SUMMARY MINUTES OF A BUSINESS MEETING

OF THE CHAPEL HILL TOWN COUNCIL

MONDAY, APRIL 14, 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, Jim Ward and Edith Wiggins.

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, Transportation Director Mary Lou Kuschatka, Assistant Transportation Director Kurt Neufang, Administrative Analyst Bill Stockard, Interim Public Works Director Bill Terry, Urban Forester Curtis Brooks, Transportation Planner David Bonk, Planning Director Roger Waldon, Principal Planner Gene Poveromo, Senior Long Range Planning Coordinator Chris Berndt, and Town Clerk Joyce Smith.

Item 1 - Ceremonies:

a. Proclamation: Sexual Assault Awareness Month.

Mayor Foy read the proclamation, stating that 425 primary and secondary survivors of sexual violence had sought assistance from the Orange County Rape Crisis Center during 2003. One in five North Carolina women have been sexually assaulted at some point in their lives, he read, and there are 5,915 sex offenders and sexual predators registered as living in North Carolina.  Mayor Foy said that the Rape Crisis Center was a non-profit, volunteer agency that had been serving the community since 1974.  He proclaimed April 2004 as Sexual Assault Awareness Month in North Carolina.

Christina Reardon, representing the Orange County Rape Crisis Center, thanked the Town for its willingness to make this proclamation.  She expressed mixed feelings about reaching the 30 year mark, however.  Ms. Reardon said that the Center was proud of all it had done but was continuing to work toward ending the need for a Rape Crisis Center in Chapel Hill.  Ms. Reardon invited Council members to the Center's 30^th Anniversary event on April 20, 2004.  She noted that the event was free and open to the public.  Ms. Reardon thanked the Town for its generous support of the Center's programs.  She distributed teal ribbons and asked Council members to wear them during April to show their support for sexual violence prevention programs.

b. Presentation of Award from Triangle United Way to Transportation Department Employee Laurie Mitchell.

Lindy Flynn, a campaign manager with Triangle United Way, recognized Laurie Mitchell, who had worked with the Transit Department as part of Chapel Hill's United Way Campaign.  Ms. Flynn explained that Chapel Hill had lead the Triangle for contributions to non-profits and grassroots organizations, such as the Orange County Rape Crisis Center.  She then introduced Steve Scroggs to present the award. 

Mr. Scroggs reported that the number of United Way contributors in Chapel Hill had risen from just a few to 110 since Laurie Mitchell took over the obligation.  He described that as a remarkable achievement in the world of giving.  Mr. Scroggs presented Ms. Mitchell with an "Employee Campaign Manager of the Year" award.  Ms. Mitchell thanked Triangle United Way for the award and said that raising funds and getting contributors had been a collaborative effort.  She was accepting the award on behalf of the entire team, she said.

c.  Presentation of Triangle Clean Cities Coalition by Interim Public Works Director Bill Terry.

Mr. Terry, speaking as Executive Committee Chairman for the Triangle Clean Cities Coalition, presented the Town with an award for improving air quality in the region through the extensive use of biodiesel fuel.  He noted that Chapel Hill had been a leader in the region and said that the Coalition had decided it was important to recognize people who had made a serious commitment to air quality, especially during tough budget times.  Mr. Terry listed other local recipients of similar awards and presented a certificate to Mayor Foy for the Town's contribution to reducing harmful transportation emissions and using cleaner burning renewable fuel.

Triangle J Clean Cities Coordinator Anne Taswell expressed her personal appreciation to the Town.  She pointed out that use of biodiesel fuel helps reduce harmful emissions and stimulates the use of a renewable fuel that can be produced in North Carolina.  Ms. Taswell noted that the United States as a whole, which is 87% dependent on petroleum to move its cars and trucks, needs to use more fuels such as biodiesel.  Chapel Hill is leading the way in that respect, she said. 

Item 2 - Public Hearings:  None.

Item 3 - Petitions by Citizens and Announcements by Council Members

a. Petitions by citizens on items not on the agenda.

1. Residents of Shady Lawn Road re Rescheduling the Installation of Sidewalks to an Earlier Date.

COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WARD, TO RECEIVE AND REFER THE PETITION TO THE MANAGER AND ATTORNEY.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

2. Iris Wadsworth re Excessive Noise, Alcohol and Drug Use in the Northside

Neighborhood.

COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK MOVED, SECONDED BY MAYOR PRO TEM WIGGINS, TO RECEIVE AND REFER THE MOTION TO THE MANAGER AND ATTORNEY.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

3.  Residents of Cedar Hills Neighborhood re Request for Traffic Calming Measures.

COUNCIL MEMBER STROM MOVED, SECONDED BY MAYOR PRO TEM WIGGINS, TO RECEIVE AND REFER THE MOTION TO THE MANAGER AND ATTORNEY.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

4.  Michael Collins for Neighborhoods for Responsible Growth, re Various Issues Concerning Horace Williams Citizens Committee Report.

Mr. Collins presented a petition asking the Council to consider scheduling work sessions on the Horace Williams development.  The petition also requested that the Council designate a staff member to work exclusively on issues regarding the Horace Williams tract until all research, information gathering, and process developing is complete.  Moreover, the petition asked Council members to insist that the terms of any development adhere to the neighborhood protection clauses of the Town's Comprehensive Plan.  And it asked them to resist pressure to engage UNC in early meetings on modifications to its Carolina North plan, said Mr. Collins.

