SUMMARY MINUTES OF A BUSINESS MEETING

SUMMARY MINUTES OF A BUSINESS MEETING

OF THE CHAPEL HILL TOWN COUNCIL

MONDAY, OCTOBER 11, 2004, AT 7:00 P.M.

Mayor Kevin Foy called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.

Council members present were Sally Greene, Ed Harrison, Cam Hill, Mark Kleinschmidt, Bill Strom, Dorothy Verkerk, and Edith Wiggins.

Council Member Jim Ward was absent, excused.

Staff members present were Town Manager Cal Horton, Deputy Town Manager Florentine Miller, Assistant Town Manager Bruce Heflin, Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos, Town Information Officer Catherine Lazorko, Planning Director Roger Waldon, Senior Long Range Planning Coordinator Chris Berndt, Technology Director Bob Avery, Traffic Engineer Kumar Neppalli, Urban Forester Curtis Brooks, and Town Clerk Joyce Smith.

Item 1 - Ceremony: Recognition of Communities in Schools

Communities in Schools Executive Director Shelia Sholes-Ross explained that the organization's mission was to connect students and families to resources. Communities in Schools had served 1,688 children in 2003-04, she said, adding that 85% of those children had passed their end-of-grade tests. The organization had programs in all six Orange County middle schools, and their goal last year was to promote true collaboration among all community service agencies in the County, she said. Ms. Sholes-Ross thanked the Town Council for its support.

Item 2 - Public Hearing: None.

Item 3 - Petitions by Citizens and Announcements by Council Members

3a. Petitions by Citizens on Items Not on the Agenda.

3a(1). Thatcher Freund, Regarding a Request for Council Committee to Discuss Strategies for any Future Town Expenditure for Open Space.

Chapel Hill resident Thatcher Freund thanked the Town Council and State legislators for providing “another weapon in the war on sprawl," by passing a bill that would allow the Town to buy open space outside its extra-territorial jurisdiction. He also praised the Town's plan for denser development downtown, but commented that such an approach would be useless without addressing sprawl and dependence on automobiles. Mr. Freund described open space preservation as the "poor stepchild" of the new urbanism. It was much discussed but then forgotten because building densely can be profitable while preserving land aside costs money, he said. But, thanks to the Town Council, Chapel Hill now had the funds to buy larger tracts and to compensate for increasing density in Town, Mr. Freund pointed out.

Mr. Freund stated that buying a conservation easement that would keep an entire farm free of development was a wiser use of Town money than buying a small, expensive parcel in a Town neighborhood. Arguing that the public would agree with that statement, he suggested arriving at a community consensus on the most efficient way to save open space. Mr. Freund asked the Council to consider forming a committee to develop and preserve open space in Orange Country. "That truly would be one of the greatest gifts we could ever give our children," he remarked.

Mayor Foy asked for input from the Manager regarding Mr. Freund's petition. He suggested that the Manager advise the Council on whether a committee or some other approach would be the best way to address the matter.

COUNCIL MEMBER STROM MOVED, SECONDED BY MAYOR PRO TEM WIGGINS, TO RECEIVE AND REFER THE PETITION TO THE MANAGER AND ATTORNEY. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

3a(2). Highland Meadows Subdivision Residents, requesting Annexation into the Town.

Alena Callimanis noted that the area in question falls within Carrboro's transition zone. She reminded Council members that the Rogers Road community was one of the oldest in the area and that the land there had been given to slaves when they were freed. Ms. Callimanis argued that annexing Highland Meadows makes sense because it would contain it within Chapel Hill's planning area. Explaining that she lived at Camden Place, she told Council members that she and her neighbors would also like to be annexed to the Town.

COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER KLEINSCHMIDT, TO RECEIVE AND REFER THE PETITION TO THE MANAGER AND ATTORNEY. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

3a(3). Bobby Clapp, regarding Public Safety and Traffic Safety.

Mr. Clapp, representing a group concerned with public safety, read a petition describing the current trend in local crime. He asked the Council what actions they had taken to improve public safety at intersections since disbanding the red light camera program. Mr. Clapp specifically inquired about the status of three suggestions that Council members had made in January 2004.

Mayor Foy recommended referring the petition to the Council.

Mayor pro tem Wiggins wondered how the Council would respond, and Mayor Foy said that they would need to discuss it to decide how to respond.

Council Member Verkerk remarked that some parts of the petition, such as increasing police enforcement, would be a budget issue. She wondered if the item should be addressed during budget deliberations. Mayor Foy pointed out that the budget would not be complete until July 2005. Something should be done prior to that, he said.

Council Member Strom commented that the item was not necessarily a budget issue, but perhaps a policy issue for the Police Department.

Mayor pro tem Wiggins explained that she wanted to ascertain the next step in order to make sure that the Council did not drop the issue.

Council Member Greene suggested putting it on an agenda and Council members agreed to do so and to discuss it this fall.

MAYOR PRO TEM WIGGINS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK, TO REFER THE PETITION TO THE COUNCIL AND TO PUT IT ON THE FALL 2004 AGENDA. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

COUNCIL MEMBER KLEINSCHMIDT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER STROM, TO REMOVE ITEM 14D, THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT UTILITY BOARD APPOINTMENT, FROM THE AGENDA. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

3b. Announcements by Council Members.

Council Member Greene announced that Mayor Foy had won the Chapel Hill/Carrboro Chamber of Commerce "Town-Gown Award."

Mayor Foy said that he had accepted that on the Council's behalf. He told Council members that he had also received an award from Friends of Bolin Creek.

Item 4 - Consent Agenda: Action Items

Mayor pro tem Wiggins removed 4f, Consideration of On-Street Parking Restrictions on Westwood Drive, noting that citizens had signed up to address that item.

Council Member Hill removed 4b, Council Procedures Manual Draft.

MAYOR PRO TEM WIGGINS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER STROM, TO ADOPT R-1 WITH B & F REMOVED. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

A RESOLUTION ADOPTING VARIOUS RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES (2004-10-11/R-1)

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby adopts the following resolutions and ordinances as submitted by the Town Manager in regard to the following:

a.	Nominations to Various Advisory Boards and Commissions (R-2).
b.	Removed.
c.	Recommended Process to Amend the Community Development Program (R-4).
d.	Deleted.
e.	Budget Amendment for Traffic Impact Analyses (O-2).
f.	Removed.
g.	Recommended Position and Classification Changes (O-4).
h.	Calling a Public Forum regarding the Process for Developing a Sidewalk and Bicycle Construction Plan (R-5a, b).
i.	Request to Extend Completion Time Limit for a Special Use Permit Modification for the Campus at Vilcom Center (R-6a; R-6b would deny).
j.	Calling a Public Hearing to Adjust Rounding for Affordable Housing Calculations in the Land Use Management Ordinance (R-7).
k.	Resolution Scheduling a Work Session on the Budget Process for October 14, 2004, at 5 pm (R-8).
l.	Resolution Scheduling a Meeting for Evaluation of the Town Manager and Town Attorney on October 26, 2004, at 5 pm (R-9).

This the 11^th day of October, 2004.

A RESOLUTION NOMINATING APPLICANTS TO VARIOUS ADVISORY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS (2004-10-11/R-2)

WHEREAS, the applications for service on an advisory board or commission or other committees listed below have been received; and

WHEREAS, the applicants have been determined by the Town Clerk to be eligible to serve;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the following names are placed in nomination to serve on an advisory board or commission:

Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board

Nicholas Lurie

Chapel Hill Active Living by Design Partnership Advisory Board

Esphur E. Foster

Stormwater Management Utility Advisory Board

W. Daye Jones, Jr.

This the 11^th day of October, 2004.

A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A PROCESS TO AMEND THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM (2004-10-11/R-4)

WHEREAS, the Town has an ongoing interest in the promotion of Community Development activities in the Town of Chapel Hill; and

WHEREAS, the Town has received Community Development program income; and

WHEREAS, the Town wishes to reallocate unused funds for current activities;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council adopts the following process to amend the Community Development program to budget approximately $100,000 of Community Development program income and reallocated Community Development funds:

· Publish a notice in the Chapel Hill Herald on October 17, 2004 to announce the time and date of the public hearing and send a notice of the hearing to our Community Development mailing list (approximately 80 organizations and individuals);

· Conduct a public hearing on November 8, 2004, to receive citizen comments;

· Review a proposed amendment and comments received at the hearing with the Housing and Community Development Advisory Board on November 23, 2004;

· Return to the Council on December 6, 2004, for consideration of a proposal; and

· If a proposal is approved, submit a revised Annual Update to the Consolidated Plan to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

This the 11^th day of October, 2004.

AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND “THE ORDINANCE CONCERNING APPROPRIATIONS AND THE RAISING OF REVENUE FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JULY 1, 2004” (2004-10-11/O-2)

BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Budget Ordinance entitled “An Ordinance Concerning Appropriations and the Raising of Revenue for the Fiscal Year Beginning July 1, 2004” as duly adopted on June 14, 2004 and the same is hereby amended as follows:

~~APPROPRIATIONS~~	~~Current~~ ~~Budget~~	~~Increase~~	~~Decrease~~	~~Revised~~ ~~Budget~~

~~GENERAL FUND~~
~~Non-departmental~~ ~~Contingency~~			~~2,300~~

~~Town Clerk~~ ~~Advertising~~		~~2,300~~

ARTICLE I

APPROPRIATIONS	Current Budget	Increase	Decrease	Revised Budget

GENERAL FUND
Engineering	955,912	50,000		1,005,912

ARTICLE II

REVENUES	Current Budget	Increase	Decrease	Revised Budget

GENERAL FUND
Charges for Service	1,570,850	50,000		1,620,850

This the 11^th day of October, 2004.

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE POSITION CLASSIFICATION AND PAY PLAN FOR EMPLOYEES OF THE TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL, SUCH AMENDMENT TO BE EFFECTIVE OCTOBER 12, 2004 (2004-10-11/O-4)

BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the following amendments are authorized effective October 12, 2004:

SECTION III

The assignments of the following positions are changes as noted:

Present Title	New Title	Number of Positions	Present Grade	New Grade
Transit Operator I	Transit Operator III	5	27	30
Building Program Supervisor	Buildings Program Manager	1	37	39
Building Mechanic Supervisor	Buildings Program Supervisor	1	35	37
Traffic Signal Technician I	Traffic Program Supervisor	1	31	37
Police Attorney	Police Attorney	1	43	45
Police Analyst	Police Analyst	1	40	41
Crisis Unit Supervisor	Crisis Unit Supervisor	1	40	41
Administrative Services Supervisor	Administrative Services Supv.	1	40	41
Office Manager	Office Manager II	2	33	35

This the 11^th day of October, 2004.

A RESOLUTION CALLING A PUBLIC FORUM TO HEAR CITIZEN COMMENTS AND INPUT REGARDING A SIDEWALK AND BICYCLE FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION PLAN FOR FY 2004-2005 (2004-10-11/R-5a)

WHEREAS, the Chapel Hill Town Council desires to develop a Sidewalk and Bicycle Facilities Construction Plan for FY 2004-2005;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby calls a Public Forum for Monday, November 8, 2004, at 7 p.m. in the Council Chamber, Town Hall, 306 N. Columbia Street, to consider a preliminary Sidewalk and Bicycle Facilities Construction Plan for FY 2004-2005.

This the 11^th day of October, 2004.

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE TOWN MANAGER TO CONSTRUCT SIDEWALK(S) AT LEGION ROAD (2004-10-11/R-5b)

WHEREAS, the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill has available approximately $50,000 in residual Capital Improvements Program funds;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Town Manager is authorized to construct the missing sections of sidewalk on Legion Road as funds permit as shown on Map 1 of the Manager’s memorandum to Council of October 11, 2004.

