raleigh city council regular session minutes - … · web viewraleigh city council regular session...

COUNCIL MINUTES

The City Council of the City of Raleigh met in a regular session at 1:00 p.m. on Tuesday, November 3, 2015 in the City Council Chamber, Room 201 of the Raleigh Municipal Building, Avery C. Upchurch Government Complex, 222 W. Hargett Street, Raleigh, North Carolina, with the following present.

Mayor Nancy McFarlane, PresidingMayor Pro Tem John OdomCouncilor Mary-Ann BaldwinCouncilor Kay C. CrowderCouncilor Bonner GaylordCouncilor Wayne K. Maiorano Councilor Russ StephensonCouncilor Eugene Weeks

Mayor McFarlane called the meeting to order and invocation was rendered by Rebi Eric M. Solomon, Beth Meyer Synagogue. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilor Maiorano. The following items were discussed with action taken as shown.

RECOGNITION OF SPECIAL AWARDS

PROCLAMATION – WORLD PANCREATIC CANCER DAY

Mayor McFarlane read a proclamation proclaiming World Pancreatic Cancer Day in the City of Raleigh. The Proclamation was accepted by Charles Croney, Volunteer with the Pancreatic Cancer Action Network.

AGENCY GRANTEE PRESENTATION – INTERNATIONAL FOCUS INC. - COMMENTS RECEIVED

Barta Al Chacai – Powell, International Focus Inc. talked about the 30 year history and partnership between International Focus Inc. and the City of Raleigh. She expressed appreciation for the City of Raleigh’s help, spoke briefly to the mission of their group and pointed out they recently celebrated their 30th anniversary with the annual event held at the Raleigh Convention Center.

CONSENT AGENDA

CONSENT AGENDA – APPROVED AS AMENDED

Mayor McFarlane presented the consent agenda indicating all items are considered to be routine and may be enacted by one motion. If a Councilor requests discussion on an item, the item will be removed from the consent agenda and considered separately. She explained the vote on the consent agenda will be a roll call vote. Mayor McFarlane stated she had received a request from

November 3, 2015

Mr. Gaylord to withdraw the budget amendment relating to Lower Longview Lake dredging project. Without objection, the item was removed from the consent agenda. Ms. Baldwin moved approval of the consent agenda as amended. Her motion was seconded by Mr. Gaylord and a roll call vote resulted in all members voting in the affirmative. The Mayor ruled the motion adopted on an 8-0 vote. The items on the Consent Agenda were as follows.

FRANCHISE AGREEMENT – PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF NORTH CAROLINA – APPROVED ON SECOND AND FINAL READING

The City Council adopted Ordinance 2015-503, approving a 30-year franchise agreement with Public Service Company of North Carolina, following a public hearing on October 20, 2015.

It would be appropriate for the Council to adopt the franchise ordinance on a second and final reading. Upheld on Consent Agenda Baldwin/Gaylord - 8 ayes.

CALENDAR – 2016 COUNCIL MEETING SCHEDULED – APPROVED

Council members received the following proposed schedule for meetings of the City Council during Calendar Year 2016.

CITY OF RALEIGH2016 CITY COUNCIL MEETING SCHEDULE

DAY/DATE TYPE OF MEETING TIMETuesday, January 5, 2016 City Council 1:00 pm

7:00 pmTuesday, January 19, 2016 Work Session

City Council11:30 am1:00 pm

Tuesday, February 2, 2016 City Council 1:00 pm7:00 pm

Tuesday, February 16, 2016 Work Session City Council

11:30 am1:00 pm

Tuesday, March 1, 2016 City Council 1:00 pm7:00 pm

Tuesday, March 15, 2016 Work Session City Council

11:30 am1:00 pm

Tuesday, April 5, 2016 City Council 1:00 pm7:00 pm

Tuesday, April 19, 2016 Work Session City Council

11:30 am1:00 pm

Tuesday, May 3, 2016 City Council 1:00 pm7:00 pm

Tuesday, May 17, 2016 Work Session City Council

11:30 am1:00 pm

November 3, 2015

Tuesday, June 7, 2016 City Council 1:00 pm7:00 pm

Tuesday, June 21, 2016 Work Session City Council

11:30 am1:00 pm

Tuesday, July 5, 2016 City Council 1:00 pm7:00 pm

Tuesday, July 19, 2016 Work Session City Council

11:30 am1:00 pm

Tuesday, August 2, 2016 City Council 1:00 pm7:00 pm

Tuesday, September 6, 2016 City Council 1:00 pm7:00 pm

Tuesday, September 20, 2016 Work Session City Council

11:30 am1:00 pm

Tuesday, October 4, 2016 City Council 1:00 pm7:00 pm

Tuesday, October 18, 2016 Work Session City Council

11:30 am1:00 pm

Tuesday, November 1, 2016 City Council 1:00 pm7:00 pm

Tuesday, November 15, 2016 Work Session City Council

11:30 am1:00 pm

Tuesday, December 6, 2016 City Council 1:00 pm7:00 pm

November 18, 2016 – General Elections

Recommendation: Adopt the 2016 Meeting schedule. Upheld on Consent Agenda Baldwin/Gaylord - 8 ayes.

BUDGET REVIEW SCHEDULE – 2016 – APPROVED

The proposed budget review schedule includes dates that are statutorily required (City Manager’s Proposed Budget presentation and public hearing) and those that have been used in the annual budget process by custom and tradition (work sessions and the pre-budget hearing). The schedule serves to notify the public of the upcoming budget review process. The Council and the City Manager may revise or add to the schedule at a later date. The following schedule is proposed for the FY 2016-17 budget review process:

Pre-Budget Hearing by City Council: January 5, 2016, 7:00 p.m. City Council Budget Work Sessions:

o Monday, February 29, 2016, 1:00 pmo Monday, March 21, 2016, 1:00 pmo Wednesday, April 6, 2016, 1:00 pm

November 3, 2015

Presentation of Proposed Operating Budget and Proposed Capital Improvement Program: May 17, 2016

Public Hearing on budget proposals: June 7, 2016, 7:00 p.m.

City Council Budget Work Sessions:o Monday, June 6, 2016, 4:00 pmo Monday, June 13, 2016, 4:00 pmo Monday, June 20, 2016, 4:00 pm (if needed)o Monday, June 27, 2016, 4:00 pm (if needed)

Recommendation: Adopt the annual budget review schedule. Upheld on Consent Agenda Baldwin/Gaylord - 8 ayes.

HALIFAX ATHLETIC FIELD – LEASE OF SPACE – MANAGER AUTHORIZED TO EXECUTE

On September 14, 1971, the City entered into a 40-year lease agreement with the Raleigh Housing Authority for property at Halifax Court to be developed and managed by as a community center and park. The original lease expired in September 2011. Both parties desired to continue with the mutually beneficial relationship resulting in leases being executed in November 2011.

Corresponding to the expiration of the original 40-year lease was the reinvestment by the City into the community center that serves the Halifax community. At that time it was the desire of the Raleigh Housing Authority to subdivide the parcel that housed the original Halifax Community Center and athletic field; as a result, two leases were executed in 2011. The community center space continued the 40-year term while the space that accommodates the athletic field was reduced to four years.

The current lease for the athletic field is set to expire in November 2015 and both parties desire for this mutually beneficial relationship to continue. The lease agreement is for four years, through 2019, at a cost of $1 per year.

Recommendation: Authorize the City Manager to execute the lease agreement. Upheld on Consent Agenda Baldwin/Gaylord - 8 ayes.

GIS SOFTWARE- ESRI, INC. – AMENDMENT NUMBER THREE – APPROVED

The City currently utilizes Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc. (ESRI) as the provider for the enterprise Geographic Information System (GIS) software. The current license is an Enterprise License Agreement (ELA) for a term of three years. A contract amendment for an additional three years of software licensing is proposed, which will continue to provide unlimited access to the software and maintenance included in the agreement by all departments. Funding for the contract amendment is appropriated in the FY2016 department operating budget.

November 3, 2015

Name of Project: GIS Software – Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc. (ESRI)

Managing Division: Information Technology – IT Application SupportRequest Reason: Contract amendment approval (contract

amendments >$150,000)Cause of Contract Amendment: Contract amendment – enterprise license agreementVendor: Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc.

(ESRI)Prior Contract Activity: Original contract $825,000 (three-year total)Amendment One (Administrative): Change of scope, no amountAmendment Two (Administrative): Change of scope, no AmountCurrently Encumbered: $0Amount of this Contract Amendment: $1,100,000 (three-year total or through December

2018)Encumbered with this Approval: $350,000 (December 2015-December 2016)

Recommendation: Authorize the City Manager to execute contract amendment number three in an amount not to exceed $1,100,000. Upheld on Consent Agenda Baldwin/Gaylord - 8 ayes.

TRAFFIC CALMING PROJECT – T.A. LOVING CHANGE ORDER #3 – APPROVED

The Public Utilities Department is currently under contract with T.A. Loving for the 2013 Water Main Replacement and Brookside Drive Traffic Calming projects. The existing project scope involves replacement of aging undersized water and sewer lines within Glascock Street and Brookside Drive, along with the traffic calming project for Brookside Drive.

It would be advantageous to add the Glascock Traffic Calming project to this work as the limits of the two projects coincide and the contractor will have mobilized in the vicinity of the traffic calming project. T.A. Loving performed the unit-price contract for the Brookside Drive Traffic Calming project and the unit prices for the additional scope of work for the Glascock project are the same, with the exception of new contract items. Pricing for new items are competitive with recent bid prices.

Contract History:Name of Project: 2013 Water Main Replacements; Brookside Traffic

CalmingManaging Division: Public Utilities – Capital Improvements DivisionRequest Reason: Contract amendment approval (Contract

Amendment >$150,000)Vendor: T.A. Loving CompanyPrior Contract Activity: 1,993,724 (Approved by City Council September 2,

2014)Amendment One: $635,477(Approved by City Council June 15, 2015)Amendment Two: $485,437Currently Encumbered: $3,114,638

November 3, 2015

Amount of this Contract Change Order: $796,960Encumbered with this Approval: $3,911,598

Recommendation: Authorize City Manager to execute contract change order in the amount not to exceed $796,960. Upheld on Consent Agenda Baldwin/Gaylord - 8 ayes.

TRIP MANAGEMENT – RIDE RIGHT, LLC AMENDMENT #2 – APPROVED

The City has an existing contract with Ride Right, LLC to provide live dispatch, taxi invoice validation, and invoice payment services for the Accessible Raleigh Transportation program. Amendment number two will extend the contract by six months. Ride Right, LLC does not provide transportation services; passenger trips are provided by approximately thirty-five taxi companies and one prime vendor.

Name of Project: Trip ManagementManaging Division: Public Works – Transportation Operations/TransitApproval Requested: Contract AmendmentReason for City Council Review: Contract Amendment >$150,000 Original Contract Amount: $67,272Vendor: Ride Right, LLCPrior contract activity: Original Contract $67,272, Amendment Number

One $67,272Amount of this amendment: $67,272New Project Budget: $201,816Reason for this amendment: To extend term by six months and have the contract

renewable on a fiscal year basis.Encumbered with this approval: $67,272Anticipated future amendments: NoneBudget transfer required: None

Recommendation: Authorize the City Manager to execute the contract amendment in an amount not to exceed $67,272. Upheld on Consent Agenda Baldwin/Gaylord – 8 ayes.

TRANSIT - WAKE COUNTY COORDINATED TRANSPORTATION SERVICES – CONTRACT APPROVED

The City has an existing contractual arrangement with Wake County transit to enhance employment related transportation options in the county and to provide transportation services for seniors and persons with disabilities. The service is provided by Wake Coordinated Transportation Services (WCTS).

As required for grant eligibility, services provided to seniors and persons with disabilities must be above and beyond what is currently required by the Americans with Disabilities Act. Staff has identified grant funding which is required to be returned if not utilized and recommends

November 3, 2015

reallocation of this grant funding source to renew the agreement with WCTS for the services identified above. Funding is appropriated in the grant fund.

Name of Project: Enhanced Employment Related Transportation Options within Wake County

Managing Division: Public Works – Transportation Operations/TransitApproval Requested: Contract ServicesReason for City Council Review: Initial contract >$150,000 Original Contract Amount: $199,900Vendor: Wake Coordinated Transportation ServicesPrior contract activity: NoneProject Budget: $199,900Encumbered with this approval: $199,900Anticipated future amendments: NoneBudget transfer required: None

Recommendation: Authorize the City Manager to execute the contract with Wake Coordinated Transportation Services in an amount not to exceed $199,900. Upheld on Consent Agenda Baldwin/Gaylord - 8 ayes.

ENCROACHMENT – BELVIN DRIVE – APPROVED CONDITIONALLY

A request has been received from Ashton Raleigh Residential to install a storm drain system located in the right-of-way of Belvin Drive. A report was included with the agenda packet.

Recommendation: Approve the encroachment subject to completion of a liability agreement and documentation of proof of insurance by the applicant. Upheld on Consent Agenda Baldwin/Gaylord - 8 ayes.

BUDGET AMENDMENT – LAUREL HILLS PARK – APPROVED – ORDINANCE ADOPTED

The Frankie Lemmon Foundation has donated $8,500 to assist with construction of the Sassafras Playground at Laurel Hills Park.

Recommendation: Authorize a budget amendment in the amount of $8,500. Accounting detail was included in the agenda packet. Upheld on Consent Agenda Baldwin/Gaylord - 8 ayes. See Ordinance 505 TF 263.

SMITH CREEK INTERCEPTOR SEWER IMPROVEMENTS – PARK CONSTRUCTION OF NC/CHANGE ORDER # 3 - APPROVED

Eight construction bids were received on June 19, 2014 for the Smith Creek Interceptor Improvements project. This project will parallel or replace the existing Smith Creek Interceptor sewer line in Wake Forest from Wait Avenue to the Smith Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant

November 3, 2015

for the future flow capacities of year 2035. The project will install approximately 43,445 linear feet of 36-inch, 30-inch, 24-inch, 20-inch, 18-inch, 16-inch, and 8-inch sewer lines. On July 15, 2014, council approved and awarded the contract to Park Construction of NC, Inc. in the amount of $7,897,113.

The Smith Creek construction contract provided for an amount of rock excavation due to geotechnical reports during the design phase but much more extensive geotechnical borings during the construction phase indicates rock excavation overages; change order number three in the amount of $418,277 will provide for these overages at the current contract prices. The Smith Creek Greenway along the sewer project corridor north of Rogers Road and adjacent to Heritage Greens Drive receives considerable flooding and will require additional grading and drainage work to drain the area properly. Change order number three will also provide for conflicts with Wake EMC underground power facilities and additional sewer repairs.