COUNCIL MEMBER WARD MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER STROM, TO RECEIVE AND REFER THE PETITION TO THE MANAGER AND ATTORNEY.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

5.  Julie McClintock, re Item #10 - Horace Williams Airport.

Ms. McClintock pointed out that the University might need to determine the future of the Horace Williams Airport before planning anything else for that site.  She urged Council members not to change their position on the airport.  Ms. McClintock stated that UNC had, over time, become a better neighbor as far as the airport was concerned. She pointed out, however, that there had been many crashes and reminded Council members that the School Board had voted unanimously to ask the airport to close.  "There's a long litany of things that have happened on this topic," she said.  Ms. McClintock argued that if the Airport were to remain open there would be a danger of increasing activity.  With four, perhaps five, schools in the area, having an airport nearby is not a good idea, she said.  Ms. McClintock asked Council members to maintain their current policy.     

The Council received the comments by consensus.

Announcements

Council Member Strom stated that several citizens had asked him about the status of the possible rezoning of a portion of the Horace Williams tract to OI-2 and if the Council would take action on that immediately.  He asked Mr. Horton what steps would have to occur for that rezoning to take place.  Council Member Strom also asked for a comment on the timing and longevity of a process for rezoning that tract.  Mr. Horton offered to bring a detailed report back to the Council by the next business meeting on May 10, 2004.   Rezoning can be accomplished quickly if the process is followed in a deliberate and quick manner, Mr. Horton said.

Item 4 - Consent Agenda

COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER STROM, TO ADOPT R-1.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

A RESOLUTION ADOPTING VARIOUS RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES (2004-04-14/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.	Receipt of Paving Petition for Jay Street (R-3).
c.	Award of Bid for a Mini-Pumper Fire Truck (R-4).
d.	Acceptance of Grant for Camp Escapade (R-5).
e.	Amendment to the Council’s 2003-2004 Meeting Calendar (R-6).
f.	Calling a Public Hearing on a Proposed Amendment to the Land Use Management Ordinance to Establish a Demolition by Neglect Ordinance for Structures in the Town’s Historic Districts (R-7).
g.	Appropriation of Payment in Lieu of Recreation Area Funds (O-1).
h.	Schedule for Issuance of Bonds (R-8).
i.	Recommended Guidelines for a Comprehensive Rehabilitation Program for the Northside Neighborhood (R-9).
j.	Response to Petition from the Siena Hotel requesting Further Discussions on the Public-Private Partnership for Development of Pritchard Park (R-10).
k.	Response to Petition from Beechridge Homeowners Association requesting an Amendment to a Special Use Permit (R-11).
l.	Airport Gardens Rehabilitation (R-11.1).

This the 14^th day of April, 2004.

A RESOLUTION NOMINATING APPLICANTS TO VARIOUS ADVISORY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS (2004-04-14/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:

Community Design Commission

Martin Rody

Jaclyn Taaffe

Jonathan Whitney

This the 14^th day of April, 2004.

A RESOLUTION RECEIVING A PETITION FOR PAVING A PORTION OF JAY STREET (2004-04-14/R-3)

WHEREAS, the Town has received a petition for paving a portion of Jay Street without curb and gutter; and

WHEREAS, the petition has been determined to be valid under G.S. 160A-217 (a): and

WHEREAS, the Town does not presently have funds available for this project;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council herewith receives said petition for the paving of a portion of Jay Street.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council directs the Manager to include the Jay Street paving petition funding request for the Council’s consideration during the 2004-2005 budget process.

This the 14^th day of April, 2004.

A RESOLUTION AWARDING BIDS FOR A URBAN INTERFACE UNIT TO THE SNUFFER CORPORATION (2004-04-14/R-4)

WHEREAS, the Town of Chapel Hill solicited formal bids by legal notice in The Chapel Hill News on February 29, 2004, in accordance with G.S. 143-129 for the purchase of a Urban Interface Mini-Pumper; and

WHEREAS, the lowest responsive bid was submitted by The Snuffer Corporation at the bid price of $108,621.43 and met the majority of the specifications established by the Town;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council award the bid for an Urban Interface Unit to The Snuffer Corporation in the amount of $108,621.43.

This the 14^th day of April, 2004.

A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING A $1,000 GRANT FROM THE FRIENDS OF CHAPEL HILL PARKS, RECREATION, AND GREENWAYS; AUTHORIZING THE MANAGER TO INCLUDE THE GRANT IN THE MANAGER’S RECOMMENDED BUDGET FOR FY 2004-05; AND THANKING BOTH THE WACHOVIA FOUNDATION AND THE FRIENDS OF CHAPEL HILL PARKS, RECREATION, AND GREENWAYS (2004-04-14/R-5)

WHEREAS, the Council has implemented a community-based Therapeutic Recreation program for people with disabilities; and

WHEREAS, the community has expressed a desire for a summer camp to serve youth with disabilities in Chapel Hill and Orange County; and

WHEREAS, The Wachovia Foundation has offered to provide $1,000 for Camp Escapade through the efforts of the Friends of Chapel Hill Parks, Recreation, and Greenways;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council accepts a grant in the amount of $1,000 from the Friends of Chapel Hill Parks, Recreation, and Greenways for a summer camp to serve youth with disabilities in Chapel Hill and Orange County.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Manager is hereby authorized to include the $1,000 grant and proposed expenditures in the Manager’s Recommended Budget proposal for FY 2004-05.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council expresses its gratitude to The Wachovia Foundation and the Friends of Chapel Hill Parks, Recreation, and Greenways for their efforts to fund Camp Escapade.

This the 14^th day of April, 2004.

A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE COUNCIL’S 2003-2004 MEETING CALENDAR (2004-04-14/R-6)

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby amends its 2003-2004 meeting calendar to reschedule the June 28^th business meeting to Wednesday, June 30^th.

This the 14^th day of April, 2004.

A RESOLUTION CALLING A PUBLIC HEARING ON A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH DEMOLITION BY NEGLECT REGULATIONS IN THE TOWN’S HISTORIC DISTRICTS (2004-04-14/R-7)

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby calls a public hearing for October 18, 2004, to consider an amendment to the Land Use Management Ordinance to establish demolition by neglect regulations applicable to structures in the Town’s Historic District.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council refers this proposal to the Planning Board and Historic District Commission for a recommendation.