This the 11^th day of October, 2004.

A RESOLUTION APPROVING A REQUEST FOR AN EXTENSION OF THE COMPLETION DATE FOR THE CAMPUS AT VILCOM CENTER (2004-10-11/R-6a)

WHEREAS, Vilcom has requested an extension of the completion time limit for the Campus at Vilcom Center; and

WHEREAS, Section 4.5.5(c)(2) of the Chapel Hill Land Use Management Ordinance requires Council to make the determination that a) the permit holder submitted the request within sixty (60) days of the completion date; b) the permit holder has proceeded with due diligence and good faith; and c) conditions have not changed so substantially as to warrant Town Council reconsideration of the approved development; and

WHEREAS, a) the permit holder submitted the request within sixty (60) days of the completion date; b) the permit holder has proceeded with due diligence and good faith; and c) conditions have not changed so substantially as to warrant Town Council reconsideration of the approved development;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council approves the request by Vilcom for the extension of the completion date of the Campus at Vilcom Center to November 8, 2009, to allow construction of the office development in accordance with the approved Special Use Permit.

This the 11^th day of October, 2004.

A RESOLUTION CALLING A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AMENDING HOW NUMBERS ARE ROUNDED IN THE HOUSING FLOOR AREA RESTRICTIONS/AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROVISIONS OF THE LAND USE MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE (2004-10-11/R-7)

WHEREAS, Section 3.8.5 of Chapel Hill’s Land Use Management Ordinance provides regulations regarding housing floor area restrictions for major subdivisions and Planned Developments and Section 3.8.6 offers substitution of affordable housing or a payment-in-lieu of affordable housing for the floor area restrictions; and

WHEREAS, Town Council members have brought forward concerns about the method for rounding up or down used in the regulations;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council calls a Public Hearing for 7:00 p.m. on Monday, November 15, 2004, in Chapel Hill Town Hall, to consider amending language in Sections 3.8.5 and 3.8.6 of the Land Use Management Ordinance.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the public hearing for the Franklin Grove Development Special Use Permit Modification Concept Plan is rescheduled to January 19, 2005.

This the 11^th day of October, 2004.

A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE COUNCIL’S CALENDAR OF MEETINGS THROUGH 2005, AS ADOPTED ON SEPTEMBER 7, 2004 (2004-10-11/R-8)

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby amends its Calendar of Meetings, adopted on September 7, 2004, to include a Work Session on October 14, 2004, at 5 p.m. to consider the budget process for development of the 2005-06 budget.

This the 11^th day of October, 2004.

A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE COUNCIL’S CALENDAR OF MEETINGS THROUGH 2005, AS ADOPTED ON SEPTEMBER 7, 2004 (2004-10-11/R-9)

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby amends its Calendar of Meetings, adopted on September 7, 2004, to include a meeting on October 26 2004, at 5 p.m. to evaluate the Town Manager and Town Attorney.

This the 11^th day of October, 2004.

With regard to 4f, South Columbia Street resident Sue Foster expressed opposition to the proposed on-street parking restrictions. She said that cars had not been parked along Westwood Drive since the Town started enforcing the permits. Ms. Foster said that the problem had been resolved and that she wished Mr. Morris would withdraw his request. Prohibiting parking on both sides of the street would create an "impossible situation" for anyone who wanted to entertain, she explained, and it could also affect the value of their homes.

Ms. Foster did request, however, that the Town add lights to a very dark stretch of Westwood Drive and place "no through traffic/residences only" signs at entrances to neighborhoods. She also suggested that traffic be slowed down at one blind curve and that the Town change the road surface to brick before and after that bend in the traffic. Ms. Foster repeated her plea to the Town Council not to take away the only place where many neighbors could park.

Shawn Thompson expressed gratitude that the Town was addressing the issue. But he cautioned the Council to make sure that they confronted the "real issue" of non-resident student commuters who park on Westwood Drive during the day and walk to the hospital and classrooms at UNC. Mr. Thompson argued that issuing parking tickets could not be a long-term solution because students would eventually return or other students would take their place. He suggested creating a new parking designation available only to residents of Westwood Drive or the immediate vicinity. Mr. Thompson noted that residents at 416 and 418 Westwood Drive were scheduled to receive such a permit. He asked that this be extended to all other residents as well.

Westwood Drive resident Aris Buinevicius said that he and his family already had problems finding places for friends, family and service people to park near their house. Restricting parking would introduce an unnecessary amount of complexity, inconvenience, and red tape, he said. Mr. Buinevicius argued that it would also create an unobstructed lane on a road that already had a speeding problem because the neighborhood was being used as a cut-through.

Westwood Drive resident Ronnie Jackson stated that she and her husband were vehemently opposed to a parking prohibition on the outer loop of Westwood Drive. That would create a hardship for them and for others who live there, she said. Ms. Jackson proposed that the Town be more vigilant in ticketing illegal parking during weekday hours. Banning parking on evenings and weekends would serve no purpose and would widen the road leading to an increase in speeding, she said.

Ms. Jackson told Council members that she and some of her neighbors do not have ample parking and that several of her neighbors had not understood the survey they had taken. She said that David Morris, who had proposed the parking ban, had since told her that he had not understood that it would include weekends and nights. Ms. Jackson recommended instituting calming devices, such as speed bumps, in the area.

Westwood Drive resident Sam Eberts, explaining that he had a six-year-old son and a two-year-old daughter, said that he would support the parking ban if he thought it would enhance safety on his street. It made sense to ban parking on the inside of Westwood Drive, he said, but banning it on both sides would prevent some residents from having a car in the neighborhood. It would also make it impossible for guests and/or workers to park at his house, he said. Mr. Eberts recommended that the Town enforce the laws that already exist and perhaps amend the parking permit process to make it more local. Banning parking altogether would penalize those who live on Westwood and lower the value of their property, he said. Mr. Eberts stated that enforcing the laws that already exist would greatly reduce the problem.

Westwood Drive resident Jay Vigatuv read a letter from his neighbor, Melanie Vaughn, in favor of restricting parking on Westwood Drive. But Ms. Vaughn suggested giving residents permission to park in front of their homes in the evening and on weekends. Mr. Vigatuv said that Ms. Vaughn's letter reflected his own opinion. He recommended having localized parking, enforcing the current restrictions, and banning parking during the week for those who are not from the area.

Mayor Foy clarified that parking was not permitted at any time on one half of the road and that no parking, except by residential permit, was permitted on the other half on Monday through Friday from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. He determined from Town Traffic Engineer Kumar Neppalli that those with residential permits for restricted parking in another part of Town could not drive to Westwood and park there. Mayor Foy asked how that was being enforced. Mr. Neppalli explained that Parking Services had issued different color permits for different Town zones. Mr. Neppalli acknowledged that enforcing that had not been a high priority for Parking Services since that kind of abuse was not widespread. Mayor Foy verified that Parking Services would not normally patrol a neighborhood unless there had been complaints from citizens there.

COUNCIL MEMBERS AGREED BY CONSENSUS TO LEAVE PARKING AS IT IS AND NOT MAKE THE RECOMMENDED CHANGE AT THIS TIME.

Council Member Hill agreed to discuss 4b at the end of the meeting.

Mayor Foy asked Dr. Ted Parrish to come forward and address Agenda Item 15 regarding Homelessness.

Item 15 – Petitions

15a. By the Mayor and Council Members.

15a(1). Public Dialogue on Homelessness (Mayor Foy and Council Member Greene).

Dr. Ted Parrish explained that issues of trust and process are what drive discussions in his community. With regard to siting a new IFC homeless shelter, he said, members of his community mistrusted the process of experiences they have had over the years. Dr. Parrish mentioned that the Tanner Homes had been intended for families but had many students living there. Also, he added, UNC had said they would talk with residents about a parking lot, but had begun building one without having talked with anyone. Dr. Parrish told Council members that The Interfaith Council had told his neighborhood that it was not part of a November 18^th roundtable discussion even though it was listed as a member. IFC members had also written that they had engaged with the community twice, he said, but they had not explained that the community had initiated those meetings. Dr. Parrish stressed that any community that is a potential site for a homeless shelter should be part of discussions regarding it. He recommended that the November roundtable discussions also include those who may be targeted for the shelter.

Mayor pro tem Wiggins noted that Dr. Parrish had listed several burdens his community has had to bear when he last spoke before the Council. She asked him to mention those again. Dr. Parrish listed the water tower on Merritt Mill Road, the UNC parking lot, the co-generation plant, the gravel pit, the major influx of students and parties, and the presence of many Section 8 families. The community was not against low-income families, he said, but they had more than their share.

15a(2). Budget Amendment for Public Dialogue on Homelessness.

THE COUNCIL ENACTED O-5 BY CONSENSUS.

AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND “THE ORDINANCE CONCERNING APPROPRIATIONS AND THE RAISING OF REVENUE FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JULY 1, 2004” (2004-10-11/O-5)

This the 11^th day of October, 2004.

Item 5 - Information Items

Council Member Kleinschmidt removed 5a, 2004-2005 Communications Plan.

5b. Response to a Petition Requesting a Crosswalk and Sidewalk on Estes Drive.

Estes Drive resident Geoff Whaller, who is blind, explained that there was no sidewalk on his side of the street and nowhere to walk except on the shoulder along some parts of that road. He suggested balancing the flow of traffic with the safety of pedestrians by installing a flashing green demand light. Mr. Whaller pointed out that his safety was being impacted by people running red lights.

Mayor Foy noted that Estes Drive was a State road and that any alterations there would have to be approved by the State. He suggested forwarding the request to the NCDOT, but asked the Manager how the Council would learn the DOT's response. Mr. Horton replied that the staff would receive a report from DOT engineers and would bring that to the Council. The Council could also explore direct negotiations with the DOT board representative who serves the Chapel Hill area, Mr. Horton pointed out.

Mayor Foy expressed little hope that much would come of sending a letter. The Town had been trying to get a crosswalk at Franklin Street by McDonalds for about 15 years, he said, and the Council was also trying to get one on Airport Road. Mayor Foy proposed that the Council authorize him to talk with the DOT representative about getting two or three crosswalks. He asked the Manager if the three mentioned were the most important. Mr. Horton replied that he thought they were but would check with the staff.

COUNCIL MEMBERS AGREED BY CONSENSUS THAT MAYOR FOY WOULD CONTACT THE DOT REPRESENTATIVE REGARDING CROSSWALKS.

Item 6 - Presentation by the Technology Committee on Technology Strategies

Terry Buckner, representing the Technology Committee, reviewed the budget recommendation that the Committee had brought to the Council in February. She discussed the Board's proposed plan for implementation of "e-democracy," which is the use of digital communication technologies to promote direct and active participation in government. Ms. Buckner also discussed creating "digital government" through a web strategy, and she addressed the role of GIS and infrastructure.

Ms. Buckner gave an example of how e-democracy would work, using South Columbia Street as an example. She explained that through e-democracy the Town could:

· Create a web page for the issue.

· Post written positions to web page.

· Create an electronic interest group.

· Use online polls and post results.

· Create a listserve and ask UNC & DOT to participate.

· Notify residents of hearings.

· Link web page to the relevant section of 2030 transportation plan.

Ms. Buckner acknowledged that technology was not the solution to everything and that many people still do not have access. But she pointed out that it could help people understand what is going on in their community, and she listed the following benefits:

· Better understanding between the University, DOT, and residents.

· More transparent and accessible decision making process.

· Historical trail for new residents.

Ms. Buckner stated that e-democracy builds understanding by providing:

· Access to official and unofficial information, such as agendas, minutes, and budgets.

