raleigh city council regular session - 06/16/2015 · web viewthe city council of the city of...

COUNCIL MINUTES

The City Council of the City of Raleigh met in regular session at 1:00 p.m. on Tuesday, June 16, 2015, in the City Council Chamber of the Raleigh Municipal Building, Avery C. Upchurch Government Complex, 222 West Hargett Street, Raleigh, North Carolina, with the following present.

Mayor Pro Tem John Odom, PresidingCouncilor Mary-Ann BaldwinCouncilor Thomas G. CrowderCouncilor Bonner GaylordCouncilor Wayne K. MaioranoCouncilor Russ StephensonCouncilor Eugene Weeks

Mayor Pro Tem Odom called the meeting to order at 1:02 p.m. The invocation was rendered by Reverend Dr. Michael Parnell of Temple Baptist Church and the Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilor Maiorano. The following items were discussed with action taken as shown.

RECOGNITION OF SPECIAL AWARDS

WEDGE COMMUNITY GARDEN OF RALEIGH – NEIGHBORHOODS, USA 2015 NEIGHBORHOOD OF THE YEAR AWARD – PRESENTED

Mayor Pro Tem Odom announced the Wedge Garden of Raleigh received special recognition and read the following:

Receiving the recognition today are Shamsa Visone, Community Gardner; Dan Bagley, Community Specialist; and Sheila Lynch, Neighborhood Services Supervisor.

Neighborhoods, USA named the Wedge Garden in Raleigh, NC the Grand Prize winner of the Neighborhood of the Year Award for 2015 at its luncheon held Friday, May 22 at the 40th Annual NUSA Conference in Houston, Texas.

Led by Shamsa Visone and located on the Alexander Family YMCA property in Raleigh, Wedge Community Garden is a true community garden and learning center that connects and motivates students and families from diverse backgrounds through organic gardening, environmental stewardship, and nutrition education.

Since 2012, it has promoted healthy and connected neighborhoods because it brings neighbors and volunteers together by gardening, educating, and sharing the harvest among neighbors, volunteers, and those in need.

The Wedge Community Garden also took home top honors in the Multi-Neighborhood Partnership Projects category.

Shamsa Visone accepted the two plaques on behalf of Wedge Community Garden. She thanked the Alexander Family YMCA for use of their property, the community gardeners from

City CouncilJune 16, 2015 of 46

surrounding neighborhoods, the HCAC members, the Raleigh Community Services Department, and the City Council. She said community gardens are on the rise and are extremely important to help educate youth of today for tomorrow, and the Wedge Connect program at the Wedge Garden does exactly that.

Ms. Crowder said she has visited the Wedge Garden. It is beautiful and the produce she was offered was delicious. It stands as a real testament to what wedge gardens can be and what they add to a community in terms of involvement, especially for children who may not be exposed to such things otherwise. She is very proud of the Wedge Garden. Mr. Weeks visited the Wedge Garden yesterday and had a beautiful salad made from the produce he was given. He thanked Ms. Visone and her partners for everything they are doing.

2014 CITY EMPLOYEE OF THE YEAR – MELVIN PARROTT – PRESENTATION MADE

City Manager Ruffin Hall announced this year's City Employee of the Year. He stated one of the most enjoyable parts of his job is to have an opportunity to recognize someone who has done outstanding work. The City of Raleigh Employee of the Year award is presented to one City employee in recognition of exceptional job performance and distinguished service provided to City residents and other employees throughout the previous year. This year's winner was selected from a distinguished group of nine nominees, each of whom had been selected as Employee of the Year for his or her City department. City Manager Hall pointed out the competition was tough because there are so many outstanding employees in the City and it is hard to pick one for Employee of the Year. This year, Melvin Parrott, Service Technician for the Pullen Arts Center, was selected as the 2014 City of Raleigh Employee of the Year. He asked Mr. Parrott to come forward for recognition. Mr. Parrott received two plaques from the City (one each as Employee of the Year for his department and for the City) and a standing ovation from the assembly. City Manager Hall told Mr. Parrott how much he personally appreciated his exceptional service and impeccable work over the last seven years. Mr. Parrott's commitment to keeping the facilities sparkling and in a safe condition during its extraordinarily busy 68-hour week, and his personal dedication to customer service, led to him being selected Employee of the Year. Pullen Arts Center Director Eliza Kiser said she could not think of describing the job Mr. Parrott does without using the words "exceptional customer service" over and over again. Mr. Parrott's fellow workers said his "sixth sense of a co-worker's or patron's needs can be uncanny." In addition to those compliments, one patron of the center called Mr. Parrott "the heartbeat of the Center." City Manager Hall stated in addition to the plaque, Mr. Parrott will receive a check in the amount of $500.00 in recognition of his excellence in service. He closed his remarks by stating that Mr. Parrott is a professional of the highest caliber whose hard work and dedication produces superb results. The City is pleased with his outstanding performance, exceptional skills, inspired leadership, and extraordinary service to the City of Raleigh. Mr. Parrott received another round of applause from the assembly.

AGENCY GRANTEE PRESENTATION – THE RALEIGH BOYCHOIR – RECEIVED

Evelyn McCauley, Executive Director of The Raleigh Boychoir, thanked the Council members for their continued support of The Raleigh Boychoir. She introduced the six choir members who


were present: Oz Rogers, Howie Bair, Will Kleompken, William Hanley, Austin Harger, and Kenya Johnson. The choir, which sings secular and other types of music, was conducted by Megan Yohman of Hunter Elementary as they sang "The Lord Bless You and Keep You" by John Rutter. Director McCauley announced the choir would sing at the Red Hat Amphitheater with "The Lord of the Rings" later in the fall; with the North Carolina Symphony; and with the North Carolina Master Chorale. Mayor Pro Tem Odom thanked the choir for singing and said it was a great way to being the Council meeting.

CONSENT AGENDA

CONSENT AGENDA – APPROVED AS AMENDED

Mayor Pro Tem Odom 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. The vote on the consent agenda will be a roll call vote. He stated he had received the following requests to withdraw an item from the consent agenda: Dix Park Property Acquisition Financing (Odom and Maiorano); License Agreement – Google Fiber (Crowder); Cross Access and Common Use Agreement (Weeks); Contract Services – Off-Street Parking Decks Safety Patrol – Downtown Raleigh Alliance (Maiorano); and Encroachment Request – Horne Street (Crowder). Without discussion, those five items were withdrawn from the consent agenda. Mr. Stephenson moved Administration's recommendations on the remaining items on the consent agenda be upheld. His motion was seconded by Ms. Baldwin and a roll call vote resulted in all Council members voting in the affirmative. The Mayor Pro Tem ruled the motion adopted on a 7-0 vote (Mayor McFarlane absent). The items on the consent agenda were as follows.

FINANCE – MUNICIPAL ORDER TO DIRECT THE COLLECTION OF TAXES – MAYOR AUTHORIZED TO EXECUTE

Council annually adopts orders directing the collection of taxes by the City revenue manager, the Wake County revenue administrator, and the Durham County tax administrator for the portions of Raleigh jurisdiction located in Durham County. The orders are required by state statutes (G.S. 105-321).

Recommendation: Authorize the mayor to execute the tax collection orders. Upheld on consent agenda, Stephenson/Baldwin – 7 ayes (Mayor McFarlane absent).

NEUSE RIVER WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT – FACILITY NAME CHANGE TO "NEUSE RIVER RESOURCE RECOVERY FACILITY" – APPROVED; STAFF DIRECTED TO RENEW DISCHARGE PERMIT

The Neuse River Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP), in operation since the early 1970s, is required to obtain a discharge permit from the State of North Carolina. The existing permit is currently in the renewal phase with the Department of Environment and Natural Resources. As part of the renewal process it is recommended to update the name of the facility to the "Neuse River Resource Recovery Facility," which aligns with the evolving nature of the industry as well as the changing technology of wastewater treatment. These changes include recovery of


valuable resources that can be recycled or reused, including clean water, energy, nutrients and eventually metals. Future technology updates include changing plant operations from being a major energy consumer to producing energy that can be used to offset energy demand as well as to reduce the carbon footprint of the City.

The Smith Creek WWTP, located in Wake Forest, and the Little Creek WWTP, located in Zebulon, do not require name changes as the treatment processes at these facilities will not change in the near future.

Recommendation: Authorize the facility name change and direct staff to take appropriate action to renew the discharge permit. Upheld on consent agenda, Stephenson/Baldwin – 7 ayes (Mayor McFarlane absent).

WRENN ROAD WASTEWATER SPRAY IRRIGATION FACILITY – FACILITY NAME CHANGE TO "CITY OF RALEIGH WRENN ROAD FACILITY" – APPROVED; STAFF DIRECTED TO RENEW DISCHARGE PERMIT

The Wrenn Road Wastewater Spray Irrigation Facility, located in Garner, became a City asset upon utility system merger agreement with the Town of Garner. The facility was originally used to treat wastewater collected from the sewer system serving most of the Garner area, and is also permitted by the State of North Carolina. As part of the permitting process it is recommended to update the name of the facility to the "City of Raleigh Wrenn Road Facility." The facility has not received waste from the sewer system since 2007, when all wastewater flow was permanently redirected to the Neuse River Wastewater Treatment Plant. Operations at the site have since been repurposed for the management of residuals generated by operation of the Dempsey E. Benton Water Treatment Plant. Water plant residuals are currently land applied and irrigated onto hay fields. It is appropriate at this time to update the name of the facility; there are no objections from the Town of Garner.

Recommendation: Authorize the facility name change and direct staff to take appropriate action to renew the discharge permit. Upheld on consent agenda, Stephenson/Baldwin – 7 ayes (Mayor McFarlane absent).

POLICE – DONATION OF BALLISTIC VESTS FOR POLICE DOGS – ACCEPTED

The organization Vested Interest in K9s wishes to donate six ballistic vests, valued at approximately $5,700, to the City for use by the Police Department canine unit.

Recommendation: Accept the donation. Upheld on consent agenda, Stephenson/Baldwin – 7 ayes (Mayor McFarlane absent).

POLICE – 2015 JUSTICE ASSISTANCE GRANT – VARIOUS ACTIONS APPROVED

The Raleigh Police Department is preparing to submit a grant application, in partnership with the Wake County Sheriff, to the Bureau of Justice Assistance for formula funding from the 2015 Justice Assistance Grant program. A copy of the grant application was included with the agenda


packet. The City will be the fiscal agent of the grant. Grant funding will be used to pay overtime and fringe benefits to sworn officers working on problem-oriented policing projects. A total of $167,851 in federal funding was allocated to the Raleigh/Wake County area. The City portion of funding based on disparate jurisdiction will be $92,318; the portion allocated to the Wake County Sheriff’ is $75,533. No cash match is required for this grant. This grant was approved by the Grants Committee on June 4, 2015. A budget amendment in the amount of $167,851 to the Grants Fund is required; accounting details were included with the agenda packet.

Recommendation: Authorize submission of the grant application, authorize the City Manager to execute the required Memorandum of Understanding, and authorize a budget amendment in the amount of $167,851. Upheld on consent agenda, Stephenson/Baldwin – 7 ayes (Mayor McFarlane absent). See Ordinance 456 TF 254.

SOLID WASTE SERVICES – VEHICLE INFORMATION MANAGEMENT SYSTEM – FLEETMIND SOLUTIONS, INC. – CITY MANAGER AUTHORIZED TO EXECUTE CONTRACT; FUNDS TRANSFERRED

The City issued a Request for Proposals for the provision of a real-time vehicle information management system for vehicle fleet tracking and monitoring, including radio frequency identification (RFID) technology with will be utilized with the City’s recycling program. Following evaluation of proposals as well as a pilot project to demonstrate equipment and services, staff has determined that Fleetmind Solutions, Inc. can provide the system which most adequately meets the needs of the City. A contract with Fleetmind Solution, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $478,417 is recommended. Additional information was included with the agenda packet; in order to execute a contract with the recommended vendor a budget transfer in the amount of $97,717 is required to cover the additional cost of including the RFID technology. Accounting detail was included with the agenda packet.

Recommendation: Authorize the City Manager to execute the contract. Upheld on consent agenda, Stephenson/Baldwin – 7 ayes (Mayor McFarlane absent). See Ordinance 456 TF 254.

MULTI-FAMILY WASTE CONTAINER COLLECTION SERVICE – WASTE INDUSTRIES, LLC – CONTRACT AMENDMENT – CITY MANAGER AUTHORIZED TO EXECUTE AMENDMENT

The City provides containerized solid waste collection services to multi-family complexes and certain City facilities via contract with a private hauler. The current contract term was for a three year period with options to extend for two additional one-year periods. The first contract extension ends June 30, 2015; both parties desire to enter into the second one-year extension. Funding is included with the proposed operating budget.

History: Original contract $114,000 not to exceed $342,000 over three-year period

Amendment Number One: Extended contract through June 30, 2015Total Contract Amount: $570,000


Recommendation: Authorize the City Manager to execute the contract amendment. Upheld on consent agenda, Stephenson/Baldwin – 7 ayes (Mayor McFarlane absent).

CUSTOMER CALL CENTER SERVICES – TOTAL OUTSOURCE SYSTEMS, INC. –CITY MANAGER AUTHORIZED TO EXECUTE CONTRACT AMENDMENT

Total Outsourced Systems, Inc. provides first-level call center services to include staff to receive inbound calls from customers requesting solid waste collection services and to perform corresponding administrative functions for these customers. Continuation of service is required in an amount not to exceed $250,000. The current contract term was for a one-year period with an option to extend for an additional one-year period; both parties desire to enter into the one-year extension. Funding is included with the proposed operating budget.

History: Original contract $114,000 not to exceed $250,000Total Contract Amount: Not to exceed $500,000


LANDFILL GAS AGREEMENT – AJINOMOTO AMINOSCIENCES, LLC – CONTRACT AMENDMENT – APPROVED

The City has a longstanding agreement to sell methane gas from the Wilder’s Grove Landfill facility, which closed in 1997. The agreement was most recently revised in 2007; at that time an agreement with Ajinomoto AminoSciences, LLC was executed for the sale of methane gas as well as for the operation and maintenance of the existing gas collection system at the landfill. In addition, the agreement established a reserve fund to provide for ongoing maintenance.

