DRAFT SUMMARY
MINUTES OF A BUSINESS MEETING
OF THE CHAPEL HILL TOWN COUNCIL
Monday, November 20, 2006, AT 7:00
p.m.
Present were Mayor Kevin Foy, Mayor pro tem Bill
Strom, Council Member Laurin Easthom, Council Member Sally Greene,
Council Member Ed Harrison, Council Member Cam Hill, Council Member
Mark Kleinschmidt, Council Member Bill Thorpe, and Council Member
Jim Ward.
Staff members present were Town Manager Rober L. Stancil, Deputy
Town Manager Florentine Miller, Assistant Town Manager Bruce
Heflin, Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos, Town Information Officer
Catherine Lazorko, Mayoral Aide Adam Schaefer, Development
Coordinator Gene Poveromo, Planning Director J.B. Culpepper, Long
Range and Transportation Coordinator David Bonk, Principal Long
Range Planner Gordon Sutherland, Engineer Services Manager Kumar
Neppalli, Finance Director Kay Johnson, Interim Parks and
Recreation Director Bill Webster, Financial Reporting Manager
Jeanne Tate, Accounting Services Manager Rhonda Sommer, Fire Chief
Dan Jones, Public Works Director Bill Letteri, Landscape
Superintendent Robert Minnick, and Town Clerk Sabrina Oliver.
2.
|
Public Forums and Hearings:
|
a.
|
Public Forum: Draft Chapel Hill 2035 Long Range
Transportation Plan Socio-Economic Projections.
|
Long Range and Transportation Planner David Bonk said
the Durham, Chapel Hill, Carrboro urban area had begun the
process of revising the Long Range Transportation Plan for
the region. The current plan included socio-economic
projections for the year 2030, and the revised plan
will include those projections up to 2035, he
explained.
Through that process each of the urban areas has requested
that each of the member jurisdictions prepare a new set of
projections out to 2035 using a process that would be
consistent with all jurisdictions in terms of identifying
areas for new development or redevelopment, Mr. Bonk
explained. This region is doing this revision in
conjunction with the Raleigh area and will have a
completely new set of projections for 2035 by early spring,
Mr. Bonk added. These projections will be used as part
of the 2035 Regional Transportation Plan, he said. The
projections will also be part of many ancillary uses such
as the regional blue print analysis, headed up by Triangle
J Council of Governments, as well as Chapel Hill’s Long
Range Transit Plan for the Chapel Hill-Carrboro
communities, Mr. Bonk added.
Mr. Bonk said the Council’s memorandum summarizes the
process used to develop the 2030 plan and comparisons
between the new set of projections and the 2030
plan. The projections are predicated on the
development and implementation of transit-oriented
development corridors throughout the Town, he
said.
Mr. Bonk used maps to show the corridors along which
the projections were made. He said that land use
projections were located along the corridors in various
locations. He said staff also reviewed
transit corridors, noting that as transit service was
expanded further development could be expected, and bus
stops may need to be consolidated to increase efficiency in
transit services. Mr. Bonk said areas where
development or redevelopment could occur also had been
identified.
Mr. Bonk said projections were also provided for the
downtown area, and the Carolina North area. He said after
public comment is received by the Council tonight, staff
recommends adoption of the projections at the December
4 meeting. He said the projections would be compiled by the
Metropolitan Planning Organization and be put out for
public comment in January or February of 2007.
Council Member Easthom asked if that projection through the
Horace Williams tract assumes a north-south road as
proposed. Mr. Bonk said no, that it was a high capacity
express bus route through what they assume will be a large
park and ride facility and the I-40/15-501 area for people
to take buses to Carolina North. He said it could be a
dedicated bus lane.
Council Member Easthom said she personally would
not support a north-south corridor through the Horace
Williams tract since they had not decided on what was going
there at this point. Mayor Foy said that corridor had been
removed from the plan. Mr. Bonk said that right-of-way had
been used expressly for a high capacity bus lane. He said
the regional plan included that corridor. He said
everything that was shown on the map was a part of the
adopted plan and nothing was a new proposal, however,
if the Council wanted that removed they could do so.
Mr. Bonk said the original set of projections that had been
done for Carolina North in the 2030 plan had been
predicated on the site plan that was done by Aire
Saint Gross and the 50-year build out for that site. He
said they used one half of the projections that had been
part of that plan. Mr. Bonk said the University
has said the projections will change but they do not
know to what extent or in which direction they will be
different.
Council Member Ward asked what the deadline was for
modifications to the 2035 plan and the conclusion of the
Long Range Transit Plan. Mr. Bonk said the 2035
projections are scheduled to be approved by the TAC in
March 2007. The Long Range Transit plan will be a
nine-month project beginning in January, which provides an
opportunity for close coordination of the two, Mr.
Bonk said. He said he saw no reason why the
consultants could not proceed immediately.
Council Member Ward said the north-south corridor through
the Horace Williams property, whether it is there or
not, is a significant element of the 2035 plan,
and seemed like it was putting the cart before the
horse with the Long Range Transit plan, and trying to
identify how existing corridors can integrate traffic.