· Documents linked together over time and across issues through dynamic search functions.

· Communications and decision making tools, such as GIS, listservs, polls, and surveys.

She said that instituting e-democracy in Chapel Hill would require:

· Strategic deployment of information technologies.

· Informed advocacy by the Council and Town Manager.

· Funding.

Ms. Buckner told Council members that the Committee had a web strategy plan that they had put together in light of a funding proposal for digital government that would come out next year through the National Science Foundation. She said that similar initiatives exist in Minnesota, Maine, Iowa, Chicago, and New York. Mecklenburg and Wake Counties had instituted digital government and perhaps e-democracy, she said. Ms. Buckner stated that the Board could plan and implement a course of action that would establish Chapel Hill as a leader in e-democracy. But they need Town Council and staff support to do so, she said, and she asked to schedule a one-hour planning meeting with the Town.

Committee Member Evelyn Daniel presented an implementation plan for a redesigned Town website. The website would be for private individuals, business people, university faculty and staff and students, Town and County staff, federal agency staff, and visitors. Ms. Daniel noted that the proposed website would differ from the existing one in accessibility and compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. She touched on what the website would provide and showed examples of what had been done in Wilson, NC and in Mecklenburg County. Ms. Daniel proposed a nine-step implementation plan, beginning with a consultant who understands e-democracy and can work with the Town. The consultant would create a content plan and would deliver a detailed design, a mock-up of what the site would look like, and a budget with cost and staff requirements, she said. Ms. Daniel explained that the estimated cost for the website was $40-50,000, and she described that as a highly worthwhile investment.

Committee Member Alan Rimer noted that there had been three Committee agendas this year. These included e-democracy, the GIS Strategic Plan, and the Infrastructure Strategy. GIS was in the formative stages of development, he said, and the Committee was focusing on finding a programmer analyst. Mr. Rimer pointed out that the GIS tool could be a very effective adjunct in e-democracy because it could help the Council visualize issues.

Mr. Rimer explained that Infrastructure Strategy meant taking stock of what the Town has and how it is used. He said that the Committee was in the beginning stages of looking at that and a sub-committee's work would be integrated into the core report when they come back for the budget in January/February. Mr. Rimer recommended that the Town find time this fall for a work session to explore the concept of e-democracy. The Committee believed that an interim investment in development of the website and its linkages into e-democracy would be a worth while one, he said.

Council Member Strom commented that an hour-long work session would be a good investment of the Council's time. He had many questions about the ramifications of these ideas, he said.

Council Member Harrison commented on the "remarkable" body of material that the staff provides on the Town's website. He pointed out, though, that there was little information available about things such as Planning Board business. Other places can get such information ahead of time, he said.

Council Member Kleinschmidt agreed that much information was available on the Town's website, "if you can find it." He noted that some basic protocols were lacking on the home page and that it was difficult to find some agenda items. Council Member Kleinschmidt wondered which, a webmaster or a consultant, would be the better use of Town money.

Council Member Greene expressed support for the one-hour work session. She noted that much information was on the Town's website but agreed that it was "pretty much top down." Council Member Greene said that e-democracy would empower citizens to participate and speak to the Town. She expressed interest in using the GIS maps, and commented on how useful it would be to view the Town through time on screen. Chapel Hill was a little behind, said Council Member Greene, adding that it was nice to imagine improving it even though she was mindful of the budget implications.

Council Member Verkerk agreed that the Town did not have a well-organized, well-designed website where the content drives the design. She cautioned, though, that e-democracy could be a tiered democracy for those who have access to electronics rather than the way it is now where anyone can come into a Council meeting. Spending at least an hour to discuss such issues would be well worth the Council's time, said Council Member Verkerk.

Mayor Foy suggested sending the whole package, with comments, to the Manager and asking him to arrange a work session with the Technology Committee to discuss goals, Council concerns, and budget implications.

COUNCIL MEMBERS AGREED BY CONSENSUS TO REFER THE REPORT TO THE MANAGER TO SCHEDULE A ONE- HOUR WORK SESSION.

Mayor Foy asked Natalie Ammerell to speak to Agenda Item 5c.

5c. Report from The Interfaith Council regarding Planning Process for Community Shelter.

Ms. Ammerell told the Council that The Interfaith Council (IFC) planned to keep them well informed with reports on a regular basis. She responded to Dr. Parrish's comments earlier in the meeting. The IFC had been asked about an October 18^th meeting involving Carrboro, she said, and had not been asked about the November 18^th Roundtable on Homelessness. Ms. Ammerell clarified that The IFC and the community were full partners in planning the Roundtable. The problem had been one of miscommunication, she said, where the The IFC had not understood the question.

Item 7 - Report from the Chapel Hill Cemetery Committee

Town Forester Curtis Brooks said that the Cemetery Committee had come up with a list of recommendations for utilizing the $150,000 and was recommending dividing it among historic preservation-related improvements, pedestrian improvements, and archives and public information improvements. The Committee had agreed, after considerable discussion, to recommend allocating $52,000 for restoration of cast iron fences. They had also recommended that $3,000 be spent on site repair associated with that fence repair.

Mr. Brooks mentioned lighting improvements on two major crosswalks and said that would cost about $44,000. He said that the Committee had also recommended adding stone entrance markers, directional markers, tree plantings, and archive/public information improvements. Mr. Brooks noted a suggestion that $40,000 be set aside for archive/public information improvements and said that a UNC graduate student might help with that research. The Committee had also recommended spending $5,000 for a redesigned, weatherproof, interpret exhibit at the Cemetery, he said.

Council Member Verkerk, the Committee chair, explained that there was archival information in several locations in Town. The Town was quickly losing oral history that it could be capturing, she said. She suggested having a UNC graduate student and advisor make recommendations, such as how to stabilize photocopies and how to gather and organize paper and old electronic information. Council Member Verkerk pointed out that the Committee's wish list would total $200-300,000. They decided to target historic and immediate problems and make one-time improvements rather than ongoing maintenance such as grave markers and weeding, she said. Council Member Verkerk praised Mr. Brooks and his crew, pointing out that the Cemetery had never looked this good.

Council Member Kleinschmidt asked how ongoing marker restorations would be accomplished. Council Member Verkerk replied that the Council would have to start thinking about that as a Capital Improvements project. She noted that there were orphan markers at the Cemetery that do not belong to a tomb and others that will need repair over the years.

Council Member Kleinschmidt recalled when the discussion of improvements first began that Ms. Rebecca Clark and others had specifically asked that the African American segment of the Cemetery be restored. He asked for specifics on how those concerns would be addressed. Council Member Verkerk replied that the African American section, which abuts UNC dorms, was where the historic dry-stacked walls are. The walls had all been improved, she said, and UNC had removed an unsightly fence and moved the trash dumpsters. Council Member Verkerk said that one of the lighted paths would go through that area, which would help address the vulnerability to vandalism. There were not many broken markers in that section because, in part, not many survived, she said.

Council Member Kleinschmidt remarked that spending a third of the money on one project seemed like an extraordinary amount. Council Member Verkerk replied that the Di-Phi cast iron fences were the two most historical markers in the Cemetery. Only two companies in the country can do that type of historical preservation, she said.

Council Member Kleinschmidt wondered why the Committee had chosen the fence, since Di-Phi had not become less significant over time. There were so many other problems, he said, and he asked if repairing markers would be much more expensive. Council Member Verkerk deferred to other Committee members for an answer, but commented that restoration of markers had been done on a periodic basis. The fences look "very disreputable right now," she said, and she explained that the Committee had immediately targeted them as something that needed work.

Mayor Foy asked how old the fences were. Committee Member Paul Kapp replied that they date back to the late 1840s to early 1850s. They were the plots of the two UNC debating societies in the 19^th century, he said, and were created for students who died at Chapel Hill and whose remains could not be sent home. Mr. Kapp said that the Di-Phi Society had given much to the University, including its school colors.

Council Member Strom inquired about a letter the Council had received from dissenting Committee Member Steven Moore, which indicated that the Committee had been disbanded. Mr. Brooks replied that the Committee had been charged with making recommendations about how to use the $150,000 and would no longer have a charge once those recommendations have been agreed upon.

Council Member Strom determined that discussions had occurred among Committee members only and had not included public forums. He stated that he had walked through the cemetery and had noticed areas, such as the McDade and Woodward plots, that were significantly worse off than the two that the Committee was recommending restoring. Council Member Strom asked why those had not been identified for restoration. Mr. Brooks replied the Committee had obtained a detailed cost estimate for the Di-Phi cast iron fences because there was so much interest in that. The other fences, many of which were painted steel, were at private, family plots and could be addressed at some point in the future, he said. Mr. Brooks stated that the Committee, as a whole, had felt that the Di-Phi fences were the highest priority and that they could be restored whereas the steel fences would have to be replaced. Replacing fences would involve having to find out whom they belong to and if anyone was still alive, he explained. Mr. Brooks pointed out that the Di-Phi Society had contributed $10,000 to the proposed restoration work.

Council Member Strom noted that the plan to repair the Cemetery had come about in the context of a split Council vote and split community opinion over the Cobb Chiller Plant/Parking Deck. So, he said, the Council should take extra care to meet the public interest there. Council Member Strom noted that the Di-Phi Society had the interest and some funding to work on this. But if the McDade family had all died and there were no heirs then the greater public good would be to address that situation, he argued. Council Member Strom stated that he had thought the Town's goal was to stabilize the Cemetery, add lighting, repair some of the damage, and fix some of the more obvious problems. Council Member Verkerk replied that the Town could repair the McDade fences for very little cost. That is because they have very little historic value, she said.

Committee Member Faison Sessoms pointed out that the Cemetery was on the National Registry of Historic Entities. The primary element that enabled that classification was the historic aspect of the Di-Phi site, he said. Mr. Sessoms added that the Di-Phi plot was an important aspect because it brings in tourists and other interested people.

Council Member Kleinschmidt wondered if this was the best use of a large portion of funds. He verified with Mr. Brooks that run-off was an issue, but not a great one, and that there was moderate erosion. The greatest issue was the gutters along the pathways, which had begun to sink and could be a tripping hazard, Mr. Brooks explained.

Mayor Foy agreed that $50,000, which was a third of the entire amount, was a lot of money. But the Committee was arguing that it was a necessary infrastructure cost, he said. Mayor Foy noted that replacements could be done at another time and the Committee was recommending an actual renovation. He drew a parallel to a homeowner who spends money to repair his foundation even though he would rather spend it on furniture. There was logic in doing the renovation before the fences deteriorate further, Mayor Foy said.

Council Member Kleinschmidt argued that a private foundation could take care of the Di-Phi renovations, however, and that such a project did not seem to address the specific concerns that the Council had when they formed the Committee. Council Member Kleinschmidt stated that he had imagined something coming back that would be more in line with comments the Council had made when they created the Committee.

Mayor pro tem Wiggins inquired about a Cemetery fund that had been established five or six years ago. Mr. Horton replied that Cemetery maintenance had been done through operational funds. Special repairs, such as restoring markers and other artifacts, had been done principally through the Council's allocations of about $10,000 per year in CIP funds over the years, he said. But a few years ago, when the State withheld a significant amount of Town money, that appropriation had been discontinued, Mr. Horton explained.

Mayor pro tem Wiggins determined from Mr. Horton and Mr. Brooks that the Town had already used most of the money at the time the fund was discontinued.

Mayor pro tem Wiggins suggested that re-instituting that fund would address some of Council Member Kleinschmidt's and other Council members' concerns. She pointed out that Ms. Rebecca Clark was not at tonight's meeting expressing objections to the Committee's report. Mayor pro tem Wiggins felt inclined to accept the Committee's recommendations, she said, noting that the Council could remember this project at budget time. She added that $10,000 is a modest amount to set aside each year for marker and/or fence restorations. Mayor pro tem Wiggins pointed out that this was not necessarily a final decision about resources to the Cemetery.