This the 14^th day of April, 2004.

AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND “THE ORDINANCE CONCERNING APPROPRIATIONS AND THE RAISING OF REVENUE FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JULY 1, 2003” (2004-04-14/O-1)

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, 2003” as duly adopted on June 9, 2003 and the same is hereby amended as follows:

This the 14^th day of April, 2004.

A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A SCHEDULE FOR THE ISSUANCE OF GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS (2004-04-14/R-8)

WHEREAS, in November 2003, the voters of Chapel Hill approved $29,360,000 of General Obligation bonds for various capital improvements; and

WHEREAS, on March 30, 2004, the Town Council received a report from the Town Manager regarding the sale of the bonds, and approved in concept the schedule therein recommended;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of Town of Chapel Hill that the Council establishes a schedule for the sale of the $29,360,000 of General Obligation bonds as follows:

	Year of Issuance
	2004	2006	2008	2009	Total
Sidewalks and Streets					5,600,000
A. Sidewalk Construction	600,000	900,000	600,000	500,000	2,600,000
B. Pedestrian Amenities	100,000	100,000	75,000	75,000	350,000
C. Neighborhood Traffic Calming and Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Improvements	300,000	150,000	100,000	100,000	650,000
D. Downtown Streetscape Improvements	500,000	1,000,000	250,000	250,000	2,000,000
Library Facilities	500,000	400,000	7,480,000	7,880,000	16,260,000
Parks/ Recreational Facilities	300,000	4,400,000	300,000		5,000,000
Open Space and Areas	1,200,000	800,000			2,000,000
Public Buildings (Energy Efficiency Projects)	500,000				500,000
Total	4,000,000	7,750,000	8,805,000	8,805,000	29,360,000

This the 14^th day of April, 2004.

A RESOLUTION ADOPTING GUIDELINES FOR A COMPREHENSIVE REHABILITATION PROGRAM FOR THE NORTHSIDE NEIGHBORHOOD (2004-04-14/R-9)

WHEREAS, on April 24, 2003, the Council budgeted $150,000 of 2003-2004 Community Development funds for a comprehensive rehabilitation program for owner-occupied homes in the Northside neighborhood;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill adopts guidelines for a comprehensive rehabilitation program as described in Attachment 1 to the memorandum presented to the Council at its April 14, 2004 Council meeting.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council authorizes Orange County to approve bids on the Town’s behalf for eligible properties in accordance with Comprehensive Rehabilitation Program guidelines.

This the 14^th day of April, 2004.

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MANAGER TO ENTER INTO FURTHER DISCUSSIONS WITH THE MANAGEMENT OF THE SIENA HOTEL CONCERNING A PROPOSED PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP FOR DEVELOPMENT OF PRITCHARD PARK AND THE SIENA HOTEL AND THE FORMATION OF A PRITCHARD PARK ART GARDEN COMMITTEE (2004-04-14/R-10)

WHEREAS, on November 27, 2000, the Council adopted the Report of the Pritchard Park Conceptual Plan Committee, which authorized the Manager to complete a plan for development of an art garden and to involve the Chapel Hill Public Arts Commission, the Library Board, and the Parks and Recreation Commission; and

WHEREAS, on November 25, 2002, the Council adopted the Report of the Pritchard Park Art Garden Committee, which recommended that the Town partner with the Siena Hotel in a manner that would allow a seamless transition between the designs of the two properties, provide funding for the Town’s park and art project, and allow the Siena Hotel to address its parking needs; and

WHEREAS, on March 22, 2004, the manager of the Siena Hotel petitioned the Council requesting further discussions concerning a proposed public-private partnership for development of Pritchard Park and the Siena Hotel;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council authorizes the Manager to enter into further discussions concerning a proposed public-private partnership for development of Pritchard Park.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council authorizes the formation of a new Pritchard Park Art Garden Committee that shall consist of 2 members each from the Chapel Hill Public Arts Commission, Library Board, and the Parks and Recreation Commission; the members which shall be selected by their respective boards.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Manager and the Pritchard Park Art Garden Committee shall report back to the Council with recommendations for action at the conclusions of discussions with the Siena Hotel and that the Pritchard Park Art Garden Committee shall be disbanded upon acceptance of their Report by the Council.

This the 14^th day of April, 2004.

A RESOLUTION DIRECTING FEE REDUCTION IN THE REVIEW OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT MODIFICATION APPLICATION FOR BEECHRIDGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (2004-04-14/R-11)

WHEREAS, the Town Council has received a petition from property owners in the Beechridge Development, requesting expedited processing of a Special Use Permit Modification application and seeking reduction in application fees;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby:

1. Reduces the normal application fee, in view of the limited issues involved, to one-half of what would otherwise be required.

This the 14^th day of April, 2004.

A RESOLUTION DIRECTING THAT THE AIRPORT GARDENS REHABILITATION CONTRACT NOT BE SIGNED AND THAT THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT BE RE-ADVERTISED FOR BID (2004-04-14/R-11.1)

WHEREAS, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) received a protest pertaining to the procurement of rehabilitation work at the Town’s Airport Gardens public housing neighborhood and has concluded that the Town did not follow procurement standards in the Code of Federal Regulations; and

WHEREAS, the HUD has strongly suggested that the Town reject all bids for this project and re-bid the procurement;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council’s previous action to award the contract for this work to Carl Garris & Son, Inc., is hereby rescinded.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Town Manager is directed to not execute the pending contract for this rehabilitation work with Carl Garris & Son, Inc. and to initiate the steps to re-advertise this project for new bids in accordance with the directions from HUD to provide clear language regarding the alternates included in the proposed construction contract.

This the 14^th day of April, 2004.