Ajinomoto has provided notice to the City that it desires to terminate the agreement, effective June 30, 2015. Terms of the agreement provide for an exit inspection to determine compliance of the methane gas collection system with all permit requirements. An amendment to the existing agreement is necessary at this time to specify duties of the respective parties with regard to termination inspections. Ajinomoto will retain an inspection company acceptable to both parties; the City will incur one-half of the cost of the exit inspection in an amount not to exceed $15,000.

Results of the exit inspection will determine the cost of any necessary repairs to meet the minimum standards for the permits held by the City for operation of the methane gas and destruction facility; any residual funding from the operational reserve is eligible to be returned to Ajinomoto under the terms of the existing agreement.

Recommendation: Authorize the City Manager to execute the amendment and authorize the expenditure in an amount not to exceed $15,000 for exit inspection purposes should the inspection process begin before the written amendment is executed. Upheld on consent agenda, Stephenson/Baldwin – 7 ayes (Mayor McFarlane absent).


LANDFILL GAS AGREEMENT – URS CORPORATION (DBA AECOM) – CONTRACT AMENDMENT – APPROVED

As a result of the notice of termination by Ajinomoto AminoSciences, LLC to purchase methane gas from the Wilder’s Grove Landfill, Ajinomoto will no longer provide the monitoring and maintenance of the landfill gas extraction system. The City has an existing contract with URS Corporation (dba AECOM) for professional design, planning, engineering, and permitting services to maintain compliance with Department of Natural Resources (DENR) permits.

To provide continuity of service and to ensure compliance with permits and other regulatory programs of DENR, staff recommends amendment of the existing contract with URS Corporation (dba AECOM) to perform monitoring and maintenance of the gas collection system for the period of one year, July 1, 2015 to June 30, 2016. The amount of the contract amendment is not to exceed $90,000; funding within the proposed operating budget has been identified for the additional services.

Recommendation: Authorize the City Manager to execute a contract amendment in an amount not to exceed $90,000. Upheld on consent agenda, Stephenson/Baldwin – 7 ayes (Mayor McFarlane absent).

SOLE SOURCE PROCUREMENT – NEUSE RIVER WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT EXPANSION –PHASE FOUR – AUTHORIZED

Improvements were completed in 2006 to the Neuse River Wastewater Treatment Plant with accommodations for eventual expansion to a total capacity to process 75 million gallons of wastewater per day (MGD). Improvements consisted of the construction of a new headworks and ultraviolet light treatment facility. The structures were sized to accommodate a planned 15 MGD expansion but the equipment was not installed at that time. The last phase of the project to increase plant capacity for the Neuse River Wastewater Treatment Plant to 75 MGD is entering the bid stage process. Sole sourcing or limiting competition on certain plant components and work will offer certain benefits and cost savings to the City. Specifically, the following equipment, manufacturer, and associated costs are recommended to be sole sourced:

Required Equipmentor System Integrator Sole Source Vendor CostGrit Pump Fairbanks Morse $ 52,825Mechanical Screens, Grit Collector, Ovivo 788,000 Grit ClassifierUV Disinfection Equipment Wedeco 1,223,000Instrumentation and Control Systems CITI, LLC 925,675Procurement Total $2,989,500

In addition to sole sourcing the equipment, it is recommended that CITI be sole sourced as the systems integrator for the project. CITI is currently the instrumentation and control system integrator consultant at the City’s water and wastewater facilities. CITI has performed well and has a unique understanding of the instrumentation and control system at the Neuse River


WWTP. Because of the unique knowledge of the instrumentation and control systems at the Neuse River WWTP possessed by CITI, security precautions, and performance on other projects, CITI is qualified and recommended to provide the instrumentation and control system integrator services.

The total estimated constructions cost for the NRWWTP Expansion to 75 MGD Phase Four is approximately $30,000,000.

Recommendation: Authorize sole source procurement of the equipment and services specified. Upheld on consent agenda, Stephenson/Baldwin – 7 ayes (Mayor McFarlane absent).

LEASE RENEWAL – OAKWOOD PARK – APPROVED

The City has leased 12.72 acres to operate the site known as Oakwood Park from the Raleigh Cemetery Association, Inc. (RCA) since 1980. The current lease for the property expires June 30, 2015. The park includes two ball fields, a picnic shelter, a restroom, and a dog park. The RCA is willing to continue to lease the property for park use and has proposed a lease of $30,000 per year. The Real Estate office has reviewed the terms and concurs that the proposed lease amount is appropriate.

Recommendation: Authorize the City Manager to execute the lease. Upheld on consent agenda, Stephenson/Baldwin – 7 ayes (Mayor McFarlane absent).

LICENSE AGREEMENT – BLOUNT STREET PARKING DECK BIKE RACKS – SKYHOUSE RALEIGH – CITY MANAGER AUTHORIZED TO EXECUTE AGREEMENT

SkyHouse Raleigh has requested to install bike racks for use by the residents of SkyHouse Raleigh as well as the general public in the Blount Street Parking Deck. The length of this license coincides with the long-term lease of parking spaces to Edison Parking, LLC and the City has the right to revoke the license agreement without cause upon 60-day notice to SkyHouse. A draft license agreement was included with the agenda packet. The agreement has been reviewed by the City Attorney and is subject to finalization of the language.

Recommendation: Authorize the City Manager to execute the license agreement subject final review by the City Attorney. Upheld on consent agenda, Stephenson/Baldwin – 7 ayes (Mayor McFarlane absent).

CONTRACT SERVICES – RISK MANAGEMENT CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION – NC LEAGUE OF MUNICIPALITIES – CONTRACT AMENDMENT – APPROVED

The City currently contracts for administration services with the North Carolina League of Municipalities (NCLM) Interlocal Risk Financing Fund of North Carolina (IRFFNC) and with the North Carolina Interlocal Risk Management Agency (NCIRMA) for the administration of property, liability, and workers’ compensation claims. The initial contract terms provide for an


option to renew for two additional one-year periods. The initial term ended June 30, 2014; the renewal option was exercised and the renewal term expires June 30, 2015.

Staff recommends exercising the second one-year renewal option, extending the current contract term through June 30, 2016. Under the terms of the extension, there will be no change in claims administration service pricing; pricing has remained the same since contract inception and averages $540 per claim processed. A Request for Proposal process for these services will be initiated in upcoming fiscal year (FY2015-16). Funding is included with the proposed operating budget.

Name of Project: Risk Management Insurance Claims AdministrationManaging Division: Finance – Risk ManagementRequest Reason: Contract amendment (extension) (contract

amendment >150,000)Cause of Contract Amendment: Contract expirationVendor: Interlocal Risk Financing Fund of North Carolina

(property claims) and North Carolina Interlocal Risk Management Agency (workers compensation)

Prior Contract Activity: Council approval July 7, 2009; original contract (April 1, 2009 – June 30, 2014); 5-year term (~$420,000/year); Option One exercised (July 1, 2014 – June 30, 2015); ($400,000/year)

Currently Encumbered: $230,000 property and general liability claims administration$170,000 workers compensation claims administration$400,000 total risk management claims administration

Amount of This Contract Amendment: $370,000/year – one-year term (July 1, 2015 – June 30, 2016)

Encumbered With This Approval: $200,000 property and general liability claims administration (with FY16 budget)$170,000 workers compensation claims administration (with FY16 budget)$370,000 total risk management claims administration


PERSONNEL – PUBLIC WORKS – RECLASSIFICATION APPROVED

The following position was reviewed by the Human Resources Department for classification. The fiscal impact of the reclassification will be addressed within existing salary and benefit appropriations. The following change to the vacant position is recommended:


Public WorksProject Engineer I (code 1012; PG 36; position 5117) to Project Engineer II (code 1019; PG 38)

Recommendation: Approve the reclassification. Upheld on consent agenda, Stephenson/Baldwin – 7 ayes (Mayor McFarlane absent).

2013 WATER MAIN REPLACEMENT PROJECT THREE AND BROOKSIDE DRIVE TRAFFIC CALMING PROJECT – T.A. LOVING COMPANY – CHANGE ORDER – 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. This project involves replacement of aging undersized water and sewer lines within Glascock Street and Brookside Drive, along with the traffic calming project for Brookside Drive.

The existing water and sewer infrastructure along Virginia Avenue, Elm Street and Norris Street are in need of replacement. These streets are in the immediate vicinity and connect to existing infrastructure being replaced as part of the original project. This neighborhood is also currently being completely redeveloped as part of the Brookview Area redevelopment, which provides the opportunity for coordination with that project.

T.A. Loving is currently performing a unit-price contract for this project. Staff recommends adding unit-price quantities to the existing contract for replacement of additional water and sewer lines on Virginia Street, Elm Street, and Norris Street.

Name of Project: 2013 Water Main Replacement Project Three and Brookside Drive Traffic Calming Project

Managing Division: Public Utilities – Capital Improvements DivisionReason for Council Review: Contract amendment >$500,000 (policy)Original Contract Total: $1,993,724Vendor: T.A. Loving CompanyContract Change Order Amount: $635,477Reason for This Change Order: Adding unit-price quantities to this contract for

replacement of additional water and sewer lines on Virginia Street, Elm Street, and Norris Street

New Contract Amount: $2,629,201

Recommendation: Authorize the City Manager to execute the change order in an amount not to exceed $635,477. Upheld on consent agenda, Stephenson/Baldwin – 7 ayes (Mayor McFarlane absent).


STORMWATER PETITION PROGRAM BUNDLE PROJECT NUMBER ONE – WHITE OAK CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION – CHANGE ORDER – APPROVED; FUNDS TRANSFERRED

The Stormwater Petition Program Bundle Project Number One contract is for repair, improvements, stabilization, and installation of existing/new drainage infrastructure and open channels on private property, City property, and City rights-of-way. Projects approved through the Drainage Petition Program (private property owner cost-share) are included in this contract, as follows:

● 304 and 308 Marsh Avenue● 2315, 2319, and 2323 Stevens Road● 1913 Glenwood Avenue● 1404, 1408, 1412, and 1416 Onslow Drive● 206, 210, and 214 Westridge Drive● 520 and 524 Lakestone Drive

A budget transfer in the amount of $167,278 is necessary to accommodate the change order. Accounting details were included with the agenda packet.

Name of Project: Stormwater Petition Program Bundle Project Number One

Managing Division: Public Works – Stormwater RequestCause for Change Order: Additional costs associated with repairs at 206, 210,

and 214 Westridge Road, which included additional undercut and fifty seven stone, a retaining wall removed not originally scoped, additional concrete driveway, additional rooted plant plugs, and additional permanent seeding-mulching. Also addition of previously approved drainage petition repair projects at 3900 Western Boulevard, 6132 River Landings Drive, 1600 Park Drive, 7613 Sutcliffe Drive, 709 Hunting Ridge Road, and 5612 Maram Court to the base contract.

Original CIP Budget: $564,615Construction Bid Award: $564,615Vendor: White Oak Construction CorporationPrior Change Orders Approved: NonePrevious Budget Transfers: Administrative ($241,965)Budget Transfer This Action: $167,278New Project Budget: $852,493Currently Encumbered: $564,615Amount of This Change Order: $287,878Encumbered With This Approval: $852,493


Recommendation: Authorize the City Manager to execute the change order and the associated budget transfer in the amount of $167,278. Upheld on consent agenda, Stephenson/Baldwin – 7 ayes (Mayor McFarlane absent). See Ordinance 456 TF 254.

TRANSFER – PUBLIC UTILITIES DEPARTMENT – ORDINANCE ADOPTED

A budget transfer in the amount of $330,000 is necessary to cover electric service expenses for the remainder of the fiscal year at facilities operated by the Public Utilities Department. Accounting details were included with the agenda packet.

Recommendation: Authorize a budget transfer in the amount of $330,000. Upheld on consent agenda, Stephenson/Baldwin – 7 ayes (Mayor McFarlane absent). See Ordinance 456 TF 254.

END OF CONSENT AGENDA

DIX PARK PROPERTY ACQUISITION FINANCING – VARIOUS ACTIONS AUTHORIZED; RESOLUTION ADOPTED

At the May 19, 2015 Council meeting, Council directed City staff to pursue a 10-year direct bank loan/installment financing for funding the $52,000,000 acquisition of the Dix Park property and begin related approval actions. At the June 2, 2015 Council meeting, a public hearing was held following which Council adopted a resolution making certain findings and determinations regarding the bank loan/installment financing and authorized City staff to make application to and request the Local Government Commission to approve the financing arrangement.

Following a competitive bid process, Bank of America, N.A. was selected to finance the Dix Park Property acquisition by offering an agreed upon fixed rate of 2.18% for the 10-year term of the financing. Final action required by Council at its June 16, 2015 meeting is to adopt a resolution authorizing the execution and delivery of an installment financing agreement, a deed of trust and related documents in connection with the financing of the acquisition of certain real property. Included with the agenda packet are suggested proceedings prepared by bond counsel for the required actions by Council.

Recommendation: Adopt the resolution and authorize staff to complete required related actions.

Mayor Pro Tem Odom stated he has always been in favor of acquiring the Dix property and although he would have preferred a public referendum on the matter, that did not happen, and he wanted to ensure he voted consistently on the matter. He asked how many banks had bid on the financing and if any small banks had participated. Mr. Maiorano asked if this was an administrative step toward what has already been approved by the City Council. Chief Finance Officer Perry James replied this is the final step in moving forward toward a closing point. It is also to approve the rate and the award of the financing to the party selected. A request for proposals was sent to 15 banks and six bids were received. There was a lot of interest and a lot of good questions from the banks. The winning bid was extremely low. Mr. Maiorano echoed


Mayor Pro Tem Odom's comment that he is also 100% behind the purchase of the Dix property but to be consistent with his previous votes, he will vote against this financing proposal.

Ms. Baldwin made a motion to uphold staff's recommendation as presented. Her motion was seconded by Mr. Gaylord and a roll call vote resulted in all Council members voting in the affirmative except Mayor Pro Tem Odom and Mr. Maiorano. The Mayor Pro Tem ruled the motion adopted on a vote of 5-2 (Mayor McFarlane absent). See Resolution 124.