Council Member Greene expressed puzzlement over the Committee's recommendation, since it had been formed in the context of approving the Cobb Deck/Chiller Plant and mitigating damage to that area of campus. She had imagined more landscaping, she said, adding that she, too, had walked through the Cemetery and had seen areas that had been totally demolished as well as much overgrowth. Council Member Greene argued that taking care of orphan plots was the Town’s public charge, regardless of their historic value. Those who care about the Di-Phi plots might raise money to restore them, she said.

Council Member Verkerk replied that decisions had to be made and that her priority had always been historic art preservation. This was a one-shot opportunity to preserve something that is very important and very historic, she said. Council Member Verkerk told the Council that there had been members of the Historic Preservation Society on the Committee and that good cases had been made for restoring the fences. She wished that the Town could afford to fix all the orphans, she said, but they do not have the time or resources to track some of the families down. In North Carolina, one must go back several generations and ascertain that no one has survived before you can touch the plot, she said. Council Member Verkerk added, though, that the Committee had consulted the law school about this and that the laws are very unclear.

Council Member Greene asked if tracing those families could be part of the archival work that the graduate student would do. Council Member Verkerk replied that it would not be, explaining that the archival work would be to preserve what is there.

Council Member Hill wondered why the Town could fix headstones and markers but could not fix fences around headstones without contacting heirs. Repairing markers and fences would be easy and inexpensive to do, he said.

Council Member Hill noted that repairing the cast iron fences was expensive because of their historic and artistic value. He wondered how expensive it would be to just stabilize them so that a more complete restoration could occur at another time. Council Member Hill suggested that $10,000 might level and paint those fences.

Council Member Verkerk asked Mr. Kapp to comment on painting the fences. Mr. Kapp explained that lead paint would first have to be removed and mediated by EPA standards. They could dismantle them and take the tree down, he said, but putting them back in their current state might be impossible.

Council Member Hill noted that he had not been on the Council when this process started. But he had understood the charge to be to mitigate the effects of the Cobb Deck/Chiller Plant. Planting trees and adding lighting on the pathways does do that, he said. Council Member Hill acknowledged that there probably were only two firms that could do such restoration work and that this probably explained why it was so expensive. He pointed out that the Town could get "more bang for the buck" by investing in some of the other projects.

Council Member Hill asked if the stone gutters had historic significance or if they could be removed. Mr. Brooks was not sure of their historic value but said that the plan was to take an historic preservation approach to their repair. Removing those stones would be problematic, at least to some, he said, adding that complete repair would require hiring a reasonably qualified mason.

Council Member Hill commented that something about the cast iron fence proposal seemed "too precious" and, in some ways, did not satisfy the charge. Council Member Verkerk replied that she had been on the Council when it received the funding and was one of those who had requested that funding. The Council had not had any specific goal in mind, she said, other than improving the Cemetery and fixing things that desperately needed repair. Council Member Verkerk said that the Council had charged the Committee to look at problems and bring back priorities and recommendations. These recommendations were a balance between increasing safety and increasing landscaping, she said, as well as retaining the Cemetery’s historical significance.

John Sanders, representing the Di-Phi Society Foundation, stated that the proposed restoration would not be an institutional tribute to the Society. The Committee had decided that the fences were the most prominent features of the Cemetery that needed repair, he said, adding that spending the money in this way would give the most attractive result in the near future. Mr. Sanders explained that the Di-Phi Society had requested that allocation. He said that the private, non-profit Foundation had a limited amount of money and that its primary responsibility was the care and maintenance of its portrait collection. The restoration project was something unusual and not primary to the Foundation in the execution of its responsibilities, Mr. Sanders explained.

Council Member Greene noted that Council Member Verkerk had stated, according to the Committee minutes, that a challenge might be issued to Di-Phi members for matching funds. She asked if the Foundation had given serious consideration to that. Mr. Sanders replied that the Foundation could not afford to do so. Council Member Greene asked if the Foundation might raise those funds. Mr. Sanders replied that the Foundation did not consist of fundraising professionals. He doubted that they would be effective in raising funds for a project of this scale. Council Member Verkerk explained that the Society was not made up of wealthy people and would not be in a position to respond if the Council put out a money challenge.

Council Member Harrison stated that he knew something about preservation work because his father had been the main "worker bee" for an historic church cemetery for 53 years. By his father’s standards, what was proposed here was a great amount of money for cemetery preservation, he said. He noted, however, that the Committee’s minutes reveal that their choice to restore the cast iron fences had not been taken lightly. Council Member Harrison described the proposal as a rational choice, noting that did not mean that everything else could not be done later.

Council Member Strom asked Mr. Brooks about the $1,000 for landscaping. How many trees, for example, would that address? Mr. Brooks replied that the Town would plant ten, eight- to ten-foot cedars this fall, which would replace those that had been destroyed by storms. Council Member Strom suggested that the Council not take action tonight and ask the Committee to present some different options.

Mayor pro tem Wiggins stated that she did not recall the Cemetery restoration project being part of an effort to mitigate the effects of the parking deck. But, since some citizens had raised the proximity to the Cemetery, it had been part of an agreement to get some help from the University. There was not much that could be done in the Cemetery to mitigate the parking deck, she said, with the exception of the landscaping and improving the stone wall. The Town had acquired the $100,000 from UNC in that context, she said, and she suggested checking the Council minutes to determine what the Committee’s charge had been. Mayor pro tem Wiggins said that she did not think the charge was to mitigate the effects of the parking deck.

Council Member Verkerk remembered being told to let the Cemetery benefit from the $150,000. Mr. Kapp agreed that the funds had been targeted for special projects to benefit the Cemetery. He said that the Cobb Deck/Chiller Plant had been mitigated through a landscape buffer on the north side of the Cemetery and construction and repair of a perimeter stone wall.

Council Member Kleinschmidt read a stipulation from the Town's agreement with the University. He agreed that building walkways and funneling people through the Cemetery was consistent with the Town's expectations of the University's responsibilities. But the second paragraph of the stipulation stated that the University would work with the Town to create a Cemetery Task Force, whose objective would be "to improve the Old Chapel Hill Cemetery consistent with the master plan for the Old Chapel Hill Cemetery," he read. Council Member Kleinschmidt stated that it was within the Committee's prerogative to reprioritize part of the old master plan. But, the items that were left undone from the old master plan fell into the following categories: replace ballards; restore markers; fix and install gutters; and, repair plot boundary wrought iron fences, he said. Council Member Kleinschmidt noted that having had much discussion did not necessarily mean that the Committee's conclusion was the correct one. It could mean that it was a close call, he said.

Council Member Verkerk pointed out that the vote had been 8-1. Council Member Kleinschmidt replied that the report indicated that there had been much discussion. That seemed to indicate the presence of concerns that had to be ameliorated, he said. Council Member Kleinschmidt also argued that the questions being raised by Council members tonight were legitimate ones.

Council Member Verkerk argued that having had a lively discussion, with questions and concerns among Committee members, was constructive. But the vote was 8-1, she pointed out, adding that the one person who dissented had not attended all meetings and had been "out of the loop." Council Member Verkerk stressed that discussions in which people persuade one another is a good and positive thing, and said that she questioned the Council trying to do the Committee's work in thirty-five minutes. The Committee had weighed priorities and brought the recommendation for one-time improvements for historical preservation and public art, Council Member Verkerk said. She said that these were things that she felt very strongly about. "I'm sorry, I can't get excited about gutters," she said, adding that they and markers could be addressed later on. Council Member Verkerk argued that if the Town did not restore the cast iron fences now it would never happen. The Town will lose historical public art, "and that's something that I'm not willing to do," she said.

Council Member Verkerk called the question.

COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK MOVED, SECONDED BY MAYOR PRO TEM WIGGINS, TO ADOPT R-10.

Council Member Greene suggested holding a public forum on the question. She expressed sympathy with Council Member Verkerk’s position, noting that she had been in similar situations on committees that had worked hard on an issue only to be confronted by reservations from Council members who had not even been there. But still, said Council Member Greene, she was not completely in favor of the proposal even though she was not intent on opposing it. She suggested that the Council hear from more people regarding this issue.

Council Member Verkerk withdrew her motion, seconded by Mayor pro tem Wiggins.

COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER STROM, THAT THE TOWN SCHEDULE A PUBLIC FORUM. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

Mayor pro tem Wiggins asked if comments from the public forum would go back to the Committee or the Council. Mayor Foy suggested reserving judgement on that until after the forum, but keeping the Committee constituted until then.

COUNCIL MEMBERS AGREED BY CONSENSUS TO KEEP THE CEMETERY COMMITTEE ACTIVE.

Item 8 – Horace Williams Issues

8a. Report from the Horace Williams Citizens Committee: Comparison of the University’s May 5, 2004 Presentation on Carolina North with Principles, Goals and Strategies for the Horace Williams Property.

Committee Member Ruby Sinreich commended her fellow Committee members for the amount of work they had invested in the Horace Williams issue. She recommended that the Town take advantage of the opportunity to clarify its vision and goals for the Horace Williams Tract.

Mayor Foy praised the "great work" that Ms. Sinreich and other Committee members had done for the Town. He remarked on how the Committee had managed to stay focused and had begun to bring clarity to what the Town might want to see at Carolina North. Ms. Sinreich and the Committee had done the Town a great service, said Mayor Foy.

Mayor Foy asked Ms. Sinreich to clarify the following statement contained in the report: "We also felt that we needed the information specified in our recommended principles, goals and strategies to proceed with any further evaluation." Ms. Sinreich replied that it referred to items of information they needed from the Town. She also conferred with one of her colleagues, who agreed that it meant the Committee wanted the Town to provide information that they need.

Mayor Foy stated that the Council may send the report to UNC and Carrboro and ask UNC to respond to questions the Town had submitted in April. He asked Ms. Sinreich if she had any objections to that, or if there was anything specific that she wanted changed about the resolution. Ms. Sinreich replied that the Committee's top priority was the actions they wanted the Council to take. She saw no problem with referring the report to those other bodies, she said.

Ms. Sinreich commented on the unstructured nature of the process, explaining that this complicated any attempts to exchange information with UNC. She recommended sharing information whenever possible, and advocated for creating a structured process for sharing information between the Town and UNC so that it could better fit into each other's processes.

Council Member Hill told Ms. Sinreich that he believed that UNC was planning to return to their four original Carolina North committees. Ms. Sinreich said she was not aware of that, and reminded Council members that she and Council Member Hill had been the Town -appointed representatives to those Carolina North committees.

Council Member Strom praised the Committee for its "intrepid focus." He had been to several of their meetings and had witnessed their wordsmithing and discussion of nuance, he said, adding that the Committee had worked long hours and had received great support from Town staff members Chris Berndt and Phil Hervey. Council Member Strom spoke in favor of R-11, and urged the Council to begin asking the staff about some of the Committee's recommendations. He wanted to "tease out" what it would mean to rezone this property, he said, noting that the Council should fully inform the public of the rationale behind rezoning. Council Member Strom recommended that the Council look at the maps, get a sense of the difference between OI-3 and OI-2, and act on the Committee's recommendations to move the rezoning ahead.