Mr. Bonk said one of the first tasks of the Long Range
Transit Plans is for the committee to delineate transit
corridors and if the committee decides they don’t want to
show the express bus corridor out of the Carolina North
property then that is something they could do.
Mr. Phillip Duchatel said the trend with development was
going outside of town.
Council Member Jim Ward MOVED,
SECONDED BY Mayor pro tem Bill Strom, TO Receive and
Refer the comments to the Town Manager. THE
MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
b.
|
Public Forum: To Consider a Potential Change in
Cablevision Public Access Fees Paid by Cable
Television Customers.
|
Town Information Officer Catherine Lazorko said that each
year the Council decides to maintain, increase or decrease
the cable-vision public access fee. She said the
customary three percent increase would result in the
fee being increased from .76 to .78 cents per customer per
month beginning in January 2007. The increase would raise
an additional $3,615 for the Peoples Channel next year, she
said. Following the public forum, she said staff
would return with the follow-up report at the
December 4 meeting.
Chad Johnson, Peoples Channel representative, said state
and federal legislation could result in changes to the fees
and franchise agreement. He said because of that
legislation this may be the last time the Council could
approve an increase in the public access fee. He
said the Peoples Channel had increased programming over the
past year. He encouraged the Council to support the
increase.
Marion Turner expressed concern about programming she
described as immoral.
David Casper said he had worked in 1998 to get the Peoples
Channel. He said he was an advocate of public television.
What we have is something that is uncensored, he said,
with no restrictions except for commercials and that
which is determined to be obscene. Mr. Casper said the
accomplishments made with the money the Peoples
Channel gets from the Town, of a total budget of
$150,000, is quite an achievement. He said programming has
more than doubled in the past three years. He said he would
encourage the Town to recognize that what we have here in
Chapel Hill does not exist in most
municipalities.
Council Member Jim Ward MOVED,
SECONDED BY Council Member Sally Greene, TO Receive and
Refer the comments to the Town Manager. This item will
return to the Council on December 4, 2006. THE MOTION
WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
c.
|
Public Forum: Downtown Development Initiative.
|
Mayor pro tem Strom, chairman of the Downtown
Development Negotiating Team, said this was the first
time the Council as a group had run a marathon and
hopefully the finish is in sight. He outlined key
milestones in the downtown development initiative. He said
he joined Council in 1999 and under Mayor Rosemary
Waldorf’s leadership had already focused on downtown
and revitalization. He said in 2000 the Council adopted the
Downtown Small Area Plan and included it as part of the new
Comprehensive Plan. In 2002 the Council ran a series of
design workshops where citizens volunteered with groups of
designers for development opportunities for Lots 2 and
5. He said also in 2002 the Council established the
Council Committee on Lots 2 and 5. He said a majority
of Council members served on that committee.
Mayor pro tem Strom said in 2003 after public hearings
were held the Council adopted principles and priorities for
Lot 5 and the downtown development that created
the standard by which it would judge the developments
it would consider. In October 2003, after issuing a Request
for Proposal and Request for Qualifications, the
Council hired John Stainback, he said.
In November 2003, the Council held public sessions where
goals and principles were explained and a community
discussion was held, Mayor pro tem Strom said. By April
2004 the Council had done its own market research and
Stainback had developed a financial plan, and a building
program had been adopted for Lots 2 and 5, he added.
Mayor pro tem Strom said that between April 2004 and
tonight there had been 41 meetings regarding the
development. He said members of the Council Negotiating
Committee were Council Members Cam Hill and Sally Greene,
and that Mayor Foy had helped smooth negotiations. He
said there had been great Council involvement and staff
support from Chris Berndt and Gordon Sutherland, Cal
Horton, John Stainback and Glenn Hardymon, and that Town
Attorney Ralph Karpinos had provided excellent advice.
He said that Ram Development Company had worked
well with Chapel Hill.
Mayor pro tem Strom said that the Town had recently started
a downtown police squad, a streetscape plan, and had
budgeted a public works position for downtown. He said
the Lot 5 project has the potential to be a giant
step forward to revitalize the downtown area. He said it
was down to the best and final offer stage for both sides
and it was important to move forward.
Mr. Stancil said the conceptual plan of
the project, which consists of mixed uses of housing,
retail and parking, is located on the block that
is bounded by W. Franklin Street, Church and W. Rosemary
Streets. The project addresses Council goals by providing
for a sense of community, bringing vitality and life to the
street, reducing dependence on the
automobile, improving public safety and increasing
business activity, he said.
The goals for the project, Mr. Stancil said, would create a
vibrant downtown, and meet the Council’s affordable
housing goal and goals for energy efficiency and
sustainability, at a minimal risk to the Town, by putting
the risk on the developer.
Mr. Stancil said the project was consistent with the
Council’s goals in the Comprehensive Plan and Small Area
Plan. He said the project is the Council’s number one goal
this year, and there were many opportunities for public
input into the project. He said the plans had been reviewed
by the dean of the NC State University College of Design,
to insure its consistency with excellent design
principles.
