MINUTES OF PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA, MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 19, 199

MINUTES OF PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA, MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 19, 1994

Mayor Broun called the hearing to order. Council Members in attendance were Joyce Brown, Joe Capowski, Mark Chilton, Pat Evans, Lee Pavão, Barbara Powell, Jim Protzman and Rosemary Waldorf. Also in attendance were Acting Town Manager Florentine Miller, Planning Director Roger Waldon, Development Coordinator Jennie Bob Culpepper, Long-Range Planning Coordinator Chris Berndt and Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos. Town Manager Cal Horton and Assistant Town Manager Sonna Loewenthal were in attendance at the annual City/County Managers Conference and were unable to attend the hearing.

Mayor Broun noted that the Sister Cities Committee was holding a community picnic for Carrboro and Town residents in the near future.

Item 1 Public Forum on University Land-Use Plans

Mr. Waldon stated that staff was suggesting that the Council appoint a committee to provide input about the Town's interests in the University's land-use plans and processes.

Morris Schaeffer said he heartily endorsed the principles in planning process proposed by Town staff. He also noted the importance of having a sound policy basis of proposed zoning for this process. Mr. Schaeffer also suggested that the proposed committee include representatives from the Town of Carrboro and other local governments.

Rachel Willis, representing the Transportation Board, said the Board supported the composition of the proposed advisory panel. She emphasized the critical role of the panel in reviewing transportation matters and land use. Ms. Willis also urged the University to examine the proposed process and build on the Transportation Board's 1992 report on single-occupant vehicle use.

Pearson Stewart suggested that the Council consider increasing the proposed committee membership and creating two subgroups to individually focus on the Horace Williams and Mason Farm tracts.

Bob Reda, representing the Alliance of Neighborhoods, suggested that the Council adopt a resolution emphasizing the importance of

a comprehensive planning process for off-site improvements relative to the University's Horace Williams property. He also emphasized the importance of examining other satellite University campus developments for their impacts on surrounding communities. Mr. Reda urged the Council to consider hiring a consultant to evaluate the University's proposed land-use plan, rather than strictly relying upon information provided by the University.

Julie Andresen, representing the Alliance of Neighborhoods, said it was unclear how the University and Town would influence one another during the University's land-use planning process. She stated that the determination of how the University's property would be developed was the most important project ever undertaken by the Town. Ms. Andresen also emphasized the importance of developing a comprehensive charge for the proposed advisory committee. She suggested that the Town employ a consultant to do preliminary design work for the project. Ms. Andresen said she endorsed Mr. Stewart's idea of enlarging the committee to review proposals for the Mason Farm and Horace Williams tracts.

Scott Radway said Chancellor Hardin's offer to participate in a joint planning process with local governments was positive and necessary and a major step forward. Mr. Radway also urged the Council to appoint panel representatives who were familiar with the Mason Farm and Horace Williams tracts. He said it was very important for the Town to have an active role in the planning process. Mr. Radway also urged the Council to work with the University and State Legislature to get funding for off-site improvements related to the proposed satellite campuses. Noting the heavy workload of existing Town planning staff, Mr. Radway suggested that the Town hire an outside consultant to assist with the overall planning process.

Dan Coleman said he supported the Council's adoption of "Resolution D" as proposed by the Alliance of Neighborhoods. Mr. Coleman said it was very important for the Council and Town residents to have a proactive role in the University's planning process. He also stated that it was important to maintain desirable Town character by encouraging the University to use progressive planning principles in relation to environmental, energy and other matters.

Mr. Coleman said it might be advisable to enlarge the committee to fifteen members. He also suggested the possibility of developing small area plans for the two sites.

Vice-Chancellor Wayne Jones said the University was pleased to have the opportunity to bring the Council up to date on discussions with its land planning consultant, JJR and Associates. He noted that the study would focus on environment, traffic and other issues at the University's Horace Williams and Mason Farm tracts. Mr. Jones noted that the study was intended to address the University's facility needs into the next century. He also noted that media briefings and open campus meetings would be included in the planning process. Mr. Jones said there would be an opportunity for public comment at the end of each of the six community advisory committee meetings. He noted that the consultant hoped to hold the first such meeting in mid-October. Mr. Jones said the University preferred that the Council make appointments to the Committee as soon as possible.