Council Member Strom inquired about the underlining zoning. He asked what permitted uses and processes must be followed, what the difference would be and what would be allowed under an OI-2 zoning. Mr. Waldon pointed out the Horace Williams property on a map and noted that the OI-2, OI-3, and R-2 zones each comprised about a third of the total area. He displayed a simplified chart showing how those districts compare with regard to permitted uses, floor area ratio, height limit, and approval process. Mr. Waldon explained that nobody was completely happy with the configuration. Some do not like the OI-3 zoning and others dislike R-2. So, the Committee had recommended making everything OI-2, at least for now, Mr. Waldon said.

Council Member Strom inquired about the procedure for making an exception in an OI-2 zone if an applicant came in with a higher floor area ratio, for example. Mr. Waldon replied that when considering an application for a SUP, the Council could, in certain circumstances, modify some dimensional standards such as floor area ratios. Council Member Strom asked if UNC could generally achieve its plan with an OI-2 zoning. Mr. Waldon and Mr. Horton stated that they did not have enough information to answer that question. Mayor Foy pointed out that any applicant could do so with a SUP.

Council Member Strom clarified that if the section zoned OI-3 remained that way it would not rise to the Council for approval. Such a UNC application would have only a site plan review by the Planning Board, he pointed out. Council Member Strom described that as risky, given the amount of flux and uncertainty the Town had witnessed. He recommended seriously consider proceeding on the OI-2 rezoning.

In reference to an earlier remark by Council Member Hill, Council Member Greene explained that she, too, had read a newspaper article that stated that UNC planned to return to the four Horace Williams committees. The story had also claimed that the Town staff was not talking to UNC, she said, and she asked Mr. Horton to restate his version of that. Mr. Horton explained that UNC had not asked the Town staff any questions that they had been able to answer. The questions that UNC had asked would be more appropriately addressed to the Council, he said. Mr. Horton explained that UNC had inquired about what the community was able to bear, such as how many car trips, what kinds of roadway improvements, what sorts of land uses, and what sort of intensity. These questions were not appropriate for the staff, he pointed out. Mr. Horton noted that the staff could answer questions about what the ordinance would allow and that they frequently do so.

Council Member Kleinschmidt praised the Committee's work and expressed support for Council Member Strom's suggestion that the Council consider rezoning. Doing so would seem to put the Town in a better position, he said. Council Member Kleinschmidt also recommended following Ms. Sinreich's suggestion to create a process for evaluating fiscal equity questions. He urged the Council to begin the process of developing a transportation master plan as soon as possible. Council Member Kleinschmidt remarked that citizens living near the OI-3 tract would feel more comfortable if it were rezoned to OI-2.

Council Member Strom, referring to information distributed by Council Member Harrison regarding Duke University and other State institutions, said that protecting land was a priority for him and for the Committee. He suggested that conservation easements and other permanent protections be put in place for undeveloped land. Council Member Strom proposed adding that to the list of actions that Council Member Kleinschmidt had suggested. Then, if an application came forward, the Town would have a way of creating certainty for the future, he said. Council Member Strom noted that the SUP process could be long and tedious. But most who go through it feel that they have a better project, he pointed out.

Mayor Foy advised the Council to prioritize what they plan to do. He noted that they already were proceeding with the transportation plan. They could initiate a rezoning, he said, noting that doing so would be a very involved process.

Council Member Harrison said that Duke University would receive State certification this week for eleven natural areas, most of which were in Orange County. These would be eligible for permanent protection under a "Natural Heritage Registry" designation, he said. Council Member Harrison noted that UNC had not registered any of its natural areas. He wondered if protection could be included in the SUP process and asked that this be a priority as well.

Council Member Hill suggested that fiscal equity be a priority. Mayor Foy asked what process he would suggest for addressing the fiscal equity issue. Council Member Hill replied that forming a committee would be worthwhile.

Mayor Foy noted that Council Member Harrison had referred to the principle on page 12 regarding preserving the maximum amount of open space. He was not sure to what extent the Council could accomplish anything in that regard, he said, but noted that they could address it as applications come forward.

Council Member Strom proposed starting on rezoning and then asking the staff how to proceed on fiscal equity and conservation issues. The Town needed to be ready and know what it wanted on fiscal issues before conversations begin, he said.

Mayor Foy recommended putting transportation and rezoning on their own separate tracks, since the Council knows how to address those. He suggested asking the Manager to come back to the Council with guidance on how to frame the other two issues. Mayor Foy noted that the Town had some history with UNC regarding fiscal equity issues. He suggested that the Council inform itself before asking a committee to accomplish a task.

Council Member Greene reminded the Council of new State legislation regarding overlay zones and their application to State properties. The Council can start with 150 feet on each side of the streams on the corridor because the RCD will apply, she said.

8b. Transmittal of the Horace Williams Citizens Committee’s Analysis to the University, Town of Carrboro and Orange County.

COUNCIL MEMBER STROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK, TO MOVE FORWARD ON REZONING AND TRANSPORTATION ISSUES, TO INSTRUCT THE STAFF TO BRING BACK A PROCESS TO REZONE THE HORACE WILLIAMS PROPERTY TO OI-2, TO SCHEDULE A REVIEW OF TRANSPORTATION ISSUES FOR THIS FALL, AND TO BRING FORWARD RECOMMENDATIONS ON FISCAL EQUITY AND CONSERVATION ISSUES REGARDING THE HORACE WILLIAMS TRACT. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

COUNCIL MEMBER KLEINSCHMIDT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER GREENE, TO ADOPT R-11. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MANAGER TO TRANSMIT THE HORACE WILLIAMS CITIZENS COMMITTEE’S ANALYSIS TO THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA, THE TOWN OF CARRBORO AND ORANGE COUNTY (2004-10-11/R-11)

WHEREAS, the Council established the Horace Williams Citizens Committee in October 2002, to develop a set of principles to guide the Council’s deliberations with the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill regarding the future development of the Horace Williams property (Carolina North); and

WHEREAS, on October 8, 2003, the Committee submitted to the Council its report, “Recommended Principles, Goals and Strategies for Guiding the Development of the Horace Williams Property (Carolina North);” and

WHEREAS, the Council on March 22, 2004, accepted the report, “Principles, Goals and Strategies for the Horace Williams Property,” for use as a guide in future discussions with the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; and

WHEREAS, the University of North Carolina presented the “Carolina North Conceptual Draft Master Plan” PowerPoint to the Town Council; and

WHEREAS, the Council on May 24, 2004, referred the presentation to the Horace Williams Citizens Committee for an analysis on how the presentation compares with the Principles, Goals and Strategies for Guiding the Development of the Horace Williams Property report;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council authorizes the Manager to transmit the Horace Williams Citizens Committee’s October 11, 2004, analysis to the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Town of Carrboro and Orange County.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council requests that the University reply to the Horace Williams Citizen Committee’s analysis and the Council’s questions transmitted by Mayor Foy to the University on April 28, 2004.

This the 11^th day of October, 2004.

Due to the late hour, Council members discussed whether or not to defer items to another evening. Mr. Zimmerman agreed to return at another meeting to discuss Item 13. Mayor Foy instructed the Manager to ensure that Mr. Zimmerman's item appeared early on the next agenda. Mayor Foy also recommended deferring Item 15 and the Council agreed.

Item 9 - Report from the Planning Board on 2,000 versus 5,000 Square Foot

Thresholds for Stormwater Management and Tree Protection Controls

Donna Bell summarized the Planning Board's report. She explained that the issue had become increasingly complicated and had been sent to committee. The committee had recommended leaving the threshold at 5,000 square feet, said Ms. Bell. They had also suggested changing the cumulative land restriction from lifetime to five-year renewable. In addition, the committee had addressed issues of impervious surface ratios as well as grandfathered properties, Ms. Bell said.

Mayor Foy recommended that the Town take under advisement the recommendation regarding the time limits within which disturbances could be made. He confirmed with Mr. Horton that the Council could refer it to the staff for a follow-up report with recommendations for an appropriate process for consideration. Mayor Foy requested more information on the recommendation about impervious surface before and after the LUMO.

Council Member Greene thanked Ms. Bell, the committee and the Planning Board for taking this up, and praised their work.

Mayor Foy expressed appreciation to the Board for giving a clear opinion and not just kicking the issue back to the Council.

The Council agreed by consensus to refer the report back to the Manager for follow-up on recommendations.

Item 10 - Presentation of Mobility Report Card – Mr. Ray Moe

Mr. Moe, of L.S.A. Associates, explained that the object of the report card was to determine whether or not changes that the Town makes lead to better mobility and alternative modes of transportation. He listed a series of 11 measures and explained the methodology used with each.

Mr. Moe concluded that traffic congestion had remained about the same. Highway 15-501, Airport Road, and Columbia Street remained problem areas, he said, adding that conditions at intersections were slightly worse.

Mr. Moe reported that travel time had decreased overall by about 14%. Sidewalk mileage had increased by 14% in Town, he said, adding that 64% of the new sidewalks were inside the Transit Service Area. Overall, there had been a 25% increase in pedestrian activity and a 45% increase in bicycle facility mileage, Mr. Moe said. He noted, though, that there had been a 20% decrease in bicycle activity, adding that it might be just an anomaly.

Mr. Moe praised the Town for increasing its fixed route transit service hours by a total of 42% and by 28% per capita. This had lead to a 55% increase in system ridership, a 45% increase in rides per capita, and a 13% increase in riders per hour, he said. He mentioned a new concept called "multimodal mobility," and pointed out that the Town might not want to invest in all of its corridors the same way. Mr. Moe recommended investing in corridors that have a high chance of success, such as Airport Road, Franklin Street and South Road/Raleigh Road. There had been a decrease in the need for parking at some office parks, he pointed out. Mr. Moe complemented the staff and the Town for moving in the right direction.

Council Member Harrison commented that there is always a good reason when an indicator is off. He proposed that the low bicycle count had been the result of a "pinch point" somewhere along that route. It is either unattractive for cyclists to get on that stretch of road, or there is no facility, or the goal is not as obvious, he said. Council Member Harrison agreed that some of the results must be anomalies, stating that some drops were so precipitous that there could not be a rational explanation for them. He confirmed that the study had been more aggressive than others that Mr. Moe’s firm had done.

Council Member Harrison pointed out that there would be a public hearing on this in a couple of weeks and asked Mr. Moe what kind of public comment would be helpful. Mr. Moe replied that this was a report of trends over time and that he was not sure how the public process would work on something of this nature. He offered to answer questions and provide explanations at the hearing.

Council Member Strom inquired about a pending Town project to make parking recommendations for LUMO. Mr. Horton replied that Mr. Moe had completed his portion of that project and that the staff would bring a report to the Council in November. Mr. Horton explained that the staff and Council had discovered that some of the national standards did not make sense for the Town. He said that the project’s purpose was to determine the needs for parking regulations in Chapel Hill based on the Town’s own experience. They would research the community and bring forward recommendations that would reflect the community's own values and experience, Mr. Horton said.

COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HILL, TO ADOPT R-12. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

A RESOLUTION RECEIVING THE 2003 CHAPEL HILL MOBILITY REPORT CARD, REFERRING THE PLAN TO THE TOWN MANAGER, TOWN ATTORNEY, ADVISORY BOARDS, AND SETTING A PUBLIC FORUM FOR NOVEMBER 22, 2004 (2004-10-11/R-12)

WHEREAS, the Chapel Hill 2000 Comprehensive Plan includes a recommendation to complete a community-wide mobility report card; and

WHEREAS, the 2003 Mobility Report Card has been completed; and

WHEREAS, Town Council wishes to receive comments and recommendations from Town staff, Town advisory boards and the public;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council receives the 2003 Mobility Report Card and refers the Plan to the Town’s Planning Board, Transportation Board, Greenways Commission, Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board, and Parks and Recreation Commission, Active Living By Design Advisory Committee, and the Greenways Committee for review and comment.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Town Council schedules a public forum on the Plan for 7:00 pm, November 22, 2004, in the Town Council Chamber, 306 North Columbia Street, Chapel Hill.

