MINUTES OF PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE

TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL, MONDAY, MARCH 16, 1992 AT 7:30 P.M.

Mayor Broun called the hearings to order. Council Members in attendance were Julie Andresen, Joyce Brown, Joe Capowski, Mark Chilton, Joe Herzenberg, Alan Rimer and Arthur Werner. Council Member Roosevelt Wilkerson, Jr. was absent excused. Also in attendance were Town Manager Cal Horton, Assistant Town Managers Sonna Loewenthal and Florentine Miller and Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos.

Item 1 Proposed Clark Road Rezonings

Planning Director Roger Waldon briefly reviewed the proposal to rezone the subject property from R-4, allowing up to ten units per acre, to R-2, allowing up to four units per acre. He noted that the proposed rezoning would be consistent with the Town's Comprehensive Plan objective of protecting steeply sloped land. Council Member Andresen requested a map of the area proposed for rezoning. Mr. Waldon said a protest petition had been found to be valid, requiring a 3/4 vote of the Council for the rezoning to occur. He briefly reviewed current zoning in the area.

Marcella Groon, representing the Planning Board, said the Board had voted 4-4 for Ordinance A, to rezone the property. She said the Board had also voted 4-4 to deny the rezoning. Ms. Groon stated that the Planning Board had agreed that there were arguments on both sides of the matter. She noted that surrounding neighborhood and environmental features could be protected through the use of a special use permit.

Horst Kessemeier, a resident of the Northside neighborhood, said he favored the proposed rezoning. He stated that the subject property had unique topography, with a ridge dropping off on all sides. Mr. Kessemeier said most of his neighbors supported moderate income development in the Northside neighborhood. He stated that the University needed to take a more active role in providing affordable housing opportunities for faculty and staff.

Alan Snavely said the staff memorandum did a good job of outlining reasons for and against the proposed rezoning. He urged the Council to follow the intent of the Comprehensive Plan and rezone the property to R-2.

Jim Lewis, an owner of property on Airport Road, said that options other than rezoning from R-4 to R-2 were available to the Council. He suggested that the Council carefully consider the rezoning proposal. Council Member Andresen inquired where Mr. Lewis' property was located. Mr. Lewis said his property was at 620 Airport Road.

Jim Cole said his firm held a mortgage loan on the subject property and opposed the downzoning proposal. He said the proposed rezoning would make current loan information for the property irrelevant. Mr. Cole said the property's collateral was based on its current zoning. He requested that the Council not vote in favor of the downzoning.

Joe Hakan, speaking as a member of the business community, suggested that the Council not upzone or downzone when special use permits were tied to a property. He also noted the importance of using design guidelines and protecting the best interest of neighborhoods. Mr. Hakan also requested that spot zoning not be permitted to take place.

John McMillan, representing the applicant, Chapel Hill Electric Company, said his firm had owned the property for over ten years. Mr. McMillan said funds for financing the property had been borrowed based on zoning of the property. He noted that the property had been zoned R-4 for over twenty years. Mr. McMillan requested that a copy of the Town's Comprehensive Plan and a zoning map of the Town be entered into the record of the hearing. Mr. McMillan said he had spent the first three years of his married life in the Northside neighborhood. Mr. McMillan said he did not know how R-4 zoned property could damage the neighborhood. He stated that spot zoning and downzoning of the property would be a travesty.

Tom Heffner said he had spoken to Town and University officials to see whether they were interested in acquiring the subject property. Mr. Heffner said a student-oriented development within walking distance of the campus was economically feasible. He urged the Council to retain R-4 zoning for the property to maintain development options.

Sue Goodman, a resident of Noble Street, said that R-2 zoning of the property would permit up to 56 units on the site, while R-4 would permit up to 144 and R-3 would permit up to 98 units. She urged the Council to rezone the property to R-2.

Estelle Mabry said the scope of the Northside neighborhood included in the conservation district should have been expanded to include the subject property. She requested the Council's assistance in redefining the conservation district for the Northside area.