LICENSE AGREEMENT – GOOGLE FIBER – CITY MANAGER AUTHORIZED TO EXECUTE LICENSE AGREEMENT AND EASEMENTS

Authorization to enter into a license agreement for a ten-year term with Google Fiber North Carolina, LLC for a portion of the property addressed as 100 Chowan Circle (North Hills Park) is recommended by staff. The purpose of the license agreement is to grant the licensee the right to use the licensed premises to construct, operate, and maintain structures associated with development of a fiber optic network owned by the licensee.

The licensed premises will be provided to the licensee for an annual fee of $2.00 per square foot contained within the license area, expected to consist of 2,288 square feet. This results in an estimated annual revenue amount of $4,576. Required statutory notice was advertised in the News and Observer on June 5, 2015.

Recommendation: Authorize the City Manager to execute the license agreement and any necessary easements across City property to allow access to provide service to the improvements within the license premises.

Ms. Crowder stated she is excited about the Google Fiber proposal, but asked for clarification on the Google Fiber huts. She wanted to know if they would be located on property the City currently has an easement on, if they would be located on private property, and how the City would determine the fee for that. Mr. Maiorano added there were concerns raised in his district about one or two instances in connection with some of this. He wants to make sure there will be a robust process to communicate to private property owners what the City is doing, and where, so there are no surprises to the property owners. Michael Basham of the City's Information Technology Department responded there are 10 locations, all on City property. The City will be vigilant about notifying neighbors prior to installment of the huts. There have been multiple discussions internally with staff and Google Fiber. Google Fiber already has a person on staff in an office in Raleigh to handle that responsibility and City staff will follow up to make sure they communicate with the neighbors. Ms. Baldwin said two weeks ago the Mayor had requested that Google Fiber representatives work with the Raleigh Arts Commission to improve the appearance of the huts, and Mr. Basham said staff already has that listed as an item for follow-up as the City moves forward with this project.

Ms. Baldwin moved approval of staff's recommendation as presented. Her motion was seconded by Ms. Crowder and carried unanimously. Mayor Pro Tem Odom ruled the motion adopted on a vote of 7-0 (Mayor McFarlane absent).


CROSS ACCESS AND COMMON USE AGREEMENT – 3125 AND 3139 WOODPECKER COURT – MAYOR AUTHORIZED TO EXECUTE AGREEMENT

The City is currently renovating the apartment building located at 3125 Woodpecker Court, part of the inventory of affordable housing units. The project includes repaving the parking area, which is shared with the adjacent property located at 3139 Woodpecker Court. The owners of the adjacent property have agreed to establish cross access to allow pedestrian and vehicular traffic from the parking area and access drives on each parcel to and from Woodpecker Court. No monetary exchange is required as part of the agreement.

Site Data Summary:Property of Sherwood H.

City Property and Phyllis L. Jones____Address: 3125 Woodpecker Court 3139 Woodpecker CourtBuilding Tax Value: $297,448 $221,357Land Tax Value: $ 60,000 $ 40,000Total Tax Value: $357,448 $261,357Lot Size: 0.60 Acres 0.60 AcresZoning: R-10 R-10

Recommendation: Authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement.

Mr. Weeks, who requested this item be pulled for discussion, said he already received the answer to his question. He moved to authorize the Mayor to execute the cross access and common use agreement. His motion was seconded by Ms. Baldwin and approval was unanimous. The Mayor Pro Tem ruled the motion adopted on a 7-0 vote (Mayor McFarlane absent).

OFF-STREET PARKING DECKS SAFETY PATROL – DOWNTOWN RALEIGH ALLIANCE – CITY MANAGER AUTHORIZED TO EXECUTE CONTRACT

The City has an existing contract with the Downtown Raleigh Alliance (DRA) to provide security and safety patrol services for the City-owned parking decks and surface parking lots in the downtown area. The current contract expires June 2015; a new contract has been proposed to continue service for the period July 1, 2015 to June 30, 2016. The cost for services is $469,315, which provides seven days per week coverage at eight parking decks and six surface lots located throughout the central business district. A total of nine DRA safety ambassadors work four shifts daily, and are required by the terms of the contract to patrol all parking levels and stairways of each deck as well as the surface lots at least twice per shift. The terms also require the safety ambassadors to contact the police when suspicious activity is observed, in addition to the provision of way-finding and responding to general information requests from citizens. Safe-walk services to and from a vehicle is also provided upon request. The contract has been reviewed by the City Attorney; funding is appropriated in the operating budget.

Name of Project: DRA Safety Patrol FY16Managing Division: Public Works – Parking OperationsRequest Reason: Contract execution


Cause of Contract: Expiration of previous contractVendor: Downtown Raleigh AlliancePrior Contract Activity: $329,589 (Contract 32-09, FY10)

$339,477 (Contract 38-10, FY11)$367,043 (Contract 23-11, FY12)$425,985 (Contract 35-12, FY13)$442,375 (Contract 44-13, FY14)$455,646 (Contract 46-14, FY15)

Amendment Number One: Add Method Road Community Center, Pioneer Building and Powell Drive ($72,360)

Previous Budget Transfers: NoneBudget Transfer: NoneNew Project Budget: $469,315Currently Encumbered: $0Amount of This Contract: $469,315Encumbered With This Approval: $469,315

Recommendation: Authorize the City Manager to execute the contract.

Mr. Maiorano asked what hours these services will be performed. He also asked if there are any decks downtown that are not being covered under this program and if so, whether that being evaluated. Parking Administrator Gordon Dash replied the DRA employees work a total of 50 hours per week in various shifts, seven days a week. Weekdays, Monday through Friday, the hours are 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. Thursday through Saturday there is extended coverage from 9:00 p.m. to 2:00 a.m. There is also extended coverage on Sunday from 7:00 p.m. to 12:00 a.m. The service covers all City-owned decks and surface lots; eight decks and six surface lots.

In response to other questions from Mr. Maiorano, Parking Administrator Dash stated the DRA employees train with safety professionals from the Raleigh Police Department and participate in some of the roll calls. The 3% increase in the contract amount is assumed every year due to increased costs in salaries and uniforms, not in coverage or manpower. There is a mechanism in place for the DRA employees to provide regular reports so City staff can respond to any issues related to the cleanliness of the parking decks and surface lots. While there is no formal audit process relative to expectations, progress, and issues that need to be addressed when the contract is renewed, Parking Administrator Dash receives weekly reports that he and Assistant Parking Administrator John Wynn review, and they are very pleased with what they see in terms of performance and expectations.

Mr. Maiorano asked if the contract has been evaluated from a liability standpoint, i.e., if there is anything in place that would protect or insulate the City in the event something occurs that would harm the DRA employees or anyone else as the result of a mishap they might be responsible for. City Attorney Tom McCormick responded the City is protected against any harm the DRA employees might incur. There is also additional liability coverage for the parking decks for the City. He believes the DRA probably has a general liability policy as well, but he does not know about it. Mr. Dash said they do. Mr. Gaylord commented the magnitude of those liabilities


would be worth analysis, including the chain of responsibility. Ms. Crowder agreed with Mr. Maiorano that an annual audit process would be helpful in evaluating what services the City expects to receive, whether the City is getting what it needs, and where the shortfalls are, if any. It would also help in determining whether the City is paying enough, or too much, for the DRA's security and safety patron services.

Mr. Maiorano moved to authorize the City Manager to execute the contract as recommended by staff, while being mindful of the issues that were discussed today. His motion was seconded by Mr. Stephenson and carried by a unanimous vote of 7-0 (Mayor McFarlane absent). The Mayor Pro Tem ruled the motion adopted.

ENCROACHMENT REQUEST – HORNE STREET – APPROVED

A request had been received from Fiber Technologies Networks, LLC to install a 35-foot, Class Three pole in the right-of-way. 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.

Ms. Crowder asked if the Fiber Technologies Network, LLC pole would be on the same side of Horne Street as the electric power poles, if a 35-foot pole is bigger than the poles Duke Energy has on the street, and how close the pole would be to the houses on this side of Horne Street. Mr. Stephenson said based on the site plan, the pole would be in the right-of-way adjacent to West Raleigh Presbyterian Church. Engineering Manager Paul Kallam was not present and without objection, the item was held until he arrived at the meeting.

Later in the meeting, just before Requests and Petitions of Citizens, Interim Public Works Director Rich Kelly apologized for Mr. Kallam being held up off-site. He had managed to get in touch with Mr. Kelly and he would respond to Council's questions instead. The Fiber Technologies Networks, LLC pole will be on the same side of Horne Street as the West Raleigh Presbyterian Church. Ms. Crowder pointed out there is an existing pole on that side of the road. She knows that power poles are shared by communication companies and other cable companies, and asked if the existing pole could be shared instead of a new pole being erected in front of the church. Interim PW Director Kelly said he is sure that sharing of poles involves legal agreements. Staff has worked with the people involved with this pole to try to minimize its impact on the existing properties. There is no arrangement at this time to share the pole with other utilities.

Ms. Crowder asked how close the new pole will be to the existing, and Interim PW Director Kelly replied approximately 20 feet. She asked if there had been any resistance or opposition from the neighbors or the church, and Mr. Kelly said not that he is aware of, but he would be glad to follow up.

Mayor Pro Tem Odom asked if the City could pursue sharing the pole. City Attorney Tom McCormick replied that is usually hard to do. Certain clearances are required and particularly in residential areas, there is not a lot of room on the poles. Pursuant to franchise agreement, the


City has the ability to put its facilities on most of these poles. The City has various arrangements with different utilities. Generally speaking, because of the height of the pole and the clearance requirement in residential areas, it is hard to put anything else on the pole.

Mayor Pro Tem Odom moved to approve the encroachment request and asked staff to follow up with utility companies about the possibility of sharing the poles. Ms. Baldwin seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. The Mayor Pro Tem ruled the motion adopted on a 7-0 vote (Mayor McFarlane absent).

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION

TC-4-15 – DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND NONCONFORMITIES – LIMITED USE – REQUEST FOR TIME EXTENSION – GRANTED

This request amends Sections 1.5.2.C., 1.5.4.D.1, 1.5.6.C, 1.5.11.B., 1.5.12.E.1.,2.2.3.E, 2.2.4.D, 2.3.4.E., 2.3.5.D., 3.2.3.E., 3.2.4.D., 3.4.2, 5.2.2., 5.4.3.A., 5.5.1., Article 10.3, and Article 12.2 of the Part 10A Raleigh Unified Development Ordinance to modify the measurement, exceptions and general rules of applicability, frontage requirements, and the nonconforming principal sections of the regulations to reflect issues and concerns raised during the initial utilization period of the Unified Development Ordinance and during the UDO Citywide Zoning Map Amendment review process.

The Planning Commission recommends a 90-day time extension.

Mr. Weeks moved approval of the 90-day extension as requested. His motion was seconded by Mr. Stephenson and a roll call vote resulted in all members voting in the affirmative. The Mayor Pro Tem ruled the motion adopted on a 7-0 vote (Mayor McFarlane absent).

SPECIAL ITEMS

HOME RENTAL SERVICES – TO BE PLACED ON JULY 7, 2015 AGENDA AS A SPECIAL ITEM

During the June 2, 2015 Council meeting, the Law and Public Safety Committee provided guidelines relative to home rental services as a limited use in certain zoning categories and a special use permit to be approved by the Board of Adjustment in other zoning classifications. Chairperson Baldwin pointed out the guidelines were a framework for development of a text change which would come back to the City Council and subsequent public hearing, and the Committee wanted Council concurrence before asking staff to undertake the assignment. It was agreed that staff would develop the background, history, and proposed text change and place it on this agenda for further consideration. Additional information was included with the agenda packet.

Ms. Baldwin stated Mayor McFarlane had requested the Council defer action on this item until she returns. Without objection, Mayor Pro Tem Odom announced the item would be held until the July 7, 2015 Council meeting.


REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY MANAGER

The City Manager did not have a report.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THEHISTORIC CEMETERIES ADVISORY BOARD

HISTORIC CEMETERIES ADVISORY BOARD – ANNUAL REPORT – RECEIVED; FY 2015-16 WORK PLAN – APPROVED

A representative of the Historic Cemeteries Advisory Board will present the Annual Report and seek authorization to proceed with the items listed on the 2015-2016 Work Plan.

The HCAB annual work plan includes continuing stabilization efforts within City Cemetery, developing landscape plans for all three cemeteries, preserving and protecting/preserving unsecured funerary materials and burial records, implementing the Volunteer Cemetery Watch program, expanding marketing efforts, and continuing its discussion on Local Designation for the Mt. Hope and City cemeteries.

Recommendation: Receive the annual report and approve the annual work plan.

Parks Superintendent Wayne Schindler stated that as illustrated in the annual report, the Historic Cemeteries Advisory Board has had a productive year, making considerable progress on a number of fronts. On behalf of the Parks, Recreation, and Cultural Resources (PRCR) Department he thanked City Council for its continued support of these important efforts to preserve and restore a valuable piece of the City's history. He asked Board Chairman Jimmy Thiem to make some brief remarks.

Chairman Thiem reminded the assembly that in April 2011, a tornado went through all three cemeteries. This was within two years of the Board's original formation and it devoted the Board's attention for a significant amount of time. Last year was the first year when the Board did not have to deal with that issue. One of the significant activities last year was a restoration celebration held at each one of the cemeteries. It was an acknowledgement of the clean-up and repair work that had been done as a result of the tornado, as well as an official acknowledgement of the importance of the cemeteries to the citizens of Raleigh. Additional work accomplished last year was the completion of a maintenance manual structured to provide the necessary controls and guidance for maintenance of the cemeteries. This is significant because taking care of a cemetery is very different from mowing a lawn. The Board also organized its first volunteer group, which is at City Cemetery. The Board is also looking into creating a watch program for City Cemetery. Lastly, the Board began landscape plans for the cemeteries, not as a reparation effort but as additions to the cemeteries. The O'Rorke Cemetery plan was completed last year and installation of the plant material is already in place.