This the 11^th day of October, 2004.

Item 11 - Montclair Subdivision Application for Preliminary Plat Approval

Mr. Waldon summarized the proposal to divide an 11-acre tract into 13 lots, with one lot being reserved for affordable housing. The Council had previously discussed this application with a small house ordinance proposal and that proposal remained the same, Mr. Waldon said. He noted that the Manager was recommending approval of R-13a.

Consultant Phil Post, representing Cazco, Inc. stated that the applicant supported R-13a and he asked that the Council support it as well.

MAYOR PRO TEM WIGGINS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER STROM, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

MAYOR PRO TEM WIGGINS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER STROM, TO ADOPT R-13A. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR MONTCLAIR SUBDIVISION (File No. 7.122.B.17A) (2004-10-11/R-13a)

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that it finds that the Montclair Subdivision, proposed by Cazco, Inc. on the property identified as Chapel Hill Township Tax Map 122, Block B, Lot 17A, (PIN 9778-90-0681) if developed according to the preliminary site plan dated September 26, 2002, revised June 5, 2004, and the conditions listed below, would comply with the provisions of the Land Use Management Ordinance and Design Manual:

These findings are based on the following:

Stipulations Specific to the Development

1. Expiration of Preliminary Plat: That this Preliminary Plat approval shall be valid for one year from the date of approval subject to reapproval by the Town Manager in accordance with the provisions of the Land Use Management Ordinance.

2. Number of Lots: That this approval shall authorize the creation of 13 lots on 11.02 acres.

3. Floor Area Restrictions: That unless noted otherwise, the provisions of Section 3.8.5 of the Land Use Management Ordinance, “Housing Floor Area Restrictions for Major Subdivision and Planned Development” shall apply to this development. That the final plans and plats shall indicate the specific lots and floor area restrictions for each lot on which size limitations are placed.

4. Affordable Housing: That the applicant may substitute an affordable housing component for the Floor Area Restrictions regulations in accordance with Section 3.8.6 of the Land Use Management Ordinance. That the following concerning Affordable Housing shall apply to this development:

· The affordable housing component shall provide initial and continued affordability of at least 15% of the dwelling units. The dwelling units shall be affordable to individuals and families who have incomes at or below 80% of the area median income for a family of four. Restrictive covenants shall be recorded with the dwelling unit(s) to ensure the continued and ongoing compliance with these requirements and shall be sold to individuals and families who have incomes at or below 100% of the area median income by family size, and published periodically by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

· The restrictive covenants shall be approved by the Town Manager and recorded concurrently with the final plat(s).

· The minimum number of affordable units shall be determined as described in Section 3.8.5 with the number of units based on the permissible units on each lot and with resulting fractions dropped.

· The subdivision final plat(s) shall be approved by the Town Manager and shall indicate clearly each lot on which an affordable unit must be constructed, and the builder, developer and purchaser shall be bound by the restriction.

5. Affordable Housing Lots: That the submission of the final plans and final plats shall include an affordable housing component. The final plans and plats shall identify Lot 3 as a lot on which an affordable unit must be constructed.

Required Improvements

6. On-Site Road Improvements: That a 27-foot wide road, measured from back of curb to back of curb, with 30-inch wide curb and gutter within a 50-foot wide right-of-way shall be built to Town Standard.

7. Montclair Way and Westbury Drive Rights-of-Way Dedication: That adequate rights-of-way shall be dedicated on the Montclair Way and Westbury Drive frontages. The rights-of-ways width shall extend three-feet beyond the sidewalk.

8. Sidewalk Improvement: That a 5-foot wide sidewalk shall be built to Town standard, on the east side of Montclair Way and the north side of Westbury Drive and around the entire cul-de-sac of Montclair Way.

9. Public Right-of-Way: That the applicant shall dedicate a 50-foot wide right-of-way, adjacent to Lot 4 and Morgan Estates extending to the Town’s Open Space, for a potential future pedestrian trail or a potential vehicular access.

Stipulations Related to Recreation

10. Minimum Recreation Requirements: That a minimum of 37,484 square feet of recreation area shall be provided for this development, in accordance with Section 5.5 of the Land Use Management Ordinance.

11. Dedication of Recreation Area: That the applicant provide for the Town Manager review and approval, a deed conveying to the Homeowners’ Association approximately 50,000 square feet in the northern portion of the site behind Lots 4, 5, 6, and 7 identified as “Montclair Homeowners’ Association Open Space.” This document shall be reviewed and approved by the Town Manager prior to recordation at the Orange County Register of Deeds Office and cross-referenced on the final plat.

12. Town Recreation Easement: That the applicant shall grant a public access easement to the Town for the entire recreation area/open space. The easement shall provide public access to build and maintain trails shall indicate and that the following users be entitled to use the public recreation area: pedestrians, users of non-motorized vehicles, and motorized wheelchairs. The easement shall be recorded by deed at the Orange County Register of Deeds Office and shall be cross-referenced on the final plat.

13. Sign Designating Community Open Space: That the applicant shall post a sign at the public access easement designating the access to community open space, subject to Town Manager approval.

Stipulations Related to Landscaping

14. Landscape Protection Plan: That a detailed Landscape Protection Plan, clearly indicating which rare and specimen trees will be removed and preserved, and indicating significant tree stands, including Town standard landscaping protection notes, shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

15. Tree Protection Fencing: That the limits of land disturbance with tree protection fencing shall be shown on the Landscape Protection Plan, to be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

Stipulations Related to Homeowners’ Association

16. Homeowners’ Association: That a Homeowners’ Association be created that has the capacity to place a lien on the property of a member who does not pay the annual charges for maintenance of common areas, however designated. The Homeowners’ Association documents shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to recordation at the Orange County Register of Deeds Office and shall be cross-referenced on the final plat. The Homeowners’ Association documents shall comply with Section 4.6.7 of the Land Use Management Ordinance.

Stipulations Related to Resource Conservation District

17. Boundaries: That the boundaries of the Resource Conservation District be indicated on the final plat and plan. A note shall be added to all final plats and plans, indicating “Development shall be restricted within the Resource Conservation District in accordance with the Chapel Hill Land Use Management Ordinance.”

18. Variances: That all variances necessary for development within the Resource Conservation District be obtained before application for final plat or Final Plan approval for the subject phase(s) of development.

19. Buildable Lots: That no lot be created that would require a Resource Conservation District Variance in order to be built upon. In addition, for each lot it must be demonstrated that there is sufficient buildable area outside the Resource Conservation District, slopes of 25% or greater, water quality vegetated buffers, other required landscape buffers, easements, and any applicable building setback limits.

20. Construction Standards: That for encroachment(s) into the Resource Conservation District the requirements and standards of Section 3.6.3(g) of the Land Use Management Ordinance and all other applicable Resource Conservation District regulations must be adhered to, unless the application is granted administrative exemptions from Section 3.6.3(h).

Stipulations Related to Steep Slopes

21. Steep Slopes: That each submittal for Final Plan approval shall include a map showing lots and street segments on slopes of 10% or more, and indicating how the development and construction will comply with the steep slopes regulations in Section 5.3.2 of the Land Use Management Ordinance.

Stipulations Related to Water, Sewer, and Other Utilities

22. Utility/Lighting Plan Approval: That the final Utility/Lighting Plan be approved by Duke Power Company, Orange Water and Sewer Authority, BellSouth, Public Service Company, Time Warner Cable, and the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

23. OWASA Easements: That easement documents as required by OWASA and the Town Manager be recorded concurrently with the final plat. That the final plat shall be approved by OWASA prior to Town Manager approval.

24. Placement of Utility Lines Underground: That all new utility lines shall be placed underground, to be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

25. Fire Flow: That a fire flow report, shall be prepared and sealed by a registered professional engineer, and showing that flows meet the minimum requirements of the Town Design Manual, to be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

26. Fire Hydrant Spacing: That maximum spacing between fire hydrants shall not exceed 500 feet, subject to approval by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

Miscellaneous Related To Stormwater Management

27. Stormwater Management Plan: That prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit the applicant shall submit a Stormwater Management Plan for review and approval by the Town Manager. The plan shall be based on the 1-year, 2-year, and 25-year frequency, 24-hour duration storms, where the post-development stormwater run-off rate shall not exceed the pre-development rate. Engineered stormwater facilities shall also remove 85% total suspended solids and treat the first inch of precipitation utilizing NC Division of Water Quality design standards.

28. Best Management Practices: That the applicant shall employ Best Management Practices, such as drainage swales and level spreaders, to manage the rate and quality of runoff, based on best available information from the NC State University Cooperative Extension. Final design and locations shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. These stormwater management features shall not be permitted within approved landscaped bufferyard areas.

29. Storm Drainageway Easement: That all stormwater management improvements, outside public right-of-way, shall be located inside reserved storm drainageway easements, per Town guidelines, to be approved by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

30. Stormwater Operations and Maintenance Plan: That the applicant shall provide a Stormwater Operations and Maintenance Plan for all engineered stormwater facilities. The plan shall include the owner's financial responsibility and include the maintenance schedule of the facilities to ensure that it continues to function as originally intended and shall be approved by the Town Manager, prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

Miscellaneous Stipulations

31. State or Federal Approvals: That any required State or federal permits or any required encroachment agreements for development in areas such as wetlands must be approved by the appropriate agencies and copies of the approved permits be submitted to the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

32. Street Names and Addresses: That the name of the development and its streets and house numbers be approved by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

33. Pavement Marking Plan: That the applicant submit a signage and pavement marking plan to be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. The signs and pavement markings shall be installed by the applicant prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy for a structure on the new lots.

34. Construction Management Plan: That a Construction Management Plan, indicating how construction vehicle traffic will be managed, shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

35. Solid Waste Management Plan: That a Solid Waste Management Plan, including provisions for recycling, and for managing and minimizing construction debris, shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

36. Open Burning: That the open burning of trees, limbs, stumps and construction debris association with this development is prohibited unless it is demonstrated to the Town Manager or his designee that no reasonable alternative means are available for removal of the materials from the subject property. The Fire Marshall may establish safety standards, which must be met in order to receive a permit under this Article.

37. Detailed Plans: That final detailed site plans, grading plans, utility/lighting plans, stormwater management plans (with hydrologic calculations), and landscape plans and landscape maintenance plans be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, and that such plans conform to the plans approved by this application and demonstrate compliance with all applicable conditions and the design standards of the Land Use Management Ordinance and the Design Manual.

38. As-Built Plans: That as-built plans in DXF binary format using State plane coordinates, shall be provided for street improvements and all other existing or proposed impervious surfaces prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy.

39. Plant Rescue: That the applicant consider conducting plant rescue activities on the site prior to initiation of development activity.

40. Certificates of Occupancy: That no Certificates of Occupancy shall be issued until all required public improvements are completed; and that a note to this effect shall be placed on the final plat.

That if the Town Manager approves a phasing plan, no Certificates of Occupancy shall be issued for a phase until all required public improvements for that phase are complete; no Building Permits for any phase shall be issued until all public improvements required in previous phases are completed to a point adjacent to the new phase, and that a note to this effect shall be placed on the final plat.

41. Erosion Control: That a detailed soil erosion and sedimentation control plan, including provision for maintenance of facilities and modifications of the plan if necessary, be approved by the Orange County Erosion Control Officer and the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, with special attention to preventing erosion associated with construction of any stormwater devices.

That a performance guarantee be provided in accordance with Section 5-97.1 of the Town Code of Ordinances prior to issuance of any permit to begin land-disturbing activity.