Contract History:Name of Project: Smith Creek Interceptor Sewer

ImprovementsManaging Division: Public Utilities – Capital Improvements

DivisionRequest Reason: Contract Amendment Approval (Contract

Amendment >$150,000)Vendor: Park Construction of N.C.Prior Contract Activity: $7,897,113 (Approved by City Council July

15, 2014)Amendment One: $93,712Amendment Two: $327,043Currently Encumbered: $8,317,868Amount of this Contract Change Order: $418,277Encumbered with this Approval: $8,736,145

Recommendation: Authorize City Manager to execute contract change order in the amount not to exceed $418,277. Upheld on Consent Agenda Baldwin/Gaylord- 8 ayes.

TRANSFER – OFFICE RENOVATIONS/CITY ATTORNEY – APPROVED

A transfer in the amount of $62,000 is recommended to support the construction of enclosed office space for attorneys for improved confidentiality, adequate personnel space, and material review in a secure setting.

Recommendation: Authorize a budget transfer in the amount of $62,000. Accounting detail was included with the agenda packet. Upheld on Consent Agenda Baldwin/Gaylord - 8 ayes. See Ordinance 505 TF 263.

November 3, 2015

WALNUT CREEK LIFT STATION PUMP STATION IMPROVEMENT PHASE TWO – CROWDER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY – APPROVED

Four construction bids were received for the Walnut Creek Lift Station Screw Pump Station Improvements Phase Two Rehabilitation project. This project involves the rehabilitation of the five Archimedes’ screws and other appurtenances at the Walnut Creek Lift Station.

Crowder Construction Company, Inc. submitted the lowest responsive bid in the total amount of $4,765,000 with 2.69 percent Small Disadvantage Minority and Women Owned Business (SDMWOB) participation.

Name of Project: Rehabilitation of Crabtree Creek North Bank Interceptor Sewer FY 2015 Improvements

Managing Division: Public Utilities – Capital Improvements Management Division

Approval request: Bid AwardReason for Council review: Formal Bid AwardOriginal CIP Budget: $5,800,000Construction Bid Award: $4,765,000Vendor: Crowder Construction Company Prior Contract History: N/AEncumbered with this approval: $4,765,000

Recommendation: Award the bid to Crowder Construction Company in the amount not to exceed $4,765,000. Authorize the City Manager to execute the contract. Upheld on Consent Agenda Baldwin/Gaylord – 8 ayes.

SANDY FORKS ROAD – CONTRACT AWARDED TO CAROLINA SUNROCK, LLC

This project includes the widening of Sandy Forks Road between Six Forks Road and Falls of Neuse Road. The project includes widening the road to a two-lane median divided Avenue (or three-lane undivided Avenue) with curb and gutter, bike lanes, and sidewalks along both sides. The project was advertised on July 27, 2015 and a total of five bids were received on September 3, 2015. The lowest bid received was from Devere Construction Company, Inc. However, following a subsequent request for additional information, Devere’s bid was rejected by staff in accordance with G.S. 143-129 due to non-responsiveness in the information provided, past performance on projects with the City, and other related factors. A copy of the letter with further details on the rejected bid was included in the agenda packet.

The second lowest bid received was from Carolina Sunrock, LLC with a base bid of $6,982,891, Alternate One bid of $6,987,095, and Alternate Two bid of $7,082,891. These bids were 7.8 percent, 8.0 percent, and 5.7 percent higher than the Engineer’s Estimate.

Alternate One was an alternate pavement design for some temporary pavement that was solely for price comparison to the base bid and is being eliminated from consideration since it did not

November 3, 2015

provide a cost savings. There were a total of 12 optional items included in Alternate Two, which included sustainable construction practices related to the Greenroads certification that is being pursued on this project. Six of these line items were provided pricing by Carolina Sunrock totaling $100,000. This equates to an additional 0.9 percent of the total project cost to implement all six optional sustainability related items priced by the Contractor. The estimated Small Disadvantaged Minority and Women Owned Business (SDMWOB) participation is 16.5 percent of the total bid including Alternate Two. Funding is appropriated in the capital budget and transfers will be made administratively.

Name of Project: Sandy Forks Road Widening ProjectManaging Division: Public Works – Design/Construction DivisionApproval Requested: Bid AwardReason for Council Review: Formal Bid AwardConstruction Bid Award: $7,082,891Vendor: Carolina Sunrock, LLCPrior Contract Activity: NoneEncumbered with this approval: $7,082,891

Recommendation: Award the bid to Carolina Sunrock, LLC, including the six line items (1, 2, 7, 9, 10, and 12) in Alternate Two, in an amount not to exceed $7,082,891 and authorize the City Manager to execute the contract. Upheld on Consent Agenda Baldwin/Gaylord - 8 ayes.

TRANSYLVANIA AVENUE IMPROVEMENTS – BID AWARDED TO CAROLINA SUNROCK, LLC

This project consists of petitioned improvements to construct a 27-foot back to back street section including curb, gutters, drains, and paving with assessments to apply was authorized by City Council on October 15, 2013. During design of the project, it was also determined that the work would include replacement of the water and sewer mains along the corridor due to the age of the existing infrastructure.

The project was bid on October 1, 2015 and a total of six bids were received. The lowest bid received is from Carolina Sunrock, LLC for $1,169,027 which is 12 percent lower than the Engineer’s Estimate of $1,340,315.

Business Assistance Program Office has certified and accepted the use of Small Disadvantaged Minority and Women Owned Business (SDMWOB) at 11 percent for the project. Funds are available in the capital budget and transfers will be handled administratively.

Name of Project: Transylvania Avenue Improvement ProjectManaging Division: Public Works – Design/Construction DivisionApproval Requested: Bid AwardReason for Council Review: Formal Bid AwardConstruction Bid Award: $1,169,027Vendor: Carolina Sunrock, LLC

November 3, 2015

Prior Contract Activity: NoneEncumbered with this approval: $1,169,027

Recommendation: Award the bid to Carolina Sunrock, LLC in an amount not to exceed $1,169,027 and authorize the City Manager to execute the contract. Upheld on Consent Agenda Baldwin/Gaylord – 8 ayes.

TRAFFIC – VARIOUS CHANGES – ORDINANCE ADOPTED

The agenda presented the following recommended changes in the traffic code.

It is recommended that the speed limit be reduced from 35 mph to 25 mph on Forest Road. Forest Road is classified as Neighborhood Local and is constructed to typical residential street standards. This request meets the requirements of the adopted Neighborhood Traffic Management Program. A signed petition has been received by staff representing at least 75 percent of the residents or property owners along each street in support of the speed reduction request.

It is recommended that a previously approved No Parking Anytime restriction on the east side of Brookside Drive from Edmund Street to the south property line of Conn Elementary School be amended to No Stopping No Standing, Monday through Friday 8:45 a.m. – 4:15 p.m. on school days.

Council had previously approved a recommendation from staff and the Raleigh Police Department in July to restrict parking on both sides of Brookside Drive, as well as some parking on two other streets, in order to improve the safety of the carpool procedure for the School. Since that time the school has informed staff it received almost no negative feedback from parents or nearby neighbors and staff has confirmed that the restrictions have helped reduce delays related to carpool and increased safety. The school principal is agreeable to a staff-proposed revision that would relax the current restriction on the east side portion of Brookside Drive to allow parking during non-school times.

It is recommended that a No Parking Zone be established along the west side of Paula Street from 11:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m., effective all nights. A request was received from the Raleigh Police Department that this zone be implemented due to congestion resulting from acts of public nuisance, fighting, and other criminal activities from the nightclubs across the street. The restriction will better enable the police to respond to emergencies. A signed petition was also received with six of the seven affected property owners in favor of the restriction.

Recommendation: Approve as recommended and authorize the appropriate changes in the traffic code as included in the agenda packet. Upheld on Consent Agenda Baldwin/Gaylord - 8 ayes. See Ordinance 506.

END OF CONSENT AGENDA

November 3, 2015

LOWER LONGVIEW LAKE – BUDGET AMENDMENT – APPROVED

A budget amendment in the amount of $300,000 is required to fund the design and construction of the Lower Longview Lake Dredging project. The project cost is estimated to be $300,000; in accordance with Council direction following the October 7, 2015 public hearing, abutting property owners will be assessed for 30 percent of the cost.

Recommendation: Authorize a budget amendment in the amount of $300,000. Accounting details were included with the agenda packet.

Mr. Gaylord stated he had withdrawn this from the consent agenda in order to be consistent with his vote against the project. Ms. Baldwin moved approval. Her motion was seconded by Ms. Crowder and a roll call vote resulted in all members voting in the affirmative except Councilors Maiorano and Gaylord who voted in the negative. The Mayor ruled the motion adopted on 6-0 vote. See Ordinance 505 TF 263.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION

TC-7-15 – SHORT TERM RESIDENTIAL LODGING – REFERRED BACK TO PLANNING COMMISSION

This is a request that amends Sections 6.1.4. of the Part 10A Raleigh Unified Development Ordinance to create a new use called “short term residential lodging.” A definition and use standards have been created for the use. Additionally, Section 6.2.2.B is being modified to clarify that the Boardinghouse use is intended as a residential use and as such is not a short term residential rental. Section 10.2.7 of the UDO is also being modified to clarify which vehicular surface area expansions are plot plans and which are site plans.

The Planning Commission finds the proposal is consistent with several pertinent policies of the Comprehensive Plan.

The Commission recommends approval of the request. Staff recommends that a public hearing be scheduled for December 1, 2015. Planning Commission Chair Schuster represented the recommendation pointing out the Planning Commission worked hard on this and tried to find a balance. He stated there is a lot of emotion involved in this item and he feels what is being recommended is a good balance.

Ms. Crowder stated she would like a little more information before going to public hearing with this item. She stated she feels it is important to have more definitions and pointed out she would like to have a requirement for this type use to be by special use permit. She questioned what an onsite manager looks like, who is an on-site manager, how do you contact the on site manager, other requirements, etc. Mayor McFarlane questioned if the definition of an on-site manager is spelled out with Mr. Schuster indicating it was not but they would be glad to give more definition.

November 3, 2015

Mr. Odom expressed concern about TC-7 in general pointing out he feels this is a zoning issue. He stated if someone has an extra room because their children had moved out, etc. and they want to rent a room out, that is one thing but that is not where this proposal is going. He stated he feels this proposal if adopted will legalize houses that he has worked so hard to try to get closed down. He just feels it is a zoning issue.

Ms. Crowder talked about affordable housing and what can happen when we all of a sudden have a disconnect and people it to subside their income and it can be a very attractive way to become a residential businesses and she just feels a need for more clarification.

Ms. Baldwin moved that the item be authorized for public hearing. Ms. Crowder expressed concern pointing out she would rather look at this further, have more definitions, etc. for onsite managers. Ms. Baldwin questioned if that information could be brought to the public hearing. Mr. Odom suggested sending the item back to the Planning Commission for additional definition, descriptions, etc. and so moved. Mr. Stephenson talked about the need for onsite management, rules, regulations, how to enforce the rules and regulation, how to enforce the rules and regulations, etc. He stated he likes the idea of BNB’s and he uses them when possible. He stated may be we should look at an overlay is used in front yard parking so that a community could opt in or opt out rather than legitimize the use of this type lodging city wide. He talked about the court case in Asheville and San Francisco and pointed out he doesn’t see the need to rush to get into something that we don’t have worked out to everyone’s satisfaction. He stated it may be that the General Assembly will decide what we can and cannot do with this type activity. He talked about the possibility of having short term rentals allowed as an overlay so that people can opt in and opt out. Ms. Crowder stated she would like to see more information on her concerns and the possibility of requiring a special use permit and seconded Mr. Odom’s motion. The motion to refer the item back to Planning Commission. The motion was put to a vote which resulted in all members voting in the affirmative except Ms. Baldwin who voted in the negative. The Mayor ruled the motion adopted on a 7-1 vote.

REZONING Z-34-15 – OAKLAND DRIVE – PUBLIC HEARING AUTHORIZED FOR NOVEMBER 17, 2015

This is a request rezone property from Residential-4 (R-4) to Residential-10-CU (R-10-CU).

While the proposal is inconsistent with the Future Land Use Map and Comprehensive Plan, it is consistent with several key Comprehensive Plan policies related to compact development, development impacts, and connectivity.

The proposed rezoning is reasonable and in the public interest. The proposal provides for additional housing options in a City Growth Center.

The Planning Commission recommends approval of the request. Staff suggests that a public hearing be scheduled for December 1, 2015. Mr. Gaylord indicated the applicant has requested that this public hearing be scheduled for November 17, 2015 and so moved. His motion was seconded by Mr. Weeks. Mr. Stephenson stated he does not object to the public hearing but

November 3, 2015

pointed out he will not support his case in its current configuration. He feels that it is inappropriate and additional work and consideration is needed. The motion as stated was put to a vote which resulted in all members voting in the affirmative. The Mayor ruled the motion adopted on an 8-0 vote.

REZONING – Z-35-15 – SIX FORKS ROAD – PUBLIC HEARING AUTHORIZED FOR NOVEMBER 17, 2015

This is a request to rezone property from Residential-4 (R-4) to Residential-10-Conditional Use (R-10-CU).

While the proposal is inconsistent with the Future Land Use Map and Comprehensive Plan, it is consistent with several key Comprehensive Plan policies related to compact development, development impacts, and connectivity.

The proposed rezoning is reasonable and in the public interest. The proposal provides for additional housing options in a City Growth Center and supports improved transit service through provision of a transit easement and concrete pad on Six Forks Road.

The Planning Commission recommends approval of the request. Staff suggests that a public hearing be scheduled for December 1, 2015. Mr. Gaylord stated that the applicant has requested that the public hearing be scheduled for November 17, 2015 and so move. His motion was seconded by Mr. Weeks. Mr. Stephenson stated he has no objection to the public hearing but pointed out he will not support this case in its current configuration. He feels it is inappropriate and additional work is needed. The motion as stated was put to a vote which resulted in all members voting in the affirmative. The Mayor ruled the motion adopted on an 8-0.

CAC – SCHEDULING/TRACKING – STAFF TO PROVIDE RECOMMENDATIONS

Planning Commission Chair Steve Schuster pointed out the Planning Commission values the input from the Citizen Advisory Councils (CAC). He pointed out the rules of the various CACs are different and they have different meeting dates, etc., which presents challenges for staff getting cases on their agendas timely, which results in issues getting before the Planning Commission and they have not received input from the CACs. This involves holding cases at the table until the item can get scheduled before the appropriate CAC. He again stated the input is valuable and it would be good if all of the CACs had common rules, etc. to follow as it relates to cases on which they need to provide input. He stated they would like to have some guidance from Council.