Mr. Stancil said the revised proposal only
develops Lot 5, and provides a mix of uses, including
28,540 square feet of retail space, 137 residential
units, with 21 of those being affordable units, with
underground parking replacing surface parking, 27,000
square feet of public plaza, and one percent for art.
The developer’s responsibilities in the project, Mr.
Stancil said, was to construct a $75 million project, with
a requirement of placing $12.5 million in equity into the
project, and lease the project for 99 years from the Town
for one dollar a year, and within 50 years have the right
to acquire the air rights to the project for $2 million,
and the developer will put $200,000 into the project for
programming of the public space.
Mr. Stancil said the Town’s role was to replace surface
parking with underground parking, and to play a regulatory
role in the Special Use Permit process.
Mr. Stancil said funds needed were $7.245 million for
161 parking spaces to replace surface
parking, with the first year of debt service on that
being $725,000. He said the Town would borrow the money and
sources of paying back those funds would come from property
taxes from the project and sales taxes from the retail
portion of the project, and incremental additions to
parking revenues by increased activity. He said
positive cash flow to the Town was estimated by year four
and the negative cash flow to the Town in the first years
would be absorbed by the funds in the off-street parking
fund.
Mr. Stancil said public benefits of the project was that it
advances the Council’s number one goal of adding residents
to downtown, connects the east and west ends of downtown,
provides affordable housing in Land Trust, provides a
public plaza, and stimulates development in the
downtown.
He said the next steps were to receive public comment
tonight, with the Council to consider action at its
December 4 meeting on whether to authorize the Manager and
the Town Attorney to negotiate an agreement with the
developer to return back to the Council within 60 days,
then the Special Use process would begin.
Bernadette Keefe, a 20-year resident of Chapel Hill,
said she lives near Lot 5. She said she believed the
project would greatly benefit the community. She said the
development would be positive for downtown and it needed
revitalization to survive. She said this would be a
flagship project that would bring residents to
downtown.
Will Raymond said he was not against change, but he
did not believe the project was a good deal for the
community. He said it was out of scale with surrounding
buildings. He said the Town could not afford this
project. Mr. Raymond said the Wallace Deck
redevelopment was needed but now it was off the table. He
said the secured debt would go against the
Town’s bond ratings.
Bill Camp said the project was a waste of public resources.
He said the project had gone from $.5 million to
$7.5 and that presented a real problem that would
come out of taxpayers’ pockets one way or another.
Phillip Duchastel said the nutshell for this project was to
revitalize the downtown area. He said it was a great
project, but in the wrong place. He said a quaint little
town cannot allow a project like this to go
forward. He said it would ruin the character of
downtown. He asked the Council to reconsider the vision. He
said there was a need for more vitality, but move it
out a little further, similar to what has been done on
Rosemary Street. He said that development would have
been a disaster on Franklin Street.
Liz Parham, speaking on behalf of the Downtown Partnership,
said they were in support of the project. She said just the
design phase had already created interest in residential
and mixed use development. She said residential development
downtown is a key component to a thriving downtown. She
said the project would add retail space, and public space,
and the Partnership would be the Town’s partner in the
project.
Josh Gurlitz said he had been a long time advocate of
enhancing vitality downtown. He said Chapel Hill was
fortunate to have a wonderful town center. He said it was
challenging for business to survive downtown, and Chapel
Hill had not been successful in maintaining residential
development there. He said the Franklin Hotel will bring
people downtown. He said the whole notion of the project
was sustainability personified.
Tom Jensen said he would really like to live
in the new project. He said he commutes to
Raleigh by TTA everyday, takes the bus to work, and
meets his daily needs by walking. He said currently
there was nowhere he could walk in 20 minutes to buy a
gallon of milk. He said he did not want to own a car. He
said it would be a horrible shame at this point to let the
project die, because it would improve the quality of
life in downtown Chapel Hill.
Anita Badrock said she supported the Lot 5 effort. She said
it was one of the most valuable pieces of real estate in
this community. She said the project would bring a good
return on the investment. She said it would provide
economic sustainability, increased tax base, and more
people. She said the project would reduce reliance on
automobiles, it would be an energy efficient LEEDS building
project, and would have 40 percent as open space. Ms.
Badrock said Chapel Hill needs people downtown, and
that would improve safety.
Scott Radway, former Planning Board
member, said the Town could get busy dying
or get busy living. He said he thought the project would
compliment Chapel Hill.
Laurie Paolicelli, executive director of the Chapel
Hill/Orange County Tourist Center, said 1.5 million
tourists leave a lot of money in Chapel Hill. She said they
were here mostly because of UNC and looking for
entertainment. She said downtowns like Chapel
Hill’s need something to attract people to its core.
She said Durham’s Southpoint Mall comes up more
than they would like to see, and Chapel Hill was
losing money that should stay here. She said the Center
supported the project.
Alan Rimer said the Council should keep in
mind the types of living quarters that will be put in these
structures. He asked the Council if they would live there
and said he was asking this because much of the living
quarters could end up as student housing. He said they
should ensure quality of construction inside as much as
outside, with heavy fire walls so you cannot hear the
party next door. He also encouraged the Council to
incorporate legal covenants so owners of the units must
occupy the units. He said he believes this is
the right project at the right time.