42. Silt Control: That the applicant takes appropriate measures to prevent and remove the deposit of wet or dry silt on adjacent paved roadways.

43. Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance: That the applicant provide the necessary Certificates of Adequacy of Public Schools prior to recordation of the final plat.

44. Construction Sign: That the applicant shall post a construction sign that lists the property owner’s representative and telephone number, the contractor’s representative and telephone number, and a telephone number for regulatory information at the time of issuance of a Building Permit, prior to the commencement of any land disturbing activities. The construction sign may have a maximum of 16 square feet of display area and may not exceed 6 feet in height. The sign shall be non-illuminated, and shall consist of light letters on a dark background.

45. Continued Validity: That continued validity and effectiveness of this approval is expressly conditioned on the continued compliance with the plans and conditions listed above.

46. Non-severability: That if any of the above conditions is held to be invalid, approval in its entirety shall be void.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council hereby approves the application for a Preliminary Plat for the Montclair Subdivision in accordance with the plans and conditions listed above.

This the 11^th day of October, 2004.

Item 12 - Chancellor’s View Cluster Subdivision

Application for Preliminary Plat Approval

Mr. Waldon reviewed the application for a 32-acre cluster subdivision off Mt. Carmel Road. The proposal included 24 residential lots plus one lot that would be the subject of another development application in the future. The application proposed that six of the 24 lots carry size restrictions, he said. Mr. Waldon noted that the Council had addressed this proposal and had discussed affordable housing at a public hearing. The applicant had come forward tonight with an alternate proposal that would include three affordable houses on Old Lystra Road, he said.

Mr. Waldon explained that Robert Dowling, of the Orange Community Housing and Land Trust, had expressed support for the affordable housing option with conditions to ensure site design and quality of units. The Manager's recommendation was for the application as submitted with six small units, Mr. Waldon said, but he added that three affordable units would be reasonable and would comply with the ordinance. Mr. Waldon noted the alternate language in the memo and explained that the Council could insert that into the resolution if they chose the affordable housing alternative.

Developer Eric Chupp, of Kovens Construction, stated that Old Lystra Road would be a good location for three affordable houses because the land there is flat. The deep slopes that fall off both sides of Chancellor's View Road would make it difficult to incorporate affordable houses into that community, he said. Mr. Chupp explained that placing the three houses on Old Lystra Road would allow those residents to avoid paying homeowners dues. Also, they would not be subject to the fairly rigorous covenants and conditions of the homes within Chancellor's View, he said. Mr. Chupp told Council members that the three cottages could be integrated into the Old Lystra Road community, which is speckled with similarly sized houses. He asked for Council support on this or his original proposal.

Robert Dowling, Director of the Orange Community Housing and Land Trust, explained that the applicant had called him and requested advice on incorporating affordable housing into his project. Mr. Dowling said that he had first asked Mr. Chupp to incorporate the affordable houses into Chancellor's View but had later come to see why it was difficult to put those units on the steep topography. Mr. Dowling stated that the Old Lystra Road proposal struck the middle ground between the Council's desires and the developer's wish to earn a profit. He had discussed the proposal with his own staff and Board members and neither he nor they had been offended by this proposal, he said. Mr. Dowling suggested giving the Manager approval over siting, design and construction quality. That will be important to neighbors on Old Lystra Road and to those who buy those homes, he said.

Zapata Lane resident Paul Johnson reminded Council members that his neighborhood had raised issues about light pollution, traffic, and road maintenance. Those issues had been addressed, he said, but he now wondered what the off-site grading would involve. Mr. Johnson noted that a nature trail, which was being described as usable by motorized wheel chairs, probably would have to be paved. He had been told that it would be a natural wood chip type trail, he said. Referring to stipulations regarding buffers, Mr. Johnson asked if the buffers would involve some of his land.

Consultant Phil Post explained that the natural trail near Mr. Johnson's house would be within the open space. Town staff had also asked for a blanket easement of all natural areas, he said, explaining that the Town could construct a greenway trail there at some future time. Mr. Post noted that any proposed trail through that area would be subject to public hearings, however. He emphasized that his firm would not pave anything. Mr. Horton added that the Town was not proposing to pave anything either, and pointed out that many types of motorized wheel chairs can run on natural trails.

Mr. Post indicated on the map where the buffers were required and said that they would not impact any lot. Mayor Foy asked Mr. Post if anything would be placed on Mr. Johnson's property. Mr. Post replied that, according to the stipulations, the development could not proceed until all necessary easements are procured. The developer had had discussions with Mr. Johnson about an area where the new street would come in, he said, adding that it would be nice, but not necessary, to make an improvement there. Mr. Post noted that the detailed design had not yet been done and that the development could not proceed without necessary easements. The stipulation protects all parties, he pointed out.

Mayor Foy inquired about offsite grading. Mr. Post replied that this would be an easement. Mayor Foy asked Mr. Johnson if the response had satisfied him. Mr. Johnson commented about stipulation 1, and Mayor Foy verified with Mr. Waldon that the developer would not put buffers on anyone else's property.

MAYOR PRO TEM WIGGINS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER STROM, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

Old Lystra Road resident Margaret White urged the Council to adopt Resolution 14a. Neighbors had not known that the proposal would include affordable houses on Old Lystra Road, she said, arguing that it would be unfair if they did not have an opportunity to respond. Ms. White explained that Old Lystra Road was busy and narrow and already had much current and future development on it. She said that an 11-acre dumpsite might be located there. Putting three affordable houses at that location at “less than required zoning” would be a setback for Old Lystra Road, said Ms. White.

COUNCIL MEMBER STROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER KLEINSCHMIDT, TO ADOPT R-14A WITH STIPULATION #4 REPLACED WITH THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING LANGUAGE AT THE TOP OF PAGE 4 OF THE MANAGER’S MEMO.

Mayor Foy asked the staff to clarify wording on page four ("timing of construction of affordable homes relative to the market-rate homes; and that a marketing agreement be established between the developer and the Land Trust"), which had not been included in the proposed language. Mr. Waldon replied that the staff would consult closely with Mr. Dowling when reviewing the plans. But they thought it would be good form, and typical of how such things had been done, to have approval authority rest with the Town Manager rather than another agency, he explained. Mayor Foy expressed agreement but wondered why there would be a problem incorporating the marketing agreement. Mr. Horton assured the Council that he would not give his approval until the marketing agreement was there.

Council Member Greene noted what Mr. Dowling had written about the timing of affordable housing construction. She did not want those to be the last built, she said, and asked if language specifying that could be incorporated. Mr. Waldon explained that a developer would submit a phasing plan if he chose not to do everything at once.

Mayor pro tem Wiggins pointed out that Council Member Greene's question was about completion and occupancy, not start of construction. Mr. Chupp said that he had discussed this with Mr. Dowling and had proposed a stipulation saying that the applicant was receptive to parameters. Mr. Horton said that the Town appreciated Mr. Chupp's willingness to reach agreement.

Mr. Waldon proposed the following wording: "If a phasing plan is submitted for approval by the Town Manager the plan shall include provisions for phasing construction and occupancy of the affordable units in a manner similar to the marker rate units.” Mr. Horton expressed a preference for saying: "The three affordable units will be completed and ready for Certificates of Occupancy prior to the 15^th unit of the other portion of the development." Mr. Chupp agreed.

Mayor pro tem Wiggins stated that the Town was moving in the right direction. She said that Homeowners Association dues challenge the concept of affordability and that this proposal puts the three houses more in line with the Town’s long term affordability goal.

Council Member Kleinschmidt noted that the units would be designed to meet the needs of people who make 80% of the median income. They will sell for $120,000, he said, adding that this was considerably more expensive than his own house. These homes would not necessarily bring down property values or bring in undesirable elements, he pointed out. Council Member Kleinschmidt described the affordable homes as an opportunity to enhance the community.

Council Member Greene stated that she was happy to support the three affordable units, but not happy that they were segregated from the others. She wished that there was a way to integrate them into the neighborhood, she said, noting the Town’s goal of economic integration. Council Member Greene pointed out that not having to pay homeowners dues also means not being part of homeowners’ meetings. Studies had shown that children in affordable housing had benefited by being integrated into better neighborhoods, she said.

Mayor pro tem Wiggins replied that when housing is this close the children who go to school together will find each other. Her own children had found others in the vicinity to play with and had done so across economic lines, she said.

COUNCIL MEMBER STROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER KLEINSCHMIDT, TO ADOPT R-14A WITH STIPULATION #4 REPLACED WITH THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING LANGUAGE AT THE TOP OF PAGE FOUR OF THE MANAGER’S MEMO, AND ADDING THAT THE THREE AFFORDABLE UNITS WILL BE COMPLETED AND READY FOR CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY PRIOR TO THE 15^TH UNIT OF THE OTHER PORTION OF THE DEVELOPMENT. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR CHANCELLOR’S VIEW CLUSTER SUBDIVISION (File # 7.126.B.2)

(2004-10-11/R-14a)

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that it finds that the Chancellor’s View Cluster Subdivision, proposed by Kapcov Ventures, LLC, on the property identified as Chapel Hill Township Tax Map 126, Block B, Lot 2, if developed according to the Preliminary Site Plan dated April 15, 2003, and revised May 19, 2004 and July 28, 2004, and the Existing Conditions map dated May 19, 2004, and revised July 28, 2004, and the conditions listed below, would comply with the provisions of the Town Design Manual and the Land Use Management Ordinance and specifically with the following cluster development requirements from Section 3.8.8(b) of the Land Use Management Ordinance:

1. The tract proposed for cluster development is at least two (2) acres in size;

2. Public, separate water supply and sewerage connections are available for every subdivided lot;

3. The total number of lots proposed for the tract, excluding parcels of reserved recreation area, is not greater than the number determined by multiplying the total gross land area by the maximum density established in Section 3.8 for that zoning district;

4. The recreation area within the tract shall conform to the recreation area standards of Section 5.5; and

5. The minimum amount of land reserved as recreation area shall be the sum of all reductions in minimum gross land area as a result of the cluster form of development, combined with the minimum recreation area reservation required in Section 5.5. Only the minimum recreation area reservation required in Section 5.5 may be dedicated outside the boundaries of the land being subdivided as specified in Section 5.5.2.

These findings are based on the following:

Stipulations Specific to the Development

2. Number of Lots: That this approval shall authorize the creation of 25 lots on 32.41 acres.

3. Single-Family Restriction: That lots 1-24 are restricted to Single-Family Dwelling Unit use only. A note to this effect shall be placed on the final plat.

4. Affordable Housing: That the provisions of Section 3.8.6.1 of the Land Use Management Ordinance, “Substitution of Affordable Housing for Floor Area Restrictions” shall apply to this development. That the final plans and plats shall indicate the specific lots dedicated to affordable housing, subject to Town Manager approval. That final siting, design, pricing, and construction quality of the affordable dwellings shall be subject to Town Manager approval prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

5. Affordable Housing Construction Timing: That Certificates of Occupancy for the three affordable dwellings on Old Lystra Road shall be issued prior to issuance of the fifteenth Certificate of Occupancy for the new single-family dwellings with frontage on the new subdivision road.

Required Improvements

6. On-Site Road Improvements: That a 27-foot wide road, measured from back of curb to back of curb, with 30-inch wide curb and gutter within a 45-foot wide right-of-way shall be built to Town Standard.

7. Sidewalk Improvements: That a 5-foot wide sidewalk shall be built to Town standard on one side of the new road.

8. T-Turnaround: That the applicant shall provide a temporary T-Turnaround, large enough to accommodate service vehicles, on Lot 15. The associated easement shall be recorded on the final plat.

