Good evening, we'd like to call the Durham City Council meeting to order Monday, August 21st at 7.01pm and certainly want to welcome all of you that are in attendance with us this evening. We just take a moment of silence, please. Meditation. Thank you. Recognize Councilman Davis. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. We are pleased on this eclipse day to have Reeve Samson, a distinguished volunteer from the North Carolina Museum of Life and Science to lead us in the pledge. May we stand? United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. Thank you. Did you see the eclipse? Did you see it? Good, good. Move your glass. Okay, great. Microphones are not working. Are these microphones working? Can you hear me? Ray, if you want to switch seats, I'm happy to do that. No, I'll just speak. Don't do it. Don't do it, Mr. I'm going to ask the clerk if she would call the roll, please. Mayor Bell. Present. Mayor Pro Tem Cole McFadden. Present. Councilmember Davis. Yeah. Councilmember Johnson. Here. Councilmember Moffitt. Here. Councilmember Reese. Here. And Councilmember Shoe. Here. Thank you. We have several ceremonial items. Is this on? Okay. This evening. The first I'd like to ask Miss Robin Davis if she would join me and Miss Davis, if you care to bring others with you. That's certified here. Miss Davis is the recipient of this month's neighborhood spotlight award. And it's probably many of you know, this is a recognition of individuals in their communities who have done extent outstanding jobs and have been recognized and recommended for this award is sponsored by the neighborhood improvements. Department and reads that Miss Davis was as a resident of the All Right neighborhood and was nominated and selected because of the want to work wonderful work that she has done continues to do in her neighborhood and it's included but not limited to organizing street wide meetings at her house to discuss neighborhood issues and projects leading a neighborhood cleanup and beautification project. Knocking on hundreds of neighbors doors to increase community involvement participating in multiple local community groups, including pack one communities in partnership, North East Central Durham Leadership Council, the All Right neighborhood Association and the mayor's transformation and 10 initiative. I want to congratulate Miss Davis on being selected for this month's award and certainly want to recognize her for all the things she has done and continues to do to make this community great for all. And we talk about neighborhoods, we talk about strong neighborhoods making a strong sitting, but obviously in those neighborhoods live people and residents who make that happen. Miss Davis is an example of that. The award reads this certificate is awarded to Robin Davis and recognition of valuable contributions to the All Right neighborhood, which is on Spruce Street and as I indicated for organizing street wide meetings at her home to discuss neighborhood issues and projects leading a neighborhood cleanup and beautification project. We're knocking on hundreds of neighbors doors to increase community involvement and participating in multiple local community groups including pack one communities and partnerships, North East Central Durham Leadership Council, the All Right neighborhood Association and the mayor's transformation and 10 initiative and it's signed by Thomas J. Bonfield, our city manager and myself, we will be the mayor of the city of Durham. And I want to present this to Miss Robin and if you have Miss Davis you have any comments that you'd like to make feel free to do that. That's the mayor pro term if you would join me. Gloria with you and Jamie join me please. Good evening everyone. I am reading a proclamation for women's equality day. Let's have a round of applause for that. I have already trained the youth commission to applaud for just about everything I say whereas in 1848 women of the United States began organizing peaceful protests for their right to fully and equally participate in workplaces, libraries, organizations and public facilities as well as the right to vote and participate in government. And whereas on August 26 1920 the 19th amendment was certified securing women the fundamental right to vote and whereas in 1971 Congress designated August 26 as women's equality day to serve as a symbol of the ongoing fight for equal rights and whereas women play a critical role in families, the workplace and in society as a whole contributing to our economy and advancing our nation and whereas women's equality day celebrates the achievements of women and pays tribute to all those who fight for their progress and whereas women's equality day is an opportunity to recognize the advancements in women's rights and to recommit to the goal of equality. Now therefore I William V. Bill Bell, mayor of the city of Durham, North Carolina do hereby proclaim Saturday, August 26 2017 as women's equality day in Durham and hereby I urge all citizens to take special note of this observance. Witness my hand and the corporate silk of the city of Durham, North Carolina this 21st day of August 2017. I present this to you, Gloria. Tell everybody who you are and some of the activities that we will take the weekend. Thank you very much Miss Cora and everyone here on the city council and the mayor. We are having a women's equality day March here in Durham. We're having a rally and it's going to be fantabulous and that's my daughter's word fantabulous. So we're going to be rallying at the American Tobacco Campus at 11 o'clock this Saturday again. We're going to have fabulous speakers, wonderful entertainment and you're just going to have a glorious time because that's women's equality day and we know how to party. So therefore we would love for you to be there again. Thank you again city council mayor and Miss Cora for this.  We are now ready to move forward with the mayor's council for women in the city of Durham.  You obviously saw the reception that was taking place for young people and they're going to be installed and recognized this evening. I'm going to ask Evelyn Scott who's the youth services coordinator. She would join me but before Evelyn does that I like all of you that in the audience that are here because you have a young person that you're involved with for the apparent relative of friend. If we just please stand. Well, I think we all know that all of us need a lot of support no matter what we're doing where it comes from and to receive support from your family and friends and relatives I think it's probably that most type of support support that you can receive. So I want to congratulate you for what you've done and what you continue to do for this young people to hear this evening and I'm going to turn it over to Evelyn for our comments and recognitions. Thank you, Mayor Bell. Good evening. I had to write my my comments down. So I'm Evelyn Scott and I along with Roderick Marshall. Raise your hand. We serve as advisors to the Durham Youth Commission in the office on Youth Division of the city manager's office. We are all excited. I hope you all could attest to the excitement of the students displayed outside in the lobby prior to coming in but they are eagerly excited to begin this term. They're charge this year is to bridge the gap between youth and local government and bring awareness to those issues that impact youth across all spectrums. Their charge is to advocate for efficient and effective youth programs and budget priorities in the city of Durham and they take this charge seriously. So parents there may be some long days in addition to everything else that the students are working on but know that they're in good hands and that we're going to make Durham the great place that it is today. So at this point at this time each student is going to come up they're going to say their name. They're great in their school. If they are a returning member they're going to state the number of years that they've served on the Youth Commission after which deputy clerk and Gray will come up and give the oath of office. As soon as we finish taking the oath of office we'll exit out and then we'll take a photo right outside. Okay. So we can start. Hi I'm Davis Kramer and I'm a senior at Jordan High School and it's my first term. Hi my name is time in Brown. I'm a senior at Southern High School and it's my fourth term. I'm Jason Beltran and I'm from City of Medicine Academy and this is my second year returning. My name is Lorraine Gohey. I'm a senior at Southern High School and I am a new member. My name is John Pachello and I'm a junior at Jordan High School and this is my second year serving on the Durham Youth Commission. Hi my name is Dominic Hicks.  Hi my name is Jake Jeffries. I'm a senior at Durham Academy and this is my first year on the Youth Commission. I'm Isaac Atkins-Piercy. I'm a senior at Carolina Friends School and this is my third year. My name is Miles Leathers. I'm a junior here at High School and this is my second term on the Durham Youth Commission. Hi my name is Vanessa Taylor. I am a senior at Jordan High School and this is my second year serving on the Youth Commission. Hi my name is Jessica Uba and I'm a junior at City of Medicine Academy and this is my second term at the Durham Youth Commission. I'm Jenny Uba. I'm a junior at City of Medicine Academy and this is my second term on the Durham Youth Commission. Hi everyone my name is Natalie Perkins. I'm a senior at Hillside High School and this is my second term with the Durham Youth Commission. Good evening everyone. My name is Ray Palma. I'm about to be a junior at Riverside High School and this will be my third term serving on the Durham Youth Commission. Hello my name is Lirianne Whitehall and I'm a junior at City of Medicine Academy and this is my first term at the Durham Youth Commission. My name is Emerson Atkins-Piercy. I am a freshman at Durham School of Arts and this is my first term. My name is Samantha Wilkins. I'm a junior at Riverside High School and this is my first year. Good evening. My name is Sarah Patterson. I am a junior at Durham School of Arts and this is my second year on the commission. Hello my name is Lama Kachab. I am a junior at Voyager Academy and this is my first year on the Youth Commission. Hi everyone my name is William Mansour and I'm a junior at City of Medicine Academy and this is my second year. Hi my name is Lucy Jones. I'm a junior at Durham Academy and this is my first year. Good evening. My name is Michaela McDaniel. I'm a rising junior at Durham School of Arts and I'm a new member. Good evening. My name is Aiden Steinbach. I'm a rising junior at Durham School of Arts and this is my first term. I do hereby solemnly affirm that I will support and maintain the Constitution and laws of the United States and the Constitution and laws of North Carolina not inconsistent their with and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge the duties of my office as a member of the Durham Youth Commission. Mr. Mayor I want to recognize Mr. Warren Laney before he leaves. Dwarren before you leave. Dwarren when he was a young person. When he was younger. You were young. Dwarren. I'm still saying when you were young. Dwarren I had a visit from him. I'm asking that we start a youth commission in the city of Durham. So he helped to plant the seed for this to take place. So let's give him a round of applause. Okay, let me ask first are there announcements by members of the council recognize Councilman Johnson. Councilman Davis, Councilman Reese in that order. Thank you. I have something to say. Mayor Pro Tem. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I wanted to present a brief statement for adoption by the council. It's a joint city county statement on the incident in Charlottesville. The county adopted it at their meeting last week and it's just a short statement and I'll just read it out and then we can have a vote on adoption.  We mourn for the life that was lost. We send our support to those who were injured and we offer our solidarity to those who acted in opposition to these groups. The city and county of Durham condemn in the strongest possible terms hate speech, hate crimes and violence in the service of hatred. These corrupt and immoral ideologies and actions deserve no place in our country. If it's appropriate, Mr. Mayor, I would move that the council adopt the statement into the record. Second. It's been properly moved in second. All in favor of the motion and get by saying aye. Those opposed. The motion passes unanimously. I should have announced to the public. Thank you, Jillian. But we don't have our voting machine up this evening. So all our votes will be by voice votes or sure of hands if necessary. Recognize Councilman Davis. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. We obviously were just led in the pledge of allegiance by Reeves Samson. And I want to just give special recognition to the Museum of Life and Science, particularly on this day, but for every day of the year for the great work they do with our youth and with our generous citizens in general. The scientific world is enhanced by the work that the North Carolina Museum of Life and Science. And we here in Durham often think of them as our museum, but they belong to the entire state of North Carolina and they serve populations almost any day you go by there you will see school buses out there from many parts of the state. So I just want to take this time to recognize them and to recognize particularly Mitchell Saber, who is one of the administrators there at the Museum and all of the people who do such a wonderful job of carrying on the scientific endeavors that we have here in Durham and in North Carolina. So thank you all particularly on this day and thank you again, Reeves for putting forth the pledge. We're going to ask Councilman Reeves. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I have two announcements. First of all, my one to announce that my nine year old daughter L is here tonight. Hi, I was really excited to bring her here so that she could hear the women's equality pro quality day proclamation and the Durham Youth Commission induction ceremony. I think what we saw today represents some of the best our community has to offer and I'm glad that my daughter could be here to experience that. The second announcement I wanted to make and you might might have heard something about this Mr. Mayor earlier today, the moon traveled in front of the sun from the surface of the planet where we said right here 93% of the surface of the sun was obstructed from view by the by the moon. It is astonishing Mr. Mayor and I can't believe I'm the first one to have to announce that we should all be screaming about that at the top of our lungs. It was an astronomical amazement. And I mentioned I mentioned that just to say this that we had we've had a bit of a week here in Durham and it was really nice. I thought to experience this astronomical wonder today to remind us how small we all are in the grand scheme of things and that what matters at the end of the day is how we treat the people that are in our lives and just wanted to say I look forward to viewing the next total eclipse of the sun. Hopefully from Cleveland, which will be right in the path to totality. It's lovely this time of year. Thank you. Mr. Mayor. Thank you very good. It was not an equal opportunity clips. It's true. That's great right where I was but I understand that recognize me approach him. Am I the last one? I just wanted to recognize Robin Davis again for her work in the community. She has done an outstanding job and helped to transform her community. So I want to applaud you again for your courage and tenacity and commitment to community. And also as as my council colleagues know we've been working on the women's council for a long, long time. And I think we have it where we're at the point where we can begin advertising. So I just want to let you know that we're going to move forward with the mayor's council on women. Don't be intimidated by that embrace us. We just want to make Durham a better city. I mean, we are already great, but we're going to be greater than than we are now. And so I applaud these young women for being here tonight. Stand up again, Jamie and Gloria. They work hard for women's rights and other rights in this city and we want to applaud you again for being here. Thank you. Recognize Councilman Schuyl. I'm sorry. Yes, Mr. Mayor in response to the to the issues and actions that happened to Charlottesville last week, the Human Relations Commission met this afternoon in a special meeting and adopted a resolution. And the chair Diane standard came to deliver to the council and I assured her that I would be happy to do so. And if I could have just a moment, I would tell you that that they this is what they adopted. Whereas the city of Durham Human Relations Commission condemns all acts of white supremacy, bigotry and religious discrimination. And whereas the commission recognizes the white supremacy exists not just in rallies as we have seen in Charlottesville, Virginia on August 11th and 12th, 2017 and throughout our nation's history, but in the institution's culture and history of our city and country. And whereas together we must work every day to root out this cancerous white supremacy in our own lives and neighborhoods not only in reaction to moments where hatred becomes visible as mobs marching uninvited to our streets. Whereas we must examine and directly address historical and present conditions to give rise to these moments of racial and religious hatred. Therefore, be it resolved that the Durham Human Relations Commission calls on citizens, elected officials and other representatives of the city of Durham to end the vast racial inequities in our city, which exist in areas of policing, workers' rights, income, health, small business ownership and others. We had further resolved that Human Relations Commission affirms that black lives matter. We had further resolved that the Durham Human Relations Commission affirms its desire to welcome all people into our communities, of whom have been the targets of oppression and discrimination in our country, particularly but not limited to immigrants and refugees, people of Jewish and Muslim faiths and people regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity. Be it further resolved that the Durham Human Relations Commission affirms its 2016 resolution stating that we believe that people of all and no religious beliefs must be respected and embraced. Be it finally resolved that the Durham Human Relations Commission is committed to ensuring that all people in our city are free to live without fear of racism and discrimination in all of its forms. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. That's the resolution that they've asked me to present to you tonight. Thank you, Councilman Moffitt. Thanks to Human Relations Commission. Are there other announcements by members of the council? If not, then we proceed with priority items by the city manager. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Good evening, everyone. Priority item this evening is agenda item number 19, which is a public hearing to consider adopting a resolution. We're sending six previously ordered petitioned utility improvements. Would request that we move that public hearing item to be the first public hearing heard this evening. And I'll have some further comments at that time. I'll move the manager's item. Second. It's been property moving second. All in favor of the motion indicate by saying aye. Aye. Those opposed, the motion passes unanimously. Recognize the city attorney for any prior times. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. No priority items. And likewise, the city clerk. Yes, Mr. Mayor, members of the city council. GBA item number 15, which is a public hearing on your agenda, Holloway Street, local historic district, overlay expansion and preservation plan amendment. A protest petition has been filed against this item and it has been ruled not valid. Entertain a motion on the city clerk's move. Move the item. Second. It's been property move the second. All in favor of the motion indicate by saying aye. Aye. Those opposed, the motion passes unanimously. We're proceed with the agenda. The first item being the consent agenda. Consent agenda items can be approved for a single vote. Remember the council, remember the audience. As for a consent agenda item to be removed, we'll discuss that later in the agenda program. Item two is Recreation Advisory Commission appointments. Item three is the Durham Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Commission of re-appointments. Item four is I-40 Westbound at US 15501 interchange project. Item five is new position for transit planning services for Durham, Chapel Hill, Carver, Metropolitan Planning organization. Item six is neighborhood bike route grant agreement. Item seven is a downtown parking garage project authorization to negotiate and execute a guaranteed maximum price amendment to the CMAR contract for construction services. Item eight is grant project ordinance for workforce innovation and opportunity act employment funds. Item nine is grant project ordinance for the North Carolina Division of Workforce Solutions Maximized Carolina grant. Item ten is request to amend grant project ordinance number 15151 supersize supersedes grant project ordinance number 14969, the Executive Office of the President, Office of National Drug Control Policy, 2016 high intensity drug trafficking areas, grant project ordinance. Item 11 is 2017, great offices building trust and community policing grant award. Item 12 is telecommunications license agreement of mobile like LLC. Item 13 is an item that can be found on the general business agenda. Items 14 through 19 items that can be found on the general business agenda as public hearings and obtain a motion for the approval of consent agenda. So moved. Second. It's been properly moved. The second, all in favor of the motion. That is capable of saying aye. Aye. Those opposed, the motion passes unanimously. We will move to the general business agenda. Item 13, which is the 2017 second quarter crime report presentation and recognize Chief Davis. Good evening, everyone. Good evening. Thank you for allowing me to present this evening on the Durham Police Department's 2017 second quarter report, which covers the first six months of the year. This quarterly report will cover the department six performance measures, violent crime, property crime, part one index crime, clearance rates, response times to priority one calls and staffing levels. The accompanying summary includes community activities and significant events during the second quarter. Part one index crime was up 5% during the first six months of 2017 compared to the same period last year. Last quarter, the first quarter of the year we were up 7%. So we've had a 2% move in the right direction. There have been decreases in two out of seven part one crime categories, homicides and burglaries. As you can see here on this chart, part one index crime has decreased steadily in the past few months of 2017, actually since the month of April compared to the same period in 2016 after a significant spike in the first quarter. Part one violent crime from January to June 2017. Part one violent crime was up 6% during the first six months of 2017 compared to the same period in 2016. The number of homicides actually decreased by 52%. Reported rapes, aggravated assaults and robberies were up during the first six months of the year. There were 12 homicides and one fatal officer involved shooting at the end of the second quarter. Three homicides from 2016 were cleared as self-defense in 2017, which under UCR guidelines dropped those three from the 2017 statistics resulting in an official total of 10. One 2017 case has been ruled as self-defense, leaving 12 cases for 2017. There are only two open cases at this time from the first six months. All 12 cases involve firearms. Investigators have also solved one homicide case from 2014 during the first six months. The number of robberies increased. However, investigators made 130 arrests since the robbery task force began in November 2016. Many significant arrests are mentioned in the second quarter written report. The robbery task force investigators have been assigned more than 500 cases since November. The task force is now staffed with 10 investigators whose primary focus is commercial robberies and robberies committed with firearms. Investigators work closely with the crime analysts and investigators from other agencies including federal agencies to share intelligence and develop cases. Many of the arrestees were connected to multiple robberies. This chart reflects aggravated assaults by the month. 33% of all aggravated assaults came from multi-victim firearm incidents during the second quarter, which is lowest since the end of 2014. We had a spike in January and the numbers have improved since then. As you can see on this particular chart, the spike at the beginning of the year in January, and then you see the lower numbers in the months of February, March, April, May, and June. Part one, property crime. Overall property crime was up by 5%. Burglaries were down and at a 10-year low for the second quarter. Property crime makes up 81% of all part one crime, compared to 82% during the first six months of 2016. Only a percentage difference. Reported burglars are still at a three-year low for the first six months of the year. Motor vehicle thefts and larcenies were at three-year highs, crimes of opportunity. We have an investigator who is dedicated to organized retail larceny, and she works closely with investigators from other local jurisdictions to target shoplifting and other retail thefts. Larcenies comprised more than half, 56% of all part one crime. 43% of all reported larcenies were from motor vehicles, or involved auto parts and accessories. More than 25% of all larcenies involved shoplifting. The most frequently stolen vehicle during the first six months of the year still remains Honda Accords. More than one-third, 37% of vehicles stolen during the first six months of 2017 had keys left inside or had the engine running. Clarence rates. Clarence rates for rapes and all part one property crimes were above the FBI national average, Clarence. However, the FBI Clarence rates listed here are for the total numbers for 2015. They still have not released the 2016 numbers as of yet. This is annual numbers in the 2015 FBI column and annual numbers in the 2016 DPD column. The two columns to the left are columns that compare 2017 and 2016 year-to-date. For annual violent crime clearances, our target is 50% and property crime clearance is 23%. Homicide clearance rate information. Our homicide clearance rate was 40% at the end of June, which is the official end of the quarter. However, currently for 2017, our clearance rate has risen to 75% with only four open homicide cases. Priority one calls for service. Our target for response is 5.8 minutes. Average response time. The average response time was 6.1 minutes. Better than the same period in 2016, only by a few points, it was 6.25 as the average. Our target of responding to 57% of priority one calls is under five minutes. 52.6% were under five minutes. Improvement over the same period in 2016. We've developed supplemental patrols by utilizing investigators to fill one-week tours in the field and to increase the number of patrol officers answering calls for service. We have consulted professional assistants to begin a study on beat realignment and calls for service based on the geographical makeup and population growth in the city. The results will help guide us in decisions regarding current beat structure and resource deployment. The new P2C, which is police to citizen portal, is now in use in generated 73 reports in April, 78 reports in May, 56 reports in June, and 42 reports in July. These were numbers where our officers did not have to respond to the call and individuals were able to file a report through the automated system. Staffing levels. There were 53 sworn vacancies at the end of the second quarter. There are currently 28 vacant positions. 16 new recruits graduated, BLET, 45, BLET, 45, Academy, and six recruits graduated from the ALET, which is our lateral program in July. The BLET 46 Academy, which currently has 34 recruits in training, started on August 8th. The number of recruit applicants increased by 63%, comparing the first six months in 2016 to the same period in 2017. 132 applicants in 16, as opposed to 215 applicants in 2017. There were 18 non-sworn vacancies at the end of the second quarter. There are currently 21 non-sworn vacancies, 83% staffing at present. As of July 1st, the end of the second quarter, we had 297 body-worn cameras that were actually issued to officers. At that time, cameras were issued to all patrol, including tack motors, bike patrols, K9, our slide squads, watch commanders, desk officers, captains, and lieutenants. All officers attend a training class when cameras are issued to them. Today, 409 cameras have been issued since July 1st. Cameras have been issued to our set teams, internal affairs, our intelligence officers, training, and BLET. Training and issuance is ongoing through September for investigators and other units, including the Community Services Division. We've instituted an auto-tagging pilot project, which began on June 1st, which means officers' recordings for dispatched calls will automatically be tagged. This feature is now ready for full departmental deployment and is scheduled for August 30th. Auto-tagging also improves efficiency for officers by eliminating the task of tagging every video during or after their shift. The automated tagging happens as the officer is working. Second quarter community events. Durham Police Department participated in numerous community activities during the second quarter of 2017. Here's a small sample of some of those activities. Many more are listed in your accompanying second quarter written report. District 1 liaison officer Terry Jennifer organized a successful multi-agency Franklin Village Safety Day on June 24th. In June, Sergeant Somerville and his officers from Squad 4B held an ice pops with the cops event. In the Cornwallis Road Housing Community, they handed out more than 100 ice pops and got to know the residents a little better. On June 2nd, DPD employees and Durham residents gathered at Durham Police Headquarters to recognize National Gun Violence Awareness Day. Participants wore orange and the DPD headquarters building was bathed in orange light to bring awareness to the issue of gun violence in our city. Our PAL program added swing pals this summer for middle school students in our PAL program to learn how to play golf. DPD officers assisted with the program. Our canine unit participated in the APS Walk for the Animals in May and Assistant Chief Rowe served as a judge for several contests. The Durham Police Department team was one of the top fundraisers. Commanders, officers and other supporters of District 4 lunch in the Mac continue to engage residents and make inroads towards sustainable relationships. The Police Athletic League remains involved with local youth as we partner with other youth development advocates. And that ends my report. Thank you, Chief. Let me ask other questions by members of the council. I recognize Councilman Shul, Councilman Davis, Councilman Moffitt. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you, Chief. Thank you. Always do a great job of the report. A couple of questions. The ALET, you said we had six people. That's our first Academy, I believe, the ALET. That's the first time in probably a few years that we've done a lateral program. Yes. How do you feel about its success? I feel really good about it. I personally met those individuals when they were first brought on before they even went to school, had an opportunity to have some one-on-one conversation with them. And I felt pretty good about the first five that I met, another officer joined them later. But we make sure that even though we have laterals, we make sure that they come with the ALET, so I felt pretty good about them. And you mentioned the number of people that the increase in applicants that we've had for the BLET. Yes. And is that mainly because the fact that the pay is better? Is that the thing that's driving it? Are there other things as well? I think it's a combination of things. We've instituted a very robust recruitment campaign, but with that campaign came the various incentives that were granted, of course the increase in salary and different incentives to take home vehicles, training, opportunities. I think it's been a combination, but the recruitment campaign has been very robust. Right. Yes. Well, it's really great to see the increase in the numbers. That's fantastic. Of course that's going to increase the quality of our officers and our ability to get the number of officers that we want on the street, so thank you. Thank you. How are you feeling about the misdemeanor Diversion Court? You didn't refer to it in this presentation, but in your larger presentation you had the numbers for that, and I thought that they looked very encouraging, but I was wondering what your impression that was, and my other question about that is, how are our officers responding to that? Are they responding favorably to it? And I'm just interested in your impressions of how things are going. They're feeling very favorable about it. Actually, I think the process has become more normalized once they identify youth that meet certain criteria. It's a policy now that that individual qualifies for the misdemeanor diversion program, and I think that's why our numbers are seen as increasing. I was quite impressed at the numbers too. Not just the numbers for our youth, but the numbers between the ages I think 18 and 20 had increased significantly as well, which means that these aren't encounters in schools. These are encounters that the officers are having just on the street, and they're taking it upon themselves to allow individuals to go into the misdemeanor diversion program. Great. And do you think that the officers themselves are pleased about this opportunity, or do you think that it is something that they do reluctantly? I'm trying to gauge the support in terms of the rank and file. What do you think about that? I think the officers feel that this is a great opportunity for young people who have never, especially young people who've never had a brush with law. Many of our officers have teenagers of their own, and this program gives young people, young adults an opportunity to have a mistake and still not have that mistake and they keep them from being productive in their lives. And then the body-worn cameras and the training that's going on, does that include the officers? Are officers trained to let residents know that the camera is on? Yes, and actually, I don't know if you remember after my last presentation we talked about the short survey we did, and as a result of the survey, we began to do retraining, primarily focusing on that issue and roll call. So supervisors are constantly reminding our officers as well to ensure that citizens know that the camera is on. Right. I continue to think that's really important and very much appreciate you including that in the training. I want to have one more question. Take me one second to get to it in the report. It's part two offenses. The drug violations have dropped in half, which is good for the January to June period from last year. I'm assuming that doesn't mean that there are less violations. I'm assuming that means that we're handling them in some different way. I wondered if you could shed some light on that. I'm on page eight, Chief. Part two, drug violations. There were 606 in 2016 and there are 302 in 2017. Well, and we've noticed the shift in drug violations as well, and I think it may have a lot to do with the manner of deployment. Our focus on various types of cases, the various diversion programs that exist as well. I don't know if my team has any. Did I hit a gas? They're looking at like, yep. And we do believe that that might have a lot to do with the numbers shifting. I'll say that I think that that's a positive development that I think we all know that, I don't think it can be repeated too many times that the criminalization of small acts is something that we do want to try to avoid if there are other ways of handling them. And so I'm appreciative of that and also appreciative of the priorities that you have set. So thank you very much and thank you for a good report. Thank you. I recognize Councilman Davis. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Chief, thank you for your report. I don't have questions necessarily, but I would like to comment on several things that you all have done well. I appreciate the national night out and all of the activities that went on in a community fashion. I thought that went well to establish good police and community relations. I also attended the recent graduation of one of the groups of people who are now sworn officers. And I appreciate not only the people who graduated, but also the fact that you had the next class out there helping to usher and to do things along the way. I thought it was a good way of trying to make sure that we continue to do some recruitment. And finally, I want to thank your department as well as the Sheriff's Department for the way you all handle the recent challenges that we've had here in the community with the large mobilization of people who are understandably concerned about issues of equity and fairness and some of the things that went on in other places and the way we've tried to handle things here. I think the restraint that the department showed was good, but also when it was time for that march to end, then it needed to end. And I appreciate the restraint that was shown there, but also the manner in which you let people know that the First Amendment rights that they had dealt with had been utilized enough and it was time to go home. So thank you for the way that that was handled. Thank you. Appreciate it. Thank you. I recognize Councilman Moffitt. I just wanted to make that I'll pass because Councilman Davis made the comments I wanted to make regarding recent events. I recognize the Mayor Pro Tem. I will pass too, except I do have to say thank you. And I know that the City of Fayetteville is trying to copy us by bringing somebody from the left to leave their department as well. Thank you for all you're doing and she's the department chief for them. I am just in awe of all the department that's doing in the community to build stronger ties with the community. And I thank you for your leadership. Thank you, ma'am. Chief, I attended a leadership conference of mayors a couple of weeks ago and I sent a note to the manager and he sent to sit responding to my question. But the number one, I shouldn't say the number, one of the priorities and concerns that was raised was this whole issue of opioids. Yes. And I was talking to mayors at the conference and I said, you know, I just haven't heard that in Durham to the extent that these, you know, mayors from Chicago, Austin, this is all across the country. And I hadn't heard that in Durham and I don't know if you might have a comment as to what level of opioid usage do we have in this community and how you're handling it. And if it's not as high as I've been led to believe, what do you attribute that to? Well, we have certainly been leaning forward trying to see whether or not that problem is proliferating in our community and we just have not seen it at that scale. And typically the opioid problem is seen in rural counties, you know, and it might be making its way into some urban areas too, but we've been fortunate that we have not seen instances of opioid abuse. Doesn't mean that it may not be happening, but it just hasn't risen to the level where we think that that is a serious problem here in Durham at all. Thank you. Recognize Councilman Schuhl. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Chief, one other thing. I just want to say that we're all concerned about the possibility that the KKK or some light group could come to Durham. We know that's always a possibility and I know that you all are thinking about how to prepare for that. And I guess I'm not asking of you to say what your preparations are, but could you just comment a little bit on your level of concern and how you all are thinking about that? Well, I think, you know, as a community, we're all concerned when a hate group comes to our town that could potentially incite a response. In law enforcement, we weigh heavily on intelligence because typically when something is planned, there's some chatter about it. So we have paid very close attention to the intelligence, not just from our area, but intelligence that federal entities send our way. I believe that the Durham Police Department is equipped and prepared to deal with any type of unrest in the city. Officers are well trained to deal with it. It is a complicated situation that you can't have an action plan for because your action plan is constantly evolving based on the scenario and the situation that you're confronted with. So I have all the confidence in the world in the Durham Police Department and recently I have talked with the Sheriff's Department as well about collaborating on how we address collectively those types of situations with public safety in mind first. Thank you. I also want to just offer one observation. Excuse me. This really has as much to do with the City Manager's Office as it does the Police Department, also the Sheriff's Department. But I felt like on Friday, so we all know there were lots of rumors circulating on the internet and everywhere. And I want us to think about how to put out if we can more quickly some of the facts that we know because I think it could have helped us on Friday. There was a lot of unhappiness, sadness, confusion, rumors. And so I just want to put that out there also for you Beverly to think about. I'm not sure. I don't know. I know it's hard to respond in those circumstances. But I think insofar as we can give people the facts on a current basis. I'll just give you one example, which is that in the afternoon, there were lots of rumors swirling around that the KKK had been given a permit to march. We know that's not true, but I got a lot of emails instantaneously saying, will you revoke the, well, I couldn't anyway, but will you all revoke the permit for the KKK? And of course I did call around and say, is there a permit for the KKK? I mean, I knew there wasn't, but you have to check that out. And so then, you know, I was responding to these people. Maybe you all were responding as well. We were. And I'm just not aware of it. We were. Early on, we were responding that there were no permits and we sent it out to the media as well in hopes, and there was no other information to send. Yeah. Only that this was sort of a rumor or information that got out and took a life of its own. But the only thing that we could do was send out something basically saying, we had no information about any event occurring in the city. There were no permits by the KKK or any other group that had been applied for with us or even with the county. So we'll continue to, we'll continue to work on that because you're absolutely right. Information has a domino effect. Yeah. And so good. But I didn't, I would getting my information by calling the manager, you know, hearing what Charlie said, you know, so somehow I think we've got to figure out how to more widely disseminate it so that we can put out some of these fires. Again, I don't have the answer to it, but I do think it's something we ought to continue to do. Absolutely. Steve, let me see. I wasn't going to get into this. You raised it. I think I need to speak to it. I think we as elected officials have a personal responsibility in terms of what we say and don't say and how we say it on social media. We have a personal, and I don't do Facebook. I don't do Instagram. I don't do Twitter. I mean, I'm backwards. I understand that. But I can tell you that we as elected officials have got to be more responsible. In my opinion, how we use social media when it comes to instances such as this. I came into the meeting probably about 10 o'clock, I guess the one I got, and when the city manager was there, the police chief, the sheriff, the staff, the county manager, and et cetera. And the first question I asked, have any permits been given for March? And they said no, none at all. I was on WRAL, and that was one of the first things that I spoke to was people asked that question. But I think we have got to look at ourselves in terms of what we do in this social media piece and how we spread things, whether they're rumors, facts, or whatever. And it doesn't help when some of the things that occurred were occurring on that day. And I'm not pointing fingers. I can just tell you that was a problem, too. And we need to understand that. In fact, at some point in time, I'm going to ask that we have a meeting to really talk about how we police ourselves on the social media issue when it comes to issues such as we had this past weekend. And I'll leave it at that. But we do have a responsibility of ourselves to how we communicate in the form of a recognized city manager. Mr. Mayor, I don't want to pile on, but I can't miss the opportunity as well. You know, as Chief Davis said, and we've said, we responded to countless, I can't count how many times we were asked the question by the media, by the public, by any number of people with the same answer. People didn't want to believe it. They wanted to believe it. They wanted to believe. And what I've told a number of people, and I've told some of you, that I would just hope that you would have enough confidence in us that if we would have issued a permit, you would have known it, and you'd never had the doubt to call because you would have had confidence that we would have already told you. And so hopefully someday we can get to that point again. I thought we were there, but as of Friday, I guess we weren't there. Thank you. Mr. Mayor, I recognize Councilman Moffitt. Two things very briefly. The first is that one of the things that every citizen, every resident can do, the peaceful protest is leave the weapons at home. I just want to make the plea from the dais, mixing weapons and emotions is a really bad idea. And peaceful, Durham should be a place where everyone can come and speak their mind, peacefully, but I plead that people leave the weapons at home. And the second thing I wanted to do, I did want to go back and just, I did want to add my thanks. I felt like the department, it's been a long week, the department acted with great restraint. At times, people have questioned that to me and I have defended the department because I felt like the decisions that you and your command staff and your officers made helped keep the volatility of the situation to a minimum. And I know Friday was a particularly long day, but I just thought that the decisions that were made were, the fact that in the course of the entire week, we had one statue that was destroyed. No other property damage. And as far as I know, no personal injuries. And I think that's a great record. Thank you. Thank you. Mayor Pro Tem. Mr. Mayor, we've been sort of proactive on the social media piece. We are having a meeting in the next week or so to deal with that issue. That's the council's procedures. Yes. This meeting, I understand. Okay, Chief, again, we