Council Member Brown said she was delighted with the comments offered this evening from a wide variety of intelligent and articulate citizens. She stated that the joint planning process with the University offered the Council and Town to undertake an active role in the overall planning process. Council Member Brown also said the Town had an opportunity to relate energy and transportation matters to zoning in the most advanced ways possible. She strongly suggested that the Council draft a set of principles or environmental and social goals and objectives regarding the Horace Williams tract. Council Member Brown also said it was preferable for the Council to have several hearings and forums, rather than a single public hearing on the University's plans for the Horace Williams and Mason Farm tracts. She expressed a preference for having two different group examine the separate tracts. Council Member Brown also said she favored enlarging the group to include members of the Citizens Energy Task Force, Parks and Recreation Commission and other Council advisory boards and commissions.

Council Member Capowski noted that the suggested master plan involved a total of approximately four square miles, comprising about 22% of the Town's existing land area. Council Member Capowski stated that he was delighted that the University was encouraging the Town's involvement in the land-use planning process. He expressed concern that the University's proposed schedule did not appear to offer an opportunity for land-use plans to go back through the review process. Council Member Capowski said he was particularly concerned about the proximity of Mason Farm to the proposed medical complex. He suggested that the Council consider appointing a University representative, perhaps from the Botanical Gardens, to the proposed committee.

Council Member Waldorf requested that Council Members receive a copy of the University's scope of work for planning of the Horace Williams and Mason Farm tracts. Vice-Chancellor Jones said copies of the scope of work would be provided to the Council.

Council Member Chilton stated that he was concerned about making the panel so large that it might become unwieldy. He noted that a fairly large portion of the Horace Williams tract was in the Town of Carrboro's jurisdiction. Council Member Chilton said he was not sure what constituted a fair number of Town of Carrboro panel representatives. He also suggested expanding the panel to accommodate representation by the Town of Carrboro. Council Member Chilton stated that the proposed "Resolution D" included a number of very good suggestions concerning requests for information about environmental concerns, comparisons with other University satellite operations and planned off-site infrastructure improvements. Mayor Broun suggested that the University's planning consultants might examine and report on these matters. Council Member Evans said it would be useful to have the information requested by Council Member Waldorf prior to proceeding. Noting that the University's planning consultant would be ready to proceed in October, Mayor Broun said it was important to go ahead with the planning process as soon as possible.

Noting that he supported most of the suggestions made this evening, Council Member Protzman said he was not sure how the Council expected the proposed committee to proceed, since no fact-finding on the planning process would have taken place by mid-October.

He inquired about the University's timetable with its planning consultant. Vice-Chancellor Jones said the total estimated timetable was twelve to fourteen months. Council Member Waldorf inquired about the type of results being sought by the University. Vice-Chancellor Jones said the University was hoping to identify particular uses for its parcels. Council Member Waldorf asked whether the University hoped to project its academic and service needs for the next fifty years. Vice-Chancellor Jones said it was not possible for the University to project parcel uses this far into the future. He stated that the University emphasis was on identifying a skeletal framework for future University development.

Council Member Protzman inquired about the legal interrelationship between the University's land-use plan and future zoning. Mr. Karpinos noted that the Town's land-use authority for State zoning was granted by the State legislature and had certain limitations.

Council Member Protzman said the University's proposed planning process could be of great benefit to the Town and its residents.

He added that the proposed timetable provided good opportunity for citizens and the Council to carefully review and challenge data.

Council Member Brown emphasized the importance of incorporating citizen ideas into the proposed committee's charge. She also suggested that the Council develop a set of goals and objectives or principles relative to the proposed land-use planning process. Council Member Brown inquired whether the Council wanted to hold more than one public hearing on the proposal.

Mayor Broun suggested that the Council appoint a committee with a broad charge as recommended by staff. He stated that the Committee's first role would be to provide input to the University about the community's interests in the development of the Horace Williams and Mason Farm properties. Stating that the Committee may wish to take more active steps in the future, Mayor emphasized the importance of getting the Committee and process in place as soon as possible. He also noted that the Town was the regulator of the proposal, rather than the property's developer. Mayor Broun said the Town had an opportunity at the University's invitation to jointly participate in the development of land-use plans for future development plans.

Council Member Capowski said it was important to set up the proposed committee as soon as possible. He stated that without the proposed committee, the University's land-use planning consultant would be unable to readily ascertain formal community viewpoints about the University's future land-use plans.

Stating that past Councils had chosen to be reactive to proposals of this type in the past, Council Member Brown said the Town had a chance to move forward in this area. She suggested that the Council had a chance to do something extraordinary and encouraged the Council to set policies and goals and objectives for the proposals.

