A sea of red filled City Hall Monday night as over 100 Durham residents--many wearing red T-shirts emblazoned with the word "Why?" in large white letters--gathered to protest a proposed affordable housing development in East Durham.
Much debate has centered around the lack of affordable housing in Durham, but this time the issue was location. In the end, the council approved a motion to re-examine its policies on the distribution of subsidized housing.
"Public housing units are always being put up in the African-American community," said Durham resident Victoria Peterson. "It's time for some of our other neighbors to carry this burden."
Protest centered around the proposed Pendleton Town Homes development project--the apartments are slated to be built using funding from government tax credit and bond money issued through the Durham Housing Authority. Officials plan to construct the 88 rental units--part of a project approved before the City Council members' current terms--in East Durham off Carolyn Drive.
The protesters' main point of contention was that the Pendleton project would violate the city's Housing Impact Plan--a resolution adopted in 1996 that set strict guidelines for determining affordable housing site selections. The plan included a mandate that subsidized housing should be evenly distributed throughout the city.
The Pendleton project would result in 21.8 percent subsidized housing in the area, almost 10 percentage points higher than the citywide ratio of 12 percent, said Charlene Montford, Housing Authority director.
After residents raised their concerns at a previous City Council meeting, Montford and other members of the City Council staff analyzed current policy and concluded that the Pendleton project would violate the Housing Impact Plan, Montford said. However, as the development project had already been approved and funds allocated, the only recourse was to draft a letter to the North Carolina Housing Finance Agency, explaining the mistake.
"To say we're going to completely ignore it is unconscionable," Mayor Bill Bell said.
Ken Spaulding, a representative for the Pendleton development, said that because the program allows low-income housing developers to obtain lower interest loans--which he said would allow for higher quality construction--the project should not be treated like those subsidized solely by the department of Housing and Urban Development.
Unlike federally financed projects, this would "put it back at the local level [and] upgrade the type of housing" in poorer neighborhoods, Spaulding said. He added that the council would lose credibility if it tried to reverse the action of a previous council.
The council approved Montford's recommendation on behalf of the staff for a report about the city's current policy, approval of the letter to the NCHFA and directed the staff to review current policy on subsidized housing and make recommendations for change.
This action will probably not have any effect on the Pendleton project, although it may change housing policies in the long term.
Durham resident Anita Wright expressed disappointment, although she did not blame the council.
"I'll probably sell my house, no doubt," she said.
Guy Rankin, a community consultant, said Durham would be in danger of losing all of its HUD funds if the city is found to have violated its own policy.
He recommended pooling all federal housing moneys and making the fund available to all developers, which he said would result in a more balanced distribution of affordable housing.
Montford said she does not know how the city's letter will be received by the NCHFA.
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.