appreciate your report and appreciate what you do for the community. We'll move now to the public hearing matters and the matters that are requested. We move item 19 to the top, which is the public hearing to consider adopting a resolution rescinding six previously ordered petition utility improvements. Mr. Mayor, this is a public hearing that is a continued public hearing. I believe this will be the second or third time that this public hearing is being considered, as you indicated, to consider adopting a resolution rescinding six previously ordered petition utility improvements. And as you'll recall, one of the major situations that was impacting this consideration were some fairly extensive regulations that the North Carolina Department of Transportation was imposing on the roadways related to these improvements that was really driving up the costs. At the last time this was heard, there was a request that we try to meet with the department and have more engaged conversation around these requirements. An initial meeting did occur several weeks ago. I'm happy to report that we feel fairly positive that there may be some movement that could result in a reduction in overall costs associated with some or all of these utility improvements. And as a result of that, my recommendation would be that the council go ahead and reopen this public hearing. Certainly, if you want to take public comment, again, that is your prerogative. But then at the end, close the public hearing and refer the matter back to the staff so that we can continue proactive discussions with the North Carolina Department of Transportation. And then as those discussions come to fruition one way or the other, we will restart these processes and bring you back information for your consideration. I'm happy to answer any questions. Let me ask other questions. This is a continuation of the public hearing. What are the questions on the manager's comments? I recognize Councilman Moffitt first. Thank you. Not a question. I know there are people here to speak on it. And I know this has been a long time working through the process. But I think the staff is really working to try to get to the possibility that answers will be more favorable. So anybody that wants to speak tonight, certainly we're here to listen. But I intend to follow the manager's recommendation and move to send it back to staff. Thank you. Any other comments by members of the council? I don't have anyone that has signed up specifically to speak on this. Is that correct, Madam Clerk? So again, this is a public hearing and if there are those who wish to speak at this time, I invite you to the podium to the right if you state your name and address on the subject. So again, is there anyone in the public that wants to speak on this item? I should have. We did notify all of the people that have participated to let them know about this recommendation in advance. I think that may be why no one's here this evening. In that case, let the record reflect that no one else has to speak on this item. I'll declare the public hearing to be closed. And matters back before the council, you have a recommendation from City Manager to maintain a motion on your recommendation. So it's been properly moved a second. All in favor of the motion, indicate by saying aye. Those opposed. The motion passes unanimously. Thank you. We'll now go back to the top of the public hearing items. That being item 14, Unified Development Ordinance, Texas Amendment, omnibus changes to, changes 10, 10 changes. Thank you. Good evening. Michael Stock with the Planning Department. And before I begin, I would like to state that the required notifications for all the planning department-related public hearing items tonight have been performed per state and UDL requirements and are on file. Texas Amendment TC 17-0-0-0-1 proposes technical revisions to reflect minor policy changes to various provisions of Unified Development Ordinance. The amendments are identified as necessary corrections, clarifications for your organization, or other minor changes to accurately comply with the intent of the regulations, codify interpretations of regulations, or reflect minor policy changes that are not solely technical in nature. Details have been provided within the memo as part of your agenda packet. The JCCPC did review a draft of the amendment at a April meeting, and the Planning Commission recommended approval 12-1 from the Board of Commissioners approved this amendment without modification at its August 14th meeting. As a reminder, the commission will be required to take two actions. The first action will be a vote with an appropriate statement of consistency, which is attachment B in your agenda packet, and the second action will be a vote on the ordinance amending the UDO itself found in attachment A of your agenda packet. Thank you. I'll be happy to answer any questions. This is a public hearing. The public hearing is open. You've heard the staff report. I would ask first of the comments, questions, A of your agenda packet. Second. Okay, next item. Is there any one in the public that wants to speak on this item? Again, this is a public hearing. On item 14, the Unified Development wants to check some amendments, ominous changes. Let the director reflect on no one in the public has to speak on this item. I will declare a point. Madam, be closed. The matter is before the council. I was opposed the motion passes unanimously remove the item Mr. Mayor it's been properly moved a second all in favor of the motion and to keep us and I was opposed the motion passes unanimously thank you we move to item 15 I am 15 is the Holloway Street local historic district overlay expansion and preservation plan amendment thank you again I use speaking at this part of the meeting room Michael talking again with the planning department before you tonight is the public hearing for the Holloway Street it's local historic district expansion and preservation plan update x10 0003 and we'd like to just walk the council through very concisely as possible the aspects of the request since it's a more unique type of zoning request that you versus what you normally see and just a little background on this petition was submitted it was a privately initiated petition by residents of the neighborhood of the Holloway Street neighborhood back in 2010 and it was back per UDO requirements it was reviewed by the Historic Preservation Commission and which approved initiating the district expansion staff at that time from 2010 to 2013 conducted additional research and held numerous public meetings and 2013 the adoption process actually began going through the first the HPC which recommended approval and then the Planning Commission which recommended denial with a 6-6 vote and this was back in 2013 when it was coming forward to city council city council referred the item back to staff for more discussion about the boundaries for the district one so skipping ahead to 2016 the consolidated review criteria was adopted in February 2016 and that was one of the hold-up factors for why it went from 2013 to 2016 not only did council ask us to take another look at it back in 2013 at the request itself but at that time the and you might be aware remember this back in February 2016 council adopted the consolidated review criteria for all the historic districts and that was just getting going back in 2013 and it was determined to be prudent to wait for this process to finish before and so for those who were considering being in the expansion area to know what the rules were that they would be playing by instead of it being kind of iffy as they were going through the process and unfortunately it did take longer than was anticipated but as soon as that was adopted in February we got back on this project and in March and April of 2016 we did outreach to the neighborhood we held a public meeting and actually did self-addressed stamped envelopes that was born out of that March meeting surveying all the residents in that area to see what kind of support there still was because there was such a time lag between 2013 and then the results and I'll have a map for you in a minute the results were kind of mixed and thus staff at that time determined that it was just prudent to move forward with the process as as the application was initially submitted August in October 2016 had additional public meetings where we've kind of again went over what it meant to be in a historic district taking a look at boundaries and any other issues that were being brought up and then December 2016 an information item was presented to the Historic Preservation Commission before their actual hearing and also you had the State Historic Preservation Office review and comments which are in your agenda packet this was a survey just a map of the survey responses from that March and April outreach and actually into May and you can see it was a roughly around a 50-50 in terms of those who responded support and not support there were a number that actually just in here from it all but based upon this information we the department decided that it was just prudent to move forward with the process and have a final conclusion to the project to the request this is just a map and focusing on the request of 2010 the highlighted area the shaded hatched area is the actual petition itself and then when staff did its analysis of the boundaries and took a look at the petition we came up with a couple other areas for additional consideration and those have also been notified through the public hearing process so they're up for rezoning there were four areas of consideration and they're highlighted there one two three four I'm gonna briefly just mention what those four areas are the first area number one or is sorry the Queen and Elliott Street parcel 601 and 603 North Queen Street those the houses that were there and I should back up the petition mimics the actual National Historic District that's applied to that area back established back in 2009 so there were houses on these two parcels back when the National Historic District was established those two houses were moved so these these these those two parcels that you see in yellow plus all the other parcels on that block are vacant so the consideration is to and actually the suggestion from the State Historic Preservation Office was to remove those two parcels from the boundary consideration and that is actually before you tonight to not include those two those two parcel those two houses were moved to the girly street parcels that you see in blue there's actually five parcels there but a long girly street to those two houses were moved there they were considered consider contributing structures to the neighborhood there is also there was a house there additionally I believe at 513 it's detailed in your memo and there's a vacant on the most southern portion there parcel there is vacant but there's actually a house under construction there as we speak but it's basically a vacant site the two properties along Mallard the corner property there is actually a city property in his vacant the one in from the corner there is actually a house that was moved from Swift Avenue was a Duke University property and it is a house that is a bungalow style house that is very consistent with a number of the houses within the neighborhood and that was actually moved there in 2013 of all time so it wasn't captured when it first came when it went through the original approval process and those are houses there I believe 6 513 and 603 were the ones that moved 601 was already there and then another parcel there was vacant area number three Oakwood and Carlton parcels those are under consideration also for addition to the boundary they are the the Carlton parcel the smaller the two parcels is vacant the one at 312 Oakwood it's new construction that is being considered mainly for completeness of context of the area along the street so the district boundary doesn't sit in the street and then the fourth is actually a request to just move the boundary up to remove the green area from that parcel that parcel it's covering just a portion of 208 North Elizabeth Street it is a apartment complex a non contributing apartment complex and within the motion tonight would just to move the boundaries to move to the southern boundaries of those parcels along Holloway again this map mimics the map that is in your agenda packet it's just a map of indicating the significant properties that would be considered significant one property that there is one property 503 Oakwood that recently went through subdivision and I'll bring this up again but that property is now 503 and 505 Oakwood and any motion tonight we would ask that you include 505 Oakwood in there and we can make amendments to the preservation plan that was just recently subdivided so it isn't reflected in the preservation plan I'm sorry would you repeat that sure about Oakwood is in the preservation plan it just went through a subdivision not too long ago so it's now 503 and the resulting parcel from it is 505 Oakwood it would be a vacant parcel would be considered non can out back up for a second it would be considered a non contributing parcel we just want to make that aware of that and on the record and any motion we would ask that would be if it is approved to include that parcel in there is 503 in the existing district no it's in the it's in the expansion area okay so it just wasn't when we update if we create an expansion area we yeah and we will make that a dust adjustment this is just we made this map just as a result of the HPC meeting back in January these are just a map of the property owners who came out of the HPC meeting there are four property owners who came out in opposition to the request and that was just a map of those who have spoken out against it in addition and these folks actually number of these properties mimic the ones from the survey response in opposition summary of the recommendations the HPC recommended approval seven to zero they were focusing on the merits of the historic district itself and they did recognize that there was a neighborhood opposition for it and didn't feel felt that there were other bodies better prepared to handle those issues and they focus more on the merits of the historic district itself the main planning Commission hearing was held and they recommended denial 11 to 2 I could clarify what that denial meant and if it was related to all four areas or any it was related to it was a the motion actually wound up being a mop so what's before you tonight is the consideration of those four areas removing those two parcels in area number one adding those parcels in two and three and then removing the existing that motion that they made they had a lot of conundrum over how to make a motion based upon the information they were receiving and it resulted in a it it included some of those areas it pulled the motion pulled out additional parcels that weren't technically pointed out by the planning department but they have a right to do as council does tonight so it was a mixture of that and it was just a flat-out denial 11 to 2 so could you clear excuse me sir could you clarify in terms of the the action the council would take tonight if the council you'd recommend the council take action on each of those items individually or they can they're all up it's all they've all been properly notified they're all included in the rezoning and it probably would behoove you to if there is a wish to create some sort of historic district to take a look take a look at it in parts if there's a motion to say just not do the expansion and maybe just remove that designation in area number 4 and do a technical updates that could also be a motion to and then one more question to clarify the the examples you gave did not include look look to not include the adjoining public rights of way and so in