Council Member Evans urged the Council to appoint the panel as soon as possible. She emphasized the importance of educating Committee members about the basis of work which needed to be done as soon as possible.

Council Member Protzman inquired whether the University would be willing to make raw data available to anyone requesting this information. Vice-Chancellor Jones said yes.

Council Member Waldorf inquired about the interrelationship between the Town of Carrboro and the Town relative to involvement in the review process. Mayor Broun suggested that staff provide suggestions in this regard.

Council Member Waldorf suggested that the Council refer the matter to the Manager, review applications for the committee and decide the committee's charge as soon as possible. Council Member Protzman suggested the possibility of forming an interim committee. Mayor Broun suggested the possibility of discussing a preliminary charge and involvement by the Town of Carrboro at the September 26th meeting. Council Member Powell expressed concern that the process might be moving along too quickly. She urged the Council to be cautious and deliberate, rather than rushing ahead.

Council Member Brown noted that advisory boards and commissions should be given the opportunity to make appointment recommendations to the Council. Council Member Waldorf suggested that the Council continue its process-related discussions, such as composition of the committee, at the September 26th meeting. Council Member Brown inquired about the nature of the staff's follow-up recommendations. Mayor Broun stated that the follow-up report would contain updated information about matters such as committee size and interrelationships with the Town of Carrboro. Council Member Brown emphasized the importance of the Council seriously considering input from citizens and other Council Members.

COUNCIL MEMBER WALDORF MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PROTZMAN, TO REFER THE MATTER TO STAFF, WITH THE ITEM RETURNING FOR FURTHER COUNCIL DISCUSSION AT THE SEPTEMBER 26TH MEETING.

Noting that a portion of the Mason Farm tract was located in Durham County, Council Member Capowski requested that staff address this in its follow-up memorandum.

THE MOTION TO REFER WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Item 2 Zoning of Horace Williams Property

Long-range Planning Coordinator Chris Berndt presented an overview of a proposal to consider rezoning a portion of the University's Horace Williams tract. She stated that the staff's preliminary recommendation, to rezone a portion of the tract from OI-3 to OI-2, was outlined in Ordinance A.

Eva Metzger, representing the Orange County Affordable Housing Coalition and League of Women Voters, urged the Council to request that the University reserve a portion of the tract for affordable housing. Ms. Metzger stated that the University had a special responsibility to provide affordable housing opportunities in the community.

Richard Franck, Chair of the Transportation Board, said the Board endorsed the staff's preliminary zoning recommendation regarding the area north of Estes Drive. He noted that the tract was along an important transportation corridor, perhaps offering the opportunity for a fixed guideway system in the future. Mr. Franck stated that enacting downzoning in the near future would guarantee greater Council flexibility in future land-use decisions in this area. He emphasized the importance of the Council carefully evaluating whether the proposed use met the Town's land-use goals for the area.

Rachel Willis, Transportation Board member, emphasized the importance of the matter before the Council this evening. She stated that the Council's land-use and zoning decisions relative to the Horace Williams tract would determine the community's fundamental future shape. Ms. Willis urged the Council to adopt the staff's recommendation concerning downzoning of the tract.

Planning Board representative Martin Rody said the University had guaranteed not to do anything at the Horace Williams tract until an overall land-use plan was prepared. Mr. Rody urged the Council to consider initiating a small area plan for the Horace Williams tract, rather than rezoning the property. He stated that going through rezoning early in the process would be fallacious.

Dan Coleman suggested that the Council require that the University submit a master plan for proposed future development of the Horace Williams tract, as suggested earlier by Vice-Chancellor Jones. He stated that interim zoning might be needed for a portion of the tract. Mr. Coleman said he recommended that the interim zoning for the tract north of Estes Drive be R-2, instead of OI-3. He added that in was in the Town's interest to minimize the possibility of premature development of the tract.

Julie Andresen, representing the Alliance of Neighborhoods, said the small area planning processes used by the Town to date had worked well. She expressed hope that the Council would consider initiating a small area planning process for the University land-use proposals. Ms. Andresen stated that it was exceedingly important that the Council make the proposed downzoning change as soon as possible.

Diane Bloom said the Alliance of Neighborhoods endorsed the staff recommendation to change OI-3 zoning to OI-2 zoning for a portion of the tract in order to minimize negative impacts on adjoining neighborhoods. She suggested that the Council consider maintaining existing buildings on the tract south of Estes Drive with OI-3 zoning, while downzoning the balance of the tract south of Estes Drive to OI-2.