Janet Kagan said the project was a great investment
for downtown and she would encourage the Council
to release Lot 2 and Wallace Deck and put them out for
proposals. She said this development was important
for a pedestrian friendly community, and she thanked them
for the public art efforts.
Joyce Brown said the buildings were too tall, and the
development was too dense, and solar technology should be
incorporated. She said the 99-year lease might be legal but
is frightening. She noted changing community needs, and
said that future generations will be stuck with it. She
asked what it would mean to taxpayers in an economic
downturn. She asked the Council to vote no on the project,
and if they could not do so, at least
incorporate the energy methods required of the
University.
Dave Hartsell, a UNC professor, said he loved the
development, but its negotiations had been conducted behind
closed doors and the investment had increased. He said it
began as a $1 million Town investment and now it
was at $8 million. He said the project was not revenue
neutral. He said he would not want to invest his money in
the project because it seemed too risky.
David Godschalk, planning professor, said that all
development projects start out rosy. He said the
project had been kept alive by continuous shuffling of
cards. He said no Council member had offered any
objections. He said if something seems too good to be true,
then perhaps it is.
Lance Alexander said he had the opportunity to start a
small business downtown, but there were not enough people
living downtown to sustain retail. He said he was seeing
some development on Rosemary Street, but there
were all kinds of gaps on Franklin Street. He
said he hears downtown businesses talking about how more
people need to live and work downtown for it to be
successful.
Roger Perry said he respected Mr. Godschalk and Mr.
Hartsell, but disagreed with them. He said he believes it
is a sustainable project, with significant affordable
housing and open space. He said he believes it
is economically a good deal, even if the projections
are optimistic. He said the development would not only be
good for downtown, but for all of the Town.
Gene Pease, a member of the Planning Board, said he
strongly supported the project and encouraged the Council
to move forward. Robert Dowling, with Orange County
Land Trust, thanked the Council for its commitment to
affordable housing, and said he was looking forward to
working with the Town to make 15 percent affordable housing
work. He said Chapel Hill was growing and it needed to take
on more density and height. He said there was nowhere else
to go if they maintained the rural buffer.
Scott Kovens said construction costs are
only going to increase and urged the Council to go
forward with the project.
Don Stanford said the biggest problem we
are facing today is quality of life. He said the Town
was fixated with a magic bullet. He said in
the 1960s the Bank of America building was sold as a
magic bullet. He said it was a major eyesore, and was
the reason Chapel Hill has Granville Towers. He said
there were thousands of citizens who live downtown and
their issues are not being addressed. Mr.
Stanford said this project is the wrong project at the
wrong time and does not solve anything. He said this
was another mistake in line with a lot of other
mistakes. He asked the Council to help those citizens who
live downtown to maintain a strong downtown, because they
were the people who supported downtown.
Council Member Thorpe said a major concern was downtown
safety. He said he wanted the underground
parking segment of the construction to be well lit to
ensure citizen safety.
Council Member Jim Ward MOVED,
SECONDED BY Mayor pro tem Bill Strom, TO Receive and
Refer the comments to the Council and staff. This item
will return to the Council with a recommendation on
December 4, 2006. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY
(9-0).
3.
|
Petitions by citizens and announcements by
Council members.
|
a.
|
Petitions by citizens on items not on the
agenda.
|
1.
|
Inclusionary Zoning Task Force regarding
the Task Force Report.
|
Council Member Greene said the Council Committee was to
come up with an ordinance for inclusionary zoning. She
said the report was what the committee had developed to
date. She said the committee wants to move it to the
next phase. She said some committee members would
speak.
Robert Dowling said he went into the committee
believing he knew everything about inclusionary zoning
and found he did not know much of anything. He
said it was so complex that a professional was needed
to determine how it would affect other parts of the
Land Use Management Ordinance (LUMO).
Scott Radway thanked Council members who participated
and supported the effort. He said one of the
committee’s recommendations was that the Council hire
a consultant to work with staff, the
Council, and the Planning Board to help get integration
of details so that they do function. He said the
other part of the recommendation dealt with the
integration of equity. Mr. Radway said one of
the principles the Council had practiced was to allow
for an increase in intensity with the inclusion of
affordable housing. He said that was one of the
principles they recommended be maintained as part of
the inclusionary zoning.
Sara Donahue said as a committee member she had been
involved with efforts to improve the lives of low
income residents. She said she had three comments on
the proposed ordinance. First, she said, was the
importance of looking at some form of inclusionary
zoning policy to attack the problem of
affordable housing. She said if the community did not
act on this it was in danger of becoming an exclusive
community where only a subset of the community could
afford to live. Second, she said, she wanted to
emphasize that the development of an ordinance would
take considerably more effort and recommended hiring
a consultant to complete the ordinance.
Finally, she encouraged the Council to create an
advisory panel on how to make Chapel
Hill more affordable and think of ways to meet the
needs of people with varieties of wealth.