In the FY 2015-16 Work Program, the Board will continue landscape plans and work for the City Cemetery and Mt. Hope Cemetery; continue work the on volunteer program, which they intend to expand to Mt. Hope Cemetery and O'Rorke Cemetery; and continue work on restoration of


headstones and other monuments in the cemeteries, which takes a special level of work to accomplish. A new item for the work plan is that the Board will begin looking at cemetery burial records to ensure they are archived appropriately and are easily accessible for research.

Chairman Thiem announced this is the Historic Cemeteries Advisory Board's sixth year anniversary. He thanked City staff, especially PRCR staff, for their assistance, as the Board could not have accomplished its work without them. He acknowledged Raleigh City Cemeteries Preservation, which was essentially the birth of the Historic Cemeteries Advisory Board. Chairman Thiem recognized the volunteers who participated in City work projects through the PRCR Department and the Board members, because they are also volunteers. He also expressed gratitude to the City Council for its continued support and asked for approval of the Board's work plan.

Mr. Weeks said he appreciate everything Mr. Thiem is doing as Chair of the Historic Cemeteries Advisory Board. He has seen the results of the Board's work and that of the citizens who are helping to maintain the cemeteries.

Ms. Baldwin moved to approve the Historic Cemeteries Advisory Board's FY 2015-16 work plan. Her motion was seconded by Mr. Gaylord and carried unanimously. The Mayor Pro Tem ruled the motion adopted by a vote of 7-0 (Mayor McFarlane absent).

REPORT OF THE UPPER NEUSE CLEAN WATER INITIATIVE

UPPER NEUSE CLEAN WATER INITIATIVE – ANNUAL REPORT – RECEIVED

Staff from the Conservation Trust for North Carolina will provide an annual report on the conservation activities of the Upper Neuse Clean Water Initiative.

Recommendation: Receive as information.

Reid Wilson, Executive Director of the Conservation Trust for North Carolina, introduced his colleague, Caitlin Burke. This is the tenth time they have reported to the Council on behalf of the partners of the Upper Neuse Clean Water Initiative (UNCWI). The City Council has been wonderful for its leadership and investment in this program that protects water quality and quantity in Falls Lake and other reservoirs in the Upper Neuse Basin. The point of the initiative is to reduce pollution in Falls Lake and the other reservoirs by protecting land along the waterways, tributaries, creeks, and streams that lead into Falls Lake and the other reservoirs. It is a cost-effective approach that prevents pollution and saves money downstream because not as much money has to be spent to remove contaminants from the water. The result is safe and abundant drinking water. This is a voluntary program; UNCWI works with land owners who want to conserve their land. UNCWI has a conservation plan that tells them which properties are most important to protect. Leverage is an important factor; the organization is always looking to federal, state and other local governments and private funding sources to leverage the City of Raleigh's generous investment. The program is about land conservation and land management, especially on farms and forest lands. Nonprofit partners include the Conservation Trust for North Carolina, Ellerbe Creek Watershed Association, Eno River Association, Tar River Land


Conservancy, Triangle Greenways Council, Triangle Land Conservation, and The Conservation Fund. These organizations have expertise in how to conserve and manage a property well; have hundreds of connections and strong relationships with land owners who ultimately will make decisions about what to do with their land; and know a lot of people at other state agencies and local governments who are important leverage partners for Raleigh.

Caitlin Burke, Special Projects and Grants Coordinator for the Conservation Trust for North Carolina, stated that last fall Council had approved several recommendations from the City's Watershed Protection Advisory Task Force. UNCWI has been hard at work implementing those recommendations this past year, including: expand the program to include the Swift Creek watershed; expand the project application review board to include representatives from other local governments as well as subject matter experts; update the UNCWI conservation plan to include updated land cover data and to develop a conservation strategy for the next 10 years; allow projects that improve water quality, not just protect land to avoid water quality degradation; support the Upper Neuse River Basin Association (UNRBA) monitoring and nutrient management strategy; and quantify the benefits of watershed protection projects. The final two recommendations to increase the watershed protection fee and reconcile funds that were unspent in past years were approved by City Council in the budget process. SP&G Coordinator Burke showed a map of projects accomplished by UNCWI. About half the projects in the watershed have been supported by direct funds from the City of Raleigh for land protection; the other half has been funded through other sources. There are four projects that have been approved for funding but have not yet closed. Eighty-five projects have been closed in the watershed, protecting land along 66 miles of streams, over 7200 acres of land at a value of over $72M, with donations from land owners of over $20M. UNCWI leveraged $12 for this program for every dollar the City of Raleigh spent. Since June 2014, UNCWI closed four projects protecting 108 acres of land along 2.3 miles of streams that will prevent more than 430 pounds of nitrogen and over 70 pounds of phosphorus from entering Falls Lake per year. That was two projects less than UNCWI expected to close this year, due to project delays and delays in funding sources.

SP&G Coordinator Burke cited two recent project examples for water quality improvements that go above and beyond land protection. One is the Tar River Land Conservancy hog lagoon cleanup on the Haynes property, which prevented over 600,000 of wastewater from going into Falls Lake, which is about a mile downstream from the property. Sludge was pumped out the lagoon and the area was reseeded and planted with hardwoods. They were recognized by the City of Raleigh in April for a regional environmental award. The other project is the Ellerbe Creek Watershed Association Green Infrastructure Project in Durham. They are working to install rain barrels, rain gardens, permeable pavement, and other activities. They are working with Duke Energy to acquire property along Ellerbe Creek, where they will be working with the City of Durham to install rain gardens and restore a wetland.

SP&G Coordinator Burke said the City of Raleigh remains a national leader in watershed protection for drinking water quality. The City has invested $5.6M in this program over the last 10 years, leveraged $47.3M in land value, protected 45 properties totaling 3,595 acres along 43 miles of streams, and was the recipient of the 2015 North Carolina Source Water Protection Award. Mayor Pro Tem Odom asked if these figures were only for Raleigh's side of the lake,


and SP&G Coordinator Burke replied they are for all around the lake and all throughout the watershed. Leverage continues to be high; the City leverages a considerable amount from state and local funding sources, as well as foundations. The match percentage is not quite as high as when the Clean Water Management Trust Fund (CWMTF) was funded at astronomical levels, but the City still pays only about one-quarter of the cost of the projects.

The other measure UNCWI uses when looking at its accomplishments is the pollutants avoided, which is an estimate of nitrogen, phosphorous, and sediment prevented from entering the lake. Buffers along streams prevent these pollutants from entering the drinking water supply. UNCWI evaluated 3,465 acres of land. If the projects that have been completed were developed according to State 1 Falls Lake Rules, we would see 2.7 times the amount of nitrogen and 2.3 times the amount of phosphorous going into the lake each year.

Executive Director Wilson stated a lot of what UNCWI is able to do to leverage Raleigh's money depends on the state legislature. In the House budget, the CWMTF budget roughly gets doubled from $13M per year to $25M per year for the next two years. The Senate budget increases CWMTF money but not quite as much, and also does a couple of things to divert that money elsewhere. Up to $5M is for solar bees in Falls Lake and Jordan Lake; there are other changes to buffer rules in this watershed; and they are proposing to change the criteria for how the CWMTF funds its projects so it will be much less about land conservation and more about other sorts of water quality projects. He suggested that after today's meeting would be a good time for the Council members to call the senators they know who represent Raleigh and tell them even though the funding is better in the Senate budget, the restrictions placed on it will make it more difficult to accomplish more land conservation and restoration projects in the Upper Neuse Basin. Another challenge is that two years ago, the legislature eliminated the North Carolina Conservation Tax Credit, which makes it harder for land owners to decide to conserve their land. The Land Trust is reaching out to land owners, reaching out to local governments, and pursuing new funding sources.

Executive Director Wilson closed the presentation by stating there are 10 projects in progress to be brought to the Council for consideration which will involve 2,570 acres of land and 15 miles of streams (four already approved by City Council, three coming to the Review Board in July, and three being scoped by partners). He thanked the Council for adopting the City budget yesterday which included an increase in funding for land conservation to protect water quality in Falls Lake and to enable the roller of funds that had already been collected earlier through the watershed protection fee.

REQUESTS AND PETITIONS OF CITIZENS

SOLID WASTE SERVICES – YARD WASTE REMOVAL – COMMENTS RECEIVED; REFERRED TO ADMINISTRATION

Gil Brazel, 8416 Neuse Rapids Road, Raleigh, NC 27616 had requested placement on the agenda in order to discuss the effectiveness, efficiency, and accommodation of citizens, taxpayers, and customers of City services related to yard waste removal. He had also asked that after his presentation, the item be sent to the appropriate committee for study and action. Mr. Brazel


stated he has been a citizen of Raleigh since 1991. Based on what he has observed with solid waste removal, the City's Web page has numerous and sundry guides for citizens to follow that appear to be an accumulation of things cobbled together over the years. He offered his services to serve either at the authority of the City Council or an existing committee. As he experienced it, the services are set up for those providing the service and not the residents of the City.

Mayor Pro Tem Odom asked Mr. Brazel if he had spoken with City staff about his suggestions or written a letter. Mr. Brazel said his experience with Solid Waste Services has been over number of years, so there is nothing specific. He has contacted various Solid Waste Services employees, including Director Fred Battle. SWS Director Battle came out and resolved one issue Mr. Brazel had. Mr. Brazel said he wants to begin at the lowest level and staff told him he had to go to the City Council.

Ms. Baldwin suggested that Council ask staff to meet with Mr. Brazel and provide Council with a report at a future meeting based on their findings. Mayor Pro Tem Odom suggested that Mr. Brazel compose a list of concerns and send it to the City Manager, who will review it and bring a report back to Council for referral to a Committee if it is warranted. Mr. Brazel said he would not turn down any positive response and would do either of both of the actions suggested. Mayor Pro Tem Odom asked if staff had any comments at this time. City Manager Hall stated he and staff would be happy to meet with Mr. Brazel to get a better sense about specific items, as well as give a report back to Council that describes the City's yard waste service and provides a rationale for it. Staff will contact Mr. Brazel to schedule a meeting.

Mr. Gaylord thanked Mr. Brazel for coming to the Council not just with a problem, but with an offer to be part of the solution. It is shocking how rare that is, he said.

CONSERVATION BUFFER – TRACT 3 OF MAP RECORDED IN BM 1980, P 252, WAKE COUNTY REGISTRY – REQUEST FOR RELOCATION THROUGH UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE REMAPPING – APPROVED

Thomas C. Worth, Esq., representing JPB Holdings, LLC and Industrial Village Road, LLC, asked for placement on the agenda to request removal of the 20-foot wide Conservation Buffer on Tract 3 of his client's property as identified on the map recorded in BM 1980, P 252 of the Wake County Registry.

Thomas C. Worth, Esq., P.O. Box 1799, Raleigh, NC 27602 distributed copies of a memorandum he wrote earlier today that explains his request further. He stated that some faulty title work in the late 1990s and engineering work in connection with a recorded plat resulted in confusion about the ownership of his client's property. As indicated in the handout, there is now a situation where a 20-foot wide Conservation Buffer or Conservation Management Area has been imposed on his client's property 30 feet inside the property line. The location makes no sense whatsoever, he said. His client is not seeking removal of the Conservation Buffer, but simply its relocation adjacent to the east line of his property. As a result of a property recombination in 2001, the City imposed a Conservation Management Area against the common property line of Mr. Worth's client and the adjacent property owner. The auto repair facility to the east of his client's property, with its parking of disabled vehicles right next to the property


line, has imposed a Conservation Buffer on its property. Now his client has a Conservation Management Area adjacent to the common property line on the auto repair facility's side, but there is a 30-foot gap between their common property line and where this Conservation Buffer is located. The second attachment to his memorandum shows the 30-foot gap is not memorialized, and he believes this is simply an error in the City's zoning maps. Mr. Worth's request on behalf of his client is simply that this anomaly be corrected by the advertisement for the Unified Development Ordinance remapping public hearing taking place on July 7. He has no desire to file a rezoning request to correct the situation. Mr. Stephenson asked if he understood correctly that the recorded deed language is in conflict with the recorded map. Mr. Worth replied that in connection with the chain of title on his client's property, there is no question that the adjacency back in the 1980s/1990s put this on his client's property erroneously. The title work, which he took back as far as 1938, is unequivocal. He has shown this to planning and legal staff and believes they concur that the imposition of this Conservation Buffer on his client's property is not correct from a title standpoint. City Attorney McCormick stated he is not sure whether that information is correct or incorrect, but there are two choices for changing this situation. One is to have Mr. Worth institute a zoning case; the other is for this to be handled as part of the remapping process unless planning staff disagrees.

Mayor Pro Tem Odom moved to authorize Mr. Worth's request to correct this situation as part of the citywide remapping process. His motion was seconded by Mr. Maiorano.

Mr. Stephenson asked what Mr. Worth wanted to happen as part of the remapping. Mr. Worth explained if the 20-foot wide Conservation Buffer could be relocated where it should be, on his client's property adjacent to the east property line, there would be 20 feet of Conservation Buffer on each side of the property line.

Ms. Crowder asked for staff comments. Planning and Zoning Administrator Travis Crane stated staff met with Mr. Worth and agrees the properties and zoning actions have a checkered history. At the time of application of the initial rezoning, the application that was put forward did not accurately represent the property ownership at the time, but the rezoning map was drawn faithfully in accordance with City Council action in 1993. Staff prefers that Mr. Worth file a separate rezoning case, but offered him the two choices mentioned by the City Attorney. Mr. Stephenson asked if staff had reviewed the property title and if it indicates the Conservation Buffer is in the right place. P&Z Administrator Crane replied when staff reviewed the title history with Mr. Worth, they agreed with him that the information submitted at the time of the rezoning application was not accurate as to ownership. However, the action the City Council took at that time was consistent with the application.

The vote on the Mayor Pro Tem's motion resulted in unanimous passage, and the Mayor Pro Tem ruled the motion adopted on a vote of 7-0 (Mayor McFarlane absent).