Vice-Chancellor Jones said the University felt that there was no need to rezone property which would not be developed in the near future. Stating that the University would not construct any buildings on the Horace Williams tract during the next twelve months, Vice-Chancellor Jones noted that the Planning Board recommended no action on the proposed rezoning at this time. He also stated that the University felt that rezoning was not in keeping with the cooperative process between the Town and University.

Lynne Pearce, a resident of Ironwoods subdivision, said she and her neighbors had a vested interest in the University's plans for the Horace Williams tract. Ms. Pearce also said she favored having a golf course on the property, rather than the current airport at the site.

Mark Nicholas said he lived very near to the parcel currently zoned on the south of Estes Drive. Mr. Nicholas suggested that the Council consider grandfathering the existing buildings and rezoning the balance of the undeveloped tract as OI-2. He expressed concern that building might be constructed against wishes of adjoining property owners if the Council did not downzone the property to

OI-2.

Stating that he was not certain that the Town needed any more OI-3 zoning, Council Member Chilton said he did not think the proposed rezoning to OI-2 was premature on the Town's part.

Council Member Capowski requested that the staff's follow-up report include a copy of the University's capital improvements plan and the Chancellor's letter concerning the proposed planning process. He inquired about the deadline for filing zoning protest petitions for the proposed rezoning. Mr. Karpinos said the deadline was September 14th. Council Member Brown requested that the staff's follow-up report contain information about whether or not existing buildings could be rebuilt in the event that they burned down or were otherwise destroyed.

Council Member Protzman inquired whether the Council could recommend OI-2 zoning for the tract in the future, rather than rezoning the tract in the near future. Mr. Karpinos emphasized that it would be incumbent upon the Council to act on a proposal within a reasonable time after holding public hearings. He stated that it would be inadvisable to postpone action more than two or three months following a public hearing on a development proposal.

Council Member Evans said it made no difference in the long run whether the Council chose to rezone the property since no development was presently proposed on the tract. She stated that the primary message if the property were rezoned would be that the Town did not trust the University. Noting the importance of continuing good joint planning processes, Council Member Evans said it would be very out of place for the Council to consider rezoning of the Horace Williams tract. She said it was possible for United States representatives to strike a compromise with Haitian rebel leaders, it should be very easy for the Town and University to have a spirit of vigorous cooperation and trust.

COUNCIL MEMBER CAPOWSKI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PAVÃO, TO REFER THE MATTER TO THE MANAGER.

Mayor Broun inquired when the item would return for Council consideration. Ms. Miller said October 10th.

THE MOTION TO REFER WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Item 3 Public Forum on RCD Regulations

Planning Director Roger Waldon presented a brief overview of the matter, including citizen concerns about construction in the resource conservation district and 100-year flood plain. Mr. Waldon stated that the staff recommended that no new structures be built in floodways. He added that it was also good public policy that no new structures be constructed in the flood plain. Noting that tonight's forum was not a formal public hearing, Mr. Waldon stated that staff could come back with additional timetables and suggestions in the future. He stated that John Gerber, an environmental engineer with the North Carolina Division of Emergency Management was in attendance to answer any flood plain- related detail questions by the Council.

John Richman, representing the owners of Eastgate Shopping Center,

urged the Council to continue to permit rebuilding of structures in the floodplain.

Bruce Ballentine said that prior to March, 1984, the minimum stream width buffer in the Resource Conservation District ordinance was fifty feet. He added that the minimum width had been increased to seventy-five feet in 1987. Mr. Ballentine stated that residents of homes constructed in the Resource Conservation District between 1984 and 1987 needed to go before the Board of Adjustment when considering additions, due to this change in minimum stream width buffers. Mr. Ballentine requested that the Council consider making a conformity allowance for homes built in the RCD between 1984 and 1987. He also suggested that the Council revisit the matter of best management practices for handling detention when water passed under roadways.

Ken Bagwell, former Board of Adjustment Chair and member, said he wished to offer his perspective as a former board member. Mr. Bagwell stated that the Town's RCD variance process was being misused. He also said that the procedure was expensive and laborious, with a 4/5 vote of the Board needed for favorable consideration of a variance. Mr. Bagwell noted that staff did not have nefarious purposes in interpreting existing variance standards. He requested that the Council consider completely rewriting Section 5.4 of the Town's Development Ordinance concerning Resource Conservation District regulations.