Item 5 - Information Items

Council Member Ward removed 5c, Response to Petition requesting Installation of Pedestrian Connection between the Glenwood Village Shopping Center and Prestwick Road.  He explained that he had been working with the petitioners on this issue and asked the Council to support him in looking into this further.

Mayor Foy suggested that Council Member Ward continue working with the petitioners with the understanding that he would bring the item back to the Council for further consideration.

Council Member Harrison stated that he was pleased that Council Member Ward was pursuing this pedestrian connection.  He had been dismayed in recent weeks to discover that it wasn't there, he said. 

With regard to 5d, Results of the 2003 Chapel Hill Transit Rider Profile Survey, Council Member Verkerk thanked Ms. Kuschatka and the Transportation Department staff for doing such a successful and informative survey.   "Rich people are riding the bus," she remarked.  Mayor Foy described the demographics on ridership in Chapel Hill as "unusual."   Council Member Kleinschmidt pointed out that "everyone was riding the bus." He pointed out that Chapel Hill was different from many communities where people who have several cars choose never to take the bus, he said. 

THE COUNCIL ACCEPTED THE INFORMATION REPORTS, WITH 5C OMITTED, AS PRESENTED.

Item 6 - Town Operations Center Application for a Special Use Permit,

 Planned Development-Mixed Use

Mr. Horton stated that Town Operations Center (TOC), if built, would house the Public Works, Transit and Housing Maintenance Departments.  The Council would be the owner/regulator of that operation, he said, and he told Council members that the staff had endeavored to meet or exceed every requirement that the ordinances dictate.  While doing so, the staff had kept the Council's three main goals (sustainable development, environmental sensitivity and fiscal prudence) in mind, Mr. Horton said.  He noted that there was a good balance among those key principles and said that the staff was prepared to proceed. Mr. Horton recommended that the Council approve the SUP with the conditions offered.

Planning Director Roger Waldon reviewed the history of the TOC project and highlighted three issues (fencing, aeration of ponds, and street trees) that had come up at a March 15, 2004 public hearing.  The staff had misunderstood the Community Design Commission's (CDC) comment and thought they had suggested adding planting strips and street trees along Mill House Road, he said.  But the CDC had been taking about canopy trees along the entrance drive to the Transportation Department.  Mr. Waldon explained that the staff had recommended against approving the planting strips but now that they understand the CDC's comments they were recommending planting canopy trees along the main entrance drive to the Transportation Department.  He recommended that the Council adopt R-A, which would approve the SUP.

Assistant Town Manager Bruce Heflin stated that the staff was willing to support and implement all of the stipulations in the Manager's recommendation, including adding appropriate landscaping along the entrance drive to the Transportation Facility.  He noted the Town's response to key issues in the owner memorandum and explained that they intended to comply or exceed the Town's ordinances.  Mr. Heflin added that the staff was attempting to resolve some issues that had not yet been answered, such as whether or not OWASA might allow the Town to recoup some of its utility investment from subsequent development that made use of the same utility lines.   He asked Council members to support R-12. 

COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER STROM, TO ADJOURN THE PUBLIC HEARING.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

a. Town Operations Center Special Use Permit Application – Consideration of Issues from the Owner’s Perspective and Authorization of Next Steps in the Project.

COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER STROM, TO ADOPT R-12.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MANAGER TO PROCEED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS AND A BIDDING PROCESS FOR THE TOWN OPERATIONS CENTER (2004-04-14/R-12)

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council authorizes the Town Manager to proceed with the development of construction documents, to apply for all needed permits, and to seek bids for construction of the Town Operations Center.

This the 14^th day of April, 2004.

b.   Consideration of Resolution to Approve the Application for a Special Use Permit.

COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WARD, TO ADOPT R-12A, AS AMENDED TO INCLUDE MILLHOUSE ROAD CONNECTION.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR THE TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL, TOWN OPERATIONS CENTER (2004-04-14/      R-12a)

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that it finds that the Special Use Permit application proposed by The Town of Chapel Hill on property identified as Chapel Hill Township Tax Maps 7.18..4, 7.19..23, 7.19..23G, and 7.19..23H (PIN 9870890971, 9871728102, 9871806829, and 9871809160), if developed according to the site plans dated February 25, 2004,

1. Would be located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or promote the public health, safety, and general welfare;

2. Would comply with all required regulations and standards of this Chapter, including all applicable provisions of Sections 3 and 5, the applicable specific standards contained in the Supplemental Use Regulations (Section 6), and with all other applicable regulations;

3. Is a use and development that constitutes a public necessity; and

4. Would conform with the general plans for the physical development of the Town as embodied in this Chapter and in the Comprehensive Plan.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council finds, in this particular case, pursuant to Section 4.5.6 of the Land Use Management Ordinance, that the following specific modifications of regulations satisfy public purposes to an equivalent or greater degree:

1. Modification of the minimum parking regulations in Section 5.9.7 of the Land Use Management Ordinance, to allow a minimum of 287 parking spaces. 

2. Modification of the dimensional regulations in Section 3.8.1 of the Land Use Management Ordinance, to allow a secondary height of 55 feet.