Council Member Greene requested
that staff comment on the work that had been
completed and on the possibility of hiring a
consultant, what the process would look like,
and the staff’s opinion on a standing
committee. She said the item could come back in
January for a public hearing. Council Member
Greene said the work is important and
necessary.
Mayor pro tem Bill Strom MOVED,
SECONDED BY Council Member Jim Ward, TO Receive and
Refer the petition to the staff with the requests
from Council Member Greene. THE MOTION WAS
ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
Mayor Foy announced that due to the large number of
people wishing to speak on specific items, he was
moving agenda items #7 and #9 to first and second
on main discussion, followed by the report on the audit
and the remainder of the agenda.
2.
|
Petition from Citizens for the Preservation
of Lincoln Arts Center.
|
Hunter Levinson gave a history of the Lincoln Center
pottery program. She said the program was 25 years old,
self supporting, and that materials and maintenance are
covered by fees. It is the only Town supported arts
center in Chapel Hill, she said, adding that it offers
the only therapeutic play classes for special children
in the community. Ms. Levinson said any member of
the community can participate regardless of income. She
said there have been 8,500 participants in the
program since it began. The heart of the history are
the stories and notes from participants and why they do
not want to lose this program, she said, noting she
would pass those along to the Council.
Barbara Tepperman, a student at the Center, told of her
experience in the program and how it had positively
influenced her life. She said the sliding fee scale
made it possible for her to participate.
Carol Barrow also spoke on behalf of the Center, noting
that she and her family had moved here from New York
right after 911 at a time when her children were not
doing well. She read a letter from the parent of
a participant and how the therapeutic classes had
benefited their child.
Marcus Bolin, a medical student, spoke of how working
with clay had helped him through personal tragedies and
his long hours in medical school. He said the program
was invaluable and he had made many friends at the
Center and saw the positive effects the class has
on its participants.
Will Raymond said he was thrilled to represent the
program. He said this was the best program around and
he heartily supports it. He said this was the only
hands-on program in Chapel Hill. He said it was the
only program that served autistic children and
handicapped children. He said he had a list of 20
facilities that could accommodate the program. He said
the community park building, that houses the
Parks and Recreation department, has needed a new
location for years. He said that department could be
relocated and the Lincoln Center program could be
housed in the Community Park building.
Council Member Mark
Kleinschmidt MOVED, SECONDED BY Council Member Sally
Greene, TO Receive and Refer the petition to the
Town Manager. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY
(9-0).
3.
|
Petition regarding the Completion and
Priority of Widening Shoulders on
Particular Roads.
|
Blair Pollock said he began talking to Council about
this issue in 1986. He asked the Council to work with
the Town of Carrboro, the Metropolitan Planning
Organization, and the Department of Transportation
about finishing construction of the remaining bike
lanes along Estes Drive. He said this was the key link
between the two towns and he hoped the Town could find
the funding.
Mark Chilton, former Carrboro mayor, said the estimates
on costs were around $500,000 which would be well
within the range allocated to the Seawell School Road
project. He said the other entities could identify
funds. He said he saw the opportunity to build the
entire bike lane, which would promote biking and create
a connection from Umstead Drive to Carrboro, to
Bolin Creek greenway and University Mall. Mr.
Chilton said if the entities could agree before
the end of the year, the project could be reviewed in
the draft Transportation Improvement Program. He said
after the end of the year it would become a bit more
laborious. Mr. Chilton said he would like to see this
done while he could still bike. He asked the Council to
move forward on this effort, adding that it would be an
excellent trade-off for the Seawell project.
Heidi Perry, Carrboro Transportation Advisory Board
member, said she had been working on this for 20 years
and she wanted to see it completed while she could
still bicycle. She requested that the Council move
forward on the project, also noting that it would be an
excellent trade-off for the Seawell School Road
project.
Mayor pro tem Bill Strom MOVED,
SECONDED BY Council Member Jim Ward, TO Receive and
Refer the petition to the staff. THE MOTION
WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
b.
|
Petitions by citizens on items on the agenda.
None
|
c.
|
Announcements by Council members.
|
Council Member Kleinschmidt announced that he had recently
represented Chapel Hill and the state at the Gay and
Lesbian Conference in Houston, TX.
4.
|
Consent agenda: action items
(R-1).
|
Council Member Thorpe requested that agenda items #4d and #4f
be removed from the Consent Agenda for discussion.
Council Member Thorpe asked that Fire Chief Dan Jones explain
the SAFER grant. Chief Jones said the SAFER grant was part of
the Homeland Security money that was put in place years ago. He
said the current administration had de-funded several of
those programs, but Congress had worked to keep them alive
although at a lower funding level. He said the SAFER grant
was based on the COPS program of the late 1990s. With
the funds being made available to recruit volunteer fire
fighters and career firefighters for smaller and mid-sized
communities based on need. He said they had applied last year
but were unsuccessful. Chief Jones said this year the
department received a $1.2 million grant that would
pay for 12 firefighters on a cost declining basis over four
years. He said the grant provided cost sharing with
90 percent federal funding for four years, then in the fifth
year the Town would pick up the expense of those
positions. He said the grant covers salaries
and benefits.