Councilor Stephenson indicated part of the problem is that the CACs need a staff report before they can consider a case. He pointed out he feels part of the problem is we do not have a tracking procedure to get the items through the CAC and up to the Planning Commission level, etc. He stated maybe staff needs to take some responsibility to get a tracking procedure in place so that the staff report would be completed prior to the CAC meeting.

November 3, 2015

Assistant Planning Director Crane pointed out staff does have a tracking procedure. He stated the problem comes in as the UDO required time frames between applicant submittal and delivery to the Planning Commission which causes many cases to go to the Planning Commission prior to getting the item on the appropriate CAC. He stated staff is bound by the code time frame. Mr. Stephenson indicated may be staff could bring back a recommendation for a text change relating to the timing, etc.

Mr. Odom pointed out the CAC’s were formed and put together by the City Council and they are to provide input to the City Council. He stated it is his understanding any person can go before the Planning Commission and give their opinion, they do not have to wait for the CAC meeting. He stated the CAC’s answer to the City Council not to the Planning Commission. He pointed out the Planning Commission is in an advisory board and the elected officials have more subjective authority. Ms. Crowder asked that the staff look at how the CAC operates as it relates to timing, etc., and bring a recommendation back to the City Council. Without objection the item was referred to Administration with that direction.

SPECIAL ITEMS

TC-8-15 – STREET CONNECTIVITY – TO BE PLACED ON NOVEMBER 17, 2015 AGENDA AS A SPECIAL ITEM

The following item appeared as a special item on the October 20, 2015 agenda. Without objection, it was directed that it be placed on this agenda for further consideration due to the fact that two Council members were absent.

During the October 7, 2015 Council meeting, a hearing was held to consider an ordinance to modify the street connectivity and street access standards in the City of Raleigh Unified Development Ordinance to permit the City Council to accept zoning conditions to alter block perimeter and site access standards in conjunction with a rezoning case. The hearing was closed and it was directed that the item be placed on this agenda for further consideration.

The Council may take action to approve, deny, or refer the text change to a committee.

Mayor McFarlane stated this item has been discussed quite a bit. Mr. Gaylord pointed out he feels the Council has been looking at this from the wrong prospective explaining the City Council maintains the authority to close streets stubs, etc., and can override the UDO in that respect. He stated however TC-8-15 gives that authority to private developers and he thinks the authority should reside with the publicly elected body not the private developer or private interest. TC-8 gives that authority to private interest and he does not feel that is proper.

Mr. Stephenson indicated many times deliberation for closing streets goes on at the Council table and maybe TC-8-15 takes the politics out of that decision. He stated we have cases such as Z-36 – Oberlin Village which has no street stubs involved; however, the applicant and the neighborhood agree that the street should not be extended through the property. He stated there are plenty of cases and he is hearing about many commercial sites that have multiple street

November 3, 2015

connections that don’t have street stubs, etc. and there are different aspects. He stated giving away or allowing street stubs to be closed goes against street connectivity and if the street stub is closed, there will never be a connection without having to buy right of away. He feels TC-8-15 is a reasonable approach to this problem. It gives the authority to the City Council to use judgment on a case by case basis. It doesn’t give away any authority. Mr. Stephenson moved approval of TC-8-15 as presented. His motion was seconded by Ms. Crowder.

Mr. Maiorano questioned how TC-8-15 gives authority to the private sector as he thought it was drafted in such a way to provide Council discretion. Mr. Gaylord talked about the problem of a zoning case which has condition to close the street stub and he feels it is the private sector’s way to advocate the decision point to rest with the private interest. Mr. Maiorano talked about the UDO features to advance connectivity. He talked about the forms of development in which we are seeing the questions and asked how TC-8-15 advocates for the private interest.

Mayor McFarlane questioned when staff looks at connectivity requirements if they consider all of the same things the City Council would consider such as threshold for traffic increases, etc. She questioned if it is possible to have staff to develop criteria and use the criteria that is important to the Council when making those decisions. She stated as she understands the way the requirements are written now, the decision comes late in the process which can create a financial hardship on the developers, etc. She questioned if TC-8 would change that.

Mr. Odom questioned clarification as to whether staff tells the private developer when they need to connect streets. Planner Crane pointed out the applicant and the City Council makes that decision in a rezoning case; however, if there is not a rezoning case involved, the staff makes that decision. Ms. Baldwin pointed out she needs clarification on the criteria that is being used by staff and stated she would like for staff to strengthen or develop criteria before the text change is adopted. She stated it is a council goal to have street connectivity and it seems that this text change might be backtracking. Mr. Stephenson read from TC-8 relating to how it affects traffic, etc. He stated he feels we do have objective criteria. In response to questioning Planner Crane pointed out changing the criteria used in administrative approval was not considered, they were directed to draft a text change that gave discretion to the City Council and that is what is before the City Council.

Ms. Baldwin made a substitute motion to hold the item and ask staff to bring criteria that would be utilized at staff level, etc. Her substitute motion was seconded by Mr. Weeks. The substitute motion was clarified to indicate that the Council would be asking staff to come back with criteria that would be used if staff makes the decision in this process. Mr. Maiorano talked about his concern of having discretion build in at staff level, the timing issue and when a simple majority or super majority is required to pass an item. Mayor McFarlane questioned is staff could come back within two weeks with criteria as suggested in the substitute motion. Mr. Maiorano stated he would also like the recommendation to include the decision point being earlier in the process. Planner Crane pointed out one concern is a lot of times site developers do not know about the connectivity requirement at the site plan stage. It would only be determined at rezoning stage and to do what is being requested would require additional information from the applicants but often applicants do not have development plans at an earlier stage. Mr. Maiorano pointed out the

November 3, 2015

other issues is the concern that there is no relief or appeal from staff’s decision other than going to the Board of Adjustment with Mr. Crane pointing out that is correct. Associate City Attorney Botvinick talked about the state law relative to legislative action. The substitute motion to hold the item for two weeks, place it on the next agenda to receive a recommendation from staff relating to refine or what criteria staff would use in making the determination was put to a vote which resulted in all members voting in the affirmative except Ms. Crowder who voted in the negative. The Mayor ruled the motion adopted on a 7-1 vote.

DOWNTOWN NIGHT AND WEEKEND PARKING RATES - APPROVED AS AMENDED

The following item appeared on the October 20, 2015 agenda under the Report and Recommendation of the City Manager:

Concurrent with adoption of the annual operating budget, Council authorized the implementation of a $5 Night and Weekend Parking Fee to be effective December 31, 2015. The additional revenue to be generated by the revised fee structure was intended to restore maintenance activity and to augment dedicated janitorial services for the various parking decks in downtown. During budget deliberations, Council asked staff to prepare a more detailed analysis and plan prior to implementation for review by the City Council.

During the July 7, 2015 Council meeting a citizen petition was presented to City Council, and Council subsequently requested that staff involve additional downtown stakeholders in the development of alternative rate structures and proposals.

Staff has held a series of seven stakeholder meetings to get feedback and better understand potential impacts of the fee. The stakeholder meetings included restaurants, bars, non-profit organizations, museums, the Downtown Raleigh Alliance Issues Committee, and other visitor amenity groups. Staff used the feedback to develop alternative service levels and fee options, as well as implementation strategies aimed to address possible impacts. Staff will be available to address both the original recommendation and the alternatives to the adopted budget ordinance. If an alternate fee structure is desired, Council will need to adopt a budget amendment to reduce appropriations in annual budget ordinance. Included with the agenda packet is a staff report which includes alternative service levels and fee options developed with input from the various stakeholders.

Following a presentation by staff and comments by stakeholders, it was directed that the item be placed on this agenda with staff to provide information on an alternative of the flat fee, Thursday, Friday, and Saturday, 7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.

During the City Council Meeting on October 20, 2015, staff presented a number of alternative plans for night and weekend parking rates to the rate adopted with the 2016 budget. The original staff report from October 20 that outlined all alternatives is included with the agenda packet; also included is a new staff report which summarizes three alternatives that have received the most discussion: the Thursday-Saturday staff preferred alternative; the Friday-Saturday

November 3, 2015

alternative developed with stakeholder feedback; and the City Council requested Thursday-Saturday after 7:00 alternative.

Recommendation: Approve the staff preferred Thursday-Saturday alternative as identified in the backup materials. Authorize a budget amendment in the amount of $383,675 to reduce the budget ordinance in accordance with the staff preferred alternative.

City Manager Hall indicated he appreciates the difficulty of this situation. The purpose of the original proposal was to try to balance the various interests in parking in the downtown area. There are two questions that have to be considered - who pays and what level of service the Council wants to see in the parking decks, and we have to balance these two concerns. He explained the original proposal adopted by the City Council was for 7 days a week. The various alternatives being considered have shifted significantly from the original plan. He stated none of these propose any impact on parking on the street which will still be free after 5 and on weekends. He stated the original purpose for the change in the parking fee schedule for our decks was multi-purpose including increased cleanliness, upgraded equipment in decks and increased maintenance and repair of all of our decks. He stated the money to do that comes from the people who park in the decks. The proposal is about more than cleanliness. He stated the Council approved a change to become effective in December 2015. Since that time, some of the stakeholders came before the City Council and asked for other alternatives and the City Council asked for a proposal for paid parking on Thursday, Friday and Saturday nights starting at 7:00 p.m.

Mayor McFarlane expressed appreciation for all of the staff time and the great discussions among staff and the business owners. She stated we do have increased needs in the parking area and the question before the Council is how to transition into paid parking without putting a negative impact on the business owners in the downtown area. She stated the City is doing all it can to encourage retail growth in the downtown area and many people felt that charging for parking during the day on Saturday would hinder that objective. She stated as she understands business owners say Thursday night is sort of hit or miss; however to charge for parking on Saturday could possibly deter people from coming downtown to shop. She stated her suggestion would be charging $5 beginning at 5:00 p.m. on Friday and Saturday nights, that is $5 at 5. The $5 payment would cover parking for the rest of the night. She moved approval of the $5 at 5. Her motion was seconded by Ms. Baldwin.

Mr. Stephenson had questions about all of the discussions that have taken place relative to the needs of the service workers in the downtown area. City Manager Hall indicated that is correct, the proposal assumes the fee reduction or discounted fee for service workers, color coded parking, agreements with Marbles, etc.

In response to questioning, Transportation Operations Manager Kennon indicated under the proposal, anyone parking in the City decks prior to 5:00 p.m. would be subject to the hourly rate and go to a flat fee of $5 at 5:00 p.m. for the rest of the evening. He explained if someone comes at 4:30 p.m. on Friday afternoon, pulled a ticket, when leaving any time after 5:00 p.m. would pay the hourly rate for the 30 minutes and a $5 flat fee. Mr. Stephenson asked about at 7 and

November 3, 2015

how that would differ. Mr. Weeks questioned if maintenance and repair for the structures would come out of this money and if so, what would that cover. City Manager Hall indicated it could be for any type of maintenance or repair such as elevator repair, replacing light bulbs, just regular maintenance. He stated he would assume we would be talking about 4 nights of janitorial services during a week. The motion to approve the $5 at 5 for Friday and Saturday nights and authorizing the budget amendment with the new rates to be effective December 31, 2015 was put to a vote which resulted in all members voting in the affirmative. The Mayor ruled the motion adopted on an 8-0. See Ordinance 505 TF 263.

REZONING Z-28-14 – SIX FORKS ROAD – APPROVED – ORDINANCE ADOPTED

Hearings were held October 7, 2015 and October 20, 2015 to consider a request from Joanne H. and Harry H. Hoddard and Eugene Boyce to rezone approximately 1.93 acres from Residential-4 (R-4) to Office Mixed Use with a Parking Limited Frontage (OX-3-PL). The property is located on the west side of Six Forks Road approximately one quarter of a mile south of Millbrook Road and approximately one mile north of North Hills. A valid statutory protest petition had been filed. The hearing was closed in order for new conditions to be presented and it was directed that the item be placed on this agenda for further consideration.

It would be appropriate for the Council to consider Z-28-15 – Six Forks Road with conditions dated October 22, 2015.

Planner Travis Crane explained the case and pointed out revised conditions dated October 22, 2015 have been received and the valid statutory protest petition has been withdrawn. Mr. Odom moved approval of Z-28-15 with conditions dated October 22, 2015. His motion was seconded by Ms. Baldwin and a roll call vote resulted in all members voting in the affirmative. The Mayor ruled the motion adopted on an 8-0. See Ordinance 507 ZC 717.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY MANAGER

RALEIGH UNION STATION – VARIOUS ACTIONS APPROVED

At the March 3, 2015 Council meeting, the Construction Manager at Risk (CMAR) team was authorized to proceed with bidding and finalization of a guaranteed maximum price (GMP) not to exceed $44,737,870.

In July and September of 2015, bids were received on the project which exceeded the estimate. The bid yielded a GMP of $60,000,000, which yielded a project gap of $15,300,000 when compared to the March estimate. Value engineering and steel rebid resulted in project savings, lowering the GMP to $54,700,000, leaving a $10,000,000 gap. Project partners have addressed the funding gap by identifying scope reductions totaling approximately $2,900,000. Remaining additional funding of $7,200,000 is required.

The following options were presented to Council at the Work Session on October 20, 2015:

November 3, 2015

Option One: Aggressive scope reduction, including removal of plaza, canopy, rooftop terrace, finishes, deferral of furniture, fixtures, equipment. Funding gap of $4,670,000 with a total project budget of $52,166,000.

Option Two: Mitigated scope reduction, including removal of canopy, rooftop terrace, finishes, deferral of furniture, fixtures, equipment. Funding gap of $5,954,000 with a total project budget of $53,454,000.

Option Three: Limited scope reduction, including removal of canopy, deferral of furniture, fixtures and equipment. Funding gap of $6,271,000 with a total project budget of $53,771,000.

It was requested that the three options above as well as a fourth option of deferred furniture, fixtures, and equipment, and no additional scope reduction with a remaining funding gap of $7,200,000 be presented for Council at the upcoming November 3, 2015 meeting; a revised total project budget for Option Four would be $54,700,000.

Recommendation: Authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with Clancy & Theys/Skanska, a joint venture, for a total not to exceed guaranteed maximum price (GMP) in accordance with Option Three outlined below. Authorize various budget amendments and transfers, as well as the related contract authorizations, also as outlined below.

Option Three: Limited scope reduction, including removal of canopy, deferral of furniture, fixtures and equipment for $53,771,000.

Budget Actions: Authorize the City Manager to transfer $500,000 in project savings from the Central Operations Facility to the Raleigh Union Station project. Authorize the City Manager to appropriate $500,000 in additional Raleigh Union Station project revenue. Authorize the City Manager to appropriate $5,271,000 from unassigned fund balance residing in the General Fund. Accounting detail was included with the agenda packet.