TRAFFIC – INTERSECTION OF HARPS MILL ROAD AND GOUDY DRIVE – REQUEST FOR PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALK AND APPROPRIATE SIGNAGE – TO BE PLACED ON JULY 7, 2015 AGENDA AS A SPECIAL ITEM

Ellen Grove Fuchs, 8800 Harps Mill Road, Raleigh, NC 27615, was present to request a pedestrian crosswalk and appropriate signage at the corner of Harps Mill Road and Goudy Drive. She stated she lives on the southwest corner of that intersection and there is no sidewalk there. She would like to use the sidewalk on the east side but cannot cross safely because Harps Mill Road at that point "is a speedway" and contains curves where drivers cannot see pedestrians. No matter how low the speed limit, and currently it is 25 mph, drivers speed through the area because there is a half mile of road from Litchford Road to her corner before the road continues to Gresham Lake Road. She has worked with Councilor Maiorano, Chief of Staff Lou Buonpane, and Traffic Calming Coordinator Tom Fiorello. What appeared suddenly one day were two "Pedestrian Crossing" signs, but there is no crosswalk, which makes the signs meaningless. There is no sign indicating there is a pedestrian crosswalk further up the road and no sign stating there is limited sight distance. Ms. Fuchs said she merely wants to be able to cross her own street.

Ms. Baldwin asked that staff meet with Ms. Fuchs, look at the situation, install a crosswalk, and install additional signage. City Manager Hall stated staff has spent considerable time with Ms. Fuchs, looking at this particular location, and examined it for traffic calming and other devices on multiple occasions. The difficulty with a crosswalk in this location is that it is midblock and does not connect to a sidewalk. It does not meet City standards associated with placement of a crosswalk and is indeed a difficult situation. Staff has done quite a bit of analysis at this point, but can continue to work with Ms. Fuchs. Ms. Fuchs stated her initial request was for a 4-way stop at the intersection, but was told that is not the way to address this issue.

Ms. Baldwin suggested this item be referred to the Public Works Committee. Mr. Maiorano replied Council could do so, but pointed out staff has spent a lot of time with him, trying to look at all the different options. He suggested that before Council refers it to the Public Works Committee, the City Manager provide Council with an historical analysis of the situation. There is no question an issue exists out there, but it is a matter of how best to fix it. Council does not necessarily have the right tools, given the existing policy framework.

Mayor Pro Tem Odom suggested holding this item to the next Council meeting and having staff provide Council with a report in the meantime. Mr. Maiorano would like staff's report to include what has been done to date, what the options are, and what Council will have to do to achieve resolution. Ms. Baldwin stated she would like staff to offer solutions, not just an historical analysis. She also requested that enforcement of the speed limit in that area be increased.

Without objection, Mayor Pro Tem Odom stated this item would be held until the July 7 City Council meeting.


MATTERS SCHEDULED FOR PUBLIC HEARING

REZONING Z-28-14 – SOUTH PERSON STREET – HEARING HELD OPEN TO JULY 7, 2015

During the June 2, 2015 Council meeting, a hearing was held to consider Rezoning Z-28-14 – South Person Street. Following the presentations and public comment, the hearing was held over in order to provide an opportunity for the applicant to present additional conditions as well as provide an opportunity for staff to validate the sufficiency of a protest petition which had been presented. Once the hearing is closed, the Council may take action on the case.

Ms. Baldwin informed the Council that Mayor McFarlane had asked that this item be deferred to July 7. Mayor Pro Tem Odom noted there is a Valid Statutory Protest Petition filed on this case.

Andy Petesch, Esq., Petesch Law, 127 West Hargett Street – Suite 500, Raleigh, NC 27601-1351 – Mr. Petesch is the attorney for the applicant. He asked Council to consider closing the public hearing. He was informed today that staff interpreted the UDO as requiring the public hearing be closed so revised conditions could be accepted by staff to meet the 10-day requirement.

Ms. Baldwin moved to close the public hearing. Her motion was seconded by Ms. Crowder. The Mayor Pro Tem noted there were audience members who wanted to speak. He continued the hearing and the following people spoke.

Keith Powell, 1105 New Castle Court, Raleigh, NC 27603-9277 – Mr. Powell stated he was present on behalf of Shaw University. They would like to keep the public hearing open to allow the parties to review and discuss some of the revisions Mr. Petesch has submitted. They are also about the proximity of the subject property to the neighbor's house. At the last Council meeting, she had expressed concern about the traffic and liquor sales as she runs a day care center.

Ms. Baldwin stated the public hearing must be closed to allow submission of revised conditions by the deadline. Closing the hearing will not interfere with the ability for conversation to continue. In fact, she said, there is a CAC meeting on July 6, before this item is brought to the Council again on July 7. Secondly, she had a question about the property next door. The woman who spoke at the last Council meeting led Ms. Baldwin to believe she lived in the home with her elderly husband. Ms. Baldwin said she has since heard that is not the case; that the property is owned by someone else and no one is living there. She asked Mr. Powell to clarify that is the case, but he said he was unable to provide such confirmation.

Rhonda Rich (no address provided) – Ms. Rich stated she has an interest in properties at 311 and 219 East Cabarrus Street and several others in vicinity. She is confused about the request to close the public hearing in reference to the UDO, which has not been approved. Those rules for the UDO should not apply to participation in this particular petition. Ms. Rich asked if her understanding was correct. She also asked if resubmission of revised conditions will also require a public hearing if this public hearing is closed. Ms. Rich said she agreed with the Mayor about holding the public hearing open.


Ms. Baldwin stated that is not what the Mayor had requested; she had requested that any Council decision be deferred to July 7.

Senior Planner Bynum Walter explained that conditions can be added for up to 30 days after the public hearing is closed, provided the conditions are more restrictive. Mayor Pro Tem Odom asked if the public could ask questions of the Council after the hearing is closed. Senior Planner Walter replied it is at the discretion of Council whether they can speak at a Council meeting after the hearing is closed, but the public can contact the Council directly at any time. Ms. Baldwin reminded everyone there is a CAC meeting on July 6 and the public will have the opportunity to discuss the case there.

Ms. Rich commented that a vast majority of CAC members that she knows do not spend a considerable amount of time on the Internet, so that is not a convenient way to contact them. She pointed out that when this hearing was continued from the evening meeting on June 2, she was not aware the June 16 Council meeting was not a night meeting. Since many people are at work during the day and could not attend today's afternoon meeting, it would be helpful if they had the opportunity to talk on July 7 because it is an evening meeting. The problem in this particular rezoning situation is not easily addressed.

Mr. Weeks stated he had talked to Reverend Wade at the Davie Street Presbyterian Church. Reverend Wade and the CAC Chair had requested this item be held open to July 7.

Mayor Pro Tem Odom confirmed with Senior Planner Walter that the applicant can make changes to the conditions 30 days after the public hearing is closed, but the conditions must be more restrictive than what was advertised. Ms. Crowder pointed out Mr. Petesch cannot submit the new conditions he wants to offer unless the public hearing is closed. Ms. Rich said if the hearing is closed, that will leave it up to Mr. Petesch and his client what conditions to apply. The Mayor Pro Tem reminded her that the Council can deny the rezoning request if they aren't the right conditions. Ms. Crowder added Ms. Rich and others still have an opportunity to discuss conditions with Mr. Petesch even after the public hearing is closed. Ms. Rich responded she and other neighbors have been giving Mr. Petesch and his client feedback. As business owners do, they selectively added conditions that work for his business, but that does not lead to public participation in what is best for the general public. She thought the purpose of a public hearing is to hear what the public had to say and not leaving it up to one business owner to determine and distribute their preferences on a zoning process. Ms. Baldwin stated Council did hold a public hearing and Mr. Petesch took the information received and created additional conditions. He needs to formalize the new conditions, present them to the public, and then present them to the City Council. As a business owner, Mr. Petesch's client is doing what he is willing to do; ultimately it will be up to the Council whether or not to approve his rezoning request.

Ms. Rich said there is an option for NX zoning that has been used in multiple other areas of the City that has not been taken into account for this particular area of the City. She believes the use of NX with some modifications, such as distance restrictions for spacing and maybe not as restrictive as office space, could accommodate the City Council's visions for growth, quality of life, and economy. She has been unable to find information about what is allowed and not


allowed under NX zoning. There are a number of options not on the table that she is concerned about leaving open to the applicant without public discussion before the City Council.

Mr. Stephenson said he thinks there is some confusion on the part of the public regarding what the options are with this rezoning request. His understanding is that in order for the applicant to bring forward the use he wants, he has no option but to select DX and condition out all the undesirable uses. This is a complex case. Mr. Stephenson thinks the applicant has reached out to all the stakeholders and explained the situation to them. The applicant has offered the conditions to the neighbors, but they have not had a meeting yet to discuss them. Whether or not the conditions have been filed and are official does not change the applicant's ability to offer them at the next CAC meeting. If the Council closes the public hearing, that will put a definite 30-day time limit on future negotiations. If Council believes no progress will be made 30 days from now, it can close the hearing. Mr. Petesch went to the last CAC meeting but did not talk about the case or conditions, so the neighbors have not official received them, even though he has reached out to individuals. Mr. Stephenson sees no reason to put a deadline on negotiations when Mr. Petesch has not had an opportunity to present his client's case to the CAC. Mr. Stephenson stated there is no advantage to closing the public hearing.

Ms. Crowder agreed there is some confusion about this case; more specifically, confusion about rezoning v. remapping. This is a rezoning case. Giving the applicant another chance to submit conditions and present his case to the CAC would be a good idea, she said, and might help solve the confusion.

Mayor Pro Tem Odom said it is his understanding the Mayor wants to hold the public hearing over to the next meeting. To him, that means not closing the public hearing. Ms. Baldwin disagreed and said she thinks the Mayor wants to see conditions filed.

Mayor Pro Tem Odom called for the vote on Ms. Baldwin's motion to close the public hearing. The motion failed by a vote of 4-3 (Mayor McFarlane absent; Councilors Odom, Stephenson and Weeks voting against the motion). The Mayor Pro Tem stated without objection the hearing will be held open to the next Council meeting.

UNFIT DWELLING – 105 BASHFORD ROAD – PROHIBIT OCCUPANCY – HEARING – ORDINANCE ADOPTED

This was a hearing to consider adoption of an ordinance, pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.6.12 of the Unified Development Ordinance Code for the City of Raleigh, to prohibit the occupancy of the unfit dwellings until repaired in compliance with the requirements of the Housing Code:

LOCATION TAXAND DISTRICT PROPERTY OWNER ID NO. TIME LAPSE105 Bashford Road (D) Martin Lavitz, Owner 0138080 139 days

and Yanqin Xu

Mayor Pro Tem Odom opened the hearing and the following people spoke.


Jenny Xu stated she just found out about this meeting, so she was not prepared. The citation is only for Unit D of the building. The tenant had not paid rent and when she asked him to pay his rent, he called the City of Raleigh Inspections Office. The Inspections Office gave her a list of items that needed repair. Everything has been done except one item, installation of a water heater. The house is 30 years old and the water heater was installed in the bedroom closet. It is a gas water heater and needs oxygen; it is not good to close the closet door on the water heater. Ms. Xu stated each time a building inspector looks at the water heater, the inspector offers a different opinion. This property is a multi-unit building. Each time an inspector comes out about an issue for one unit, he looks at all four units. She thinks the inspector should focus on the one unit he is supposed to inspect, not all four units. These inspections disturb the tenants.

Housing and Neighborhood Preservation Inspections Administrator Ashley Glover stated this case was initiated in September 2014. The main concern is the gas-fired water heaters. They are located in the bedroom closet, which is not allowed under the current Code due to possible carbon monoxide poisoning. Three of the units have been enclosed within the clothes closets, but have not been sealed completely. There is some high-low venting next to the water heaters, with outside air coming from somewhere. One unit in a closet has clothes around it; there is no closure around it and nothing to keep carbon monoxide from leaking out. Staff considers it a life safety issue. Staff is working with PSNC Energy right now to determine what their next action will be. Staff met on-site with Ms. Xu and also agreed to meet with her contractor, if she hires one. There is no record of permits being issued for the last 15 years for installation and approval of the four water heaters. Inspections Administrator Glover said he thinks the inspectors may be able to work with the enclosures that three of the water heaters are in by sealing them completely so no carbon monoxide escapes. Additionally, some of the pipes are too close to the vent hoods; they need to be at least six inches away from the top of the water heater where the flame comes out and the exhaust is. He said Ms. Xu has not been willing to work with the inspectors to bring a contractor to the building to remedy the situation.

Mr. Stephenson asked if there is a need for fresh air intake and venting. Inspections Administrator Glover said there is some venting there but it is questionable whether it is enough for the appliances that are there now. Mr. Stephenson said it seems like an extremely dangerous situation, and Mr. Glover agreed it could be hazardous. Mayor Pro Tem Odom asked how many water heaters are in the building and Inspections Administrator Glover replied there is one water heater in each of the four units, in the same location. Staff is asking Council to adopt an ordinance declaring the building unfit for human habitation until the situation is remedied.

Mayor Pro Tem Odom asked Ms. Xu if she understands the danger of carbon monoxide. She responded she does, and there is a carbon monoxide monitor in the bedroom close to the water heater. Unless a house was built within the last 10 years, all houses have a water heater in either a bedroom closet or a living room closet. She sees no difference between installing a water heater in a bedroom closet or a living room closet. The air is being monitored. Mr. Stephenson told her the idea that the other water heaters in other houses are located in life-threatening locations is not a good reason for her to do the same thing. He pointed out there is tremendous liability for her if she does not correct the situation.


No one else asked to be heard; thus, the hearing was closed. Ms. Crowder moved to adopt the ordinance declaring all four units at 105 Bashford Place uninhabitable until the gas water heater situation is corrected. Her motion was seconded by Mr. Gaylord and carried unanimously. Mayor Pro Tem Odom ruled the motion adopted on a vote of 7-0 (Mayor McFarlane absent). See Ordinance 457.

In response to questions from Mr. Stephenson, Inspections Administrator Glover stated the ordinance is effective immediately but provides 90 days for the violation to be corrected. He noted Ms. Xu already had at least seven or eight months to comply, since the case was initiated in September 2014. Ms. Xu asked if her tenants could have a voice in determining whether or not the building is uninhabitable. The Mayor Pro Tem declared if there is carbon monoxide in the building, it is uninhabitable. That is a life safety issue, which is why Council had to adopt this ordinance.