9. T-Turnaround Removal: That the T-Turnaround and associated easement shall be removed when the stubout is connected to future development to the west.

10. Off-Site Grading: That off-site temporary construction agreements, authorizing grading and landscaping, shall be provided for any off-site work, such as the area required for building the connection to Zapata Lane, and shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to recordation at the Orange County Register of Deeds Office. The agreements shall be recorded prior to initiation of work.

11. Stub-out: The new roadway shall be constructed to stub-out at the western property line between lots 14 and 15 and the open space area.

12. Stub-out Signage: Signage shall be located at the roadway stub-out that indicates the roadway will be extended for future development. The size, text, and color of the signs shall be subject to the Town Manager’s approval.

13. Sight Distance Improvements: That the recommendations related to sight distance improvements from the Traffic Impact Analysis, dated March 2002, shall be identified on the final plans and shall be subject to the Town Manager’s approval.

14. Zapata Lane Maintenance: That Zapata Lane shall be accepted for maintenance by the North Carolina Department of Transportation prior to Final Plat approval by the Town Manager.

Stipulations Related to Recreation

15. Minimum Recreation Requirements: That a minimum of 15.54 acres of recreation area shall be provided for this development. The applicant or Homeowners’ Association shall remain responsible for the recreation area, unless and until the Town assumes responsibility.

16. Dedication of Recreation Areas: That the applicant provide for Town Manager review and approval, a deed conveying to the Homeowners’ Association the 15.54 acres identified as “Open Space.” These documents shall be reviewed and approved by the Town Manager prior to recordation at the Orange County Register of Deeds Office and cross-referenced on the final plat.

17. Town Recreation Easement: That the applicant shall grant a public access easement to the Town for the entire recreation area/open space. The easement shall provide public access to build and maintain trails and shall indicate that the following users be entitled to use the public recreation area: pedestrians, users of non-motorized vehicles, and motorized wheelchairs. The easement shall be recorded by deed at the Orange County Register of Deeds Office and shall be cross-referenced on the final plat.

18. Greenway Path Signage: That the applicant shall provide greenway path signage identifying the path at all points of entry. The signs shall state that the greenway paths are for public use, and shall comply with sign design standards contained in the Land Use Management Ordinance.

Stipulations Related to Landscaping

19. Landscape Buffers: That a 20-foot Type-C buffer shall be provided along the Old Lystra Road and Zapata Lane frontages, and that a 30-foot Type-D buffer shall be provided along the U.S. Highway 15-501 frontage.

20. Ownership of Landscape Buffers: The Old Lystra Road and Zapata Lane landscape buffers shall be on land that is deeded to the Homeowners’ Association.

21. Landscape Protection Plan: That a detailed Landscape Protection Plan, clearly indicating which rare and specimen trees will be removed and preserved, and indicating significant tree stands, and including Town standard landscaping protection notes, shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

22. Tree Protection Fencing: That the limits of land disturbance with tree protection fencing shall be shown on the Landscape Protection Plan, to be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

Stipulations Related to Homeowners’ Association

23. Homeowners’ Association: That a Homeowners’ Association be created that has the capacity to place a lien on the property of a member who does not pay the annual charges for maintenance of common areas, however designated. The Homeowners’ Association documents shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to recordation at the Orange County Register of Deeds Office and shall be cross-referenced on the final plat. The Homeowners’ Association documents shall comply with Section 4.6.7 of the Land Use Management Ordinance.

Stipulations Related to Resource Conservation District

24. Boundaries: That the boundaries of the Resource Conservation District be indicated on the final plat and plan. A note shall be added to all final plats and plans, indicating, “Development shall be restricted within the Resource Conservation District in accordance with the Chapel Hill Land Use Management Ordinance.”

25. Variances: That all variances necessary for development within the Resource Conservation District be obtained before application for final plat or Final Plan approval for the subject phase(s) of development.

26. Buildable Lots: That no lot be created that would require a Resource Conservation District Variance in order to be built upon.

In addition, for each lot it must be demonstrated that there is sufficient buildable area outside the Resource Conservation District, slopes of 25% or greater, water quality vegetated buffers, other required landscape buffers, easements, and any applicable building setback limits.

27. Construction Standards: That for encroachment(s) into the Resource Conservation District the requirements and standards of Section 3.6.3(g) of the Land Use Management Ordinance and all other applicable Resource Conservation District regulations must be adhered to, unless the application is granted administrative exemptions from Section 3.6.3(h).

All required erosion control sediment basins and stormwater improvements, outside the public right-of-way, including associated clearing and grading be located entirely outside of the Resource Conservation District where practicable to minimize land disturbance. That all grading associated with the construction of a residence be located entirely outside of the Resource Conservation District.

Stipulations Related to Steep Slopes

28. Steep Slopes: That each submittal for Final Plan approval shall include a map showing lots and street segments on slopes of 10% or more, and indicating how the development and construction will comply with the steep slopes regulations in Section 5.3.2 of the Land Use Management Ordinance. The Town Manager shall decide if the proposed building and site engineering techniques are appropriate. These restrictions shall be referenced in the Homeowners’ Association documents.

Stipulations Related to Water, Sewer, and Other Utilities

29. Utility/Lighting Plan Approval: That the final Utility/Lighting Plan be approved by Duke Power Company, Orange Water and Sewer Authority, BellSouth, Public Service Company, Time Warner Cable, and the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

30. OWASA Easements: That easement documents as required by OWASA and the Town Manager be recorded concurrently with the final plat. That the final plat shall be approved by OWASA prior to Town Manager approval.

31. Placement of Utility Lines Underground: That all new utility lines shall be placed underground.

32. Fire Flow: That a fire flow report, shall be prepared and sealed by a registered professional engineer, and showing that flows meet the minimum requirements of the Town Design Manual, to be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

33. Fire Hydrant Spacing: That maximum spacing between fire hydrants shall not exceed 500 feet, subject to approval by the Town Manager.

Miscellaneous Related To Stormwater Management

34. Stormwater Management Plan: That prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit the applicant shall submit a Stormwater Management Plan for review and approval by the Town Manager. The plan shall be based on the 1-year, 2-year, and 25-year frequency, 24-hour duration storms, where the post-development stormwater run-off rate shall not exceed the pre-development rate. Engineered stormwater facilities shall also remove 85% total suspended solids and treat the first inch of precipitation utilizing NC Division of Water Quality design standards.

35. Best Management Practices: That the applicant shall employ Best Management Practices, such as drainage swales and level spreaders, to manage the rate and quality of runoff, based on best available information from the NC State University Cooperative Extension. Final design and locations shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. These stormwater management features shall not be permitted within approved landscaped bufferyard areas.

36. Storm Drainageway Easement: That all stormwater management improvements, outside public right-of-way, shall be located inside reserved storm drainageway easements, per Town guidelines, to be approved by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit

37. Stormwater Operations and Maintenance Plan: That the applicant shall provide a Stormwater Operations and Maintenance Plan for all engineered stormwater facilities. The plan shall include the owner's financial responsibility and include the maintenance schedule of the facilities to ensure that it continues to function as originally intended and shall be approved by the Town Manager, prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. The Stormwater Operations and Maintenance Plan shall be referenced in the Homeowners’ Association documents.

Miscellaneous Stipulations

38. State or Federal Approvals: That any required State or federal permits or any required encroachment agreements for development in areas such as wetlands must be approved by the appropriate agencies and copies of the approved permits be submitted to the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

39. Street Names and Addresses: That the name of the development and its streets and house numbers be approved by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

40. Pavement Marking Plan: That the applicant submit a signage and pavement marking plan to be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. The signs and pavement markings shall be installed by the applicant prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy for a structure on the new lots.

41. Construction Management Plan: That a Construction Management Plan, indicating how construction vehicle and pedestrian traffic will be managed, shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

42. Solid Waste Management Plan: That a Solid Waste Management Plan, including provisions for recycling, and for managing and minimizing construction debris, shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

43. Open Burning: That the open burning of trees, limbs, stumps and construction debris association with this development is prohibited unless it is demonstrated to the Town Manager or his designee that no reasonable alternative means are available for removal of the materials from the subject property. The Fire Marshall may establish safety standards, which must be met in order to receive a permit under this Article.

44. Detailed Plans: That final detailed site plans, grading plans, utility/lighting plans, stormwater management plans (with hydrologic calculations), and landscape plans and landscape maintenance plans be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, and that such plans conform to the plans approved by this application and demonstrate compliance with all applicable conditions and the design standards of the Land Use Management Ordinance and the Design Manual.

45. As-Built Plans: That as-built plans in DXF binary format using State plane coordinates, shall be provided for street improvements and all other existing or proposed impervious surfaces prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy.

46. Plant Rescue: That the applicant consider conducting plant rescue activities on the site prior to initiation of development activity.

47. Certificates of Occupancy: That no Certificates of Occupancy shall be issued until all required public improvements are completed; and that a note to this effect shall be placed on the final plat.

48. Erosion Control: That a detailed soil erosion and sedimentation control plan, including provision for maintenance of facilities and modifications of the plan if necessary, be approved by the Orange County Erosion Control Officer and the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

That a performance guarantee be provided in accordance with Section 5-97.1 of the Town Code of Ordinances prior to issuance of any permit to begin land-disturbing activity.

49. Silt Control: That the applicant takes appropriate measures to prevent and remove the deposit of wet or dry silt on adjacent paved roadways.

50. Construction Sign: That the applicant shall post a construction sign that lists the property owner’s representative and telephone number, the contractor’s representative and telephone number, and a telephone number for regulatory information at the time of issuance of a Building Permit, prior to the commencement of any land disturbing activities. The construction sign may have a maximum of 4 square feet of display area and may not exceed 6 feet in height. The sign shall be non-illuminated, and shall consist of light letters on a dark background.

51. Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance: That the applicant provide the necessary Certificate of Adequacy of Public Schools prior to recordation of the final plat.

52. Continued Validity: That continued validity and effectiveness of this approval is expressly conditioned on the continued compliance with the plans and conditions listed above.

53. Non-severability: That if any of the above conditions is held to be invalid, approval in its entirety shall be void.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council hereby approves the application for a Preliminary Plat for the Chancellor’s View Cluster Subdivision in accordance with the plans and conditions listed above.

This the 11^th day of October, 2004.

Item 13 - Report from the Council on a Sustainable Community

The Council agreed by consensus to defer Item 13.

Item 14 - Appointments

a. Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board. The Council appointed Nicholas Lurie.

Council Members

Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory

Board

Foy

Greene

Harrison

Hill

Kleinschmidt

Strom

Verkerk

Ward

Wiggins

TOTAL

Nicholas Lurie

Ab-sent

Other

b. Chapel Hill Active Living By Design Committee. The Council appointed Esphur Foster.

Council Members

Chapel Hill Active Living by Design Partnership Advisory Committee

Foy

Greene

Harrison

Hill

Kleinschmidt

Strom

Verkerk

Ward

Wiggins

TOTAL

Esphur E. Foster

Ab-

sent

Other

c. Personnel Appeals Committee. The Council appointed Rebecca Clark.

Council Members

Personnel Appeals Committee

Foy

Greene

Harrison

Hill

Kleinschmidt

Strom

Verkerk

Ward

Wiggins

TOTAL

Anita Badrock

Ab-

Rebecca Clark

sent

Charles Collier

Bernard Law

Pikuei Tu

d. Stormwater Management Utility Advisory Board.

Council members agreed by consensus to defer Item 14d.

Item 16 - Reserved for Discussion of Consent Agenda Items if Necessary

Council members agreed by consensus to defer Items 4b and 5a to the next meeting.

The meeting adjourned at 11:04 p.m.