Related Contract Authorizations:Authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with Froehling and Robertson, Inc. in the amount of $781,279 for construction materials testing, special inspections, third-party inspections, and environmental testing consultant services for the Raleigh Union Station.

Authorize the City Manager to execute a contract amendment with MBP Carolinas, Inc. in the amount of $86,400 to provide Building Envelope Construction Phase Commissioning and Testing Services for the Raleigh Union Station.

Authorize the City Manager to execute a contract amendment with STV Engineers, Inc. in the amount not to exceed $275,000 to provide bridge construction observation and certification services for the Raleigh Union Station. Funds are available and will be transferred administratively.

Authorize appropriate road closures required for the project.

November 3, 2015

City Manager Hall stated this is a critical facility for downtown and the City’s overall transit strategy in general. He stated staff presented information at the October 20 work session explaining we are about to move into the construction period. He stated the bidding and pricing is very difficult as we are seeing a lot of price increases in construction in general, concrete and steel pricing, seeing fewer bidders and it is a very complicated project which involves a lot of partners which requires a lot of coordination. City Manager Hall pointed out staff shared the bid tabulation at work session and provided three options to help reduce the gap in construction of the project. He expressed appreciation for all involved in the partnerships that are working so hard together. He pointed out staff had developed Option 4 at the request of Council during the October 20 work session. Ms. Baldwin stated she had been previously excused from discussion on this matter therefore left the table.

Mr. Maiorano stated he agrees this is a very critical facility and moved that the City proceed with funding the project in total without removing any aspects of it. He stated he appreciates the work of staff in evaluating increased cost but he thinks it is important for the City of Raleigh to invest in this facility and invest in a quality facility. He stated the Council has made a commitment to the private sector, our citizens, etc. and for many reasons he believes this is the appropriate action and again moved funding of the project and total without removing any aspect and approval of moving ahead as outlined with Option 4. His motion was seconded by Mr. Weeks.

Ms. Crowder pointed out she is in favor of all mode of transportation and she appreciates Mr. Maiorano asking to move forward with the total project. She expressed concern however that she keeps reading in the newspaper that rail will not be a part of the Wake County Transportation plan so she has some trepidation about moving forward with something that doesn’t include the Wake County Transportation Plan. City Manager Hall pointed out Wake County has recently issued some information on the plan pointing out it is felt there is some disconnect in what is being reported in the media and Wake County’s direction. He stated he thinks the discussion is more about timing rather than modes. He stated he would be happy to provide the information from the Advisory and Technical Committee as to how rail and various factors would be included. The question is timing.

Mr. Stephenson pointed out the City keeps talking about revitalization in the downtown area. We need to provide transportation modes, talked about the canopy not being a critical part but an enhancement or a nice icon on the plaza. The motion as stated was put to a roll call vote which resulted in all members voting in the affirmative except Ms. Baldwin who was excused from participation in the item. The Mayor ruled the motion adopted on a 7-0 vote. See Ordinance 505 TF 263.

OUTDOOR SEATING – 90-DAY REPORT – ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS APPROVED; TO BE PLACED ON NOVEMBER 17 AGENDA

During the August 4, 2015 City Council meeting Ordinance 2015-479 was adopted, which served to amend outdoor seating regulations in the City. During discussion of the ordinance

November 3, 2015

changes, staff was directed to report on implementation of the regulations in 90 days. The 90-day update on the status of the Outdoor Seating ordinance will be presented.

Recommendation: Receive as information.

City Manager Hall introduced the item pointing out the goal of all is for a safe and healthy downtown for all – businesses, visitors, residents, etc. He pointed out a successful downtown indicates we must be successful in the use of our public rights of ways.

Special Events Coordinator Derrick Remer presented Council members with a report entitled, “Initial Implementation of the Outdoor Seating Ordinance” dated November 3, 2015. Mr. Remer explained that outdoor seating is a part of our Private Use of Public Space, (PUPS) handbook. He explained the timeline beginning the February-April 2015 time frame in which the Council started the review and evaluation of the PUPS through a preliminary update to Council. He explained the goals of the program which include addressing public safety and ADA issues; proactively regulating the right-of-way (sidewalk) in a manor that maintain public access at all times; enhance the overall experience for visitors, residents and establishments; develop a balanced approach to address issues associated with the outdoor seating permit and protecting the City’s investment in downtown revitalization. He stated the measures of success relate to public safety issues being addressed, overcrowding, safety pedestrian access and responsibility of establishments; a clear, formalized process, ADA issues being addressed, enforcement of rules and balanced needs of stakeholders. He pointed out an application process has been developed and gave examples of how it is working. He stated at this point 42 applications have been submitted with three permits being issues and went through the status of the 42 applications. Mr. Remer talked about the quality of life issues (alcohol violations, assaults, begging, damage to property, indecent exposures, intoxication, littering, sleeping in public places, trespassing, urinating in public and weapons violations) and explained the reduction or percent of changes in these all of which show a reduction in violations with the exception of sleeping in public places.

Mr. Remer went over the other items discovered during the evaluation period including existing encroachment agreements, State right-of-way questions/issues, etc. He indicated the next steps for staff would be to continue to receive applications and issue permits, work with establishments to insure compliance, transition enforcement away from the RPD and RFD and resume efforts to update the PUPS handbook. He stated the possible next steps for Council would include considering the authorization of additional staff for PUPS enforcement, recommend that the Appearance Commission evaluate appearance standards and accept technical changes to the ordinance from the Attorney’s office and consider possible adjustments to portions of the ordinance as identified.

Mayor McFarlane questioned what kind of technical changes the City Attorney’s Office would be recommending with Associate City Attorney Leapley pointing out it would not involve any new requirements just some simplification of the wording for better understandings.

November 3, 2015

In response to questioning from Mr. Weeks, Mr. Remer talked about the possibility of adding two staff members for enforcement pointing out staff would bring that information and the technical terms to a subsequent meeting if that is Council’s desire.

Mr. Gaylord pointed out the ordinance has been implemented and it may more complex than is necessary. He suggested amending the ordinance to allow the use of outdoor space until 2:00 a.m., delineate the outdoor space and mark it on the ground and as many people that could be seated in that space would be allowed. Mr. Gaylord stated he thought the City had accomplished what they had set out to do.

Ms. Crowder questioned the RPD’s thoughts and recommendations on where we are today. Deputy Chief Perry pointed out the Police Department is very encouraged. There has been a 32% reduction in quality of life violations which is making the downtown district commander very happy. He stated he feels the reduction in quality of life problems speak for themselves.

Mr. Odom questioned if we had reduced the number of places that are open or if the ordinance has caused problems or closed any business. Mr. Remer pointed out not to his knowledge and he thought a couple of more facilities have opened. The ordinance has not shut any one down. He stated as long as an establishment has submitted an application the City allows them to continue to operate. He stated he thought a couple of violations had been issued to establishments who were operating without a permit and had not applied for a permit.

Mr. Stephenson talked about the motion of expanding the hours pointing out he could possibly support that if we can ensure enforcement and cleanliness would continue. He questioned if the police department is comfortable with Deputy Chief Perry indicating that would fall under the fire department or who ever takes over the enforcement. Mr. Stephenson questioned the locations of markings on the ground and if that would adequately delineate the outdoor dining area with Deputy Chief Perry indicating as long as it is clearly defined.

Mayor McFarlane questioned if this is something that could be given to the Appearance Commission as she understands some people are unhappy with the way the stanchion and the markings or delineation of the areas look with it being pointed out that would be appropriate. Mr. Stephenson stated he hears concerns about all the different kinds of furniture and questioned if the Appearance Commission could look at some requirements on what is used.

Mayor McFarlane also questioned the inside enforcement pointing out the use of uniforms inside was a concern to some of the business owners. She indicated the addition of two nonuniformed inspectors may help and questioned if we would still have police presence. City Manger Hall indicated staff is looking at the process for enforcement and currently working on coordination among the various units and how that can be accomplished. Mr. Gaylord moved that the ordinance be adjusted to allow utilization of the outdoor areas until 2:00 a.m., remove the 15 square foot per person requirement, delineate/mark the outside area but require that everyone be seated within the delineated area and send the issues to the Appearance Commission to look at the appearance/use of stanchions. His motion was again seconded by Mr. Weeks.

November 3, 2015

Mr. Maiorano talked about development of the ordinance, looking at other cities, best practices, and how what was developed in Raleigh compares. He also asked about the cutoff time for use of the outside areas. Mr. Remer pointed out a large number of cities required ceasing use of the outside area at midnight and those that had later hours normally had more restrictive components in their ordinance. Mr. Maiorano talked about looking at areas in San Francisco, Charlotte and Roanoke over the last few weeks pointing out most of those have permanent stanchions, well organized and well defined seating by head count, cutoff at a reasonable hour, etc. He stated it seems what we have is working and he is not sure why we would take our guard down and he is disappointed that we seem to be backing away from the hard work of staff, the professionals, etc. pointing out he could not support the motion.

Mayor McFarlane pointed out we have seen some possible outcomes and we were looking at a 90-day trial period. She expressed appreciation to David Meeker and others for their hard work on this issue. She stated one of the things she heard over and over is that the different closing times for inside and outside is very confusing. When the deadline for outside arrives the people move inside and caused overcrowding. She talked about the responsiveness of the business owners, pointing out she supports the 2:00 a.m. outside closing time as long as people are in their seats. She talked about the 15 square foot requirement and how the City had required the business owners to submit architectural drawings, etc. and questioned if it will be problematic if that is changed.

Vincent Whitehurst, Foundation Bar, talked about businesses being allowed to redesign and resubmit and he doesn’t think that would be a problem. He stated having a clear delineation without stanchions sense as people don’t like the feeling of being pinned in even though they are outside. He stated the 15 square foot per person does limit many establishments. He stated enforcement is the big issue and the way it is enforced will either make or break. Clear rules are very important.

Mr. Maiorano expressed concern with the motion on the floor and questioned if it could just be held at the table and let staff come back with proposals so that every one understands what is being proposed. Ms. Baldwin stated she feels what is on the table is a compromise and questioned the possibility of a 2:00 a.m. closing on Friday and Saturday night and let the Appearance Commission look at the stanchion and signage issue, remove the 15 square foot requirement and hire two more inspectors. Whether Ms. Baldwin was making a motion, a substitute motion or clarifying Mr. Gaylord’s motion was talked about. Other discussions related to engaging DRA to help with the enforcement and the feeling that they were already doing that took place.

Mr. Odom talked about small businesses in the downtown area that would only have space for a table for two and referred to the Mecca and the possibility of increasing what is allowed for businesses such as that. Ms. Baldwin restated the motion to amend the ordinance to go to a 2:00 a.m. for use of outside facilities, ask the Appearance Commission to look at any changes in the stanchions/signage and furniture, hire two inspectors for enforcement, ask for feedback on the 15 square foot requirement, staff to provide information on the DRA engagement in the enforcement and cleanliness issue and ask. Discussion took place as to whether it was a restated

November 3, 2015

motion, who actually made the motion. The motion as clarified was put to a vote which resulted in all members voting in the affirmative except Mr. Maiorano and Ms. Crowder who voted in the negative. The Mayor ruled the motion adopted on a 6-2 vote.

The City Clerk asked when the 2:00 a.m. closing time and new requirements would take effect with the City Manager indicating staff would bring back a report outlining the changes, etc. for final consideration and ordinance changes at the next meeting.

COMMUNITY ALTERNATIVES FOR SUPPORTIVE OF ABODES – FUNDING ALLOCATION – APPROVED

The City advertises an open Request for Proposals as funding is available for financing of smaller affordable housing developments. The purpose of the program is to provide developers of affordable multi-family housing low interest loans in order to build or purchase and rehabilitate privately owned and managed rental units. City funds are leveraged with conventional financing and/or other public funding sources. This program has been operating since 1988 and has provided funding for over a thousand affordable housing units.

Community Alternatives for Supportive Abodes (CASA) is requesting funding from the City for two projects:

Sunnybrook Village – up to $1,500,000 in affordable housing bond proceeds for the acquisition of a 42-unit development for low-income families and individuals.

Sherman Avenue – up to $431,373 in HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME)/Community Housing Development Organization (CHDO) funds for the acquisition of an 11-unit development for low-income individuals with disabilities.

The City has positive development experience with CASA and all payments are current. CASA has a waiting list of over 975 people demonstrating a large need for affordable housing in Raleigh. Additional details are included with the agenda packet. Funding is appropriated; transfers will be handled administratively.

Recommendation: Authorize the funding allocation and authorize the City Manager to execute appropriate loan and legal documents. Ms. Baldwin moved approval. Her motion was seconded by Mr. Weeks and a roll call vote resulted in all members voting in the affirmative. The Mayor ruled the motion adopted on an 8-0 vote.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY BOARD

ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY BOARD – ANNUAL REPORT – ACCEPTED; ANNUAL WORK PLAN – APPROVED

Council members received the annual report for FY2040-15 in their agenda packet. Council also received the following proposed annual work plan for FY2015-16.

November 3, 2015

1. Evaluate and determine the role of the Environmental Advisory Board in relationship to the goals and objectives outlined in the City of Raleigh Strategic Plan including:

a) Identification of best practices and policies that contribute to the protection and improvement of water, air, soil and groundwater resources. Raleigh Strategic Plan Growth & Natural Resources (RSP GNR) Objective I

b) Provision of recommendations for regulatory processes that facilitate productive communications with Council, staff, and other boards, RSP GNR Objective I

c) Identification of opportunities to engage with work-groups formed to implement the Strategic Plan. RSP GNR Objective I

2. Continue to host the Raleigh Environmental Awards, implementing changes & modifications to the program as appropriate, RSP GNR

3. In partnership with the City, identify neighborhood-scale pilot projects to test innovative strategies to optimize resiliency and sustainability, conserve natural resources, promote healthy food systems, and encourage outdoor activity. RSP GNR Objective I

4. Review the city’s solar permitting and inspection policies as they compare to nationally established best practices. Provide recommendations for streamlining and improving Raleigh’s permitting process. RSP GNR Objectives, 2, 3, 4; RSP Safe, Vibrant & Healthy Community Objective 4

5. Other items as directed by Council.

Ms. Baldwin moved approval of the work plan and acceptance of the bylaws. Her motion was seconded by Mr. Weeks and a roll call vote resulted in all members voting in the affirmative. The Mayor ruled the motion adopted on an 8-0 vote.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE FAIR HOUSING HEARING BOARD

FAIR HOUSING HEARING BOARD – FY2015-16 WORK PLAN – APPROVED; BYLAW CHANGES APPROVED

Council members received in their agenda packet the following annual work plan for 2015-16.