Said public purposes being that: a) The proposed number of parking spaces is based on a vehicle needs study that specifically addressed the employee and visitor parking space requirements for the proposed development and does not justify the need for additional parking spaces;  b) The study indicates that the proposed 287 parking spaces will meet the existing and future needs of the facility;  c) Minimizing the number of parking spaces will preserve trees, natural areas and decrease the amount of impervious surface area and stormwater runoff; d) Construction of vehicle maintenance buildings in excess of the maximum secondary building height will permit sufficient height to allow daylighting components including upper story space for windows;  e) Additional height will allows the construction of vehicle maintenance buildings that permit the installation of high vehicle service bay necessary to work on large vehicles such as Town buses, and large Public Works vehicles such as fire trucks, and refuse trucks; and f) Lower building heights would not permit the construction of a sloped roof, which requires less long term maintenance than a flat roof and facilitates construction of a rainwater collection system.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council hereby approves the application for a Special Use Permit for the Town of Chapel Hill, Town Operations Center in accordance with the plans listed above and with the conditions listed below:

Stipulations Specific to the Development

1. That construction begins April 14, 2006 and be completed April 14, 2034.

2. Land Use Intensity: This Special Use Permit authorizes a public service facility and a public use facility with land use intensity requirements and dimensional standards as specified below:

Land Use Intensity
Net Land Area	53.78 acres
Total # of Buildings	6 (not including secondary outbuildings and storage areas)
Permitted Building Area	168,632 sq ft (including 137,034 sq ft of floor area)
Permitted Floor Area	137,034 sq ft
Impervious Surface Area	870,875 sq ft
Minimum # of Parking Spaces	287
Minimum # of Bicycle Spaces	57
Maximum Building Height  (Public Works and Transportation Vehicle Maintenance Buildings)	55 feet

Stipulations Related to Transportation Issues

3. Off-Site Roadway Improvements:  That prior to occupancy, subject to approval from the North Carolina Department of Transportation and if adequate right-of-way can be obtained, the applicant shall construct the following roadway improvements:

· Eubanks Road:

a) Improve the turning radii at the Airport Road intersection as necessary to accommodate buses and large service vehicles.

b) Construct a 300-foot east bound left-turn storage lane at the Airport Road intersection.

c) Construct a westbound right-turn lane onto Millhouse Road.

· Millhouse Road:

a) Improvements at the southbound approach to Eubanks Road shall include: Widen roadway (36-foot pavement width) to accommodate three travel lanes-- one 12-foot wide northbound travel lane, one 12-foot wide southbound left-turn lane onto Eubanks Road, and one 12-foot wide southbound right-turn lane onto Eubanks Road.

b) Improvements between Eubanks Road and the proposed development site shall include: Widen roadway to accommodate two 12-foot wide travel lanes, two 5-foot wide striped bike lanes, curb and gutter on both sides of the road, and a 5-foot wide sidewalk -along the east side of the roadway.

c) Relocate the railroad crossing to realign with the proposed northern entrance to the development.  Install a four-way stop at the intersection.

· Traffic Signal:

That a fully activated traffic signal shall be installed at the Eubanks Road/Millhouse Road intersection.

That the final design of roadway improvements, including the traffic signal, must be reviewed and approved by the North Carolina Department of Transportation and the Town Manager, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

4. Encroachment Permit:  Prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, the applicant shall secure and provide an encroachment agreement from the North Carolina Department of Transportation for all work within the State maintained roadway right-of-way.

5. Parking Lot Standards:  That all parking lots, drive aisles and parking spaces shall be constructed to Town standards.

6. Marked crosswalks:  That the parking lot striping plans shall include marked crosswalks  between internal sidewalks and parking areas.  This plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

7. Greenway Trail:  That the approval of this Special Use Permit shall approve the conceptual location for that portion of the Rail and North Trails greenway network, adjacent to Interstate 40, as shown on the submitted site plans.  That in those areas where it is anticipated that the final location of the future greenway trail will be adjacent to land disturbance associated with the initial phase development of the Operations Center, clearing and grading for the anticipated greenway corridor is permitted.

8. Lighting of Internal Sidewalk: That the proposed boardwalk, between the employee parking area and administration building on the Transportation portion of the site, shall comply with Section 5.11 (Lighting Standards) of the Land Use Management Ordinance. The lighting plan details must specify how the plan intends to provide adequate lighting to ensure the safety of pedestrians and security of property.

9. Bicycle Parking:  That the development shall comply with the Town’s Design Manual for bicycle parking design.  Minimum number of bicycle parking spaces shall be provided as:

Minimum  Number of Spaces	57
Number of Class I Spaces	29
Number of Class II Spaces	28

10. Transportation Management Plan:  That prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, the applicant prepare a Transportation Management Plan for approval by the Town Manager.  The required components of the Transportation Management Plan shall include:

a) Provision for designation of a Transportation Coordinator;

b) Provisions for an annual Transportation Survey and Annual Report to the Town Manager;

c) Quantifiable traffic reduction goals and objectives;

d) Ridesharing incentives;

e) Public transit incentives; and

f) Other measures determined appropriate by the Town Manager.

11. Traffic Control on Millhouse Road: That the applicant establishes a policy that restricts Town owned vehicles from traveling on that portion of Millhouse Road, north of the proposed entrance into the Public Works portion of the site, with exceptions for emergency conditions. The policy shall be reviewed and approved by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

12. Bus Shelter, Bench and Pad: At such time that bus service is extended into the Public Works portion of the facility, the applicant shall install shelters with bench and pads at the two proposed bus stops, subject to Town Manager approval.

Stipulations Related to Landscaping and Architectural Issues

13. Required Buffers:  That the following landscape buffer be provided; and if any existing vegetation is to be used to satisfy the buffer requirements, the vegetation shall be protected by fencing from adjacent construction:

Location	Required Buffers
Interstate-40	100’ wide Type E (including Conceptual Buffer Section B-B)
Millhouse Road	50’ wide Type D (including Conceptual Buffer Section A-A)
Three property lines  adjacent to  Nunn property	Nunn  north  & east property lines 30’ wide Type C
	Nunn south property line 30’ to 50’ wide Type C
Southern property line between Millhouse Road and I-40	50’ wide Type C

14. Installation of Solid Fence Along Neighboring 10.3 Acre Residential Parcel:  That, except in the Resource Conservation District and near significant trees, the applicant shall install a solid fence long the north, east and south property line of the 10.3 acre parcel adjacent to the southern half of the proposed development site. 

a. In those areas where the installation could negatively impact significant or notable stands of trees, the fence shall not be installed and instead may be located within the applicant’s landscape buffer area.  Prior to installation, final location of the fence shall be field located and approved by the Town’s Urban Forester.

b. That the design of the fence shall included gaps between the bottom of the fence and ground level.  The design of the fence shall be reviewed and approved by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

c. That if during future discussions with the owners of the 10.3 acre residential parcel, Town staff are informed that the property owner do not want sections of the fencing to be constructed, the applicant will eliminate these sections of fence. 

