor as well in terms of the remodeling or the changes to some of the properties. Thank you. Thank you. But I'd be glad to get it to you. Who would you suggest I give my contact information to? If you just meet the gentleman in the back of the room, Keith Chadwell, he'll be glad to get it for you. Okay, thank you. Thank you, sir. Yeah, so there are other comments. Anyone else in the public that wants to speak on this item? Again, this is a public hearing matter. That director reflected no one else in the public has to speak on this item. I'll declare the courtroom to be closed as a matter of fact before council. It's been properly moved. Second, Madam Clerk, we open the vote. Close the vote. It passes seven, is he right? Thank you. We'll move back to consistency on that one. Yeah, move that. It's been properly moved. Second, Madam Clerk, we open the vote. Close the vote. It passes seven, is he right? Let's move back to item 15, Cleveland Street and Holloway Street preservation plan update. The proposal here is very similar to what I described for the Fayetteville Street District. However, because there was a request in that we are as soon as we complete this project going to be assessing to expand the Holloway Street local historic district. We didn't do extensive modifications to the preservation plan itself. Just reviewed the significance of non-contributing or contributing structures and referenced the new criteria, remove the old criteria. Again, this is a public hearing. The public hearing is open. Would ask first are there questions, comments by members of the council? Recognize, oh, you're waving. Okay, that's good. That's okay. Does anyone in the public want to speak on this item? Again, let the record reflect that no one in the public has to speak on this item. I'll declare the part being closed. Matters back before council. It's been properly moved. Second, Madam Clerk, we open the vote. Close the vote. It passes seven, is he right? It's been properly moved. Second, Madam Clerk, we open the vote. Close the vote. It passes seven, is he right? Moved item 16, downtown Durham preservation plan update. This is a similar proposal, slight difference in that because we recently updated this preservation plan back in 2011, we did not review all of the contributing non-contributing classifications because we felt they were already as they needed to be. And so there are not any changes to this plan except for modifying the criteria that are relevant. This is a public hearing. The public hearing is open. You've heard the staff report. Are there questions about members of the council? Is anyone in the public wants to speak on this item? Let the record reflect that no one in the public has to speak on this item. I will declare the public hearing be closed. Matters back before the council. Second, it's been properly moved. Second, Madam Clerk, we open the vote. Close the vote. It passes seven, is he right? We open the vote. Is there a second to the movement? It's been properly moved. Second, Madam Clerk, we open the vote. It passes seven, is he right? Thank you. Move to item 18, Moorhead Hill Preservation. The modifications to this document are generally in keeping with those I described for the Fayetteville Street District. One of the things to note in this is that we found it some time ago a discrepancy between the list of properties in the district and the map itself. We determined that because it's a zoning overlay. The map is what was the binding instrument. So, therefore, we added into the list the document, the properties that were not listed originally. We specifically notified those property owners to make sure that they understood this change and that it was not actually a change in their zoning, but clarifying the document that was incorrect at the time of its adoption. Again, this is a public hearing. The public hearing is open. You heard a staff report on that. Questions, comments by members of the council? Anyone in the public wants to speak on this item? Yes, sir. If you come to the podium and state your name and address. Did you fill out a card? No, I didn't. Okay. After you speak, could you? I will. Thank you. Blaine Butterworth, 1109 Vickers Avenue on the resident of the Moorhead Hill Historic District. Great, great job on the plan. I had some opportunity to provide some input and some of the wording, but it looks good and it sounds good. There's two issues that I have with, in general, the historic plans, if you will, is the, especially the non-contributing, but along with general maintenance, like replacing a roof or paintings, the outside is not a problem, but replacing a roof, we're encouraged to get similar or exact the same materials. And some of those roofs, I have a roof that's a tin roof. I'm not going to get a tin roof now. It drives you into the COA and a lot of discussion. But as I heard the discussion on Fayetteville, I would be on Fayetteville Street, I'd be very concerned about, there's really not, there's encouragement in the plans for people to keep their property up. But if you're really looking for Fayetteville Street to look different, it just up, you know, keeping the properties up, but it's going to make the house, I mean, it won't look, homes look a lot different. They'll just look like they were preserved from whatever time frame they were built. And it seems to me that the district plans can inhibit changing the look or the big picture of a property. And certainly, I would agree that the entrance, the corridor into North Carolina Central needs to be improved. But I just don't think within a historic plan, there's much latitude, much encouragement. In our district, we had two homes, one of which probably could be repaired. The other was beyond repair. We had to wait for a year. In fact, people in the neighborhood were hoping that homes could be saved, but they we had to wait a whole year before they were torn down. So now we've got an empty lot. And it's, you know, it's that condition if they can't be restored. And the homeowner says, I don't have the money. It's a big deal. I've got things that are, you know, five four or five things that are just major things. It's too expensive to try to to bring that home back from the 1930s or 1950s to to a current state. So even with that being a challenge and trying to go further and make it look really, you know, really