2015-2015 Future Planning and Initiatives

1. Community Outreach and monthly workshopsThe purpose of the Community Outreach Workshops is to provide Raleigh citizens with information on comprehensive fair housing laws while increasing the awareness of resources available that aid in identifying discriminatory housing practices. This program will enhance the awareness of other Fair Housing Hearing Board initiatives; which

November 3, 2015

includes the annual conference. As a result, the citizens of Raleigh will benefit through improved social capacity as it pertains to fair housing practices and laws. It will also strengthen relationships between the board and the community at large.

2. City of Raleigh Fair Housing OrdinanceThe Fair Housing Ordinance was adopted by the City of Raleigh in 1976. The board will focus on how to enforce the ordinance for the betterment of the citizens. Specifically, the Fair Housing Hearing Board will determine the ways to handle customer complaints and properly forward this information to City Council and other organizations dedicated to the procurement of fair housing.

3. Fair Housing Hearing Board BylawsUpdated bylaws will be developed and approved by the 2015/2016 Fair Housing Hearing Board. The Board will use the Fair Housing Ordinance as guidance and also provide more details to establish consistency, stability, and clarity to maintain a well-managed and full functioning hearing board.

4. Youth Initiative – Fair Housing Five and the Haunted HouseTo further educate the community about fair housing, the Fair Housing Hearing Board will also focus on educating young people. Every elementary school and public library in Wake County will receive a copy of two books, the “Fair Housing Five and the Haunted House” and “The Other Side.” Both of these books encourage young people to engage in a meaningful and challenging dialogue at an early age so that they understand their rights. The goal is to educate citizens at an early age about treating everyone fairly and not on the basis of their race, color, religion, national origin, gender, family status, or disability.

5. 2016 Fair Housing ConferenceThe Board will hold its annual conference on April 15, 2016 at the McKimmon Center in Raleigh, NC. The 13th annual conference will target citizens around the State and feature topics that matter to the citizens of Raleigh.

Mr. Weeks moved approval of the FY2015-16 work plan and receipt of the FY2014-15 annual report. His motion was seconded by Ms. Baldwin and a roll call vote resulted in all members voting in the affirmative. The Mayor ruled the motion adopted on an 8-0 vote.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE BUDGET AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE

SURPLUS PROPERTY – 11317 FALLS OF NEUSE ROAD – DIRECTION GIVEN

Councilor Crowder reported the Budget and Economic Development Committee recommends that Council declare as surplus and authorize the sale of 11317 Falls of Neuse Road to Mangal Kahn and Ashiqullah Pardisi for $60,000, subject to the negotiated offer and upset bit process with the understanding the winning bidder will pay all advertising costs accrued during the upset

November 3, 2015

bid process and with the further understanding the winning bidder will dedicate 15 feet of right-of-way at the time of closing.

On behalf of the Committee, Councilor Crowder moved approval. Her motion was seconded by Councilor Weeks and a roll call vote resulted in all members voting in the affirmative. The Mayor ruled the motion adopted on an 8-0 vote.

LEASE – 0 FERNDALE LANE – APPROVED CONDITIONAL

Chairperson Crowder reported the Budget and Economic Development Committee recommends that Council authorize the lease of 0 Ferndale Lane, containing approximately 7500 square feet, to North Carolina State University and/or the Board of Trustees of the Endowment Fund of North Carolina State University for surface parking for a rental period of three years with no monetary consideration and the understanding that either agency would have the ability to terminate the lease at any time after one year, with 120 days written notice; with the further understanding the University will take on the responsibility for lighting, cleaning, and maintaining the parking areas; and with the further understanding the University will provide a right-of-way for the Hillsborough Phase II project at no cost to the City. On behalf of the Committee, Councilor Crowder moved approval as read. Her motion was seconded by Mr. Weeks and a roll call vote resulted in all members voting in the affirmative. The Mayor ruled the motion adopted on an 8-0 vote.

LEESVILLE ROAD – DONATION FROM THE ANGUS BARN PROPERTIES, LLC – ACCEPTED CONDITIONALLY

Councilor Crowder reported the real estate section of the Budget and Economic Development Committee recommends authorizing staff to accept a land donation of 14.79 + acres located at 12301 Leesville Road from the Augus Barn properties, LLC, subject to a satisfactory phase I environmental site assessment. The owner of the parcel will pay all outstanding property taxes through 2015 and any outstanding assessments owed against the site. On behalf of the Committee, she moved the recommendation be upheld. Her motion was seconded by Mr. Weeks and put to a roll call vote which resulted in all members voting in the affirmative. The Mayor ruled the motion adopted on an 8-0 vote.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING COMMITTEE

TC-4-15 – DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND NONCONFORMITIES – LIMITED USE – APPROVED AS AMENDED

During the October 20, 2015 Council meeting, the Comprehensive Planning Committee presented TC-4-15 – Development Standards and Nonconformities – Limited Use as amended. No action was taken; therefore, it would be appropriate for the Comprehensive Planning Committee to make their recommendation and the Council may take action on the text change as amended.

November 3, 2015

Mr. Stephenson pointed out he had been contacted by Ron Rogers who had discussed some items with staff concerning this issue. Deputy City Attorney Botvinick presented the following changes and explained them.

PAGE 6 OF TC-4-15 (Rear Additions greater than 25% to Building):

ii. Rear; AdditionRear additions are not allowed until the required build-to-percentage for the lot has been met except when the addition is used exclusively for one or more of the following: loading areas, storage, kitchens, repair facilities (including bays for motor vehicles) and mechanical equipment.

PAGE 9 OF TC-4-15 (Renovations to Existing Buildings):

6. Lots subject to build-to requirements that contain buildings existing at the time the frontage regulations were first applied to the property may, without deference to the build-to requirements, make voluntary renovations or alterations changing the exterior appearance of such buildings, including vertical expansions, that do not enlarge the foot-print of the existing buildings, when done in accordance with pedestrian access, transparency and streetscape requirements of UDO, and the pedestrian access requirements of this UDO when the costs of the improvements exceed cumulatively $10,000 in any one calendar year. Voluntary demolitions or tear-downs shall be replaced with building improvements that comply with the regulations of the applicable build-to requirements and all other frontage requirements.

Ron Rodgers, representing Bojangles talked about build-2 requirements as it relates to requiring buildings to occupy at least 50% of the lot. He pointed out in the Bojangles situation the buildings are not wide enough because of the drive-thrus and usually there is no room for parking in the front because the drive-thru customers park there while waiting for their order. He talked about pedestrian access requirements and Attorney Botvinicks’ comments about sidewalks from the street to the front of the building, pedestrian access requires installation of front door and sidewalks to the front door; however another section of the UDO indicates this applies to doors installed after the December 1, 2013 deadline. He stated there is ambiguity and confusion. He presented the following information and explained.

PAGE 4 OF TC-4-15 (Provision applicable to Additions of less than 25%):

2. Lots subject to build-to requirements that contain pre-existing buildings and maintain pre-existing buildings and which add additions to existing buildings that singularly or collectively comprise no more tan 25% of the gross floor area existing at the time the build-to requirements became applicable to the property, or 1,000 square feet, whichever is greater, are allowed to expand the building anywhere within their minimum setbacks, without deference to the build-to or

November 3, 2015

pedestrian access requirements. All other frontage requirements, if any, shall apply.

PAGE 6 OF THE TC-4-15 (Rear Additions greater than 25% to Building):

ii, Rear; AdditionRear additions are not allowed until the required build-to-percentage for the lot has been met except when the addition is used exclusively for one or more of the following: loading areas, storage, kitchens, repair facilities (including bays for motor vehicles) and mechanical equipment.

PAGE 9 OF TC-4-15 (Renovations to Existing Buildings):

6. Lots subject to build-to requirements that contain buildings existing at the time the frontage regulations were first applied to the property may without deference to the build-to requirements, make voluntary renovations or alterations changing the exterior appearance of such buildings, including vertical expansions that do not enlarge the foot-print of the existing buildings, when done in accordance with pedestrian access transparency and streetscape requirements of this UDO. In the event the voluntary renovation or alternation includes the relocation of a pedestrian entrance, the pedestrian access requirements of this UDO shall also be followed .

Mr. Rogers talked about the administrative alternative and pointed out it would be beneficial to include provisions that if one modernizes a building but does not increase the size they don’t have to go through the administrative review process or request a variance before the renovation can occur.

Mr. Odom talked about an issue relating to the comments that have been received and referred to Wells Fargo building on Falls of Neuse Road where there is no front entrance.

Attorney Botvinick talked about Mr. Rogers draft and how if pedestrian renovations are not included no access is required and stated under his draft the Planning Director can require pedestrian access or sidewalk/connecting entrance and street.

Mr. Stephenson talked about the language relating to bays and how this would be a clarification. Attorney Botvinick talked about Mr. Rogers’ proposal which there is no requirement for access at the front door. Attorney Botvinick stated he is just trying to make sure there is a sidewalk between the public realm and the entrance if the building renovation is over $10,000.

Mr. Gaylord moved approval of TC-4-15 including the City Attorney’s recommendation clarification. His motion was seconded by Ms. Crowder and a roll call vote resulted in all members voting in the affirmative except Mr. Odom who voted in the negative. The Mayor ruled the motion adopted on a 7-1 vote. See Ordinance 508 TC 373.

November 3, 2015

COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING COMMITTEE – CANCELED

Mr. Stephenson indicated if the Comprehensive Planning Committee does not get a referral during the evening meeting there would be no Comprehensive Planning Committee meeting next week. Clerk’s Note: The Comprehensive Planning Committee’s regular meeting day would be November 11, which is a holiday; therefore no meeting would be held on that day. During the night portion of the meeting, no items were referred to Comprehensive Planning Committee therefore the next committee meeting is canceled.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE LAW AND PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE

NO REPORT

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE

TRAFFIC CALMING –LAUREL HILLS ROAD – PROJECT CANCELED

Chairperson Weeks reported the Public Works Committee recommends canceling the traffic calming project on Laurel Hills Road and so moved. His motion was seconded by Mr. Maiorano. Mayor McFarlane questioned who was notified about this discussion. The City Clerk reported the notification followed the normal procedure, that is any one who spoke at the public hearing or spoke when the item was referred to Committee or had contacted her office and asked to be notified when the item is discussed. The motion as stated was put to a vote which resulted in all members voting in the affirmative. The Mayor ruled the motion adopted on an 8-0 vote.

ASSESSMENT ROLLS – SKYCREST ANNEXATION AREA – VARIOUS – APPROVED AS AMENDED

Chairperson Weeks reported the Public Works Committee recommends adopting resolutions confirming the following assessment rolls:

Water AR 1352 – Jean Drive, according to Resolution Number (2015) 161 adopted August 4, 2015

Water AR 1313 – Planna Terra Annexation Area, according to Resolution Number (2015) 158 adopted August 4, 2015

Water AR 1335 – Skycrest/Dogwood Annexation Area, according to Resolution Number (2015) 159 adopted August 4, 2015

Water AR 1335A – Skycrest/Dogwood Drive Annexation Area, according to Resolution Number (2015) 160 adopted August 4, 2015

The Committee also recommends that staff be authorized to remit payment for the assessments and utility connections for the 17 property owners (properties shown in gold) on a map labeled “Former Variety Pick-Up Trawick Road & Skycrest Drive, Raleigh, North Carolina” dated

November 3, 2015

October 26, 15. Funding is appropriated. A copy of the map was included with the agenda packet.

The Committee further recommends authorizing a budget amendment in the amount of $7,077 to cover the City’s assessment costs. Accounting details were included with the agenda packet.

The City Clerk reported since the beginning of this process several lots have changed ownership; therefore she would suggest when the Council confirms the assessments that it be with the following amendments. She stated she had conferred with the City Attorney’s Office to confirm that would be appropriate.

Water Assessment Roll 1313 – Planna Terra Annexation Area Lot 17 – Steven W. Daughtry, Trustee

Water Assessment Roll 1335 – Skycrest/Dogwood Annexation area Lot 174 – Christopher Watts

Water Assessment Roll 1335-A – Skycrest/Dogwood Annexation area Lot 39 – Habitat for Humanity of Wake County

Mr. Weeks moved approval of the assessment rolls as amended. His motion was seconded by Mr. Maiorano and a roll call vote resulted in all members voting in the affirmative. The Mayor ruled the motion adopted on an 8-0 vote. See Resolutions 219, 220, 221 and 222.

REPORT OF MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS

ETHICS RULES AND REGULATIONS – UPDATE REQUESTED

Mr. Maiorano requested an update on work on the City Council’s ethics rules and regulations. He stated he believes the City Attorney’s Office and the City Manager’s Office were asked to work together and give recommendations on any changes, etc., needed. City Manager Hall stated he would be happy to work with the City Attorney’s Office on providing a report.

BUSINESS AND TECHNOLOGY CENTER – STATUS REQUESTED

Councilor Weeks pointed out the Council authorized an RFP for the operation of the Business and Technology Center pointing out he would like to know the status of that RFP and results. He talked about the history of developing the RFP and questioned when a recommendation would be made. He talked about the process leading up to the RFP. City Manager Hall indicated two proposals were received and they are currently being reviewed and examining the criteria. He stated staff will be bringing back a recommendation to a future Council meeting. Mr. Weeks asked if he would come back at the next meeting with City Manager Hall indicating staff would try to make that happen.

November 3, 2015

RALEIGH CONVENTION AND PERFORMING ARTS CENTERS AUTHORITY – MEMBERSHIP INCREASED

Mayor McFarlane stated she understands Mayor Pro Tem Odom would love to serve on the Raleigh Convention and Performing Arts Centers Authority but there is no vacancy. She moved that the Council adopt an ordinance increasing the membership by one. Her motion was seconded by Ms. Baldwin and put to a vote which passed unanimously. The Mayor ruled the motion adopted on an 8-0 vote. See Ordinance 509.

Mayor McFarlane moved that John Odom be appointed to a two year term on the Raleigh Convention and Performing Arts Centers Authority. Her motion was seconded by Mr. Weeks and a roll call vote resulted in all members voting in the affirmative. The Mayor ruled the motion adopted on an 8-0 vote.

ADVANCE COMMUNITY HEALTH – REQUEST FOR $450,000 – ADMINISTRATION TO PROVIDE A REPORT

Ms. Baldwin indicated she recently attended a breakfast relating to a new facility in southeast Raleigh, Advance Community health Center. She talked about their Capital Campaign and their request for a grant of some $450,000 for the City to match the County’s grant of the same amount. She asked that staff come back with an option for potential funding for this project pointing out this will transform Southeast Raleigh. Mayor McFarlane pointed out the Council worked hard to have a process for people to come to the Council for funding and this would be outside that process. Ms. Baldwin asked that a report be made to Council as soon as possible.