terms of defining the boundaries do they include the it would include to the centerline of the rights even though the pictures didn't show that they were included they because they were just showing the parcels they would be included right and that's standard for any of the zoning I just want to clarify from the picture thank you thank you Mr. vanishing I was going to ask the same question maybe not extent you had what does denial mean denying what that's what this is what occurred to me okay look you've completed and the only other thing I want to say that staff had made a determination that the request would be consistent with the comprehensive plan thank you let me first ask other questions comments by members of the council on the staff report if not then we have several people that have signed up to speak I have one two three four five six proponents I want to make sure it's proponents of what and I have one two three four opponents so let me call the names and each person has three minutes to speak I will say 18 minutes for the proponents and the opponents will have four minutes to speak I haven't said that Natalie spring if you come to the podium to the right Natalie spring Alicia Trot Tiffany graves Ron Emerson Heath breath I can't get the last name you can see that Susan saying saying as anyone saying that I did not call that is a proponent of your own business tonight and I'm 15 if not okay we can just line up behind persons okay we know somebody's got a boat hi my name is Allison Trot and I am a longtime Durham resident actually born and raised here and the parcel number three that's looking to be added I'm sorry could you just give your name and address please yes Allison Trot and I live at 312 Oakwood which is actually parcel number three in this picture so that's the lots that were vacant but I have built a very modern looking home on them and live there now I grew up in Durham I'm a longtime Durham resident I love this town and I very much want to stay here and plan on it and I am for the historic district I've read through it very carefully and I feel that it does a lot to keep the feel of the neighborhood it's a lot like the neighborhoods that I grew up in and I came over here because of that and there's a lot of those elements that I think could very easily be moved out if they aren't protected in some way and so I'm I'm a proponent of the historic district I think it's a good thing and we built the house around having a historic district so we planned for it because we were pretty sure it was gonna pass when I bought the lots and so when we built we built that way and my builder was very clear and that it would probably pass if it had been a historic preservation district he actually knew a couple people on the on the permit committee and talked to them about it in advance and after we built it and they said that it would not have been an issue so this kind of building could still take place even if the historic district did pass so that's my two cents thank you so much you're welcome have a good night my name is Natalie spring I live at 801 Cleveland Street and I own a rental house at 503 North Queen Street that's Mary and Hillary spring who's sitting with Councilman Reese this afternoon I'm speaking in for in favor of the historic district you know there's been a lot of talk back and forth for seven years among neighbors among outside developers among people who very desperately love this area and there are people who desperately love the area on both sides there are people who've lived here you know I've lived here for 16 years there's people who've lived here double that on both sides you know it is a it is a hard issue that's before you tonight there isn't a really clear yes this is amazing no this isn't and I just want to tell you why I'm for it Durham wants to be a lot of things for a lot of people and I think that Durham as a town has that ability to really care for and nurture growth in a way that benefits all people I don't think it has to be a us versus them a new versus old a historic versus modern I think we can do all of those things and we have an entire city in which we do those so we have in our little village of Cleveland Holloway we have massive beautiful modern homes like Allison's and we have massive beautiful Victorian homes like mine we also have 600 square foot houses and we have thousand square foot houses and what you're voting on today is not protection protecting the fussy Victorians like mine my fussy Victorian is already protected I'm in the local district on Cleveland Street what you're protecting are thousand square foot bungalows their 1200 square feet thousand square feet the planning department was talking about 503 has been parceled off what we're going to see because of the size of these lots is the thousand square foot houses going away and two three four five thousand square foot houses being built in their place we can't stop gentrification in Durham we can't stop the gentrification that's happening and happened in Cleveland Holloway but we can make an affirmative statement that having a neighborhood right by downtown that has a mix of uses that has a mix of housing options is something that we as a city want we want there to be condos downtown we want there to be condos on rocks bro we also want there to be thousand square foot houses not just in Golden Belt Golden Belt needs them but Cleveland Holloway needs them too and so if you want to stop the pressure that we'll see to remove those and make it downtown just for the rich then you have the opportunity tonight to vote for the local historic district and to protect some of these smaller houses now they're still expensive I'm not gonna I don't want to mislead you those small houses are expensive but a thousand square foot house is always going to be cheaper than a five thousand square foot house and we need a range in downtown thank you I'm Heath Beckett I'm also speaking for the historic expansion I live at 705 Mallard Avenue and I also have a house at 510 Carlton one of the things that kind of made me fall in love with Cleveland Holloway was that it had preserved its historic character whereas a lot of other neighborhoods in Durham maybe haven't I you can walk through and like you can just see the history and it's living and people are actually still using structures it's not like a museum in the past 12 months alone I've seen three of these houses demolished and quickly you know a cookie cutter like 3,000 square foot box is put up in this place in my opinion if this expansion does not pass due to the rising home costs and you know basically everything's just getting more expensive you're gonna see a lot more of that and pretty much all of these historic homes that aren't five thousand square foot Victorians are going to be demolished and they will become these cookie cutter homes so in my opinion I think that the history and the character of this neighborhood and of Durham itself is under attack and I think that this is a way to prevent that thanks well hello everyone I'm Tiffany Graves I live at 523 Holloway Street some of you may know me from another lead issue going on there that's another time I am for the historic expansion and I have been since the beginning I live on Holloway Street I am already protected so I would you know defer to what more of the people inside the neighborhood was say I wanted to think back to the map that showed you the contributing and contributing structures to show you that these houses are truly historic and should be protected and I believe today what you need is one day notice to knock those houses down and if this passes I believe you would need a year notice and I think it would preserve the houses that should be protected there's danger in this neighborhood of people being very concerned about density and not being concerned about the neighborhood we are I am for density a lot of us is for density but not at the sake of the people who are living right next door in a you know thousand square foot house if you have to be right across the street from a massive structure that's built on an empty plot so this would help protect those neighbors from what could be next door the roads in the neighborhood can't hold a gigantic complex being built there Cleveland Holloway is just a special place I love it I don't necessarily not want it to change I do want density I do want to be modern but I don't want the character taken and I do want people to have to be thoughtful before they remove these houses and change the character of the neighborhood I think that's all I wanted to say but again if you go back to that map showing you which homes are contributing you'll see that this I mean it really is a historic neighborhood so I think I should have that designation thank you hello my name is Susan Zhang I live at 510 Carlton and I wanted to speak today in favor of the local historic district I moved into Cleveland Holloway in 2013 when all this was already happening and it's been ongoing since then so I've been receiving many letters in the mail about this proposition and I wanted to say you know when I I'm an immigrant and first moved to the United States as six years old and my parents always had an American dream of owning a house and having a backyard they never achieved that dream but when I purchased that 1000 square foot bungalow the tiny house not a Victorian at all built in 1920 the year my grandfather was born it was me realizing the American dream and the fact I could afford it when so many of the houses now are being torn down of that size and a 400 thousand dollar house is going up in its place something you see in Kerry that I could never afford that for me shows we need to protect Cleveland Holloway and make sure it's still an affordable neighborhood where people can still buy a 1000 square foot house to bed to bath with a little yard and have that historic preservation that makes Durham so special and not just Kerry or Morrisville or any other place in North Carolina so I really please recommend that you think about how long this process is and what we want Durham to be in the future even as we continue to grow thank you welcome hello my name is Rob Emerson I live at 1202 North Gregson Street in Durham and I currently serve as president of the board of directors of Preservation Durham I know it won't come as a huge surprise to any of you that preservation Durham unequivocally supports the creation and expansion of this district we stood here about a year ago with the residents of Golden Belt and now we're standing with the residents of Cleveland Holloway who initiated this petition seven years ago long before the runaway development and gentrification had taken such a hold in their neighborhood with this protection comes a little bit of added bureaucracy but without it we're much more likely to lose the diversity and character of this historic neighborhood much of the land within this proposed district boundary is zoned for multifamily development combined with its proximity to downtown and the value of the land relative to the small homes on them we have a near perfect recipe for speculative development tear downs and overbuilding like any zoning action the decision to designate a historic district is reversible demolition is not local districts offer the only mechanism I know of to prevent or delay the demolition of a historic building on one hand we're facing an affordability crisis and we talk about stewardship of scarce national natural resources and the desire to keep Durham dirty on the other hand we're bulldozing modest homes and commercial buildings of brick stone and old-growth timber a short walk or bike ride from downtown we're replacing small homes and entrepreneurial spaces that were recently affordable to teachers and artists with bland buildings of inferior materials that only a few of us can afford where local district protections are not in place we're losing not only the character of these early 20th century neighborhoods but we're also losing the diversity that a wide variety of building types shapes and sizes promotes thank you hello my name is Jenny Tucker and I live at 707 North Queen Street I am here to speak in favor of the expansion and I will not speak too long simply because the people who spoke before me did a wonderful job of articulating so many of my similar feelings as well I can only speak personally in that I do live in one of the smaller homes within the neighborhood and that I'll also reiterate that something that someone else recently said which was that everyone on both sides has both agreements and disagreements of this discussion and both foreign against and I will say the connective threat is a love and passion for this neighborhood which I think is can echo really all of all of Durhamites which has made it such a wonderful home for myself and then also personally I will say that as an art historian and professionally I have a particular interest in this expansion simply because in my mind the most precious part of this is a pause for thought and a pause for a collective conversation on how best to both preserve thoughtfully and carefully which is mirroring much of what is happening in the city at large and I'd also like to say thank you so much for your time I'm a neophyte here at the city council has been a thrilling experience I mean that bottom of my heart I've loved it so thank you all so much well that's an unusual sentiment let me ask is it anyone else that wants to speak on this item as a proponent that's not spoken let's reflect that no one else has to speak as a proponent who now move to those that are opposed opponents I have Mark Gallifianakis James Bradfoot Chris Dickie and Ram Netter and is it anyone else that wants to speak in opposition to this proposal if not if you proceed to the podium to my right I set your name and address good evening my name is Mark Gallifianakis my address is 516 Polk Street if I can ask Michael would you mind putting up the map of the responses to the neighborhood survey that'd be great my family my father grew up on what is now called Mallard Avenue it was Markham Street at the time and over the years picked up a couple extra parcels we will not be impacted by this directly but indirectly and I'm mainly here tonight supporting the folks who are opposed to it I think the two biggest points I want to make is this map right here pretty much tells the story there's not unified support for it there's not a majority of respondents who were in favor of it but in fact if you actually count up the parcels and include the undecideds more people are against it than in favor of it it's it's a very small majority but it's but it is a majority so that tells the story the good thing is both the proponents and our opponents on this issue of all remain civil and been able to get along and remain neighbors as you know this has been going on since 2010 there was a petition filed to rezone this area to a local historic district overlay and the signers of that petition roughly half of them are not are now gone so they're no longer property owners are living in the neighborhood and that's what got this whole ball of wax rolling and today you see results like this so there's just not unified support for this like there have been in other cases and you know we've gone through and analyzed all the signatures from 2010 and and roughly half half the folks are still around and still property owners in fact Natalie's close by but no longer living in the rezone area another important point I want to make is this is a rezoning so it's it sounds like nothing comes along with it you're gonna get this local historic district label but it is a burden to some folks especially the longtime residents the folks that have been there 30 40 50 years the folks are retired and on a fixed income and although the city might not say we're not gonna tell you what