15. Landscape Protection Plan:  That a detailed Landscape Protection Plan, indicating which rare and specimen trees shall be removed and preserved, as well as all 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.  This plan shall also include rare and specimen trees and associated root zones within the land disturbance area associated with off-site utility infrastructure construction

16. Landscaping Plan: That a detailed landscape plan including a landscape maintenance plan, be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.  Canopy trees shall be installed along the main entrance drive to the Transportation Department.  The landscape plan shall indicate the size, type, and location of all proposed plantings.

17. Tree Protection Fencing:  That tree protection fencing be installed along the limits of all land disturbance, including that associated with off-site utility infrastructure construction, and that the location of this fencing be shown on the Landscape Protection Plan, to be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

18. Parking Lot Screening: That all parking areas shall be screened from view in accordance with the provisions of Section 5.6 of the Land Use Management Ordinance.  The screening plans shall be approval by the Town Manager.

19. Building Elevations:  That the Community Design Commission approve building elevations, including the location and screening of all HVAC/Air Handling Units, for this project, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

20. Lighting Plan:  That the Community Design Commission approve a lighting plan for this project prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

Stipulations Related to Environmental Issues

21. Land Disturbance in the Resource Conservation District:  That land disturbance in the Resource Conservation District is authorized in accordance with Section 3.6.3 of the Land Use Management Ordinance.

22. Wetlands Location: That the applicant submits Final Plans which show the location of State or federally regulated wetlands on the site or in off-site locations associated with required infrastructure and roadway improvements.  That any proposed disturbance of wetlands shall demonstrate compliance with applicable State and federal regulations.

23. Impervious Surface Limits: That the site shall comply with Section 3.8 of the Land Use Management Ordinance.  Impervious surface area is authorized at 870,875 square feet.

24. 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 and the post-development stormwater runoff volume shall not exceed the pre-development volume for the local 2-year frequency, 24-hour duration storm event. 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.

25. Aeration of Stormwater Ponds: That the applicant shall install aeration devices, or similar water circulation equipment, in the proposed stormwater management ponds.  The final type and design of the aeration device shall be review and approved by the Town Manager. 

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

27. Stormwater Operations and Maintenance Plan: That the applicant shall provide a Stormwater Operations and Maintenance Plan for all engineered stormwater facilities.

28. State or Federal Approvals:  That any required State or federal permits or encroachment agreements 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.

29. 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. 

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

31. Noise Certification:  That the final plan application shall include a signed and sealed letter from a Professional Engineer, licensed in the State of North Carolina and with demonstrable expertise in acoustical design and attenuation practices, certifying that any increase in measurable noise will not exceed noise levels allowed in the Town Noise Ordinance as established at the time the final plan application is approved by the Town. This noise restriction shall not apply to property that is in the same ownership as property owned by the applicant.

32. Lighting Plan Certification: That the final plan application complies with the lighting standards in the Land Use Management Ordinance.

Stipulations Related to Utility and Service Issues

33. Off-Site Utility Improvements:  That prior to occupancy of any new structures the applicant shall construct the following utility improvements:

• Water Line:

a) 16-inch water line, in the Eubanks Road right-of-way, between Airport Road and Millhouse Road.

b) 8-inch water line, in the Millhouse Road right-of-way, between Eubanks Road and the proposed development site.

· Sewer Lines:

a)  Sewer force main between the proposed pump station at the southeast corner of the site and the Larkspur pump station off of Eubanks Road. 

b) Gravity sewer line between the Larkspur pump station and the proposed pump station near Old Field Creek, if the applicant can obtain necessary utility easements.

· Natural Gas:

A natural gas line shall be extended to this site from Eubanks Road within the Millhouse Road right-of-way.

34. Off-Site Utility Infrastructure Construction: That approval of this Special Use Permit shall authorize the installation of off-site utility infrastructure.

35. Off-Site Utility Easement: That off-site utility easements, authorizing the installation of the required sewer and water line improvements shall be provided and approved by the Town Manager and OWASA and recorded at the Orange County Register of Deeds Office prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

36. 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.

37. Heavy Duty Pavement:  That all new drive aisles needed to access refuse containers shall be constructed of heavy duty pavement.  The final plans must include a detail of this pavement section. 

38. Overhead Obstruction/Utility Lines:  That the final plans included details verifying that no overhead obstruction or utility wires will interfere with service vehicle access or operation.

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

40. Utility Line Placement: That all new utility lines shall be placed underground. Where practicable, underground utilities shall be located outside of the Resource Conservation District.   The applicant shall indicate proposed off-site utility line routing and upgrades required to service the site on Final Plans, to be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

41. Fire Flow: That a fire flow report, shall be prepared and sealed by a registered professional engineer, which certifies 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.

Stipulations Related to Miscellaneous Issues

42. 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.

43. Traffic and Pedestrian Control Plan:  That a Traffic Management Plan for movement of motorized and non-motorized vehicles on any public street that will be disrupted during construction, including detour information and a pedestrian management plan indicating how pedestrian movements will be safely maintained shall be reviewed and approved by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

44. 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.

45. 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 will 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.

46. 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.

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.

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 if applicable a note to this effect shall be placed on the final plan and/or plat.

48. 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.

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

50. 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 the Special Use Permit application for the Town of Chapel Hill, Town Operations Center in accordance with the plans and conditions listed above.