Mayor Broun inquired whether Mr. Bradley's University Place proposal had been to construct ninety-eight units. Mr. Horton said the proposal was to construct approximately seventy units.

Maria Oyaski said the previous Council had decided that the proposed University Place project would be harmful to the Northside neighborhood one the basis of safety and environmental concerns. She stated that a special use permit would not be sufficient to prevent development from occurring. She urged the Council to rezone the property to R-2.

Janet Tice said the topography of the subject property was a very narrow ridge with very steep slopes. She requested that the Council rezone the property to R-2.

Tom Gunn said the subject property had been falsely appraised on the basis of zoning. Mr. Gunn requested that the Council rezone the property to R-2.

Robert Joesting said that less dense zoning was appropriate for the property. Mr. Joesting requested that the Council consider including the parcel in the Northside conservation district. He stated that R-2 zoning would allow more units than desirable due to the area's topography and narrow roads without sidewalks.

Lightning Brown said additional measures were needed to protect the Northside neighborhood. He noted that low and moderate-income housing should be encouraged in the Northside neighborhood. Mr. Brown said developers and the Orange Community Housing Corporation had discussed such projects. Mr. Brown said he favored rezoning the property to R-2.

Sharon Drechsel, a member of the Orange County Economic Development Commission and investment advisor, emphasized the importance of good investment choices. Ms. Drechsel said she looked forward to the Council putting its energy into finding a creative solution which would work.

Council Member Herzenberg said it was possible that the Council had erred in 1981 in deciding to maintain R-4 zoning on the property. He urged the Council to consider the staff's recommendation on the rezoning proposal. Council Member Herzenberg inquired why the staff had not suggested rezoning to R-3 instead of R-2 zoning. Mr. Waldon noted that the Council had called the public hearing to consider rezoning the property to R-2. He added that rezoning the property to R-3 was a possibility also. Mr. Waldon said that rezoning the property to R-2 would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.

Council Member Andresen said that any high density usage of the land would contribute to runoff and infiltration problems. She also noted that the site had topographical constraints and inadequate roads and sewers. Council Member Chilton inquired whether other parcels in the area were undeveloped and if so, their current zoning designations. He noted that there was not a compelling need for additional student housing in the central area or the Northside neighborhood. Council Member Chilton said zoning the property R-2, 3 or 4 did not guarantee that affordable housing would be built on the site.

Council Member Werner requested that the staff comment on spot zoning in its follow-up report to the Council. He also requested staff comment on the potential impact of zoning on the types of housing that could be constructed.

Council Member Rimer requested that the staff provide information on the number of instances of spot zoning approvals by the Council in the past decade. He said the approach of downzoning the property was wrong since special use permits could adequately address situations of this type. Council Member Rimer said that market forces would determine what could be built on the property. He requested the staff to reexamine the conditions for rezoning and to determine whether a manifest error had been made. Council Member Rimer said he saw no reason to rezone the property.

Council Member Brown noted that a number of citizens had requested expansion of the Northside conservation district. She requested that the staff provide information on how this process could be accomplished.

Council Member Capowski inquired about the schedule for the proposed steep slopes ordinance. Mr. Waldon said the public hearing on the matter had been postponed. He added that a workable proposal was several months away. Council Member Capowski inquired when the rezoning proposal would return for Council consideration. Mr. Horton said he anticipated that the item would return in May. Council Member Andresen requested additional information on more intense zoning uses and possible impacts on the conservation district and area traffic conditions.

COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN, TO REFER THE MATTER TO THE MANAGER AND ATTORNEY. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

Item 2 Proposed 1992-1993 Transportation Improvements Program

Mr. Horton noted the number of categories in the Transportation Improvements Program had been reduced, but the Town's basic priorities were unchanged. Transportation Planner David Bonk said the staff memorandum summarized the Transportation Improvements Program process. He briefly reviewed the process and priorities. He noted that bikeway projects were listed independently and projects new to the listing were designated.