APPOINTMENTS

APPOINTMENTS – VARIOUS ACTIONS TAKEN

The City Clerk reported the following results of the ballot vote:

Appearance Commission – Two Vacancies – Mr. Gaylord and Mr. Weeks nominated Lauren Dickens. Ms. Baldwin, Mr. Maiorano, Mr. Odom, Ms. Crowder and Mr. Weeks all nominated Valerie Jordan. The City Clerk reported since Ms. Jordan received 5 nominations, she would assume that the Council would want to make that appointment with the Council agreeing. One Vacancy would be left on the Appearance Commission.

Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Commission – One Vacancy. Susan Hatchell – 5 (Gaylord, Stephenson, McFarlane, Maiorano, Crowder); Molly McKinney – 3 (Baldwin, Odom, Weeks)

Environmental Advisory Board – One Vacancy – No nominees

Substance Abuse Advisory Commission – One Vacancy – Willard Roderick Perry – 5 (Baldwin, Maiorano, Odom, Crowder, Weeks).

November 3, 2015

The City Clerk announced the appointment of Valerie Jordan to the Appearance Commission, Susan Hatchell to the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Commission and Willard Roderick Perry to the Substance Abuse Advisory Commission.

NOMINATIONS

DANGEROUS DOG COMMITTEE – SIZE TO REMAIN AT THREE

The City Clerk reported Sue Sturgis was recently appointed to the Dangerous Dog Committee; however, she has determined she will not be able to serve therefore there is one vacancy. The City Clerk reported there is no set number for this committee presently there are four members but with Ms. Sturgis not being able to serve there are three members. She stated the Council could appoint another person or could leave the membership at three. Ms. Baldwin suggested that the membership be left three with the Council agreeing.

ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY BOARD – VACANCY ANNOUNCED

The City Clerk indicated a letter of resignation has been received from Mickey Fanney; therefore there is one vacancy for consideration.

PARKS, RECREATION AND GREENWAY ADVISORY BOARD – ACTION TAKEN

The City Clerk reported the terms of Rodger Koopman and Thomas F. Moore are expiring. Mr. Koopman is not eligible for reappointment due to length of service. Mr. Moore is eligible for reappointment. Ms. Baldwin moved that Mr. Moore be reappointed by acclamation. Her motion was seconded by Mr. Weeks and put to a vote which passed unanimously. The Mayor ruled the motion adopted on an 8-0 vote (Clerk’s Notes: Following the meeting it was learned that Mr. Moore would not be able to serve if reappointed therefore the vacancy remains).

PLANNING COMMISSION – ADAM TERANDO – REAPPOINTED

The City Clerk reported the terms of Adam Terando and John B. Buxton are expiring. Both are eligible for reappointment. Mr. Terando would like to be considered for appointment; however Mr. Buxton, due to another commitment does not wish to be considered for reappointment. Ms. Baldwin moved the Council suspend its rules and reappointment Mr. Terando by acclamation. Her motion was seconded by Mr. Maiorano and put to a vote which passed unanimously. The Mayor ruled the motion adopted on an 8-0 vote.

Ms. Crowder nominated Steve Smith. Ms. Baldwin, Mr. Gaylord, Mr. Maiorano and Mr. Weeks nominated Matt Tomasulo.

RALEIGH TRANSIT AUTHORITY – DEBRA B. REZELI – REAPPOINTED

The City Clerk reported the term of Debra B. Rezeli is expiring. She is eligible for reappointment and would like to be considered for reappointment. Ms. Baldwin moved the

November 3, 2015

reappointment of Ms. Rezeli. Her motion was seconded by Mr. Weeks and put to a vote which passed unanimously. The Mayor ruled the motion adopted on an 8-0 vote.

STORMWATER MANAGEMENT ADVISORY COMMISSION – VACANCY ANNOUNCED

The City Clerk reported the term of Williams S. Service is expiring. He does not wish to be considered for reappointment because of conflicts due to his work travel schedule. No nominations were made.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE CIT ATTORNEY

NO REPORT

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY CLERK

MINUTES – VARIOUS – APPROVED AS PRESENTED

Council Members received minutes of the October 7, 19, 20 and 26, 2015 meeting minutes in their agenda packet. Mr. Odom moved approval as presented. His motion was seconded by Mr. Weeks and a roll call vote resulted in all members voting in the affirmative. The Mayor ruled the motion adopted on an 8-0 vote.

ELECTIONS – ABSTRACT OF VOTES FOR OCTOBER 6, 2015 – MADE AVAILABLE

The Wake County Board of Elections has presented the Abstract of Votes for the October 6, 2015 Council elections. The information is available for inspection in the office of the City Clerk. Mr. Odom moved accepting the information. His motion was seconded by Mr. Weeks and put to a vote which passed unanimously. The Mayor ruled the motion adopted on an 8-0 vote.

CLOSED SESSION

CLOSED SESSION – HELD

Mayor MacFarlane stated a motion is in order to enter closed session pursuant to GS-143.318.11(a)(4) for the purpose of considering the location or relocation of a business or industry to Raleigh and to discuss any incentives that may be involved in such a move and pursuant to GS143-318.11(a)(6) to finalize the City Manager’s performance review. On behalf of the Council, Mayor McFarlane moved approval of the motion as read. Her motion was seconded by Mr. Weeks and put to a vote which passed unanimously. The Mayor ruled the motion adopted on an 8-0 and the Council went into closed session at 3:10 p.m.

November 3, 2015

The Council reconvened in open session at 4:00 p.m. Mayor McFarlane announced the Council gave direction to staff with regards to the upcoming budget process relating to an economic development opportunity.

The Mayor also announced the City Council held the annual performance evaluation of the City Manager in Closed Session on October 26, 2015, as provided for pursuant to State law. Following the annual performance review the City Council took the following actions to be commemorated as an addendum to the Manager’s contract, effective with the pay period which commences closest years to the Manager’s date of hire of November 18: increase base salary 3.5% to $231,426 and established a City Manager monthly expense allowance in the amount of $500 per month.

RECESS

Mayor McFarlane announced the meeting recessed at 4:01 p.m. to be reconvened at 7:00 p.m.

Gail G. SmithCity Clerk

jt/CC11-03-15

November 3, 2015

The City Council of the City of Raleigh met in a regular reconvened session at 7:00 p.m. on Tuesday, November 3, 2015 in the City Council Chamber, Room 201 of the Raleigh Municipal Building, Avery C. Upchurch Government Complex, 222 W. Hargett Street, Raleigh, North Carolina, with all Council members present. The Mayor called the called the meeting to order and the following items were discussed with action taken as shown.

REQUESTS AND PETITIONS OF CITIZENS

PUBLIC NUISANCE – 1109 MARK STREET – WITHDRAWN

Jeremiah Frederick had requested to discuss concerns about alleged damage to the lawn in front of his office property at 1109 Mark Street. Mr. Frederick was not at the meeting therefore the item was removed with no action taken.

STORMWATER PROBLEM – 4401 DELTA LAKE DRIVE – REFERRED TO ADMINISTRATION

Khaled Assel, 6558 Guard Hill Lane, indicated he owns property at 4401 Delta Lake Drive in Raleigh. He indicated the City of Raleigh dumps stormwater onto the property and he feels that should stop as it is contaminating the property. There are pipes that go to and on his property. The stormwater is coming from the public property and its useless for him to pay taxes and be responsible for this property as it is being destroyed by the City. He asked the Council to please have the City stop dumping water onto his property. He asked that the City remove the pipe from his property so he can use the property. The City should take care of the situation as the City is causing the problem.

City Manager Hall suggested the item be referred to Administration which would provide a report to Council. Without objection the item was so referred.

AMPLIFIED ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT – LUC LOUNGE – REQUEST TO REVOKE – REFERRED TO THE CITY ATTORNEY

Nicholas Voss, 2128 Bellaire Avenue, indicated he is representing the neighborhood of Forest Acres which has great concerns with the Luc Lounge. He stated Luc Lounge has received constant noise violations; there is constant noise that penetrates into their back yards, living rooms, bedrooms, etc. He stated it is normally a peaceful neighborhood but the constant noise problems are causing great concern. He stated it is not that they hear music from the Luc Lounge, the problem is there is no time they cannot hear the music. The base penetrates from the lounge into their neighborhood and houses. He stated this club does not operate under normal hours and pointed out they have received a number ALE violations and that prompted the revocation of that license; however, now they operate from 1:00 a.m. to 6:00 a.m. through a bring your own bottle concept. He stated their neighborhood is about a 1,000 feet away. This music is occurring in the dead of the night. He stated he had included with his petition to appear before Council, information on the over 150 calls between May 1 and October 1. He talked about the number of complaints, violation and lack of citations. He stated of the 42 violations at

November 3, 2015

no time was the music turned down. He talked about the number of complaints, problems, work with the Police department, etc.

Mayor McFarlane questioned what constitutes a public nuisance which could cause revocation of their permits. Deputy City Attorney Leapley indicated this issue has not been formally referred to the City Attorney’s office, however, the City Attorney’s office and the Police have been working with the issue. She talked about the process that has to be used or involved and suggested that the Council allow the City Attorney to proceed with the investigation and proceed with court action when and if that point is reached. Ms. Baldwin moved the Attorney’s recommendation be upheld. Her motion was seconded by Mr. Maiorano.

Mr. Odom questioned if there are enough parking spaces pointing out there are towing signs every where people leave their bottles, trash, etc., and the business owners near the club do not want them parking in their lots. Mr. Odom stated he thought in the afternoon section of the meeting, the Council took action to restrict parking on part of the street with it being pointed out that is correct. What can be done was talked about with Mr. Maiorano pointing out it is apparent this is a public nuisance and the City needs to do something about it. Mayor McFarlane questioned if they have an amplified entertainment permit from the City with the City Manager indicating he is not sure. The motion to authorize the City Attorney to proceed with the investigation and proceed with court action if necessary was put to a vote which resulted in all members voting in the affirmative. The Mayor ruled the motion adopted on an 8-0.

MATTERS SCHEDULED FOR PUBLIC HEARING

NEIGHBORHOOD REVITALIZATION STRATEGY AREA PLAN – HEARING – APPROVED; TARBORO ROAD IMPROVEMENTS – REPORT REQUESTED

This is a continuation from the September 1, 2015 hearing before the City Council to provide citizens further opportunity to comment on the Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy Area Plan (NRSA) prior to the submittal to the US Department Housing and Urban Development (HUD).

Once the hearing is closed, the Council may take action to approve the plan for submittal to HUD.

Larry Jarvis, Housing and Neighborhoods Director, provided an update of what has occurred since September. He presented a PowerPoint talking about Neighborhood Revitalization Strategic Area (NRSA) Plan. He went over the background, benefits, outreach and community engagement before the beginning of the public hearing and since the public hearing, and how NRSA links to the strategic plan, Department of Housing and Urban Development which encourages mixed income neighborhoods, read information about NRSA eligibility, the boundaries of the proposed 2016 NRSA, activities allowed and proposed, community outreach prior to September 1, 2015 and since September 1, 2015, what they heard relative to mixed income concerns and responses, need to increase affordable housing in the areas and the changes to increase numbers to at least 60%, gave illustrations, the next steps and recommendations.

November 3, 2015

In response to questioning from Ms. Baldwin, Mr. Jarvis pointed out the City has a contract with JDavis to help develop the master plan and talked about the public process which will be used, mixed income and pointed out until the staff knows the direction of Council, the consultant is on hold. He stated after the public process the item will come back to City Council. Mr. Stephenson expressed appreciation for the public outreach pointing out most of the comments he heard during the meeting held at Tarboro Road related to low interest or forgivable loans and asked for clarification on that concept. Mr. Jarvis explained the desire to craft rehab loan programs that will be attractive to seniors. He stated a lot of the times elderly people do not want to encumber their home for long periods of time, they want to be able to pass their homes to their heirs. The details are yet to be finalized and staff will be going out to the public with those at the appropriate times. Mr. Weeks expressed appreciation that the percentage for low and moderate income housing has been raised to 60% and questioned if that can be raised any time during the process. Mr. Jarvis stated as the final edits are made, language could be added to make sure the Council could make adjustments at any time it sees fit. Mr. Maiorano had questions relative to preserving affordability for the long term and if that is built into the process for new units. Mr. Jarvis explained the loan process, recapturing of funding and how it would be set up to discourage people from selling quickly after they purchase the homes. He talked about the possibility of land trust units, etc.

Mayor McFarlane opened the hearing.

Octavia Rainey, 1516 East Lane Street, pointed out she had lived in the College Park area some 60 years. She stated she is opposed to this plan pointing out she met with HUD officials yesterday and has asked for a Federal investigation into the process. She talked about the Census Tract 506 and how the boundaries have been germanded. She stated 509 is worse than 506. She presented a chart showing the “most distressed areas.” She expressed concern as to why Greg Warren of DHIC filed the College Park LLC pointing out this designation should be for Washington Terrace. She talked about meetings she has attended and the need to build trust. She asked the Council not to approve the process as she feels it is sneaky, under handed, etc. She again talked about her call for a federal investigation.

Roland Gammon, 2845 Claremont Road, Chair of DHIC, distributed the following written comments:

I currently serve as the Chair of the DHIC Board of Directors and would like to thank the City for your support over the years. We know that we could not have purchased the Washington Terrace property without your assistance in early 2014. And, this partnership will continue as we build new housing in the site.

Over the past 6 years that I have been on the DHIC Board I have been continuously impressed with both quality of housing that DHIC builds and the staff's capacity to leverage financial resources from all quarters to get the biggest bang for the buck.

November 3, 2015

Further, I have learned that DHIC's reputation for creating quality creative affordable housing solutions extends well beyond the immediate area. DHIC is a regional, and indeed, a national leader.

The DHIC Board sees the NRSA designation in the area that includes Washington Terrace as an important tool that could help us add to a neighborhood rich with history.

NRSA will enhance our chances to secure tax-credits to assist the delivery of affordable housing for seniors.

We will also make critically important infrastructure upgrades at the Washington Terrace site that will benefit the entire area- water, sanitary sewer, and stormwater systems.

We support the City's application for NRSA designation in the area and because of all the benefit it is poised to have for the entire area, we are glad that Washington Terrace will be a key component.

Thank you again for the time to speak this evening.

Mr. Gammon stated he does not recognize the comments about Greg Warren and pointed out DHIC and Greg Warren are highly regarded nationally and he just does not understand the comments. He stated DHIC and the City of Raleigh have enjoyed a good relationship over the years and talked about how this program came about.