color you can paint your house or not paint your house there is an application process someone's got to come downtown and make application they've got to pay a fee and that is a burden especially for folks on a fixed income and things as simple as you know someone needing a wheelchair room can't just go build it you gotta come down nobody's gonna turn it down but you still got to come down here file an application and pay a fee and so there is a cost involved and if we're if we're worried about affordable housing that needs to be taken into account too that there is a cost there is a burden to property owners and that's those the two two main points I want to make there's just there's just not enough support here to rezone a hundred and some properties where at least half the folks that are engaged aren't interested in it and that's it and if I if I may I'd like to reserve a minute of time in case something pops up thank you good evening James Bradford I live at 7616 Herndon Road here in Durham I'm here to support the longtime residents of this neighborhood I bought my first property over there in this neighborhood in 84 so I've been there a long time and there's a few people still live there that was there when I first bought the property and I know none of them who want this matter of fact a few of them who signed the petition to start this once they learn more about it they signed a protest petition to get out of it because they don't want to have to come downtown and explain what they want to do especially when neighborhood services comes in and say you got to do this this this and then someone else says you have to do it this way so you know I don't want to play but the label this but I just don't see why this is needed you can go over there right now and you'll see new construction and you'll see rehab there's not every house being torn down there's a house on Queen Street right now whole house jacked up in the air people building a foundation to renovate it they're putting tons of money to renovate it so the idea that everything is gonna be torn down it's not true I have a friend of mine on on Oakwood also no Queen he just finished a renovation his house sold in two days he did a great renovation so renovation is happening some tear downs are happening new things are being built everyone who I think spoke tonight house is being protected by state law they're still they can apply for the credit if they can do all the things they want to do they're still protected so why do they need another level of protection why do the longtime residents need one other weapon against them thank you members of council Chris Sticky I live at 311 Oakwood and also for one Oakwood I apologize for my wife for not being here but my son is working at the Durham Boulevard Park and she needs to give him a ride home once the game is over here but me and my family have been in this particular community since 1993 when it was unheard of to move to Cleveland Holloway during that time I've had the opportunity to meet a lot of people a lot of people have moved gentrification has come in and moved a lot of people out and bought a lot of people in but I think the main thing that we're we're discussing here is if we look at factual I mean this this process started back in 2010 and back in 2010 it got brought before council right around that area and there were some questions at that particular time and moment in reference to the amount of support council said let's go back and see what you can do with the community to generate and grant support that has not happened you can see that this community is although we're conciliatory towards one another we we are divided to a large extent what this impacts to me is my family my family owning to have a large Victorian home and I have a small home I understand what it's taken to sort of rehab and revitalize for me to go through that process through the if this is passed here would be very very painful but because I've worked I mean I work for the city I understand how to circumvent that but I also understand as some of these folks have alluded to there are a lot of people that have moved in this neighborhood that cannot be here or who don't even understand the process that's who I'm representing here as well is that these folks a lot of retirement people a lot of folks who don't really understand that you've had a lot of new folks who've come to this particular area who voiced their opinion and I humbly respect that I do humbly respect that but what I'm asking you to do is this here is look at the facts this does not have substantial community support the Commission denied this thing not once but twice even the historic preservation community that went through this there was when we were sitting there as the foreigners went before them they had a problem with this as well and basically they want to document it in the minutes period that basically that this does not have substantial community to support so I guess what I'm asking from this particular from this particular council here I know it's very tough I know it's very passionate I can say I've lived in that community in 1993 in my community there has not been a lot of houses that have been knocked down most of the houses in that particular community that we're talking about here have been renovated there's not a lot of brand new houses that are just going up stick big houses that are going up yeah one right across the street for that house across street that was torn down was torn down because it was condemned and this young lady built a brand new beautiful home there now with that home where they exist right now it's beautiful with that particular home move or go through the threshold there I don't know but it doesn't exactly fit but I think it's a wonderful improvement to our particular community so I guess what I'm saying to you a console is this here affordability is gone there is not affordability in that neighborhood anymore 200 225 thousand dollars for a shell is what's being cost there's not affordability in Cleveland Holloway anymore I think the facts here is this here is that from an economic benefit as it relates to my family and some of the other things it will be painful to me and my family thank you thank you members of council my name is Ram Netta I live at 501 Oakwood Avenue on the corner of Oakwood and Ottawa in the very middle of the district that would be in the very middle of the area that would be affected by the potential expansion although I'm not from this country I've lived in Durham for 14 years and I've lived in Cleveland Holloway for five years and I was one of the signatories on the original petition in favor of the LHDO expansion and I signed that petition in favor of the expansion for the reasons that Natalie Spring and Tiffany Graves very eloquently stated in their defense of the expansion I can summarize very quickly why I changed my mind which is that data from the National Bureau of Economic Research indicates that over a 10-year period property that's inside a local historic district increases in value faster than property that's not and so passing this expansion is exactly the wrong way to address what I take to be Durham's affordable housing problem at least if you believe the data now as a property owner in the affected district if you decide to pass this expansion I should say a big thank you because that's more money in my pocket but the future Susan Zhang who wants to buy affordable property in that district is not going to be able to so that's my reason for changing my mind from supporting the expansion to opposing it so thank you for your time can I ask you a quick question I'm sorry I didn't catch your name sir Ram Netta Ram is like yeah R. A. M. and the last name is N. E. T. A. great thank you okay are there are other persons that want to speak again we've heard we're hearing from the opponents to this proposed change let the reconflect that no one else has to speak either as an opponent or proponent of this item I'm not going to close the public hearing yet but I'm bringing them out of back before the council for comments that my colleagues may have before I entertain a motion for our closing the hearing and then entertain a motion. I recognize the mayor pro term. Good evening. Been a long time resident of Durham I'm really familiar with this area and I wonder now what demographics are in terms of age and and race I I can remember when there were lots of seniors there and I assume that there are a lot of seniors still there can somebody answer that question for me. She's asked if you want to come forth and respond to her questions and because I have some concerns about burdens on on senior citizens. So I'll speak from my experience that for the past five years me and Tiffany have been the organizers of the Christmas Eve carols to our elderly neighbors and very sadly our list of places we can Carol grows smaller every year. We have about six elderly residents right now who live on Mallard Queen Carlton who are still in their houses that they own free and clear that they've lived in since 6570. But our elders are dying and their family members are encouraging them to leave sell the houses and move into places that are easier on their family members. There's a lot of deferred maintenance with our elderly neighbors. We've had several who without the local historic district have had to move because they were cited by NIS.  And so we've lost several neighbors that way as well in the past two or three years. Thank you for that. I'm concerned still about the stability of the neighborhood as it relates to the elderly. Still I know some elderly folk who live in that area and I would hate to see cost burdens on them from escalating taxes. And as Mr. Bradford outlined, if they needed a wheelchair ramp, they would have to come to City Hall and go through a burdensome process to make that happen. But I'm still listening to comments. Can I listen to Mr. Bradford? Mr. Mayor? Sure. Okay. About the demographics and what I've seen and what I've seen some of the people now, the older people who are still there are moving out are trying to pass it down to their kids. And in many cases they don't have the money to do a full renovation, but they're they're doing some fix up and this will hurt them. You know, they're giving it to their grandkids, you know, to members of their family or they have family members who live on the property that don't have anywhere else to go, that they're trying to keep it for them. And so when things happen where there's repair needed or neighborhood services comes in and say you have to do certain things, it is additional burden on them to then have to go through another process. Have property taxes escalated there? Yes. That was a question. Many of them have more than double.   So you can imagine they look at it. Sometimes I'm mad. I look at the house values from a tax standpoint and it's I hope they can get the money for that. And then there are area houses on the periphery of that district that are suffering as well because of the houses there. Yes. So we have to be mindful of them too. Thank you so much. Other questions? Comments recognize Councilor Moffitt. Yes, if I can get all this in. First of all, I have a question for staff. And just just a curiosity here because of the obvious split in the neighborhood. When someone files a petition for a new district like this, what's the threshold of percentage of properties that have to be represented? Back in when this was done in 2010, I believe it was 25 percent. 25 percent. Is that different now? The process is different now. We don't specify a percent. The whole initiation process has changed. Okay. Yeah. Thank you. I want to appreciate everyone who spent time up to seven years working on this and especially people who came tonight, people who sent emails. When I first got on Council five years ago, this is one of the first things that people sought me out to talk about. It's actually sort of the second thing. But this is one of those that they sought me out to talk about. And there were people who were vigorously opposed to the idea of creating a district, which is one reason why we wound up sending it back to staff four years ago. And I want to comment that I love the obvious mutual respect of those in favor and those against. It's very rare to disagree without rank or these days. And I commend all of you for the way that you're approaching this. Rob Emerson from Preservation Durham talked about Golden Belt. That district, they worked, I think, very hard to inform and get people on board and no homeowner that I was aware of disagreed with the district at all. I'm not in a district, but I live very near one, Watts Hospital, Hillendale, and likewise they worked really hard. And I doubt, I don't think anybody spoke in opposition to it. I do have concerns about I am leaning against approving an expansion of this district because I have concerns about the number of people who are clearly opposed. And the burden, there's pluses and minuses have been pointed out. But the burden that it places on people who are not ready to accept those burdens. And so that's my leaning at this time. I look forward to hearing any other comments from my colleagues. Thank you for coming out. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I guess a couple of things probably about what's being proposed. And I too want to compliment all of the persons that have spoken this evening. I understand well the persons who are for this, irrational for it. I understand those that are opposed to it. I guess the first thing that struck me and Don sort of spoke to it, but the large number of persons that are in this area that are against it. That just, that's, that troubles me somewhat. The other piece is we just had a long discussion a couple of weeks ago about homeowners property bias having risen and then with the tax rates that have been set by the city and county, their property taxes have gone up. And at least my focus was on those areas where the city had the unintended consequences revalorized some of those neighborhoods. And as a consequence, those homeowners below median income that were in there had done nothing to the homes had the property bias entries and we're trying to find a way to mitigate against that. Almost see the same thing happening here. Here you have a district or site or location where the city hasn't gone anything going in there and done anything to actually help revalorize that neighborhood. We haven't built any new houses. We haven't done anything like we did over on Southside. But I could very easily see how by imposing the historic district has been overly, it's been proposed here. And I've heard people talk about how the property values have gone up. I could very easily see how some homeowners are saying, but not for you haven't done that. My values might not have gone up as much. I also have have a concern for persons who talk about people selling their properties of being forced to sell their properties because the all the values are going up so high people tend to move. That's an individual decision. I mean for African Americans in particular, probably the biggest asset that we have is in our homes. Is in our homes. And you know, we tend to hold on to those homes as long as we can. We also hold on so we can pass them on to persons in our families. They appreciate the value goes up. Maybe I don't need want to be there anymore. So I move. I move. But what I see in this particular situation where you have the vast number of people who don't want it. And then for whatever reason, we come along and I shouldn't say for whatever reason. We make a decision to impose that overlay.  