Mayor Foy said that Chief Jones was aggressive in locating
funding and is successful in educating the public concerning
the importance of fire protection.
Council Member Greene requested that agenda item #4i be
discussed at the end of the meeting.
Council Member Thorpe asked for an explanation of agenda item
#4f. Mr. Neppalli said staff had received a number of
complaints about signage, in downtown particularly, and
that the existing signs are not in
compliance. He said staff was developing a new sign
program for the downtown area and improving the street name
sign program for the entire Town.
Mayor Foy noted that the Town was putting sidewalks in on Estes
Drive, and at the Post Office. He said people want to know how
those projects are getting funded, and he believes it is
important that citizens know that it is tax dollars funding
those projects.
Council Member Ward said one area that is lacking
signage is on major roads and the bypass at the
cloverleafs. He said prior to exits off these roads there
are no signs indicating where the exit takes the driver. Mr.
Neppalli said that was also being looked at.
Council Member Ward asked if the signage for the bicycle and
pedestrian routes could also be made consistent. Mr. Neppalli
said they would make sure the signs were consistent in the
future.
Council Member Bill Thorpe MOVED,
SECONDED BY Council Member Mark Kleinschmidt, TO Adopt R-1
as amended with item #4i removed. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED
UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
Council Member Greene requested that agenda item #5g be removed
for discussion. Council Member Ward requested that agenda item
#5f be removed for discussion.
By Council consensus the above items were continued to the
December 4, 2006 business meeting.
Will Raymond said, with regard to the update on wireless
initiative, he was pleased to see the direction taken by the
Technology Task force and asked how much public participation
was anticipated.
Council Member Easthom said Council needed to
determine the makeup of the committee that would carry
this out. She asked Mr. Stancil when the report
would come back to the Council. Mr. Stancil said it would
return in February. Council Member Easthom asked if the
committee makeup would be available before then. Mr. Stancil
said it would.
All other information reports were accepted by consensus of the
Council.
9.
|
Southeast Chapel Hill/Southwest Durham
Collector Plan (R-11).
|
Long Range and Transportation Planner David Bonk said this item
was a follow-up report in response to comments and questions
received at the October 18 public forum.
Mr. Bonk said questions had arisen concerning the need for
extending sidewalks on Lancaster Drive, and that staff
supported pursuing that. He said concern had also been
expressed about the extension of Kilkenny connecting to
Nottingham Drive and the impact of more traffic on all of those
roads. He said traffic calming measures had been implemented on
Lancaster and Nottingham. He said the other collector in
question was a connection onto Pope Road north of Ephesus
Road. He said all three of those roads would impact directly
into Chapel Hill.
Mr. Bonk said questions were raised about utilizing George
King Road as an arterial collector connecting Southwest Durham
Drive and Meadowmont Lane. He said there were no plans for
expansion of the two-lane portion of Meadowmont Lane.
Concerning the possible realignment of Southwest Durham Drive
to George King Road, Mr. Bonk said at the most recent TAC
meeting, Durham had requested an amendment to the Plan using
the existing George King Road as the realignment of Southwest
Durham Drive. He said the TAC agreed to the proposal in concept
but has not yet received comment from other units and that was
not expected until after January. He said they were willing to
consider this because it would still connect to the north and
northeast across Farrington Drive and I-40 and continue to
connect in the southwest to Meadowmont Lane as outlined in the
Plan.
Mr. Bonk said that the realignment of Southwest Durham Road and
Meadowmont Lane were not part of the decision making process
that other units had been requested to comment on.
Mr. Bonk said there were also comments regarding the lack of
quantitative analysis particularly of the collector system in
Chapel Hill. He said the Plan did include a qualitative
analysis. He added that he did not believe there
would be any significant traffic impacts due to any
of these alignments. He said once the system is implemented,
Chapel Hill residents would find it easier going east using
this collector street system rather than traveling north or
south.
He said questions had also arisen concerning the proposal to
construct collector streets across I-40 north and south of US
15-501. He said this proposal was consistent with the
approved US 15-501 Transportation Master Plan, which included
recommendations to provide alternative connections between the
four quadrants of the US 15-501 and I-40 interchange to
reduce anticipated congestion along US 15-501. He said the
collector street south of US 15-501 differs from the
Master Plan in that it proposes two separate crossings for
the roadway and the fixed guideway corridor.
Mr. Bonk said staff believes this may be unrealistic,
recognizing the cost of a bridge and the likelihood of
securing funding for the bridge if it combined both
the roadway and the corridor.
Mr. Bonk said staff recommended that implementation of the
collector street connections to Chapel Hill should be
coordinated to ensure that multiple connections will disperse
traffic along alternative routes; that the MPO should provide
funding from the Surface Transportation Program Direct
Allocation program to implement traffic calming, including
bicycle and pedestrian improvements along existing streets that
are part of the proposed collector street network; that the MPO
should revise the Memorandum of Understanding to correct any
inconsistencies between state statutes and the provisions of
the memorandum; and that the draft Collector Streets Plan
should be revised to realign the proposed collector street
crossing of I-40, south of US 15-501 to conform to the proposed
fixed guideway crossing.