UNFIT BUILDING – 2607 SADIE HOPKINS STREET – DEMOLITION – HEARING – ORDINANCE ADOPTED

This was a hearing to consider adoption of an ordinance, pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.6.8D of the Unified Development Ordinance Code, to authorize the demolition of the unfit buildings listed below if the repairs necessary to render the dwellings fit for human habitation are not completed within 90 days:

LOCATION TAX VACATEDAND DISTRICT PROPERTY OWNER ID NO. AND CLOSED2607 Sadie Hopkins Elvin Rogers, Sr. Heirs 0060903 478 daysStreet (X) c/o Elvin Rogers, Jr.

Mayor Pro Tem Odom opened the hearing and the following people spoke.

Anthony Rogers (no address provided) – Mr. Rogers stated he has power of attorney for Elvin Rogers, Jr., who is incarcerated and is a mentally disabled adult. The problem has been trying to find other people to help with financing. He has boarded the property and posted No Trespassing signs. A family member from the other side of Elvin Rogers' family keeps breaking into the house and Mr. Rogers has to go to the property and have the family member arrested. The man is currently charged with breaking and entering and trespassing. Mr. Rogers said the nuisance property is not this one, but the property next door which contains a shade mechanic shop where they sell drugs and do a lot of other things. That property is owned by Marion Robinson. Mr. Rogers has told the housing inspector that no one has permission to be in or on Elvin Rogers' property. Mr. Rogers has done everything to repair the house which the housing inspector asked him to do except the electrical work, because he did not have the funding. He has now listed the property for sale to eliminate this problem. Mr. Rogers asked for an extension of time because Elvin Rogers, Jr. needs funding for his welfare when he is released from jail in February 2016.

Housing and Neighborhood Preservation Inspections Administrator Ashley Glover stated the case was initiated in January 2014. The property has been vacant and closed for over a year.


Staff is requesting that an ordinance be adopted ordering the property to be repaired or demolished within the 90-day time period, which should give Mr. Rogers time to sell the property. He may need to come back to Council and request additional time for repairs, but at this time, staff recommends adoption of the ordinance. Mr. Rogers said he has no problem with that at all, but he is concerned the property will not sell at fair market value in 90 days. Ms. Baldwin and Mr. Weeks told him if the house doesn't sell in 90 days, he can return to Council and ask for an extension of time.

No one else asked to be heard; thus, the hearing was closed. Mr. Weeks moved to adopt the ordinance authorizing demolition of the unfit building at 2607 Sadie Hopkins Street if the necessary repairs are not completed within 90 days. The motion was seconded by Ms. Baldwin. The Mayor Pro Tem suggested adding to the motion that the Raleigh Police Department be directed to check out the adjacent property owned by Marion Robinson to see what is going on there. His modification was accepted by Mr. Weeks and Ms. Baldwin. Mr. Rogers said the problem is that is actually a County law enforcement situation; the City does not cover it. He and Mr. Glover have discussed this. Mr. Rogers had to have the County Sheriff come out to make the arrest, but the County really does not want to deal with it. Mayor Pro Tem Odom told Mr. Rogers the City will recommend to the County that County law enforcement look into the matter. Mr. Weeks' motion carried unanimously and the Mayor Pro Tem ruled the motion adopted on a vote of 7-0 (Mayor McFarlane absent). See Ordinance 458.

PUBLIC NUISANCE ABATEMENT – VARIOUS LOCATIONS – HEARING TO CONSIDER CONFIRMATION OF CHARGES – RESOLUTION ADOPTED

This was a hearing to consider adoption of a resolution to confirm as a lien against the property as listed below the charges for the abatement of public nuisances.

LOCATION TAX COST OFAND DISTRICT PROPERTY OWNER ID NO. ABATEMENT4424 Fawn Glen Drive (B) Trinh Pham and Toan Q. 0286768 $261

Tran1723 Fox Hollow Drive (C) L.K. Burnette, Owner 0190973 $2671725 Fox Hollow Drive (C) L.K. Burnette, Owner 0192289 $2671214 Fuller Street (D) Wheeler Crossing 0161919 $289

Homeowners Association,Inc.

508 Ileagnes Road (D) Weishi Yuan and Hai Yan 0071254 $539607 West Morgan Street (D) Raleigh Acquisition Group, 0017680 $755

Inc.5412 Robbins Drive (C) C&D Custom Homes, LLC 0333900 $495

c/o Carroll G. Ogle Heirs5416 Robbins Drive (C) C&D Custom Homes, LLC 0333899 $897

c/o Carroll G. Ogle Heirs4407 Roller Court (B) Mohammed Ismali and 0131513 $100

Abdelhak El Harch, Owner


Mayor Pro Tem Odom announced the charges had been paid for 607 West Morgan Street and 4407 Roller Court. He opened the hearing for each remaining location. No one asked to be heard; thus, the hearing was closed. Housing and Neighborhood Preservation Inspections Administrator Ashley Glover stated the charges for 4424 Fawn Glen Drive had been partially paid and the amount to be confirmed is $175, not $261. Mayor Pro Tem Odom moved adoption of a resolution confirming the charges as amended. His motion was seconded by Mr. Gaylord and a roll call vote resulted in all members voting in the affirmative. The Mayor Pro Tem ruled the motion adopted on a 7-0 vote (Mayor McFarlane absent). See Resolution 125.

ANNEXATION – WEST LAKE COUNTRY TRAIL – HEARING – ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION ADOPTED

This was a hearing to consider petitioned annexation of the property known as West Lake Country Trail. Following the hearing, if the Council wishes to proceed with the annexation, it would be appropriate to adopt an ordinance annexing the property immediately and adopt a resolution assigning the property to City Council Electoral District E.

The Mayor Pro Tem opened the hearing. No one asked to be heard; thus, the hearing was closed. Mr. Gaylord moved adoption of an ordinance annexing the property effective immediately and a resolution placing the property in the City Council Electoral District E. His motion was seconded by Mr. Weeks and put to a vote which resulted in all members voting in the affirmative. The Mayor Pro Tem ruled the motion adopted on a vote of 7-0 (Mayor McFarlane absent). See Ordinance 459 and Resolution 126.

ANNEXATION – PINEBROOK HILLS – HEARING – ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION ADOPTED

This was a hearing to consider petitioned annexation of the property known as Pinebrook Hills. Following the hearing, if the Council wishes to proceed with the annexation, it would be appropriate to adopt an ordinance annexing the property immediately and adopt a resolution assigning the property to City Council Electoral District E.

The Mayor Pro Tem opened the hearing. No one asked to be heard; thus, the hearing was closed. Mr. Gaylord moved adoption of an ordinance annexing the property effective immediately and a resolution placing the property in the City Council Electoral District E. His motion was seconded by Mr. Weeks and put to a vote which resulted in all members voting in the affirmative. The Mayor Pro Tem ruled the motion adopted on a vote of 7-0 (Mayor McFarlane absent). See Ordinance 460 and Resolution 126.

MONTESSORI SCHOOL OF RALEIGH, INC. – DEBT ISSUE – REQUIRED PUBLIC HEARING – DEFERRED TO JULY 7, 2015 CITY COUNCIL MEETING

At the request of bond counsel for the Montessori School of Raleigh, Inc., it was requested to delay the hearing to the July 7, 2015 City Council meeting.


This was a hearing on the proposed issuance of not-to-exceed $7,000,000 of bonds to be issued by the Public Financing Authority. The hearing is held solely for the purpose of meeting the requirements of the Internal Revenue Code and educational facilities revenue bonds to be issued by the Public Finance Authority for the benefit of the Montessori School of Raleigh, Inc.

Action does not constitute a debt of the City, nor require a tax levy or pledge of faith and/or credit of the City, nor will it affect the City’s debt ratios or legal debt limit.

Following the hearing, if the Council so desires, it would be appropriate to adopt a resolution approving the issuance by the Public Finance Authority (Wisconsin) of $7,000,000 aggregate principal amount relating to the Montessori School of Raleigh, Inc. project.

Without objection, Mayor Pro Tem Odom stated the public hearing would be deferred to July 7, 2015.

STORMWATER PLAN – COMPLIANCE WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL AND NATURAL RESOURCES PERMIT UNDER THE NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM – HEARING – APPROVED

This was a hearing to provide an opportunity for public comment on the City's stormwater plan for compliance with a permit issued by the North Carolina Department of Environmental and Natural Resources (NCDENR) under the national pollutant discharge elimination system. Following the hearing, if the Council so desires, it would be appropriate to approve the plan.

Mayor Pro Tem Odom opened the hearing. No one asked to be heard; thus, the hearing was closed. Mr. Gaylord moved to approve the City's stormwater plan for compliance with the permit issued by NCDENR under the NPDES. His motion was seconded by Mr. Weeks and carried unanimously. The Mayor Pro Tem ruled the motion adopted on a 7-0 vote (Mayor McFarlane absent).

HILLSBOROUGH STREET MUNICIPAL SERVICE DISTRICT – EXPANSION – APPROVED AS AMENDED

This was a hearing to consider expansion of the Hillsborough Street Municipal Service District (MSD) to include all ancillary lots and properties in the Cameron Village area and Morgan Street as illustrated on the map included in the agenda packet. Following the hearing, if the Council wishes to expand the boundaries, it would be appropriate to adopt a resolution to amend the boundaries by including the specific lots. The Mayor Pro Tem opened the hearing and the following people spoke.

Neil Riemann, 204 East Park Drive, Raleigh, NC 27605-1714 – Mr. Riemann stated he was present on behalf of the Cameron Park Neighborhood Association (CPNA). When the original draft of the MSD expansion was published, they had concerns with four of the parcels to be added. Their concerns about three of the parcels were addressed satisfactorily; one parcel is still of concern. One of the parcels proposed to be added to the MSD is a parking lot behind the


Vann Law Firm offices on Hillsborough Street at Woodburn Road. The MSD takes the position that the parking lot is already included in the district; the tax office had been assessing that parcel for some time. The CPNA researched the issue and the best they can determine, based on information provided by the City, is that the parking lot is not part of the MSD. They do not want it to be part of the MSD. It is a surface parking lot and while it is associated with the law firm, it is in an R-6 district like the R-6 district all along the alley on the north side. It is inconsistent with their long-term goals for development along that alley for it to remain a surface parking lot. The CPNA hopes to see dense residential development along both sides of the alley, against the alley. They have been working a long time on an alley transition proposal that they are trying to get City staff to discuss with them, and they believe staff will. They also believe in order to further that proposal, there needs to be a residential use on that side in the long term.

Ms. Baldwin asked if one of the four parcels of concern to the CPNA was the fire station. Mr. Riemann replied it was, and they objected to its inclusion. The original proposal suggested the fire station be included in the MSD, but it was taken out. Ms. Baldwin told him it has not been removed yet; that is something Council will have to do at this hearing. The original map is the map that was submitted for this public hearing and that is why she is trying to document the four properties. Mr. Riemann said he was sent the map showing the revised boundary with the fire station removed and he assumed that was a City map. Ms. Baldwin told him that map was for Council consideration. Mr. Riemann clarified the three parcels they originally objected to were the fire station, which he understands the Hillsborough Street Community Services Corporation has agreed not to seek to include; the Preiss Company parking lot next door, which the HSCSC agreed not to add; and a rental property owned by Mr. Haley's successors in interest which is adjacent to Oberlin Road. That parcel is a triangular-shaped property which is wedged in with the Player's Retreat parking lot. The CPNA has relented and agreed to the addition of that parcel.

No one else asked to be heard; thus, the hearing was closed. Ms. Baldwin moved to approve the MSD map that Council originally approved, minus the fire station and the Preiss Company parking lot. She said based on feedback from the case, the owner of the other parking lot wants to stay in the MSD and receive the benefits of being in the MSD. Mr. Maiorano seconded the motion.

Ms. Crowder distributed copies of the original map so people could see the Vann property and see that it was not included in the original MSD. On the secondary map which can be accessed online, the Vann property appears as one parcel, not two, but the tax office has been collecting taxes for the entire parcel. The property owner pays MSD taxes, benefits from being in the MSD, and wants to remain in it. Mr. Stephenson asked if the adjacent parcel that is also north of the alley has never been in the MSD, and Ms. Crowder replied not to her knowledge.

Jeff Murison, Executive Director of the Hillsborough Street Community Services Corporation, pointed out the Vann property on a map. The Vann property is actually two parts but was consolidated into one parcel in 2000. He indicated the Preiss parcel on the map and the parcel behind the Preiss parcel, which is a parking lot. That parking lot is zoned the same as the parking lot behind the Vann property. It is not in the MSD now and is not proposed to be added. Ms. Baldwin said according to the map that was published for this public hearing, that parking


lot behind the Preiss parcel is proposed for inclusion in the MSD. Mr. Murison said he misspoke; it is proposed for removal from the MSD based on Mr. Riemann's feedback.

Mr. Stephenson said Mr. Reimann had stated that in the past, the Vann parking lot, zoned R-6, has not been officially in the MSD even though the property owner is paying MSD taxes. Mr. Murison replied he believes both statements are correct. The property was purchased by Mr. Vann in 2000 and the two parts were consolidated into one at the county level. The MSD was created by the City Council in 2009. The map used to illustrate the MSD boundaries at that time did not include the parking lot; however, the County has been assessing the entire parcel and the property owner has been paying the entire assessment since the MSD was created. Mr. Murison believes whoever drew the map at the time mistakenly drew the boundary line along the alley and did not include the parking lot. The Preiss lot, which is also zoned R-6, is a completely separate parcel.

Ms. Crowder asked if the Vann property as of 2000 is now a one-lot parcel and Council decides the parking lot can come out of the MSD, is it legal to exclude the back portion of a parcel. City Attorney McCormick replied it is legal, but he thinks it is very bad practice. An MSD should be created along easily identifiable lot lines or streets or some identifiable topographic feature. Otherwise, you get in a situation like you are technically in here, where there should have been an allocation of the amount of property tax actually paid, because the owner of the Vann property is paying tax on some property that is not technically in the district. Attorney McCormick reiterated the scenario proposed by Ms. Crowder is legal, but it is very bad practice to split a lot. Mr. Murison stated he talked to the Wake County Revenue Director, who indicated the County does not have the capability to subsidize dollar amounts because they've only done an assessment for the entire property and not the separate individual parcels.