They didn't ask for it. They weren't here tonight, but the survey has been done. And typically when we go through these zoning matters, we tend to listen to those of the for those of the against and try to rational how we make the decision. So I just have a problem in supporting. Put an overlay on a large district is this. Given the opposition that the survey says is there. More importantly, the impact that I think you can have on those persons who haven't made in the conscious effort to have that values. Rise. But they do rise. Constantly the taxes rise and you come back to the city and say, but not for what you've done. That wouldn't have happened. And to me, it puts us right back in this other situation that we deal with a couple of weeks ago. I really appreciate what those that have made the investment in this area have done. I appreciate the fact that it's been sort of a cordial. Yes, we support it. No, we don't support in some how you still get along. But I just have problems. Me personally of supporting that type of change for this large of a district with this many people who are opposed to it. And the subsequent consequences that I think could occur for those persons who live in there and don't want it. Don't want this. It's our district. And polls upon their properties. I recognize council release. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Question for staff. Do we have that actual vote totals when the current residents were uphold on this? The map shows us some colors. I could try to count them, but I'm really old. We got around 40 some responses and they were generally, yeah, it was maybe 49, 51, one way or the other. I don't have the specific numbers, but it was pretty evenly split. Okay. The materials that are attached to this agenda item include attachment number three, attachment A, which is the original petition. Is that correct? Yes. Are there pages that could be missing with other signatures on the petitioners? This is what we've got. These are the people that actually signed the petition back in 2010. As far as I'm aware, this is it. Okay. Mr. Netta? Okay. I just wanted to ask him why his signature and property address doesn't appear on the petition. That's all. Since he said he signed it, I just wanted, and that was pretty powerful commentary I thought for all of us as someone who signed it now wants to get out, but I'll maybe we'll have time to ask him that when he gets back in the room. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I thought he said he'd live one place and had properties in another place, but anyway. He definitely said he signed the petition. That address is not listed in the petition, neither is his name. The original petition you're speaking about. It's not listed on the original petition. Right. Since I've got the microphone, I'll go ahead and talk about the underlying matter before us. I'm not 100% certain why this matter took so long to get to this stage in the process. But I think it constitutes. I think 7 years has to constitute a failure at some level. And the failure is on the part of the city to the folks who came to us with this petition in the first place. I look at the materials before us. I took a look at the criteria that we use to determine whether or not these kinds of historic districts are appropriate. It seems to me that the district does have a sufficient number of historically significant residential structures that warrant protection. Seems that protecting those structures is consistent with our comprehensive plan. We have a petition before us that was the result of a lot of hard work and had the matter been put forward in a more reasonable timeframe. I think that we would have a different situation before us. Because I think the number of, because I do think there are a number of historically significant residential structures in the area. And because that is the purpose of this sort of district, I intend to vote in favor of the staff recommendation. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you. I'm going to close the public hearing. So I recognize all the council members who have comments. If not, I'm going to entertain a motion one way or another on the site. I'm sorry. If I may to help maybe guide in thinking about a motion at a minimum, not knowing which way council is thinking, but at a minimum plan would like to see at least a motion to approve at a baseline the technical updates to the preservation plan and possibly also the removal, the designation in area number four, if that's a baseline. And if there's going to be just, you don't want the expansion or just vote not to do expansion, that would be like just a baseline approval. And then obviously you can do whatever else you want. But we would like at least that. And we need to do the consistency statement as the first. The consistency would still be first. Right. So I'll move that we approve the consistency. Second. It's been properly moved. It's been properly moved. Second. All in favor of motion indicate by saying aye. Aye. Those opposed. Motion passes. unanimously. I'll move that we remove the existing historic designation on 208 north Elizabeth Street labeled as area four. Second. Can you state the address again for 208 north Elizabeth Street? Do you also want to move the technical correct or the technical updates to the preservation? Yes. And the technical updates to the preservation area. I'll second all that. It's been properly moved. Second. All in favor of motion indicate by saying aye. Aye. Aye. Those opposed. Motion passes unanimously. So then I'll move that we expand the historic district as petitioned except for 601 and 603 North Clean Street properties identified as area one and that we include the properties identified in area two and three in the expansion. Second that. Been properly moved. Second. Mr. Mayor. I can ask Councilor Moffitt. Point of clarification. There were additional properties that you talked about tonight, right? That are outside of one, two, three and four. The only ones that we raised to you were one, two, three and four. There are others who brought up their own properties. 311 Oakwood, 501 Oakwood, but those areas consideration were five lots on Gurley Street. Right. That's area two. Well, I'm sorry. The map in. Okay. There must be something. I have a different thing with different number twos on the corner of Ottawa. That'd be great. Thank you. So what you're looking at the hatched area is that area as petition that it actually does include the area as petition did include area number one. And from what I understand from the from Councilman Johnson's additional motion was to remove area one from that from the expansion. Area two is the Gurley Street and Mallard Street parcels. Area three is the Carl, the one Carlton parcel and the Oakwood parcel 312 Oakwood. And number four is what you already removed from the from the from the district designation. And my understanding is that that's the staff recommendation is to exclude area one include area two and area three. That's correct. Recognize there's a motion to second and comment. Recognize Councilman Schuyl. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This is a hard decision. I really appreciate everybody being here for it. I have been really torn about this and trying to figure it out. In the end, I do think that the danger of tear downs is is is very significant. And we're seeing it all over town and large single family, very large single family dwellings going up, including in areas which are, you know, historic districts can still happen, but it does take longer. I also think that, you know, this I understand what people are saying about the fact that it can visit additional hardship on people. I live in a historic district. There are I recently, I don't know, a couple years ago made a change to a foundation simply replacing it with the similar materials. I did have to go downtown. It was instantly approved, but I can appreciate that that was easier for me than it is for some people. And I think Chris Dick, you made that point. I get that. And so I think it's a it's this is a close call. But I think that for me, the trade off is that I think the danger of the tear downs is very really significant. I think that we do want to be preserving our our, you know, the these are some of the most, you know, these are wonderful historic houses and the Durham's so much of what's good about Durham is built on the attractiveness of our historical structures and the way we have used them. So I'll be voting for this, but I will say that I appreciate the opponents. It is a very close call for me. Thank you. Steve, could I ask you a question on that, please? Sure. You mentioned tear downs. So if I'm living in one of these structures, I own it. I've been there for half a long. And I suddenly decided that I can't live there anymore. And I have an opportunity to sell the structure to allow me to move away or whatever. And I sell to someone. And they want to tear down. You have a problem for that. I mean, that's that's that's that's what I'm trying to understand. You have a problem that my structure, my house that I've spent whatever time and it kept it up as best I could. I now have an opportunity to attain some value out of it for personal reasons. And it so happens that the person I'm going to sell it to says, I don't want that. I want something else. And so you're going to die me the opportunity to sell my house. So this person wants to tear it down because you don't like to see tear downs. I'm missing something. Yes. Okay. Well, that's fine. That's why I asked the question. Well, I'll just give you my point of view. Okay. So we have that situation in my neighborhood now. You can sell your house and if someone it takes a year to tear it down, but you can still tear it. But I think that the if you're living in this neighborhood and you want to sell your house and let's say you're living in a small one of the small bungalows that have been described. Those are and you've been living there for a significant amount of time. You're still going to realize a very large, you know, increase in value. If you sell it simply for the use that it's, you know, that it's been made of it already. So I don't think we're depriving people of the right to make a profit on their home. And I don't think it's any different than anything else than any other of our historic districts, except maybe that it might be more favorable to you than some of our other districts because we have we have this because the the appreciation of property has been so significant. So that's what I'd say. So it's not to tear down your mind tearing it down if it takes a year to tear it down. That's fine. Is that what you're saying? I'm saying that I think it gives people the opportunity for a thoughtful process. So again, I'll use just an example from my neighborhood, where there was someone who brought a bought a old house that they had planned to tear it down. The historic commission that went to the historic commission historic commission put a year away on it. Not exactly sure that the right terminology. The there was a lot of, you know, good work and discussion done about that. And the people the the houses are still remains they've put on a really nice addition. And I think everybody's happy about it. So I think it gives a delay to give people the opportunity for thoughtful consideration. So again, you aren't still seems to me that you don't care about the tear down. You just don't want to torn down within a year. You want to take a year before you tear it down. I think that the fact that you get a year makes it less likely that the tear down will occur. Okay, I guess I differ on that. People that have the money that want the property will probably be willing to wait a year to make that. But anyway, I need to hear another there. I think we've had a healthy discussion this item recognized Councilman Davis. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'm a little bit torn also. And I we've spent a lot of time on this Council talking about affordable housing and making sure that we don't want to put people who feel that so called gentrification is pushing them out of the neighborhoods. So I'm I want us to be consistent. And for that reason, and the whole idea that many of the people who might have to leave the neighborhood because of issues around gentrification would suffer. So I'm going to be opposed to the plan that's on the table now in the motion. Okay, Councilman. Yes, thank you. I do want to say I think as we saw with proponents and opponents and discussion on council, there's good arguments on both sides of this issue. Ultimately, what I've realized is the most compelling item for me. The case was raised that had this been addressed much earlier that there'd be likely be more support for seven years ago at its peak. The petitioners were able to get signatures representing only 26% of the acreage, only 28% of the number of lots. And this is a significant change in the use restrictions on these properties. And I don't find it compelling that that just over a quarter of the people that this will be imposed upon were supportive of it at the time that it had its potential to be imposed on the property. At the time the petition was submitted, and what we've been told is it's most support. So I will be voting against it tonight. Thank you. Councilman, I have no further discussion on the call and question on the motion. All in favor of the motion as well. Those opposed, indicate by saying nay. No. It's four to three if you want to get that. Those that are opposed, can you raise the hands? Opposed? Yeah. You have it? Okay, thank you. We're going to move to the next item. Is there anything else that the staff needs? Item 16, zoning map change, Fletcher's meal. Thank you, Jacob Wiggins with the planning department. The zoning map change request has been received from SP Fletcher's meal for one parcel located at 2018 Fletcher's meal road. This site is currently his own residential role and the applicant is requesting to change that designation to plan development residential 1.964 or PDR 1.964. The development plan associated with this application commits to a maximum of 68 single family residential units at the site. There has been one technical correction to the development plan. The plan in your packet shows a portion of a project boundary buffer in the Duke power easement. We caught that late last week that has since been shifted outside of the power easement so that it complies with the UDO requirements. Some key commitments on the proposed development plan include side access points, true preservation areas and project boundary buffers and riparian features. The planning commission recommended approval of this case by a vote of 13 to 0 at their April 11, 2017 hearing. Staff determines that the request is consistent with the comprehensive plan and applicable policies and ordinances. There will be two motions required for this item. The first motion would be for a consistency statement and the second would be for a zoning ordinance. I'm happy to answer any questions the council may have at this time. This is a public hearing. The public hearing is open. You've heard the staff report. I would ask other questions from the council, the staff. If not, we have one person that has sounded to speak on this item proponent, Patrick Becker. Before Patrick comes is there anyone else that wants to speak on this item? This has been a public hearing. I recognize Patrick Becker for three minutes. Good evening Mayor Bell, members of council. My name is Patrick Becker. I live at 2614 Steward Drive. I'm here representing the property owner, SCP, which is Shamrock Capital Partners, Fletcher's Mill LLC. I want to thank the planning department for the staff report and since we have the unanimous recommendation for approval from the planning commission, I'll refrain from my remaining two minutes and 47 seconds and just ask if you all have any questions. If not, we appreciate your time tonight. We respectfully ask for your approval. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Becker. Good to see you. Let me just ask these. I'll ask them together. The development is adding non-students to the population projected for Durham Public Schools and have you all considered what many developers have done of donating $500 per student to Durham Public Schools? No, I'm sorry councilmember Schruel, we haven't had a chance to consider that. I did note the schools that are being served by the schools that have served this development are Merrick Moore, Neal, and Southern. I was actually pleased that we had a development in this area because I personally tutored in Neal Middle School. I might have mentioned it to you. I'm pleased that we'll be having new homes built with those schools, but I'm sorry we haven't had a chance to debate that. I'm sorry, not debate it, but discuss that. I believe those schools are all, my impression is they're under capacity. I'm not sure if that's true. Yeah. You're also adding 68 new units of housing. Have you considered a contribution to the city's dedicated housing fund? No, sir. Would you consider such a contribution? I'm afraid my client is actually a venture capital fund out of Greensboro and they couldn't make it here tonight. I'm afraid I don't have the ability to authorize that at this point in time, but it is a very small increase in housing and it is on, you may have noticed it's actually on the edge of our suburban tier. We've actually segregated off a small portion of this site in the critical area and preserved that with absolutely no development whatsoever. So, given its location, given that we didn't consider that particular issue since most of the affordable housing issues are much closer to our downtown area. What do you think the price point of these houses might be? I really don't know, sir. I represent the property owner. They'll be working with home builders to determine that. I don't know. The houses in that area seem to have very reasonable price points. If you drive up and down Fletcher's Mill Road, most of them are brick ranch houses that were built in the decades after World War II. Okay, thank you. Thank you, sir. Although the persons don't want to speak, if not, I'm going to close the public hearing as a matter of fact before the council. Move the consistency. Oh, excuse me. Second. Okay. It's been property move in second. All in favor of the motion, indicate by saying aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Those opposed, the motion passes unanimously. Move the item. Second. It's been properly moved in second. All in favor of the motion, indicate by saying aye. Aye. Aye. Those opposed, the motion passes unanimously. Moved item 1817. Did I miss something? 1717. Zoning map change session law 2017-88 Wake County initial zonings. Thank you. Jacob Wiggins again with the playing department. June 29, 2017 to North Carolina General Assembly formally approved session law 2017-80 which annexed 56 areas known as donut holes. These are properties or portions of property under county jurisdiction which are completely surrounded by the city limit into the city of Durham effective June 30, 2017. 10 of these parcels are either wholly or partially within Wake County and are now subject to city of Durham zoning. Staff is recommending that the council apply the residential suburban 10 zoning district to these properties as this is a district that staff found is most similar to the current designation of residential four under the city of Raleigh's zoning jurisdiction. On August 8, 2017 the Durham Planning Commission recommended approval of this change by a vote of 10-0. Staff also recommends the RS-10 designation for these properties and I'm happy to answer any questions that you all may have at this time. Again, this is the public hearing. You've heard the staff report. The public hearing is open. I would ask for their questions. My members of the council hearing none. Is anyone in the public that wants to speak on this item? Let the record reflect no one in the public asks to speak on this item. I'll declare the public hearing to be closed as a matter of fact for the council. Second. It's been properly moved and second. All in favor of the motion, indicate by saying aye. Aye. Those opposed. The motion passes unanimously. Move the item. Second. It's been properly moved and second. All in favor of the motion, indicate by saying aye. Aye. Those opposed. The motion passes unanimously. We're now moved. Item 18. Zoning map change. Sessions law official. Jacob Wiggins again with the planning department. This item is for the Durham County or I should say the parcels located entirely within Durham County that were a part of session law 2017-80. This item would affect 411 parcels. Staff is recommending an exact translation for all county designated zoning. And staff recommends approval of that. Two motions would be required for this item. The first being a consistency statement and the second being the zoning ordinance. And I'm happy to answer any questions the council may have regarding this item. Again, this is a public hearing. The public hearing is open. You've heard the staff report. I would ask our questions by members of the council. We do have one person that's signed up to speak. I recognize Barbara Garmin. Is that correct? You have 3 minutes. Good evening. I apologize for my coughing interruptions. I've got a cute bronchitis. I'm in here. Could you just state your name and address me? Yeah, hi. I'm Barbara Garmin. I live at 4603 Hunters Ridge Trail in Durham. Hunters Ridge Trail is over off of Farrington Road for those who don't know where it is. I want to thank you all for everything that you do, but at the same time on July the 13th I came home and I had a letter from the city manager welcome me into the city of Durham. Thank you. Let us all add our welcome to that. It was to my surprise it was a result of the Senate State Bill number 266. All of you received an email from me on July the 20th. All of you did. I heard a response back from two of you. The bill, the way that it's written in this is the bill right here. It states that in the top it says as an act adding certain described property to the corporate city limits of the city of Durham because the property is completely surrounded by the city's corporate limits. My property as of June 20th was not surrounded or touching any city property and I really took issue with why did Durham have this as a North Carolina Senate bill vote in the house of North Carolina? Why did the representatives of Mecklenburg, Uncombe County, Wayne County have a concern about my property being in the city of Durham? That bothered me a lot because I was real concerned that why didn't this panel take care of it? And then I did a little bit more research and I found out that three or four years ago it was put before our state representative, Mr. McKenzie to put this on the floor then. Well now it was started in March of this year that Mr. McKenzie had it and there were three readings on this particular state bill 266. And it went through. After speaking with two of the council people on the telephone, I was told that y'all were totally unaware it was even in Raleigh on the floor. And I'm like that was very concerning to me that the city council people don't even know what's going on with the city of Durham over in Raleigh. That bothered me. And so I've got five pages here and I think I'm on page six now and I don't know where I am. But I was just real concerned about it and I don't see why my property, which is not connected to the city properties anywhere, why you want me. I got four acres that back up to the Federal Reserve Plain of Jordan Lake Watershed to a property. I've got the maps here. Anything I've got I'll be happy to share with you. I started to make copies but I'm not really sure how many copies to make. But it I apologize. Basically this is my property. This is the Jordan Lake flood plan back here. Excuse me just a minute. Let it take five minutes. Thank you. This is the flood. This is an HOA homeowner association for the Prescott Place. They do not pay city taxes. This eight acres right here. They don't pay city taxes. The Federal Government doesn't pay city taxes. My property is right here. And I am not. No, that's the licking size. This is my property here. I am not surrounded by city property anywhere. My closest city neighbor is here. This gentleman is not. This I'm not. These people are not. So please explain to me why this bill reads in the top it is surrounded by city limits. I'm not. I am on a fixed income. I am 66 years old. I went to Hawaii Smith over on Drive Avenue. I went to Holton. I graduated Durham High. I'm a Durham Mike. I'm proud of it. I understand a lot of the statements that are made in here tonight. I read on how to speak to the city council and they said don't get emotional but it is emotional to me. My family has been in that house 36 years. I now have to consider putting it on the market because the city taxes, the assessment raised my house payment $100 last year. Now I can only imagine what my escrow is going to be with my house payment which I cannot afford on a fixed income of self security. I want to continue raising my grandchildren there. Got swing sets. We got hiking trails. And I don't know what to do because I've been told that once it goes by state bill there's nothing you can do. So I don't understand it and it's bothersome. And the shame that it went to Raleigh on the floor and my city council didn't even know it. I'm sorry. You're good. Miss Garmin. I just want to clarify one thing and then ask you a question. But first of all I want to say I really appreciate you coming down here. I know we all do. And we're very sympathetic to your situation. We're not unsympathetic to it. I want you to hear that. So we didn't know it was on the floor. It's true but it is also true that it has been something that we as a city council have wanted. It's not that Senator McKissack went off by himself and did something that we hadn't already wanted because and the reason it's done is that it's hard to render good service. Think about fire service for example. If you don't exactly know who's in charge of it and that's what these donut holes have created. It's an inability for us to render good public safety service and fire service and other things like that to people who are inside them or just maybe on the other side of them because we haven't known who should be getting there and when they should be getting there and so it's been complicated. And we want to render good emergency service and fire service and police service to people. That's one of the underlying reasons. But my question is, have you availed yourself of the circuit breaker, the tax circuit breaker because if you are on a fixed income, your own social security and fixed income and you're 66 years old, you should be able to qualify for the county's circuit breaker which applies both city and county taxes. Yeah, I have that print out here. I don't qualify. I have a three-quarter job because I like to say employed. Sure. And I have fixed income but I also have a three-quarter part-time job and my salary puts me out. Understand. And I'm proud of what I do. I'm proud of having standards and morals. I was raised to take responsibility. Sure. And I will and I do. But now the opportunity to do that's been taken away from me. You know, right now where the solid waste container comes to the property closest to me is 600 feet away and I've been told that the waste container trucks will not come down there. I have to drag my container if it's full which is over 100 pounds over 600 feet down an incline and up an incline. I can't do it. Well, in that case we do have someone can come get it for you. I'm sure the manager. I need to know how to do that. I know that I'm a quarter mile off Farrington Road. I am not going to get city water and sewer anytime. Probably not in my lifetime. I appreciate the 50% discount the city and water that you're going to give me on taxes but I don't think I saw it reflected on my tax bill. How come y'all can't extend that 50% a little bit longer until it's on the books and planned? Even that would help. I don't because the city water is at 24.7% and it's a little pie chart. And the way I read it and the way I look at it, I've done a lot of homework on this ladies and gentlemen. I'm aware of everything. And you know the 24.7% for the city and water, thank you for the 50% you'll give me for one year but I don't think it was applied to my tax bill. I would like to know if it was. Let me try something else and I'm not the attorney. This is the attorney sitting next to Dr. Baker. I'm Mr. Baker. I guess the question is if in fact the property doesn't meet the requirements then is there an acceptance of that? I mean specifically we were talking about she as we said we were talking about it. Okay, thank you. Just to clarify, Ms. Harmon's property itself was not directly adjacent to the corporate limits however she was part of a group of three or four properties. Those themselves comprised. In the middle of other properties that are part of Donut Hole. Yes it was a group of properties including hers which constituted the Donut Hole that was annexed as part of the legislation. And as I discussed with you, it reads if the property is surrounded. My property is not the way it's read. That's the question I was trying to get at. Yeah, I would agree with Ms. Harmon that the title is somewhat confusing. I think property is meant to be viewed as a plural in that regard. If you read further down in the bill starting at section one it says specifically that these properties are going to be annexed into the city of Durham I think that is the meat of the bill itself. So all of those properties that are listed are there. Let me ask it another way. Does her property meet the wording of the bill itself? No it does not. Okay, so if you, I'm sorry. I mean it doesn't meet the little wording of the bill. It does not meet that criteria. If you think property is a singular form as in just one particular piece of property. That's how it's written. So it seems to me notwithstanding the fact that we've listed it it doesn't meet that requirement. I assume that all these other properties do meet it. They don't? Okay, well I guess I'll back off then. I want to hear you talk some more. If I could jump in and the issue and I'm looking at the wording here it's the properties that are surrounded and I think we're getting mixed in between surrounded versus contiguous. Because if you look at the dot I'm not sure exactly which dot it is but that dot is a series of dots that are surrounded by the city limits. If it read that it is completely contiguous that's the difference. I accept that. Mr. Attorney. It's my understanding that when you read a piece of legislation the introduction and title of the bill those parts of the document aren't necessarily operative legal language. Is that correct? That's correct. The legal language of the bill itself indicates that the following parcels are incorporated into the city limits. Is that correct? That's correct. That's right. I think that may be part of the confusion here is that the title itself could have a greater error or a slight drafting ambiguity as this apparently does. And nonetheless the operative legal language of the bill which states that the following parcels will be incorporated into the city limits is correct and has effect regardless of what the title may or may not say. Mr. Mayor, the other thing I wanted to say since I forgot the microphone is that as my council, that's my colleague council member Shule has stated we're all sympathetic to what you've said and I was one of the folks that reached out to you and we had a conversation on email about this. I also copied Senator McKessick's office in the hope that someone from his staff would double check whether or not your particular lot was intended.  And so if the bill