Johnny Mariakakis said he had owned a property in the Eastgate area for about thirty years. Mr. Mariakakis said the Resource Conservation District was effectively a means of protecting properties from further development. He stated that his business paid for everything he and his family members owned. Mr. Mariakakis stated that the proposed amendments to the Town's Resource Conservation District regulations were reasonable and equitable.

Karen Raleigh said she believed that Resource Conservation District regulations for new development were good. Ms. Raleigh stated that she was concerned that existing ordinance provisions would not permit the rebuilding of structures in the RCD which were 51% or more destroyed by fire or other catastrophe, unless the Board of Adjustment granted a variance. She urged the Council to change the existing ordinance to permit rehabilitation and renovation in flood plains but outside of floodways. Ms. Raleigh also requested that the Town clarify and improve the RCD ordinance and provide an understandable map of the district to citizens.

Lightning Brown said he though the existing ordinance needed to be tightened in terms of safety and water quality issues. He also suggested that empirical issues such as slopes and soil types needed to be reexamined.

Bill Davis, representing the Alliance of Neighborhoods, said the Town had been a beautiful place to live, even before enactment of the RCD ordinance. He stated that the ordinance protected the Town in an environmentally sensitive manner. Mr. Davis noted that the Alliance's main concern was that existing properties not grow beyond their existing size. He added that the Alliance was also concerned about protection in terms of future development.

Julie Andresen said she concurred with Mr. Davis' remarks. She stated that the RCD ordinance had been good for the Town. Ms. Andresen stated that some inconsistencies might need to be worked out. She also noted the importance of protecting existing waterways.

Bill White said he and his wife had invested in an office condominium at 104 Estes Drive in 1982. Mr. White stated that if 55% of his office property burned, he and his wife would lose 45% and the value of their land and building. He requested that the Council consider allowing the rebuilding of structures in the RCD.

Joel Harper requested that the Council consider allowing redevelopment if unfortunate circumstances were to occur. Mr. Harper expressed hope that the Council would permit flexibility in this regard.

Phil Post said he wished to suggest eight modest changes to the existing ordinance. He stated that the purpose of the changes was to make the ordinance easier to understand.

Dave Cook said the Planning Department had put together a good report. He emphasized the importance of extensive citizen involvement in the review process. Mr. Cook also said it would be wrong for regulations to unnecessarily place the economic burden on individuals. He stated that the Town's planning staff was overworked and could not check every local stream for buffering requirements.

Hersch Slater said he supported the comments of Mr. Davis and Ms. Andresen. Noting that the 100-year flood level was not a permanent measurement, Mr. Slater emphasized the importance of the Town

providing good information about building in flood-prone areas. He also said it was important that the Town's Resource Conservation District ordinance continue to protect the Town's citizens.

John Kent said he was actively involved with Stream Watch along the New Hope Creek and the Town's Stormwater Management Committee.

Mr. Kent advised the Council to be slow in changing its very good RCD ordinance. He suggested that the Town initiate an insurance rate study, relative to properties located in the Resource Conservation District. Mr. Kent also emphasized the importance of protecting uplands areas and investigating the possibility of floodproofing of buildings.

Council Member Capowski asked whether RCD regulations applied to University property. Mr. Waldon stated that State statutes dictated that overlay zones such as the Resource Conservation District could not be applied to State property. Council Member Capowski inquired whether this also excluded Mason Farm. Mr. Waldon said this was correct. Mr. Karpinos said he believed that standards pertaining to floodways and floodway fringes could be applied to State property.

COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO REFER THE MATTER TO STAFF. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY

(9-0).

Item 4 Resource Conservation District Ordinance Amendment

Development Coordinator Jennie Bob Culpepper stated that this evening's hearing was very narrowly focused on proposed changes to existing regulations. She noted that Town floodway and floodplain regulations were more stringent than federal standards.

Ms. Culpepper stated that the proposed text amendment would permit reconstruction and rehabilitation of structures when they were not located in the 100-year flood plain. She said that the staff's preliminary recommendation was the adoption of Ordinance A.

Martin Rody, Planning Board representative, said the Board had reviewed the proposed ordinance amendment at its August 23rd meeting and recommended its adoption to the Council. He also said it would be helpful for the Planning Board to have additional information about adjoining properties when reviewing development applications.

Ken Bagwell said he felt that the language contained in the proposed amendment was superfluous since the use was permitted under current regulations. Mr. Bagwell also stated that the language in section C should be the same section B, subsection 2, with the addition of language paralleling subsection 1. Mr. Bagwell noted that he favored the proposed amendment.