Bill Sax, president of the Oaks Villas
Homeowners Association, deferred his time to Dr. Ed
Kaiser.
Dr. Ed Kaiser said he was representing the residents of the
Oaks Villas. He said that future development would be
creating traffic impacts on Lancaster Drive, not the creation
of the plan. He said they commended all of those
involved in developing the plan. He said a plan should address
all issues that would affect the plan. He said for this
reason they believe the plan fails to reach its potential and
that the problem was with Kimley-Horn. He said as a
result, planners were backed into a corner to support an
inferior plan. He recommended that the plan be sent
back to staff for revision. He said clarification was also
needed concerning the meaning of coordination of multiple
intersections to disperse traffic.
Phil Post said the plan was flawed. He submitted a
resolution to the Council outlining concerns. He said
the plan was putting pipelines in Chapel Hill so everyone could
escape to Durham and spend their money there.
William Dunk, a resident of the Oaks, said the plan would
result in irresponsible development and asked what Chapel Hill
would get out of the plan. He said the plan would increase
traffic, pollution, stormwater, and erosion. He told the
Council they did not have the data to make a responsible
decision.
Morris Waller, a Meadowmont resident, said the plan was
flawed and lacked analytical information. He questioned how the
Council could ensure that the plan was the proper
investment.
COUNCIL MEMBER HARRISON READ THE RESOLUTION HE HAD SUBMITTED
EARLIER IN THE EVENING. HE MOVED, SECONDED BY MAYOR PRO TEM TO
ADOPT THE RESOLUTION.
Mayor Foy asked if this was in addition to another resolution
in regard to other roads, noting that this addressed only
George King Road. Council Member Harrison said his
resolution addresses Meadowmont Lane.
After further discussion by Council members, Mayor
Foy said he believed the motion and second should be
withdrawn, with no further action taken until the item comes
back to Council on December 4.
Council Member Harrison withdrew the motion.
6.
|
Comprehensive Annual Financial
Report.
|
By Council consensus this item was continued to the December 4,
2006 business meeting.
7.
|
Fairway Hill Subdivision: Application for
Preliminary Plat Approval.
|
Development Coordinator Gene Poveromo said this item was
continued from the October 18 public hearing. He said
it involved a four-lot subdivision on the east side of
Pinehurst Drive adjacent to Meadowmont. He said the
item had not been before the Transportation Board, which is
scheduled to meet on November 30, 2006. Mr.
Poveromo said the Council could receive comments from
neighbors tonight, and the Transportation Board’s comments
would be referred back to staff and the item would return
to Council on December 4, 2006.
Mr. Poveromo said the key issue was the street alignment. He
said there was the applicant’s proposal and an alternate
proposal. He said the applicant’s proposes an intersection at
the existing driveway with the street curving to the south
creating an open area to the north that the applicant
proposes as a recreation area. He said this complies
with the subdivision ordinance and the Engineering
Department accepts the intersection. Mr.
Poveromo said the Town was recommending payment in lieu
for a portion of the recreation area that is not satisfied
by the two proposed pedestrian paths. He said the applicant was
proposing recreation area of about 13,000 square feet and two
pedestrian pathways. He said staff was proposing payment in
lieu instead of acceptance of this area as recreation.
Mr. Poveromo said there was discussion of an alternate
proposal. He said it shows the road coming in at the same site
and ending in a cul-de-sac. He said the Planning Board did not
accept this alignment.
Mr. Poveromo said the applicant’s proposal complies with the
subdivision ordinance.
Megan Crunkleton, representing Gene Rayfield, owner of 1027
Pinehurst Drive, and the developer of Fairway Hill, explained
the history of the application. She said the compromise the
Town accepted met their request except for the recreation area
payment in lieu. She said the area meets the requirements as
outlined in the Land Use Management Ordinance. She said she was
requesting that Council adopt Resolution A with an alternative
for the recreation requirement because the area is outside the
Rural Conservation Buffer, flat, and dry. Ms. Crunkleton
said the area could accommodate many recreation activities. She
said the area was also contiguous with the Meadowmont soccer
fields. She said this area, the sidewalks, and
bicycle and pedestrian paths supplement the recreation area in
a more personal way to benefit the residents in the new
community and adjacent communities. She said the applicant’s
proposed space and design meet the ordinance requirements, and
she questioned the justification of the payment in lieu
when the area supports active recreation uses.
Ms. Crunkleton asked that the Council adopt Resolution A
with an alternate to recreation.
Art Chansky, 1031 Pinehurst Drive resident, said he opposed the
entrance for reasons of encroachment upon Meadowmont neighbors.
He contended that the application was not in compliance. He
said the road would create safety and traffic issues. He said
100 plus trees would be cut down, and that the road would
create a dam effect resulting in a stormwater management issue.
He asked the Council to send the request back to staff for
study.