The Mayor Pro Tem called for the vote on Ms. Baldwin's motion. The motion carried by a vote of 6-1 (Mayor McFarlane absent; Mr. Stephenson voting in the negative).

Ms. Baldwin raised the issue of Mr. Stephenson's property being located within the MSD. She asked if he should he have recused himself from the discussion and vote. City Attorney McCormick responded he does not believe Mr. Stephenson recused himself when the municipal service district was originally set up, so he does not think he needs to recuse himself now. An MSD is about paying more tax, and it is not a direct pecuniary benefit to anyone to pay more tax. Ms. Baldwin pointed out Mr. Stephenson voted against her motion, which could be construed….. (Ms. Baldwin shrugged with her hands). City Attorney McCormick said how Mr. Stephenson votes is separate from whether there is a conflict of interest. Mr. Stephenson said he would be happy to separate the vote, but Mayor Pro Tem Odom said the City Attorney has stated there is no conflict, so Council will move forward.

Mr. Stephenson stated he has a strong concern about the implication that was brought forward about the intent of his vote. He would be happy to vote himself into the MSD expansion as a separate vote and then vote against the Vann parking lot as a separate vote. That will eliminate any confusion about his intent. City Attorney McCormick stated someone who voted on the prevailing side needs to make a motion to reconsider. Ms. Baldwin made a motion to reconsider


her previous motion, Mr. Maiorano seconded the motion, and approval was unanimous, 7-0 (Mayor McFarlane absent).

Ms. Baldwin moved to approve the Hillsborough Street Municipal Service District boundaries with the exception of the fire station and the Priess Company parking lot, and with the removal of Mr. Stephenson's property. City Attorney McCormick suggested the better approach would be a motion to excuse Mr. Stephenson from voting on the conflict, the parking lot he wants to vote "no" on. Mr. Stephenson said there is no conflict because he has no interest in that parking lot. The City Attorney stated Council must have a reason to justify holding a separate vote on the Vann parking lot. Mr. Stephenson said the reason for the separate vote is that his "no" vote on Ms. Baldwin's original motion might be construed as a vote to keep himself out of the MSD, which is the opposite of what he wants to do.

Mr. Stephenson moved that the Council vote on all the MSD expansion except the Vann parking lot, but including the removal of the fire station and the Preiss parking lot. Mr. Gaylord seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. The Mayor Pro Tem ruled the motion adopted on a 7-0 vote (Mayor McFarlane absent).

Ms. Baldwin moved to include the Vann parking in the MSD boundary. Her motion was seconded by Mr. Gaylord and carried by a vote of 6-1 (Mayor McFarlane absent; Mr. Stephenson voting in the negative). The Mayor Pro Tem ruled the motion adopted. See Resolution 127.

Steve Guth, 10 Enterprise Street, Raleigh, NC 27607-7398 – Mr. Guth asked if it was possible to opt out of the MSD. He would like to opt out, if possible, because he takes care of his own property and does not need the services of the MSD.

Ms. Baldwin said Mr. Guth's property was included in the MSD for the same reason Mr. Stephenson's property was included. State law does not give Council the ability to opt people out if they request it. Mayor Pro Tem Odom added that regardless of state law, the Council chose to include Mr. Guth's property in the MSD.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THEBUDGET AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE

NO REPORT

BUDGET AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING – JUNE 23, 2015 – ANNOUNCED

The Mayor Pro Tem reported the Budget and Economic Development Committee would meet next week.


REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THECOMPREHENSIVE PLANNING COMMITTEE

TC-2(A)-15 – USE REGULATIONS – ORDINANCE ADOPTED AS AMENDED

Chairperson Stephenson reported the Committee recommends the City Council uphold the Planning Commission's recommendation for approval of TC-2(A)-15 as outlined in CR #11616, Sections 1 through 6 only. The Committee makes no recommendation for Sections 7 and 8 of the proposed text change. Copies of TC-2-(A)-15 and CR #11616 were included in the agenda packet. Chairperson Stephenson moved approval of Sections 1-6 of TC-2(A)-15. His motion was seconded by Mr. Weeks.

Mayor Pro Tem Odom asked what Sections 1-6 do for the City. Planning Administrator/Zoning Eric Hodge explained the majority of the changes align the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) with the old Part 10 Code and as much as possible, transfer the uses allowed in the comparable Part 10 zoning districts to those in the UDO. PAZ Hodge cited each of the six sections, all of which amend the Allowed Principal Use Table in Section 6.1.4 of the UDO.

Section 1. Excludes "Pawnshop" as a Permitted Use within the CX- district.

Section 2. Expands the allowed uses within the OP- district to include "Overnight Lodging, Except as Listed Below:" as a Permitted Use.

Section 3. Expands the allowed uses within the OX- district to include "Dance, martial arts, music studio or classroom" as a Permitted Use.

Section 4. Expands the allowed uses within the MH- district to include "Civic, Except as listed below", "Cemetery" and "School, public or private (K-l2)" as Limited Uses.

Section 5. Removes "Outdoor Sports or Entertainment Facility (≤250 seats)" as a Permitted Use within the CM- district.

Section 6. Expands the allowed uses within the IH- district to include "Office" as a Permitted Use.

Mayor Pro Tem Odom called for the vote on Mr. Stephenson's motion. The motion carried unanimously and the Mayor Pro Tem ruled the motion adopted on a vote of 7-0 (Mayor McFarlane absent).

Section 7 of TC-2(A)-15 amends the Allowed Principal Use Table in Section 6.1.4 of the UDO to expand the allowed uses within the NX district to include "Bar, nightclub, tavern, lounge" as a Limited Use. Section 8 of the text change amends Section 6.4.10B of Part 10A of the UDO, Bar, Nightclub, Tavern, Lounge, by inserting the following underlined section numbered "2": "Use Standards:


a. A bar, nightclub, tavern or lounge in the NX- District is subject to the following:

i. No live performances.ii. No dance floor.iii. No outdoor seating.

Mr. Stephenson moved that the Council not adopt Sections 7 and 8 of the text change related to limitations on bar, nightclub, tavern, and lounge use in the NX district. The proposed conditions in the text change were no live performances, no dance floor, and no outdoor seating. By split vote, the Comprehensive Planning Committee modified condition iii. to allow outdoor seating up to a maximum of eight seats. Mr. Stephenson said he did not support the Committee's motion because these sections would grant a brand-new entitlement in the NX district, i.e., bars, nightclubs, taverns and lounges, without the Council being able to limit them in any way in terms of hours of operation, square footage of the facility, parking, or amplified music. He cannot imagine any Council member would want to grant that entitlement next door to his or her neighborhood.

Ms. Baldwin asked where the text change originated. PAZ Hodge replied the UDO citywide remapping process. Prior to the text change, the thinking was that certain locations in the City that already had bars, nightclubs, taverns or lounges and if not for the allowance of those uses in NX districts, it would force the City to not render the uses nonconforming and remap those properties with the higher intensity CX- zoning. Planning Director Ken Bowers explained further this was one of a number of issues raised during the Comprehensive Planning Committee discussion of UDO remapping issues. In looking at neighborhood shopping plazas that were mapped CX and not NX, many times bars would have to be an allowed use so as not to render them nonconforming, although given their size and location, NX would have been the more obvious zoning choice. One potential remedy for that would be to look at an allowance for bars and nightclubs in the NX district to allow staff to place NX zoning on those types of shopping plazas. The Comprehensive Planning Committee instructed staff to look at the text change. Staff had extensive discussions with the City Attorney's office in terms of some reasonable use limitations the City could place on the NX district, given what the City is pre-empted from regulating by the state Alcohol Beverage Control Board, and the result was the text change before the Council now. Staff looked into trying to control aspects of bars that might create a nuisance situation.

Ms. Crowder asked if the Council had no choice about amplified music. Planning Director Bowers explained that is a separate permit process from whether or not the use is permitted, and that special use permit is approved by the City Council. Mr. Stephenson asked about indoor music, and the City Attorney responded those permits are issued administratively.

Mr. Gaylord stated basically, this text change came about because the City was remapping properties NX which had bars, nightclubs, taverns and lounges in them and it was an inconsistency. He thinks this is a reasonable proposal put forth. The Committee was a little confused about some of these provisions, but the Committee members are mostly in agreement now. This text change generally allows for a neighborhood bar, wine bar, or bottle shop where


bottles are opened for patrons. It is not intended for major impacts, which is why conditions i., ii. and iii. were added to Section 8.

There was no second to Mr. Stephenson's motion. Mr. Gaylord moved to approve Sections 7 and 8 with an adjustment to new condition iii. to allow for eight seats outdoors. His motion as seconded by Ms. Baldwin.

Ms. Crowder asked if a bar located in an NX district could be of any size pursuant to this text change. Planning Director Bowers responded affirmatively, and reiterated the City does not have the power to regulate size. The Mayor Pro Tem noted the bar size would be restricted by property size, trees and parking lots. Planning Director Bowers stated the size of any building is determined by the dimensions of that property and other regulations. The City regulates the size and bulk of buildings, but if a property owner had a large enough site, he could have a nightclub but no live performance, dance floor, or more than 8 outdoor seats.

Mr. Stephenson said he loves the idea of a quaint neighborhood bar and he was interested in exploring whether that could be done in a way to allow that use while protecting neighborhoods, but to merely hope there will not be large lots for bars, nightclubs, lounges and taverns next to neighborhoods is not sufficient protection and does not look out for the public interest. He reiterated this text change would allow new bar, nightclub, lounge and tavern entitlements next to neighborhoods with no distance separation, with unlimited size, with unlimited hours of operation up to 2:00 a.m., with unlimited parking, and with amplified music indoors. He does not believe any Council member wants to zone that next to his or her neighborhood.

Mr. Maiorano asked if the Comprehensive Planning Committee discussed alternatives and concluded there were no alternatives and nothing additional that could be applied to address the concerns articulated by Mr. Stephenson. Mr. Gaylord replied the Committee considered limiting the number of televisions that could be in an establishment, but determined that was overreaching and there was not necessarily a rational nexus between the number of televisions and external impacts. Planning Director Bowers pointed out there is a provision in the parking code that says if an establishment is open late and is located within so many feet of a residential district, the owner must provide the complement of parking even if it is otherwise exempted. This code provision offers some control in areas where older commercial buildings are adjacent to residential neighborhoods, such as Hillsborough Street.

Mr. Maiorano asked about a distance limitation. Planning Director Bowers said staff looked at all these things and settled on those the City has the authority to regulate. City Attorney McCormick confirmed the City cannot regulate a distance requirement in this circumstance. In North Carolina, the state occupies the entire field of ABC laws and alcohol sales and has pre-empted distance regulation. Mr. McCormick stated this text change is a good attempt to do everything the Council can do except ban the sale of alcohol in a particular facility like this. Planning Director Bowers explained how this relates to past zoning practices and pointed out current law prohibits bars, nightclubs, lounges and taverns in NX districts, which is more restrictive than prior zoning practices. Mr. Stephenson made a final comment that alcohol sales are allowed in restaurants in NX districts, and sometimes restaurants turn into bars after 10:30 p.m.


Mayor Pro Tem Odom called for the vote on Mr. Gaylord's motion. The motion carried 6-1 (Mayor McFarlane absent; Mr. Stephenson voting in the negative) and the Mayor Pro Tem ruled the motion adopted. See Ordinance 461 TC 369.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OFTHE LAW AND PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE

ENCROACHMENT – 501 DEVEREUX STREET – QUIT-CLAIM DEED AND RELEASE OF PROPERTY APPROVED

Chairperson Baldwin reported that although it has been determined the City makes no claim of title to, or interest in, said property and area, the Committee recommends entering a quit-claim deed and release of the property at 501 Devereux Street in order to remove any cloud to the title for the property owner. She moved approval of the recommendation as presented. Her motion was seconded by Mr. Maiorano and approval was unanimous. The Mayor Pro Tem ruled the motion adopted on a vote of 7-0 (Mayor McFarlane absent).

PRIVATE USE OF PUBLIC SPACES – OUTDOOR DINING – VARIOUS RECOMMENDATIONS – APPROVED AS AMENDED; ITEM TO REMAIN IN LAW AND PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE

Chairperson Baldwin reported that by split vote, the Committee recommends the following:

● That the expiration dates for existing outdoor dining area permits be extended to August 1, 2015;

● That all outdoor dining areas along Fayetteville Street be clearly delineated during the July 4th festival;

● That a Hospitality Committee be formed consisting of business owners from Fayetteville Street, Hillsborough Street, and Glenwood South areas as well as members of the Downtown Raleigh Alliance, Shop Local Raleigh, and the Convention and Visitors Bureau; and

● That staff take steps to increase enforcement of existing Private Use of Public Spaces rules and regulations.

This item will remain in committee.

Ms. Baldwin moved approval of the recommendation as presented. Her motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Odom.

Ms. Crowder asked if residents of the downtown area could be included as members of the Hospitality Committee. Chairperson Baldwin that was discussed by the Committee and is the reason Mr. Maiorano objected. She explained this is intended to be more of a technical committee. The Fayetteville Street District has been meeting with residents and business owners for more than a year. Glenwood South already has a partnership with residents and merchants.


This committee is meant to be more of a way for staff to communicate with retail merchants if there are any issues.

Mr. Maiorano stated he believe this is a good approach and is necessary and appropriate. The only reason he voted against the recommendation was the make-up of the Hospitality Committee that is being formed. He also believes an opportunity is being missed, for two reasons: by narrowing this to a strictly technical discussion and by removing voices from discussion. The City would benefit from a collaborative effort. Having said that, he is still supportive of what has been outlined here, but encourages increased participation in the Hospitality Committee. Chairperson Baldwin noted the Law and Public Safety Committee could not decide what resident(s) should be on the Hospitality Committee, and Mr. Maiorano said he would leave that up to the (Hospitality) Committee.

The Mayor Pro Tem thanked Assistant City Manager Marchell Adams David for the job she did and what she brought to the Council; he thought it was great work. His understanding is that only six establishments are creating the problem. He supports moving forward in this direction and looks forward to August. Mr. Stephenson said he supports what Mr. Maiorano said. This is a great step forward. It would be beneficial to have all the stakeholders at the table. To limit the discussion to technical issues could be viewed by some as an attempt to limit participation. He supports adding residents to the Hospitality Committee.