Janet Barnes, President of the African American Caucus, distributed a pack of information relative to their concerns. She stated she attended the meeting with HUD officials and presented the same packet to them. She expressed concern about the LLC form by Greg Warren. She talked about David Price and also suggested that the Council take McDonna Acres out of the numbers as that is a historic area and shouldn’t be included as they do not need financial assistance. She stated if that area is removed then it would not meet the requirements. She stated the packet of information includes information on the formation of the LLC, talked about her feeling that it is a conflict of interest on the part of the DHIC, talked about calling for the federal investigation indicating HUD is not doing their job and they should never approve of McDonna Acres being included. She talked about their expectations and the votes they represent.

Greg Warren, President of DHIC and of the College Park Collaborative LLC, stated he is totally confused by the conversations and the comments being made. He stated when DHIC purchases property they always put it in a LLC that is how they have operated for many years. This LLC was formed to purchase the Washington Terrace property and talked about how he may not have choose the right name for the LLC and he apologizes for any confusion. He stated he would disclose any information about the College Park Collaborative and made the following remarks:

November 3, 2015

Good evening, I am Gregg Warren President of DHIC and my office is located in the historic Prairie Building at 113 S. Wilmington Street, Raleigh NC.

We at DHIC are most appreciative of the City's support of our plan to replace the existing run-down apartments at Washington Terrance with new, beautiful, energy efficient and affordable apartment homes.

As you know, DHIC has a more than a 40 year legacy of creating affordable; high-quality housing for renters and first-time homebuyers in Raleigh and the Triangle. In SE Raleigh alone, DHIC has built 8 affordable rental communities totaling 590 apartments with a value in excess of $40 million.

And, we have helped many SE Raleigh residents find a path to homeownership.

I use the term "transformative" carefully, but I think you will find that our plan will indeed have a significant positive impact on the lives of Washington Terrace residents, our adjoining residential neighborhoods to the North and South, and St. Augustine's University.

We envision a community that embraces the best qualities of green, sustainable design that will enhance family stability and healthy living for all of our residents.

Our team has engaged Washington Terrace residents, businesses, congregations and other stakeholders in a generative discussion on the plan to remake the Washington Terrace community. Our master plan is well underway and will be presented to the community in December.

Affordability, accessibility and quality are three concepts we have heard time and again through the series of community and stakeholder meetings held discussing the future of Washington Terrace and the neighborhood.

While our first priority is to replace the existing 245 apartments with new affordable apartments on a one-to one basis, later phases of our plan will involve for sale housing and perhaps market rate rental housing. We will build a mixed income community.

The NRSA designation will immediately help DHIC compete for 9% tax-credits that will allow us to more quickly deliver affordable, accessible high quality housing and amenities at Washington Terrace for seniors.

DHIC is immensely qualified and remains committed as we have for decades, to use all available tools to deliver and maintain affordable apartments and homes for sale- and NRSA can help create more of those opportunities. Thank you!

November 3, 2015

Sheila Porter presented the following prepared statement:

Thank you for the opportunity to speak this evening. My name is Shelia Porter and I have the pleasure of serving as the Director of the DHIC Homeownership Center located at 450 East Davie Street.

I am certified as a counselor through the Association of Housing Counselors and NeighborWorks® America. I also have my N.C. Real Estate Brokers License.

At the DHIC Homeownership Center, our goal is to aid individuals build wealth and housing stability through homeownership opportunities.

Our services include credit repair, budget counseling and providing support throughout the home buying process.

We also work in partnership with area banks and the City of Raleigh to provide our services to families, at our below 80% of the Area Median, who seek City down payment assistance.

We understand that a possible outcome of NRSA in this area is the creation of affordable homeownership opportunities and we believe that DHIC can be of service.

In 2014, over 400 prospective homebuyers participated in our monthly Homebuyers Education Workshops and we're on track this year to match or exceed this number.

In 2014, 90 individuals that participated in our program went on to purchase their first home. Here is a snapshot of who we served:

64% were aged 31 to 50; 65% African-American 51% had 2 or more children; 73% had household incomes less than $40,000;

I do not want to simply recite percentages to you, but wanted you to know that DHIC stands ready to assist individuals and families prepare for homeownership opportunities that may result from the NRSA designation and we look forward to doing so. Thank you!

The resident at 4201 Winter Place told of her experience of tutoring some young people who live in the New Bern Avenue area and these two young people’s need for affordable housing. She gave the history of this family who pays $625 a month for rent and health issues that caused the father to have to retire and what they have gone through to try to pay their rent. She talked about

November 3, 2015

how this family and others need affordable housing and asked the Council to do what they can to provide for affordable housing.

Les Seitz, 3200 Ridge Mill Road, indicated he has served on the Affordable Housing Task Force, has a long-standing relationship with DHIC and called on the Council to support staff’s recommendation for the NSRA. He pointed out how he feels approving the NSRA would be in keeping with the goals and plans that the Council has recently approved including the adoption of the Affordable Housing Location Policy which replaced the scattered site policy. He stated affordable housing is a hot topic; talked about various Council members’ efforts relative to housing and Council members’ efforts to provide additional resources for affordable housing. He asked the Council to move forward and keep up the good work.

Cheryl Parson presented the following prepared statement:

Good Evening! My name is Cheryl Parsons and I serve as the Regional Manager for Ginkgo Residential, the property management company contracted by DHIC to manage property operations at Washington Terrace. My address of record is 1951 Booker Drive, Raleigh NC.

Since DHIC purchased the property in January 2014, we have enjoyed working with DHIC and with the residents at Washington Terrace.

Our property team consists of Shavonna Herron, property manager, Barry Tyler, assistant manager, Jamien Taylor, maintenance supervisor and Ricky Stokes, maintenance tech and they have done a great job serving and meeting the needs of residents at the property on a daily basis.

As stated earlier, Washington Terrace was built in 1950 and as you can imagine, maintaining a property this old that has gotten great usage over the years is a daily challenge for our team, though we manage to do.

We are reminded each day of this challenge and the desperate need for new construction housing when we go into vacant units to make ready for the on-site relocation of current Washington Terrace residents.

We are also reminded when things breakdown and we're told that they don't make the parts anymore.

Ginkgo manages properties throughout the region and we work with owners going through similar processes and comparably, I can say that DHIC has been very thoughtful and accommodating and has worked extremely hard to make sure that current residents are cared for during this transition.

Thank you for your time and we support the approval of NRSA so that those we serve on a daily basis can live in quality, safe, and affordable housing.

November 3, 2015

Glen French, 1732 Quail Ridge Road, presented the following statement:

Good evening! My name is Glenn French and I reside at 1732 Quail Ridge Rd, Raleigh.

I am a DHIC Board member as well as a member of the board's Washington Terrace Advisory Committee.

This year I am celebrating my 40th anniversary as a Certified Property Manager and I have extensive experience in property management, urban renewal and the turnaround of distressed properties.

Earlier in my career, I served as the director of management of the Cambridge Housing Authority in Massachusetts and upon my departure, the city-wide tenant organization recognized me for the work I had done.

In addition, for 11 of those years, I served as a consultant to Saint Augustine's University where I developed, designed, and implemented the only real estate degree program among the nation's HBCUs. I also had the pleasure of serving as Chair of the Board of Directors of the St. Augustine's Community Development Corporation.

The board created the Washington Terrace sub-committee to advise the DHIC board and staff on matters directly related to the Washington Terrace civic engagement and master planning process.

I have attended most, if not all of the community meetings hosted by DHIC, and at least one of the City sponsored meetings, and I was impressed with the involvement from the community and especially impressed with the involvement of Washington Terrace residents, whose presence served as a constant reminder of why we were all there.

At the meetings, I heard firsthand what residents wanted to see in a new Washington Terrace and what they valued in their neighborhood and in my experience, what I heard only served to enhance the process and ultimately the outcome of the master plan.

However, what I heard most often where residents asking how soon would the new housing be made available. In other words, they wanted to see new housing sooner, rather than later.

This leads me to why supporting the NRSA designation is important for DHIC. Approving the NRSA will help DHIC deliver new housing sooner for residents who currently live in this area and for those who want to return to this area to live.

November 3, 2015

We are also very much aware of the history that is associated with Washington Terrace and the surrounding neighborhood and we, like others, want to make sure that all viable affordable housing options are available for those who need it the most.

Thank you for your time and support and we look forward to future opportunities that will serve the housing needs of the community.

Janet Howard, Poole Road, indicated the question before the City Council is whether the designation really meets the criteria as established by the Federal government. She stated the program is intended to reduce poverty in an area and there are five elements. One of the elements relates to resident engagement and community leadership and she feels the process was missed in this discussion. She talked about the Washington Terrace redevelopment plan but questioned if that makes this an NRSA area. She stated there should be other stakeholders at the table such as St. Augustine’s, talked about the program needing strategic and accountable partnerships, the need to look at the entire area and how this doesn’t look beyond Washington Terrace, her understanding that the infrastructure would only benefit Washington Terrace or the lots owned by the City of Raleigh, called on the Council to look at the entire area, Maple Street to Heck Street as she feels they should be included. She stated she has seen three versions of the plans with three different sets of numbers, expressed concern that they were not given all of the information and everyone should look at more than Washington Terrace.

James Giles, 2120 Sanderford Road, talked about his work for the Community Development department some 20 years ago. He spoke against the NRSA plan, talked about how he worked and what his job for the city entailed and stated in his opinion this plan does not meet the Federal guidelines and the people are not being treated fairly.

Colby Crandall, 211 Ashe Avenue, talked about the need to get the community involved and that has to be done if this is done right.

A representative of Grace AME Church which is located at the corner of Hill and Boyer talked about the different master plans that have been developed for the area. He stated he is not opposed to what is being talked about but he just feels they should be included in the process. We should be talking about more than Washington Terrace. He stated a group came together and paid for a master plan for College Park, talked about St. Augustine’s University being ready to participate in the process and asked that they all be included at the table. They want to be participates.

No one else asked to be heard thus the hearing was closed.

Ms. Baldwin indicated she needs a little clarity on what is being proposed with the NRSA. She stated she understands the NRSA is only a designation, the plan will come later. There will be a lot of work done in the future with the planning process, etc. Mr. Jarvis indicated that is correct.

November 3, 2015

In response to questioning from Mr. Weeks, Mr. Jarvis clarified the census track used and how the boundaries were drawn. Ms. Baldwin questioned what staff is asking the Council to approve with Mr. Jarvis presenting the following list.

Approve the draft FY 2016 Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy Area (NRSA) Plan;

Amend the 2016-2020 Consolidated Plan to include the NRSA designation and Plan; and

Authorize submission of the Plan to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Mr. Maiorano moved approval of the recommendations. His motion was seconded by Mr. Stephenson. What will happen at this point was talked about briefly. The motion as stated was put to a roll call vote which resulted in all members voting in the affirmative. The Mayor ruled the motion adopted on an 8-0 vote.

Ms. Baldwin pointed out the infrastructure comments that were made earlier made her think about concerns raised by Mr. Weeks and Mr. Odom in trying to get improvements made for Tarboro Road. She stated she understands there is funding available in reserve and she would ask administration to bring back a report about the possibility of earmarking up to $3M to develop necessary infrastructure for Tarboro Road. Mayor McFarlane stated it was her understanding we were waiting for the results of the economic development study that is occurring in this area. City Manager Hall talked about the design elements along the corridor pointing out staff could provide an update. When this update could be provided was talked about briefly with the Mayor pointing out she thought we were waiting for the study results to find out how to best spend the money. City Manager Hall indicated he could schedule a time to present the results and Council can determine how to go ahead. Ms. Baldwin asked that it be brought to the next meeting with City Manager Hall indicating he would provide an update at the next meeting.

SIDEWALK INSTALLATION – WOODLINKS – HEARING – APPROVED

This was a hearing to consider a petition signed by 100 percent of the property owners to install a sidewalk on the east side of Woodlinks from Lorimer Road to the existing sidewalk, which is an approximate distance of 217 feet at an estimated cost of $21,700.

Following the hearing, the Council may take action on the request.

The Mayor opened the hearing no one asked to be heard thus the hearing was closed. Ms. Baldwin moved approval as outlined. Her motion was seconded by Ms. Crowder and a roll call voted in all members voting in the affirmative. The Mayor ruled the motion adopted on an 8-0 vote.

November 3, 2015

ANNEXATION PETITIONS – VARIOUS – HEARING – ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTION ADOPTED

This was a hearing to consider the following petitioned annexations.

Annexation Area Electoral DistrictEmpowerment Place D351 South Rogers Lane C3005/3009 Club Drive A

Following the hearing, if the Council wishes to proceed, it would be appropriate to adopt ordinances annexing the areas effective November 3, 2015 and adoption of a resolution placing the areas in the appropriate electoral district.

The Mayor opened the hearing on each location. No one asked to be heard thus the hearing was closed. Ms. Baldwin moved adoption of ordinances annexing the properties effective November 3, 2015 and adoption of a resolution placing the properties in the appropriate electoral districts. Her motion was seconded by Mr. Weeks and a roll call vote resulted in all members voting in the affirmative. The Mayor ruled the motion adopted on an 8-0 vote. See Ordinances 510, 511, 512 and Resolution 223.

STC-8-15 – BELVIN DRIVE – HEARING – HELD FOR SIX MONTHS

This was a hearing to consider a request from Carolyn Elliott to close a right-of-way known as Belvin Drive according to information included in Resolution 2015-204.

Following the hearing, if the Council wishes to proceed, it would be appropriate to adopt a resolution directing the closing according to Resolution 2015-204.

Eric Lamb, City Planning Department, explained the situation pointing out this relates to two lots that have been recombined and the property owner is requesting to close the unopened section of right-of-way. He pointed out there is an adjacent developer that is doing some mediation stormwater work which involves this unopened right-of-way.

Thomas Craven, Priest Carven representing an adjacent property owner who is working to solve some flooding problems. He stated the plan relates to discharging the stormwater across this right of way of Belvin Drive. He stated he had been working with staff and the City Attorney relative to an encroachment agreement that would allow his clients to encroach on the right-of-way to help resolve this stormwater problem. He indicated his client is asking that the Council defer any action on closing this right-of-way until they can execute the resolution to the stormwater problem. He stated it is felt that will probably take 3 to 6 months depending on timing of development process, weather, etc.

Carolyn Elliott indicated she had received permission to combine her two lots. She stated since that recombination occurred there is no need for the right-of-way. It does not serve any purpose.