Lightning Brown said he opposed the proposed amendment because it was not refined to address water quality and public safety, especially in commercial areas. Mr. Brown submitted an earlier citizen's proposal which would not allow rebuilding of structures in all instances. Mr. Brown stated that RCD special use permits would be required for reconstruction of commercial buildings in flood plains. He also said that flooding events were occurring more frequently in recent years. Mr. Brown noted that the Stormwater Management Committee had recommended to the Council that existing Resource Conservation District regulations not be weakened.

Joel Harper of the Chapel Hill-Carrboro Chamber of Commerce expressed his support for adoption of Ordinance A. He emphasized the importance of not losing local business investments and jobs. Mr. Harper requested that the Town allow owners to rebuild what they previously constructed.

Phil Post stated that allowing owners to rebuild buildings would have very little or no impact on increased flood heights. Mr. Post stated that current standards and regulations discouraged worthwhile improvements.

John Kent said he opposed the proposed amendment. He noted that levees along the Mississippi River designed to provide 500-year flood plain protection had failed during the flooding of 1993. Mr. Kent suggested that the Town consider initiating a flood insurance rate study to evaluate which areas might be effected by different types of flooding and the intensity of such events.

COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON, TO REFER THE MATTER TO THE MANAGER.

Council Member Capowski requested that the staff's follow-up report contain a clearer explanation of items contained in the second paragraph on the third page of the staff memorandum to the Council. Mayor Broun asked when the item could return for Council consideration. Ms. Miller said October 24th.

THE MOTION TO REFER WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Item 5 Advent Lutheran Church SUP Request

Persons wishing to testify in the matter were sworn. Ms. Miller requested that the agenda item and related materials be entered into the record of the hearing. Development Coordinator Jennie Bob Culpepper provided an overview of the proposal, noting that the subject property was located directly adjacent to the Windhover townhomes. She stated that the only key unresolved issue was whether the church should provide curb and guttering or a bicycle lane along Sage Road.

Dan Jewell, the applicant's representative, said the applicant agreed with the proposed conditions of approval in resolutions b and c. Mr. Jewell stated that phase one of the project would be completed in two years, while the total project would take seven years to complete, rather than the five years noted in the proposed conditions of approval. He also said the applicant favored extending curb and guttering along its frontage, rather than adding a bicycle lane, thereby necessitating the removal of oak trees. Mr. Jewell noted that both the Planning and Transportation Boards recommended that the applicant provide additional curb and guttering.

Martin Rody said the Planning Board felt that Sage Road should remain in its current condition. He stated that the Board felt that adding ten feet of roadway for a bicycle lane would encourage illegal parking in the area. Mr. Rody said the Board had recommended the applicant's request by a vote of 5-1, with the dissenting member being concerned about extensive impervious surfaces.

Mayor Broun inquired why staff was recommending a bicycle lane. Ms. Culpepper stated that staff would ultimately like to see bicycle lanes along Erwin Road. She also said it would not be equitable to require that other developers on the other side of Sage Road provide bicycle lanes on both sides of the roadway.

COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WALDORF, TO REFER THE MATTER TO THE MANAGER.

Mr. Jewel said the applicant was amenable to the proposed conditions of approval.

THE MOTION TO REFER WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Item 6 Ward Street Paving Petition Assessment

Engineering Director George Small said residents were requesting paving of Ward Street, with the Town to assess fifty percent of the cost, and the balance of $20,000 to be paid with Town funds, if the Council directed. He noted that residents would have up to ten years to repay the assessments. Council Member Capowski inquired about the cost per foot to residents. Mr. Small said this would depend upon the amount of ditch work involved.

COUNCIL MEMBER PROTZMAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER POWELL, TO REFER THE MATTER TO THE MANAGER. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Item 7 Burning Tree Drive Storm Drainage Improvements

Mr. Small noted that this requested had been initiated by area homeowners. He stated that the Town staff had reached an agreement with area homeowners that if the homeowners could present a valid requesting petition, the Town would front the money for the project and assess homeowners for one hundred percent of project costs. Mr. Small said that homeowners would have up to ten years to repay assessments. Council Member Waldorf asked whether the Town had undertaken such a project in the past. Mr. Small said the Town had undertaken a similar drainage project with the Trail Shop in the downtown area several years ago.

COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO REFER THE MATTER TO THE MANAGER. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

The hearings concluded at 11:02 p.m.