Tony Lindsay said there were two problems. He said one was
the number of trees that would be cut down and the stormwater
issue. He said it was a beautiful piece of land. He said there
was an existing natural pathway where the entrance should
be. He said his backyard has turned into a playground for
school age children, and that construction of the road, within
five feet of his backyard, would create an unnecessary
safety hazard.
Mayor Foy said no action would be taken tonight. He said staff
needs to look at this more closely to see
if the request meets the ordinance. He said
the safety concerns were clearly an issue.
Ms. Culpepper recommended the item be continued to the January
8, 2007 meeting.
Council Member Ward said he wanted to how the Land Use
Management Ordinance addresses the placement of the entrance
road, and if it does not then he would like to see it
incorporated at another date.
Mayor pro tem Bill Strom MOVED,
SECONDED BY Council Member Sally Greene, TO Defer action
and continue the hearing on January 8, 2007. THE MOTION
WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
8.
|
Acceptance of Bid for Homestead Park
Aquatics Center (R-10).
|
Council Member Ward asked what had happened to the solar
hot water. He said he thought that was something that was
very important. Mr. Webster said LEEDS certification was
not possible within cost considerations.
Council Member Ward asked if the contingency fund
could be cut or would it be available for additional
technology he would like to see in this building. Mr. Heflin
said based on experience staff would not recommend cutting
contingency. Council Member Ward questioned the use of
rain water. Mr. Heflin said that would be used to flush toilets
and to irrigate.
Council Member Easthom asked about the underwater
lights for the pool. She said she supported having the
lights. Mr. Webster said he had done a lot of research on
these and they are an aesthetics issue. He said the
Triangle Sportsplex does not use them except for parties.
Meadowmont pool has them but rarely uses them, he
said. Mr. Webster said as long as there are overhead
lights underwater lights are not needed for safety. Council
Member Easthom said she still wanted the underwater
lighting.
Council Member Thorpe said the bids are very, very close
and he would like to accept the best bid, not necessarily the
lowest bid. Mr. Heflin said staff believes the recommended
contractor was the best low bidder.
Mayor pro tem Strom entered a friendly amendment to add the
underwater lights. Mayor Foy and Council Member Easthom agreed
as long as the addition was the lowest on the list of
amenities.
Council Member Jim Ward MOVED, SECONDED
BY Council Member Bill Thorpe, TO Adopt R-10 as
amended. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
10.
|
Process for Revision of the Comprehensive
Plan (R-12).
|
Principal Long Range Planner Gordon Sutherland
said staff had gathered comments from the Planning Board
concerning revisions to the Comprehensive Plan. He said
Council memorandum included a matrix which outlined
staff responses to Planning Board questions and comments
regarding the plan. Mr. Sutherland said staff
was recommending that staff redraft sections of the plan
according to Planning Board considerations. He said staff was
also recommending periodic updates to the plan, on a quarterly
basis. At the end of the process there would be a public
hearing addressing proposed revisions, and the entire
redrafting process would be done in 2007, Mr. Sutherland
added.
Amy Ryan, a member of the Community Design Commission, said the
commission would like to see a more specific vision for
development and concrete guidelines. She said development scale
and density have increased, and the Town was entering a
critical point, and was in danger of losing
its distinctive character. She said putting just one
inappropriate building in an area could lead to another,
creating a domino effect. She said key areas of concern were
the Glenn Lennox area, West Rosemary Street, and the area
between Hillsborough Street and Martin Luther King, Jr.
Blvd. Ms. Ryan said the commission had no standard by
which to judge projects. She said the City of Seattle has
guidelines about identifying the character of neighborhoods and
how to maintain them. She said these would be valuable
documents for the commission and for developers. She
said without such guidelines, development will take on a life
of its own.
Community Design Commission member Chris Culbreth said the Lot
5 building would be a key building. He cautioned that
developers will see that building and come here to build more
like it. He said he did not have a negative opinion about
students, but Rosemary Street was all students, with no
professionals living there. He said the Lot 5 building would
set a precedent. Mr. Culbreth asked the Council to
give a conscious effort to see that Lot 5 is built. He said his
concern was the massing of those buildings and how they
would function.
Council Member Jim Ward MOVED, SECONDED
BY Mayor pro tem Bill Strom, TO Adopt R-12. THE
MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
Mayor Foy requested that the Seattle design
guidelines be referred to the Planning Board.
Mayor pro tem Bill Strom MOVED,
SECONDED BY Council Member Jim Ward, TO Receive and
Refer the Design guidelines back to staff. THE
MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
a.
|
Orange Water and Sewer Authority Board of
Directors.
|
The Council appointed Alan Rimer and Thatcher Freund to the
OWASA Board of Directors. Alan Rimer will begin his term on
December 31, 2006 and Thatcher Freund will begin his term
on July 1, 2007.
a.
|
By the Mayor and Council Members.
|
Council Member Mark Kleinschmidt
MOVED, SECONDED BY Mayor pro tem Bill Strom, TO Receive and
Refer a petition regarding Empowerment’s efforts to
petition Orange County for exemption from property on the
Midway Office building be referred to the Council for the
December 4, 2006 meeting. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED
UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
The meeting adjourned at 11:45 p.m.