This the 14^th day of April, 2004.

Item 7 – Report regarding Parking Lots 2 and 5

a. Summary of Market Demand Study for Parking Lots 2 and 5.

Mr. Horton reported that earlier in the evening the Committee on Parking Lots 2 and  had received a follow-up report from Consultant John Stainback, of Stainback Public/Private Real Estate (SPPRE) and had entertained questions from citizens.  Mr. Horton stated that the Council had been following a careful process for consideration of development and he recommended proceeding with the project.

Mr. Stainback told the Council that the predevelopment process conducted by SPPRE already had brought great results.  This included a strong market demand study and a market-driven building program, which he would present tonight, he said. Mr. Stainback stated that the program places the Town in a position of strength to attract quality developers and to negotiate a private/public development agreement. He summarized his report and discussed the market study and the priorities that had been revealed during Council and Committee discussions and a recent public forum.  Mr. Stainback presented the results of a land area/floor area ratio analysis for Lots 2 & 5 and outlined the next steps in the process.

THE REPORT WAS RECEIVED BY CONSENSUS OF THE COUNCIL.

Council Member Verkerk asked if the additional parking would be for the public or for new Downtown residents.  Mr. Stainback replied that it would be open to the public but some would be designated for the housing units and possibly for retail tenants.

Council Member Hill inquired about the point at which developers would get involved.  Mr. Stainback replied that the next stage would be a financial analysis of the design to determine whether or not the project would be feasible.  They would involve developers only after determining the best finance plan for the Town, he said. Mr. Horton pointed out that a flow-chart had been included in the Council's previous materials.  That chart showed the schedule, he said, and he offered to provide Council members with another copy.

Council Member Hill wondered about the degree to which the project would be designed by HAS Architects.   Mr. Stainback explained that there were about four stages of design and that this was the earliest stage.  It was basically a master plan, he said, and it was relatively inexpensive. Mr. Stainback explained that his team would not even get into schematics this soon yet because that might change with whatever developer they select.

Mayor Foy asked how the transit transfer station would fit in, given the allocation of square footage.  Mr. Stainback replied that the architects would decide the form of the transit center.  It could be related to adjacent streets, or offsite, but it will be a full facility, he said.  Mr. Stainback expressed concern that the sites were too small to accommodate a full transit center.  Mayor Foy agreed that the Town must be carefully about how it uses that land.  One of the goals was to knit East and West Franklin Streets and Rosemary Street together, he said, noting that a big transit center with bus fumes could be harmful to this effort.  Mayor Foy recommended that everyone think hard about how to accomplish a transit center in the Downtown without creating an unpleasant place.  Doing so could mean some distribution of the facility, he said. Mr. Stainback agreed that a full transit transfer station would not work in that location.

Council Member Strom noted that the Council and community wanted the lots to act as both a destination and a crossroad for the community.  There had been significant conversation at the Committee meeting that morning about how important public space is to achieving the community's hopes and desires for Downtown, he said.  There had been discussion about transforming this as a community centerpiece and how it could function to augment the arts and possibly be a public art market and/or music venue, Council Member Strom noted.

Council Member Strom suggested eliminating the top numbers of the square footage for the pedestrian/public space from Resolution B and to leave that open.  Then designers could think in terms of meeting the Town's goals, he said, rather than being locked into a prescriptive maximum from the Town as to size and scope.

Mayor Foy asked if Council Member Strom was suggesting that the pedestrian/public space would, therefore, be 1,000 square feet and up on Lot 2 and 3,500 square feet and up on Lot 5.  Mr. Horton remarked that the staff had not intended the numbers to be prescriptive.  They had tried to make it clear in the last resolve that there would be some design flexibility, he said.  Mr. Horton said that Council Member Strom's suggestion was useful and would promote that intention well.

Mayor pro tem Wiggins asked if the public space would be managed by the private part of the partnership.  Council Member Strom replied that this had not been determined.  Mayor pro tem Wiggins pointed out that there were residential lots close to Lot 5 and the people there had asked the Town to be mindful of how public spaces can be used.  She said that private companies were better able than the Town was to maintain security around the clock.  Mr. Horton replied that if the project were to move forward then the Town would negotiate responsibility for full maintenance and security of the public spaces.  It would not become a public cost, he said, adding that Mr. Stainback would assist the Town in those negotiations.

Council Member Greene commented that if a private party manages public space then there is a question about whether it is private or public.

Mayor pro tem Wiggins repeated her point about how the Town would not want to make neighborhoods that already feel vulnerable feel even more insecure because the Town had created a space "that draws insecurity."

Council Member Ward verified that Mr. Stainback would have the Town's principle regarding long-term sustainability in hand when talking with designers.  Mr. Stainback explained that this would be part of the information packet that he would transmit.  Mr. Horton added that the packet would also include all of the meeting notes, resolutions adopted by the Council, and the minutes of discussions. 

Council Member Harrison commented that the level of insight among citizens at that morning's Committee meeting had been high, noting that there had been much exchange with Mr. Stainback.  The current transfer center for the entire transit system consisted of eight auto parking spaces on East Franklin Street, he pointed out.  Council Member Harrison stated that it would not require a much bigger facility to do better than the Town is doing now. With architectural expertise the station will fit in well, he said, noting that there were many ways to shape that center, including using Church Street and nearby state roads. 

Mayor Foy asked if Council Member Harrison was suggesting converting Church Street into part of the project. Council Member Harrison replied that it would be worth looking at.

Council Member Kleinschmidt expressed support for the idea of creating interesting pass-throughs.  He also agreed with the need for security, but cautioned against giving the impression that the Council necessarily wanted to have purely private management of the area.  Council Member Kleinschmidt pointed out that the Town would not want the area monitored as tightly as University Square, for example.  Having the Town take on some responsibility for security might be in the interest of citizens for a number of reasons, he said, such as not having private interests roping it off and preventing the public from going though.  Mr. Stainback replied that these issues would be resolved in the development agreement, in which the Town would negotiate whatever terms it thinks are important.  Council Member Kleinschmidt said that he did not want to give the impression that the Town's ability to protect its citizens in this public space was poor.