neat, like some of the historic districts in the country kind of, I mean, they have beginning building blocks from the 50s or the 30s, but they, they kind of look a lot better than they did in those times. There's not much encouragement, I don't think in any of these plans to do that. Those are my few comments. I think I appreciate your comments. But let me ask you this. Yes, what do you think should be in there to provide the type of encouragement you're speaking about? Well, I think it would have to be latitude, similar to the ability in the new construction. There's a lot more latitude and new construction. We have a project that's going in, it's going to look totally different than the huge home right next to it. It's going to be three stories, and it's going to be more modern looking, have some some things that look historic. That's not the intent of new construction, try and make things look, you know, like the rest of the houses. So it'll look a lot better. But if you don't start from scratch, I think you got a real challenge. And so relaxing it, you know, this district may have to have some relaxation and the requirements to enable something to look different. But I just the street has to be widened, I would think would be one thing and that would be a city issue. The homes I think need to be, I don't know, cleaned up and I'm not a contractor, but you could do a lot with homes if you have the ability to go outside the guidelines. And Lisa may have comments on that. I would hope. Yeah, so I'm not sure I did you initially say that you were talking about having that flexibility with non contributing structures or across the board? Well, specifically in that one historic district in near central, that's where I think it needs needs to be done there, Fayetteville. Got it. Well, what I can say is that you know, we went we go into this knowing there's a there's something that we're trying to preserve. There's a historic character in these districts that's been recognized by the city and by the residents in those homes and by others in the community that there's something worth preserving there not just in terms of the experience that you have being in those districts and the homes themselves. But also the history that that ties us to in terms of our lengthy Durham history. So one of the things that we really looked at as we were going through this process because we heard a lot of folks who wanted to have very few or no restrictions on properties within local districts. We heard some folks who wanted very, very strict requirements for district properties. And again, we tried to find a balance. We wanted to make sure that we were able to hold on to the historic character that really made these worth designating and keep them tied to that sort of history and that historic development pattern. But also to where we can allow as much flexibility as possible. And so we have this approach that has come out of that desire and those conversations both with staff with community members with applicants with the Historic Preservation Commission in order to try and find a good balance to move forward with. And if we have missed the mark on that, then I would love to hear it. And there is possibility for modification. Well, I suspect that once this plan is finalized and approved and people try to execute, then you start getting some of the questions raises whether you need more latitude or not. So we'll accept it with that. I appreciate your comments. Yes, sir. It may take a special project, if you will, within city government planning, as well as central to come up with what what that street ought to look like and see if that can be done within the restrictions. And then if not find a way to bypass those restrictions, that would be my thought. Thank you. Thank you. Are you going to say something? Well, he was speaking specifically more here, but he referenced Fable Street. Let me ask any other persons that want to speak on this item. If not, again, let the record reflect no one else has to speak. I would clarify the public hand to be closed as part of the council. It's been proper to move in second. Madam Clerk, will you open the vote? Close the vote. It's been proper to move in second. Madam Clerk, will you open the vote? Close the vote. It's a seven to zero. Okay, my life's not going right. Let's move to my 19, Trinity Heights preservation plan update. Again, the Trinity Heights preservation plan has a similar set of revisions, as I described for the Fable Street area. I'm happy to answer any questions on what that entails. Again, this is a public hearing. The public hearing is open. We'd ask other questions by the council or the staff. Anyone in the audience that wants to speak, this being a public hearing. Let the record reflect no one in public has to speak. I would clarify the public hand to be closed. Madam Clerk, will you open the vote? Close the vote. It's a seven to zero. It's been proper to move in second. Will you open the vote? Close the vote. It's a seven to zero. Thank you. Move to item 20. Watch Hill and Hill preservation plan update. Again, the changes in this revised document are similar to those proposed for the adopted new Fable Street district plan. Okay, this is a public hearing. You've heard the staff report. Comments by council. Here and none. Anyone in the public wants to speak on this item? Let the record. Are you raising your hand? Okay. Let the record reflect no one has to speak. I would clarify the public hearing to be closed. Madam Clerk, will you open the vote? Close the vote. It's a seven to zero. It's been proper to move in second. Madam Clerk, will you open the vote? Close the vote. It's a seven to zero. Okay. We had one item that was pulled item nine. Prove a grant for full fame festival. Greg Brits evening. Yeah, three minutes. Yes. Was there a question? I'm sorry. You pulled item. Did you pull item nine? Oh, no, I just signed in. Because in case I needed to speak, I'm sorry. I was told to sign in when I came in in case I'm an addict. Okay, that's what you said. It's been proper. It's been proper to move in second. Madam Clerk, will you open the vote? Open the vote. Close the vote. It passes seven to zero. At least you got to enjoy a nice meeting of Durham City Council, Mr. Mayor. Any other items coming for the council? If not, meetings are during at eight or four p.m. Thank you.