Joan Bartel, a resident of South Columbia Street, said she had witnessed a near fatal car/bicycle accident on South Columbia Street about three weeks ago. She urged the Council to make roadway improvements to enhance the safety of motorists, pedestrians and bicyclists in the area. Ms. Bartel requested that the Council install curbs in the area and possibly add bicycle lanes and sidewalks on both sides of the street. She also requested that underground utilities be installed along South Columbia Street. Ms. Bartel suggested that immediate safety enhancements could be made by reducing the speed limit on South Columbia Street to 25 MPH, enforcing no parking restrictions along the street and reducing curb speed limits to 15 MPH.

Council Member Brown requested that the staff address Ms. Bartel's

safety concerns.

Council Member Andresen inquired why the widening of Fordham Boulevard to the Chatham County line was included in the proposed Transportation Improvements Program. Mr. Bonk said he recently had a conversation with former Mayor Howes who had indicated that an agreement had been made with Chatham County to include this roadway in the Transportation Improvements Program in exchange for Chatham County's inclusion of Jack Bennett Road. Council Member Werner expressed concern that the Council had not been aware of this agreement prior to this evening's meeting. Mr. Bonk stated that former Mayor Howes had indicated that the Town was interested in getting Chatham County's concurrence about including Jack Bennett Road in the proposed Transportation Improvements Program.

Council Member Andresen inquired whether Chatham County had agreed to include Jack Bennett Road in the proposed Transportation Improvements Program. Mr. Bonk said no, adding that the plan adopted by the Transportation Advisory Committee included Jack Bennett Road. Mr. Bonk noted that Chatham County did not want to extend Jack Bennett Road, nor have it designated as a thoroughfare. He stated that Chatham County was amenable to having the existing Jack Bennett Road designated as a thoroughfare. Council Member Werner noted that the Council's principal concern was to move traffic through northern Chatham County without traffic having to come through the Town. Mayor Broun requested that the staff provide a follow-up report on the matter. Mr. Horton noted that proceedings of the Transportation Advisory Committee were independent from individual local governments. Council Member Werner also requested that the staff provide additional information on widening and improving Mount Carmel Church Road between U.S. 15-501 and the Chatham County line in its follow-up report to the Council.

Council Member Herzenberg said he wished to echo Ms. Bartel's concerns about safety on South Columbia Street. He noted that speeding on South Columbia Street tended to be a problem during non-rush hours. Council Member Andresen said that U.S. 15-501 should not be widened until a major thoroughfare was designated and widened in northern Chatham County, for access to Durham. She stated that not widening the roads would potentially result in additional traffic congestion on Fordham Boulevard. Council Member Chilton noted that problems along South Columbia Street tended to occur only during major events at the University such as football games.

Council Member Rimer inquired where the proposed two travel lanes would be added on U.S.15-501 between I-40 and Franklin Street, since landscaping was planned in this area. Mr. Bonk said the configuration of improvements would need to be studied. Council Member Rimer inquired about the source of suggestions for the proposed bicycle projects. Mr. Bonk said most of the projects had been suggested following staff discussions. He noted that the proposed projects would be taken to advisory boards and commissions for additional input. Council Member Rimer inquired about the total estimated cost of the bikeway projects. Mr. Bonk said no total figure had been determined. Council Member Rimer requested a total estimated cost of the bikeway projects. He stated that if the total were reasonable, the Town would be well-advised to fund the projects as soon as possible.

Council Member Werner inquired how the bikeways projects had been prioritized. He noted that if one or two roadway projects were built in a decade, this was a large number. Mr. Bonk said the priority listing involved a number of different factors. He noted that there was no way to determine when all the bikeway projects would be completed. Council Member Werner requested that the staff provide additional information on timeframes for road extension and widening issues in its follow-up report to the Council.