Ms. Baldwin amended her motion to add a resident to the Hospitality Committee and allow the Committee assembled by ACM Adams David to choose the resident. Mr. Maiorano seconded the amended motion. Ms. Crowder asked Ms. Baldwin to please restate her motion. Ms. Baldwin clarified the motion is to approve the Law and Public Safety Committee recommendations as presented plus add a resident to the Hospitality Committee, but have ACM Adams David and the Hospitality Committee decide who it will be. Mayor Pro Tem Odom called for the vote on the motion, which carried unanimously. The Mayor Pro Tem ruled the motion adopted on a vote of 7-0 (Mayor McFarlane absent).

Chairperson Baldwin expressed appreciation to ACM Adams David for all the work she did, and thanked the Fayetteville Street merchants who have "stepped it up" and are now looking at self-compliance. City Attorney McCormick recognized Nicolette Fulton for her tremendous amount of work on this issue.

LAW AND PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MEETING – JUNE 23, 2015 – TIME CHANGE

Chairperson Baldwin asked the members of the Law and Public Safety Committee if they could meet at 3:00 p.m. instead of 4:00 p.m. on June 23, 2015. Upon receiving affirmative responses, she announced the Committee would meet at 3:00 p.m. on June 23.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OFTHE PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE

NO REPORT


PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING – JUNE 23, 2015 – CANCELED

Chairperson Weeks reported the Public Works Committee meeting scheduled for June 23, 2015 has been canceled.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THETECHNOLOGY AND COMMUNICATION COMMITTEE

NO REPORT

TECHNOLOGY AND COMMUNICATION COMMITTEE MEETING – JUNE 23, 2015 – CANCELED

Chairperson Gaylord reported the Technology and Communication Committee meeting scheduled for June 23, 2015 has been canceled.

REPORT OF MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS

CROSSWALKS – NEW BERN AVENUE – REFERRED TO ADMINISTRATION

Ms. Baldwin stated there is a lack of crosswalks on New Bern Avenue. She knows the City is getting ready to enter the design phase for sidewalks on New Bern Avenue and some citizens have expressed concern. She asked staff to meet with her so she could provide them with the names of the concerned citizens. She also requested that temporary crosswalks be placed on the street to help alleviate the citizen concerns.

PARKING DURING SPECIAL EVENTS – PROGRESS ENERGY PARKING DECK – REFERRED TO ADMINISTRATION

Ms. Baldwin said she recently attended a concert at the Lincoln Theatre and was disturbed to discover that all handicapped parking access was roped off in the Progress Energy parking deck. People who required handicapped parking had to park three and four blocks away and get to their location using wheelchairs. Her understanding is that this was done privately and City staff did not know about it. Ms. Baldwin wants to make sure going forward that people understand they cannot mark off handicapped parking spaces; it defies Americans With Disabilities Act compliance. Police officers who were present did not feel they could undo that. Ms. Baldwin stated this incident was unacceptable and deserves serious discussion among Special Events staff and others.

TRAFFIC CALMING – KAPLAN DRIVE – TREE MARKERS – REFERRED TO ADMINISTRATION

Ms. Crowder asked to meet with staff to discuss the Kaplan Drive traffic calming project. Some very large trees have been marked, but those markers keep disappearing and she would like to talk to staff about what they think is going on.


SINO-U.S. BUSINESS CONFERENCE – COMMENTS RECEIVED

Mr. Weeks reported that the first North Carolina Sino-U.S. Business Promotion Conference held in Raleigh on June 8 was very successful. Approximately 25 Chinese businesses participated and over 100 people attended the conference. The North Carolina Secretary of Commerce and other representatives from that department were also present. He gave kudos to Sister Cities and James Montague for promoting the conference.

DOWNTOWN EXPERIENCE PLAN – COMMENTS RECEIVED

Mr. Stephenson commented there is a lot going on downtown, which is fantastic. On May 11 he had raised the question of how the Council will pay for all these wonderful community benefits it wants There has been a lot of discussion about affordable housing and some potential solutions came out today during the Council's lunch work session with Housing and Neighborhoods Director Larry Jarvis. All the things going on downtown made Mr. Stephenson think about a series of public input sessions he attended a year ago to create the Downtown Experience Plan, which is our consultant Sasaki Associates-driven 10-year plan to create a great downtown. The April 2015 draft plan is on the City's Web site. It is an excellent plan and exciting plan that identifies a comprehensive list of goals and action items for creating great community benefits as part of a great downtown and great development options. It discusses goals for historic preservation, diverse housing options, homeless housing, high-quality development, five catalytic projects for a downtown area that design in concept form great public spaces, human scale, building setbacks, building heights, and opportunities to restore urban streams like Pigeon House Branch. It even gets into a financing toolbox where it talks about different ways developers can contribute to open space, purchases, various value-capture methods, and creating financial districts. Mr. Stephenson said it is a great draft vision that has not come before Council or been discussed publicly at a public hearing. It has not been adopted by the City Council. Since Council is talking about a downtown remap and decisions attendant to that about building height and assignment of land value to various downtown benefits, it makes sense to him that Council would adopt the vision before taking those actions.

PARKING STUDY – SCOPE – COMMENTS RECEIVED

Mr. Maiorano said he wanted to make sure the scope of the parking study the City is undertaking is as far-reaching as possible. He does not want the study to be just a space count to determine the need and location for a new parking deck, but be a long-reaching look at what might be parking demands downtown, development effects on transit, vehicle sharing such as Uber, space sharing, the regulatory structure within the UDO, whether the City needs so many comprehensive spaces set aside, and whether there are ways to ensure utilization. He does not want to see underutilized property with a parking deck sitting on it that the City is not benefitting from fully. He would like the parking study to be as robust, comprehensive, far-reaching, and forward-thinking as possible.


DOWNTOWN RALEIGH – CLEANLINESS – COMMENTS RECEIVED

Mr. Maiorano stated Council has had a large amount of discussion over a long time period regarding cleanliness downtown, and he thinks the City needs to continue to do a better job. Part of the challenge the City is facing is due to growth of the City and so is the expanded use of downtown. The City should do a better job, hold itself accountable, and figure out how to do it. He encouraged staff and the City as a whole look at this. One thing we can add to that is figuring out whether or not there are appropriate locations throughout downtown for garbage cans, permanently located on City corners so we are giving people easy access to throw trash away rather than deposit it on the ground. Everyone needs to take ownership of this issue; it will take a partnership.

ETHICS RESOLUTION – CITY COUNCIL – REFERRED TO CITY MANAGER AND CITY ATTORNEY

Mr. Maiorano said at the last Council meeting, he asked the City Manager and City Attorney to review and evaluate the Council's existing ethics policy, look at the statutory framework, look at best practices for elected officials and appointed public bodies, and make sure the Council's policy withstands the level of scrutiny and expectations the Council would hold itself to. He also raised the possibility of incorporating or creating a professional code of conduct for the Council regarding how the members hold themselves out to the public. Mr. Maiorano believes these are two different components and he does not think the City Manager and City Attorney would necessarily be drafting that code as a combined effort. He talked to the Mayor about it and their expectation and hope is that the City Manager and City Attorney would look at best practices, come back to the Council with a recommendation for the ethics policy, which is regulatory-driven, and come back with a recommendation on existing professional codes of conduct. The item can then be brought to the Council table to consider appointment of a committee to look into this and help the City devise something appropriate.

APPOINTMENTS

APPOINTMENTS – VARIOUS ACTIONS TAKEN

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

Board of Adjustment – Two Vacancies – Betsy Kane – 5 (Crowder, Gaylord, Odom, Stephenson, Weeks). Ms. Baldwin nominated Judson Root.

Fair Housing Hearing Board – One Vacancy – Rob Boggs – 5 (Baldwin, Crowder, Odom, Stephenson, Weeks).

Historic Cemeteries Advisory Board – One Vacancy – No nominees. Ms. Baldwin nominated Barden Culbreth.

Raleigh Sister Cities – One Vacancy – No nominees. Ms. Baldwin and Mayor Pro Tem Odom nominated Jean Tedrow.


Raleigh Transit Authority – Chairperson. During the last meeting, the City Council took action which provided the Raleigh Transit Authority with a full composition. It is the Council’s responsibility to name the Chairperson. Council members received in the agenda packet a list of the current membership. The current Chairperson was listed on the agenda as Jason Horn. The Council should take action to name a Chairperson. The Deputy City Clerk pointed out the current Chairperson is Les Seitz, not Jason Horn as listed on the agenda. She spoke to Mr. Seitz yesterday and he recommends the appointment of Jason Horn as Chairperson. Mr. Gaylord moved to appoint Jason Horn as Chairperson. His motion was seconded by Ms. Baldwin and carried unanimously. Mayor Pro Tem Odom ruled the motion adopted on a vote of 7-0 (Mayor McFarlane absent).

Substance Abuse Advisory Commission – One Vacancy – No nominees.

The Deputy City Clerk announced the appointment of Betsy Kane to the Board of Adjustment, Rob Boggs to the Fair Housing Hearing Board, and Jason Horn as Chairperson of the Raleigh Transit Authority. The other items will be carried over to the next Council meeting.

NOMINATIONS

APPEARANCE COMMISSION – VACANCY ANNOUNCED

The Deputy City Clerk reported staff had received a letter of resignation from Damien Graham, who recently accepted the position of Communications Director for the City of Raleigh; therefore, there is one vacancy on the Appearance Commission. This item will be carried over to the next Council meeting.

HISTORIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION – REAPPOINTMENTS MADE – NOMINATIONS MADE

The following six terms on the Historic Development Commission are expiring: Jannette M. Coleridge-Taylor, Fred Belledin, Kiernan McGorty, Miranda L. Downer, Jenny Harper, and Donald Davis. Ms. Coleridge-Taylor and Mr. Belledin are not eligible for reappointment because of length of service. Ms. McGorty does not wish to be considered for reappointment. The three remaining members – Ms. Downer, Ms. Harper, and Mr. Davis – are eligible and would like to be considered for reappointment.

Ms. Baldwin moved to suspend the rules and reappoint Miranda L. Downer, Jenny Harper and Donald Davis. Her motion was seconded by Mr. Weeks and the motion carried by unanimous vote of 7-0 (Mayor McFarlane absent).

The following nominations were made: Esther Hall (Baldwin), Caleb Smith (Baldwin), Curtis Kasefang (Stephenson), and Kaye Webb (Weeks). This item will be carried over to the next Council meeting.


REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY ATTORNEY

City Attorney Tom McCormick reported he had only a closed session item today, and the City Manager also has a closed session item.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY CLERK

MINUTES – VARIOUS – APPROVED

Council members received in their agenda packets copies of the minutes of the May 12, 2015; May 19, 2015; June 2, 2015; and June 8, 2015 Council meetings. Approval is recommended.

Mayor Pro Tem Odom moved approval as presented. His motion was seconded by Ms. Crowder and carried unanimously. The Mayor Pro Tem ruled the motion adopted on a vote of 7-0 (Mayor McFarlane absent).

AMENDED MINUTES – MAY 18, 2015 UDO WORK SESSION – APPROVED

The Deputy City Clerk added this item to the Report and Recommendation of the City Clerk, reminding the Council members they had received via e-mail yesterday a copy of amended minutes for the May 18, 2015 UDO work session. Staff must advertise the public hearing for Z-27-15 on Wednesday, June 17, 2015 and it is necessary to correct the minutes to ensure the proper language is included in the advertisement. The change to the first paragraph on page 9 of the May 18 minutes is as follows (deleted text stricken through, new text underlined):

Discussion took place regarding the building height recommendations as outlined in Council Comments 1 and 2 with Mayor McFarlane making a motion to recommend Council Comment #1 for rezoning Council Comment #2 with seven stories between Seaboard and Peace, 12 stories adjacent to Capital Boulevard, and seven stories for the remainder. Her motion was seconded by Ms. Baldwin and put to a vote that resulted in all members voting in the affirmative except Mr. Gaylord and Ms. Crowder, who were absent and excused. Mayor McFarlane ruled the motion adopted on a 6-0 vote.

Mayor Pro Tem Odom moved approval as presented. His motion was seconded by Ms. Crowder and carried unanimously. The Mayor Pro Tem ruled the motion adopted on a vote of 7-0 (Mayor McFarlane absent).

EASEMENT SALE – 1564 WAIT AVENUE, WAKE FOREST – APPROVED; RESOLUTION ADOPTED

The Deputy City Clerk added this item to the Report and Recommendation of the City Clerk. She reported that on June 2, 2015, the City Council accepted an offer of $100.00 from Bowling Green Associates, LLC to purchase a portion of a City-owned sanitary sewer easement at 1564 Wait Avenue, Wake Forest, NC which totals approximately 0.57 acres, or approximately 2,499 square feet. All legal procedures have been followed and it is recommended that Council adopt a resolution authorizing the sale.


Mayor Pro Tem Odom moved approval as presented. His motion was seconded by Ms. Crowder and carried unanimously. The Mayor Pro Tem ruled the motion adopted on a vote of 7-0 (Mayor McFarlane absent). See Resolution 128.

CLOSED SESSION

Mayor Pro Tem Odom moved to enter closed session pursuant to NCGS 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 any such move, and pursuant to NCGS 143-318.11(a)(3) to consult with legal counsel regarding the following matter: Parrish right-of-way acquisitions. His motion was seconded by Mr. Weeks and carried unanimously. The Mayor Pro Tem ruled the motion adopted on a vote of 7-0 (Mayor McFarlane absent). The Council entered closed session at 3:57 p.m.

The City Council reconvened in open session at 4:41 pm. Mayor Pro Tem Odom announced that in closed session, the Council authorized the City Attorney to make the settlement in the Parrish matter.

ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business before the City Council, Mayor Pro Tem Odom announced the meeting adjourned at 4:41 p.m.

Leslie H. EldredgeDeputy City Clerk

raleigh city council regular session - 06/16/2015 · web viewthe city council of the city of...

Documents