November 3, 2015

She explained why she wanted to close the right-of-way. Mr. Odom pointed out it is good that an adjacent development is trying to resolve the stormwater problem and staff has agreed with the approach being used. It was pointed out even though the lots have been combined and the right of way has never been opened the city still owns the right-of-way. After brief discussion on the timing, etc., it was agreed to hold action on this request until the stormwater issue is resolved which will be approximately 6 months and the item could be placed on the agenda for an update at that time.

STC-9-15 – UNNAMED ALLEY – 1105/1115 WEST LENOIR STREET – HEARING – CONTINUED UNTIL NOVEMBER 17, 2015 MEETING

This is a hearing to consider a request from Robert Peacock and Judy Payne to close an unnamed public right-of-way for an alley located between 1105 and 1115 West Lenoir Street according to information included in Resolution 2015-205.

Following the hearing, if the Council wishes to proceed, it would be appropriate to adopt a resolution directing the closing according to Resolution 2015-205.

Eric Lamb of the Planning Department explained the request, location, etc.

The Mayor opened the hearing.

Eric Vann presented an affidavit of H. Glenn White, Jr., owner of the property located at 1115 West Lenoir Street explaining his ownership/involvement since 1946. Mr. Vann talked about the 2030 Comprehensive Plan, the fact that this alleyway has never been a public road, presented photos of the area and pointed out if the alleyway is closed it could divide the corner of lot 6 and deny access to his client’s property. He referred to General Statutes 136-96, presented information on how the recorded subdivision occurred in March 1925 and an alley was created on that map and is still in existence; Lot 5 was sold but the alley is still there. The maps have never been changed. He talked about the original plat of Boylan Heights and pointed out he feels the petition submitted is flawed. Who owns what was discussed. Deputy City Attorney Leapley pointed out an alley or street closing could not take away access to any lot. She suggested that the Council hold the hearing open and allow the City Attorney’s office to come back with information.

Judy Payne, one of the petitioners, pointed out the present situation has existed as far back as she can remember. She talked about state law which allows the City Council the right to close a street or alleyway and what occurred in 1953 relating to the closing. She indicated the alleyway has not existed for past 20 years and the adjacent property owner has not expressed any concern throughout the years that they alleyway did not exist. She talked about adverse possession, questioned the need for ingress and egress if the same person owns all of the property and questioned why it has become an issue at this point.

Ms. Crowder moved that the hearing be continued and placed on the November 17 agenda to give the City Attorney an opportunity to provide a report. Her motion was seconded by Mr.

November 3, 2015

Gaylord and put to a vote which passed unanimously. The Mayor ruled the motion adopted on a 8-0 vote.

STC-10-15 – EAST WHITAKER MILL/NEW ROAD – HEARING – APPROVED WITH RETENTION OF EASEMENTS

This is a hearing to consider a request from Ray Cooper to close the right-of-way labeled abandoned road between East Whitaker Road and New Road according to resolution 2015-206.

Following the hearing, if the Council wished to proceed, it would be appropriate to adopt a resolution directing the closing according to Resolution 2015-206.

Eric Lamb, City Planning Department explained the request, location, etc.

The Mayor opened the hearing, no one asked to be heard. Mr. Lamb pointed out if the right of way is abandoned or closed, it would be appropriate to retain a public utility easement. The hearing the hearing was closed. Ms. Baldwin moved approval of the closing with the retention of the public utility easements. Her motion was seconded by Mr. Gaylord and a roll call vote resulted in all members voting in the affirmative. The Mayor ruled the motion adopted on an 8-0 vote. See Resolution 224.

REZONING Z-20-14 – SIX FORKS ROAD – HEARING – CLOSED; TO BE PLACED ON NOVEMBER 17 AGENDA AS A SPECIAL ITEM

This is a continuation from the October 7, 2015 and October 20, 2015 hearings to consider a request from Sally E. Harris and Joseph S. Harris Revocable Trust to rezone approximately 1.5 acres from Residential 4 (R-4) to Office Mixed-Use – 3 Stories with Parking Limited Frontage Conditional Use (OS-3-PL-CU). The property is located on the east side of Six Forks Road at its intersection with Northwood Drive.

Once the hearing is closed, the council may take action to approve, deny, or refer the case to committee.

Assistant Planning Director Travis Crane explained this case, the conditions that have been submitted, etc. Ms. Crowder had questions concerning access.

Attorney Michael Birch indicated the hearing has been held open to talk with representatives of Capital Towers about access but they are not interested in that process. He told of the conversations he had had with some of the residents on Northwood and their concern about construction traffic and traffic in general. He suggested that the Council close the hearing so they could add conditions. He talked about the conditions relating to 25 year storm, offer to cross access even though that may not occur, access points on Northwood, putting a sidewalk on their frontage, traffic calming measures the length of Northwood and talked about the traffic and the number of cars projected to use Northwood.

November 3, 2015

John Cady, 311 Northwood reiterated the concerns he had voiced in the past relative to access onto Northwood and why this property could not have access to Six Forks. The resident at 352 Northwood talked about the conditions and concern about a 30,000 square foot office building with 79 parking spaces, construction traffic, and traffic flow from the area.

Susan Donn, 512 Northwood Drive, talked about Attorney Birch’s efforts to work with the neighborhood and the conditions he is offering relating to construction traffic, traffic patterns, cross access. She stated 3 Council members have said that they would support or have conversations about changing the light at Capital Towers to a full traffic light, etc. Mr. Stephenson asked about the traffic calming and if it would move past the ones on the books. Todd Delk indicated it is not on the City’s list but if the private developer provides traffic calming they would suggest that it go through the same process. The traffic pattern wants once the median goes in on Six Forks Road was talked about as was the fact that the corridor study shows a pedestrian and bike path along Six Forks Road. Mr. Stephenson talked about the buffer between this property and the neighborhood.

The hearing was closed and it was directed that the item be placed on the November 17, 2015 agenda to allow for consideration of the case with new conditions.

REZONING Z-36-14 – OBERLIN ROAD – HEARING – CLOSED – TO BE PLACED ON NOVEMBER 17 AGENDA

This is a continuation of the July 7, 2014, October 7, 2015, October 20, 2015 hearings considering a request from Oberlin Gardens, Oberlin Road Land Leases, LLC, Capital Land Investment Company, and Catherine H. Wall to rezone approximately 2.14 acres from Residential-6 with Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District (R-6 w/NCOD) to Residential Mixed-Use – 3 Stories – Conditional Use (RX-3-CU). The property is located on the east side of Oberlin Road south of its intersection with Glover Lane.

Once the hearing is closed, the Council may take action to approve, deny, or refer the case to committee.

Planner Travis Crane explained the request and discussions that have taken place.

Attorney Michael Birch, representing the applicant, indicated they have deferred this a number of times waiting for the Council to take action on TC-8. Attorney Birch asked that the Council close the hearing so they could present additional conditions particularly relating to heights being no more than two stories.

Sabrina Goode, Executive Director of Friends of Oberlin, Rebecca Ryan, 613 Rosemont, Mabel Patterson, Carmin Cauthen, 703 Latta Street spoke about their concerns in protecting the Oberlin neighborhood, continued dialogue in an effort to try to preserve their neighborhood, the history of Oberlin Village, the fight that Oberlin Village has endured through the years to protect their neighborhood, asked Council not to confuse Oberlin Village with Cameron Village, talked about the history, people who grew up in the area, the assess that Oberlin Village is, etc. Mike

November 3, 2015

Houston, 701 Cameron Street, representing the Cameron Village Condo Association spoke in support of Z-36-14 pointing out they continue to see a lot of high rises around Cameron Village and a two-story project in this area would be good.

No one else asked to be heard, thus the hearing was closed and the item will be placed on the November 17 agenda as a special item to consider the case with additional conditions.

REZONING Z-22-15 – BRIER CREEK PARKWAY – HEARING – CLOSED – TO BE PLACED ON NOVEMBER 17 AGENDA AS A SPECIAL ITEM

This is a continuation from the October 20, 2015 hearing to consider a request by representatives of SLF Ruby Jones, LLC to rezone approximately 9.48 acres from Thoroughfare District Conditional Use with Planned Development District (CUD/TD w/PDD) to Office Mixed-Use – 5 stories – Conditional Use (OX-5-CU). The property is located on the southeast quadrant of Brier Creek Parkway and TW Alexander Drive.

Once the hearing is closed, the Council may take action to approve, deny, or refer the case to committee.

Assistant Planning Director Travis Crane explained the request, conditions, proposed use, etc.

Attorney Chad Essex talked about revised conditions relating to build-to, the fact there has been no opposition, they have submitted new conditions to staff but they cannot be accepted as the hearing is still open. He asked that the hearing be closed, the new conditions accepted and the item be on the November 17 agenda for further consideration. Without objection, Mayor McFarlane closed the hearing and directed the item be placed on the November 17 agenda.

REZONING Z-27-15 – SOUTH BLOODWORTH/SOUTH EAST STREET/HEARING – PROPERTY REZONED TO OX-5 – UL

This is a hearing to consider a request from MIP Holdings, LLC to rezone approximately one acre from Residential Business (RB) to Neighborhood Mixed-Use – 5 Stories – Urban Limited (NX-5-UL), General Use. The property is located on the north side of East Hargett Street extending north along South Bloodworth and South East Streets.


Deputy Planning Director Crane explained the case, existing zoning, presented aerial views and views from various locations pointing out it is a general case so no conditions, uses allowed in the existing versus proposed zoning, Future Land Use Map, Urban Form Map and went through the inconsistent policies that were determined during the Comprehensive Plan Analysis. Outstanding issues include anticipated demands for transit, sewer and fire flow capacities may need to be addressed upon development and considerations of contextual site design as identified

November 3, 2015

by the Comprehensive Plan and area redevelopment plan. He pointed out the Planning Commission recommends approval on a 9-0 vote as the proposal is consistent with the Future Land Use Map, Urban Form Map and several pertinent policies of the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed rezoning is reasonable and in the public interest as the request supports a mixture of retail, office and/or residential uses on the edge of downtown on a currently underutilized site. The request is compatible with the surrounding area. The requested zoning is the same as that proposed under the UDO remapping initiatives.

The Mayor opened the hearing. Attorney Mack Paul representing the owners indicated they requested a general use as this rezoning is basically intended as a placeholder as they do not know when remapping may occur. He talked about the remapping discussion, areas of concern, discussions with the CAC, conceptual site plan for 19 units, talked about the need for a text change about building type to allow, fourth level terraces and pointed out if the Council so chooses, the hearing could be closed and they would accept OX-5-UL. No one spoke in opposition thus the hearing was closed. Mr. Weeks moved rezoning the property covered by Z-27-15 to OX- 5 – UL. His motion was seconded by Ms. Baldwin and put to a vote which resulted in all members voting in the affirmative. The Mayor ruled the motion adopted on an 8-0 vote. See Ordinance 507 ZC 717.

REZONING Z-29-15 – NORTH ROGERS LANE – HEARING – APPROVED

This is a hearing to consider a request from the Wake County Board of Education to rezone approximately 20.47 acres from Residential-4 with Planned Development District (R-4 w/PDD) to Residential Mixed-Use – 4 Stories (RX-4), General Use. The property is located on the east side of North Rogers Lane at Robbins Drive.


Deputy Planning Director Crane presented the case pointing out the surrounding development is mostly residential, talked about the master plan, what is allowed under existing versus proposed zoning pointing out there are no inconsistent policies, no outstanding issues. The Planning Commission recommends approval on a 9-0 vote as the proposal is consistent with Future Land Use Map and pertinent policies of the Comprehensive Plan, is reasonable and in the public interest and the proposed school will address a pressing need in the community and the proposal is compatible with the surrounding areas and the anticipated school combines limited height, considerable setbacks, landscaping and open space with interconnectivity to existing and potential development. The South CAC voted 10 to 3 for approval. The Mayor opened the hearing, no one asked to be heard thus the hearing was closed. Mr. Maiorano moved approval as requested. His motion was seconded by Ms. Baldwin and put to a vote which passed unanimously. The Mayor ruled the motion adopted on an 8-0 vote. See Ordinance 507 ZC 717.

November 3, 2015

REZONING Z-31-15 – POOLE ROAD – HEARING – APPROVED

This is a hearing to consider a request from the Wake County Board of Education to rezone approximately 22.87 acres from Shopping Center and Manufactured Housing (SC and MH) to Residential Mixed-Use – 4 Stories (RX-4), General Use. The property is located on the south side of Poole Road west of its intersection with Barwell Road and Barwell Road, west side south of its intersection with Poole Road.


Deputy Planning Director Crane described the request briefly explained the only inconsistent policy is LU1.2 and pointed out the Planning Commission recommends approval on a 9-0 vote. The Southeast CAC recommended denial on a 4-9 vote. It was pointed there was no one in the audience to speak on this case. The hearing was opened and closed. Mr. Weeks moved approval as requested. His motion was seconded by Ms. Baldwin and a roll call vote resulted in all members voting in the affirmative. The Mayor ruled the motion adopted on an 8-0 vote. See Ordinance 507 ZC 717.

REZONING Z-32-15 – OAK FOREST DRIVE – HEARING – APPROVED

This was a This is a hearing to consider a request from Robert T. Hedrick to rezone approximately 16.94 acres from Industrial-1 (IND-1) to Commercial Mixed-Use – 3 Stories – Conditional Use (CX-3-CU). The property is located on the north side of Oak Forest Drive at its intersection with Departure Drive.


Deputy Planning Director Crane pointed out Council members had received information in their agenda packet. No one was present to speak for or against the proposal. The Mayor opened the hearing no one asked to be heard, thus the hearing was closed. Mr. Odom moved approval as outlined. His motion was seconded by Ms. Baldwin and a roll call vote resulted in all members voting in the affirmative. The Mayor ruled the motion adopted on an 8-0 vote. See Ordinance 507 ZC 717.

TC-10-15 – ALLY TRANSITIONS – HEARING – ORDINANCE ADOPTED

This is a hearing to consider adoption of an ordinance to amend Section 3.5 of the Part 10A Raleigh Unified Development Ordinance (UDO), Transitions, to address situations where a Mixed-Use District or Campus District is separated from a Residential District (R-1 through R-10) by an intervening ally.


November 3, 2015

Deputy Planning Director Crane pointed out Council members received information in their agenda packet. The Mayor opened the hearing. There was no one in the audience to speak for or against the item. The hearing was closed. Ms. Baldwin moved approval of TC-10-15 as presented. Her motion was seconded by Mr. Odom and a roll call vote resulted in all members voting in the affirmative. The Mayor ruled the motion adopted on an 8-0 vote. See Ordinance 513 TC 374.

ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business, Mayor McFarlane announced the meeting adjourned at 10:15 p.m.

Gail G. SmithCity Clerk

jt/CC11-03-15

raleigh city council regular session minutes - … · web viewraleigh city council regular session...

Documents