Council Member Capowski inquired whether the Town tended to receive more funds than other communities for bikeway projects. Mr. Bonk said this tended to be the case, since the Town had a well-developed bicycle plan. He noted that new state legislation required that additional funds be spent on bikeways projects. Mr. Horton noted that discretionary funding might also be used for bus system operating or capital expenses. Mr. Horton said he was a little less optimistic than Mr. Bonk about the availability of funding at the local level. Council Member Capowski requested additional information concerning improvements to South Columbia Street between Mason Farm Road and Fordham Boulevard. Mr. Bonk said there had been controversy over the scope and type of improvements proposed in this area. Council Member Andresen requested an update on this process. Mr. Horton said this project was not currently active. He added that the Council appeared to be interested in a three-lane proposal with a possible bicycle lane.

Council Member Capowski said a number of neighbors were confused by the fact that a portion of South Columbia Street was "scheduled for right-of-way protection only". Mr. Bonk said this meant that state might purchase property in the corridor, but construction money for the project had been withdrawn.

Council Member Capowski inquired about the status of the proposed access road to U.S. 15-501 South park and ride lot. Mr. Horton said it was possible that this project would be funded. Council Member Brown inquired about the anticipated timeframe for resolving discretionary funding matters. Mr. Horton said this matter was undetermined. He noted that the Transportation Advisory Committee would consider a recommendation to split transit system funds between the Town and the City of Durham at its next regular meeting on March 18th. Mr. Horton noted that the Town had not received a response to its letter to Transportation Secretary Harrelson concerning the availability of additional state funding for transportation projects. He stated that Council Members Herzenberg and Wilkerson had received mixed news during their recent visit to Washington, D.C. Council Member Herzenberg noted that he and Council Member Wilkerson had an opportunity to brief U.S. Representatives Price and Valentine on the local transit funding situation.

COUNCIL MEMBER RIMER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON, TO REFER THE MATTER TO THE MANAGER, ATTORNEY AND APPLICABLE ADVISORY BOARDS. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

Item 3 Proposed Ballet School Rezoning

Development Coordinator Jennie Bob Culpepper said the subject property was located on the north side of East Franklin Street, contiguous to Velma Drive. Ms. Culpepper said the applicant's request was to rezone the property from R-5 to O&I-1. She noted that the East Franklin Street Corridor Study had suggested that uses other than high-density residential might be appropriate along the corridor. Ms. Culpepper said the proposed rezoning was consistent with the Town's Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Culpepper said the staff's preliminary recommendation was adoption of ordinance A.

Gretchen Vickery, managing partner and part owner of the ballet school requested that the Council approve her request for rezoning.

Marcella Groon, representing the Planning Board, said the request had been considered on February 4th. She said the Board had unanimously recommended the rezoning request, since it would be in accord with the East Franklin Street corridor study.

Council Member Andresen asked whether the request was only for rezoning. Mr. Horton said this was correct. He stated that the main reason the applicant was requesting rezoning was to improve the surety of financing for the property. Council Member Andresen asked whether other office and institutional uses would require a special use permit. Mr. Karpinos said this was correct. Council Member Rimer said the proposed zoning corrected a problem for persons occupying the property.

COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER RIMER, TO REFER THE MATTER TO THE MANAGER AND ATTORNEY. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

Item 4 Proposed Springcrest Subdivision Annexation

Planning Director Roger Waldon noted that Springcrest Subdivision was located on Erwin Road and was currently under construction. Mr. Waldon noted that the subdivision was contiguous to an existing satellite of the Town's corporate limits. He stated that the staff's preliminary recommendation was for the annexation to be granted effective June 30, 1992. Council Member Andresen inquired when the subdivision had been originally approved by the Council. Mr. Waldon said the approval had been granted in 1987 or 1988. Council Member Andresen requested that the staff examine the landscaping plan which had been approved in conjunction with the subdivision.

COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON, TO REFER THE MATTER TO THE TOWN MANAGER. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

The hearings concluded at 9:33 p.m.