Council Member Greene explained that her previous comment meant that this was an interesting and relevant policy question that the Town Council would have to grapple with.  They would not want to limit any activity that is otherwise legal on this space or to give the private owner the right to do that, she said.

Mayor pro tem Wiggins stated that her only concern was that the illegal activities that might take place there at night could spill over into neighborhoods that already have problems. She suggested that residents of those neighborhoods be invited to explain what they need for protection when the Town is working out security issues.

Council Member Verkerk pointed out that this would not be a park with bushes and shrubs but an open, urban courtyard surrounded by restaurants and coffee shops.  Mr. Stainback added that he imagined the space surrounded by art galleries, outdoor cafes and retail shops.

Mayor pro tem Wiggins said that she had visited a similar place in Atlanta a couple of weeks ago, "and it has its problems."  The Town cannot assume that the area will not need attention she said, because there is a residential neighborhood very close.

Mayor Foy pointed out that there will also be another residential neighborhood right at the site.  Fifteen percent of that will be affordable, he pointed out.  Mayor Foy verified that the Council could invest more money later on to increase the number of affordable units there.  

b. Development of Town Parking Lots 2 and 5: Authorization to Proceed with the Project; Consideration of Land Uses for Conceptual Master Plan.

COUNCIL MEMBER STROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WARD, TO ADOPT R-13A.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PROCEEDING WITH PART 1B, DEVELOPMENT OF MASTER PLANS, FOR PARKING LOTS 2 AND 5 (2004-04-14/R-13a)

WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan and Downtown Small Area Plan identify Town Parking Lots 2 and 5 as key redevelopment sites; and

WHEREAS, the Town Council has established principles and priorities for development of Town Parking Lots 2 and 5; and

WHEREAS, the Council on February 24, 2003, authorized the Town Manager to develop a request for proposals for economic development consultant services to help plan and manage the options for proceeding with the development of Town Parking Lots 2 and 5 and help represent the Town’s interests in any development agreement; and

WHEREAS, on April 28, 2003, the Council authorized proceeding with a Request for Qualifications/Request for Proposals selection program; and

WHEREAS, the Council Committee on Lots 2 and 5 in August 2003, voted unanimously to continue discussions with Stainback Public/Private Real Estate LLC of Malvern, Pennsylvania, on a consulting contract after interviewing representatives from four prospective consulting firms; and

WHEREAS, the Council on October 27, 2003 authorized the Town Manager to execute e a contract with Stainback Public/Private Real Estate; and

WHEREAS, the Consultant has completed Part 1A of the contract, completion of a Market Analysis Study, and has recommended a program of uses to the Council based on the economic feasibility of the results of the Study;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council authorizes the Town Manager to initiate work on the next phase 1B of the contract with Stainback Public/Private Real Estate, Development of Master Plans for Both Sites, based substantially on the terms in the attached Work Statement from Contract for Consultant Services authorized by the Council on October 27, 2003.

This the 14^th day of April, 2004.

COUNCIL MEMBER STROM MOVED TO ADOPT R-13B, AS AMENDED TO DELETE THE UPPER RANGE IN SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR THE PEDESTRIAN/PUBLIC SPACES IN PARKING LOTS 2 AND 5 USES, SECONDED BY MAYOR PRO TEM WIGGINS.

Council Member Greene suggested correcting a typographical error in the number of total spaces.

Council Member Ward asked to add a friendly amendment to include a minimum rather than leaving it blank.

Mayor Foy suggested letting the maximum number be the minimum number.  Mr. Horton cautioned against that based on the Committee's discussion about having a "great space none of which is a huge space."

Council Member Greene explained that the Committee had felt much of it was design dependent and that the Town was not at that point yet.

Council Member Ward proposed adding "or more."  Mr. Horton noted that the Town was paying Mr. Stainback a lot of money to make sure they understood this.  Council Member Ward agreed to leave it as is.

THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A PROGRAM OF USES FOR DEVELOPMENT OF MASTER PLANS FOR THE PARKING LOTS 2 AND 5 SITES (2004-04-14/R-13b)

WHEREAS, the Consultant, Stainback Public/Private Real Estate, has commissioned a Market Analysis Study conducted by Economics Research Associates, Inc.; and

WHEREAS, the Council has held a public forum on March 22, 2004 to hear citizen comment on the proposal;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council authorizes consideration of the following uses and range of square footage in the preparation of a land, building, and infrastructure program for Lots 2 and 5 as part of the next stage of  development of conceptual Master Plans for both sites:

Parking Lot 2 Uses: Range in Square Feet

Retail Space                                            20,000 – 30,000

Market-Rate Housing                               65,000 – 75,000

Affordable Housing                                     9,750 -  11,250

Art Gallery                                                 1,500 –   2,500

Pedestrian/Public Space                              1,000

Parking:

Replacement Parking                            104 spaces

Additional Parking                                149 spaces

Total                                                    253 spaces

Parking Lot 5 Uses: Range in Square Feet

Retail Space                                             30,000 –   50,000

Market-Rate Housing                             101,000 – 122,000

Affordable Housing                                   15,150 -   18,300

Art Gallery                                                3,500 –     4,500

Pedestrian/Public Space                             3,500

Specialty Grocery Store                             2,000 –     3,500

Parking:

Replacement Parking                            170 spaces

Additional Parking                                258 spaces

            Total 428 spaces

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council authorizes consideration of design options for a transit transfer center in conjunction with the development of Parking Lots 2 and 5 as part of the next stage of developing conceptual master plans for the sites.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council reserves the right to make adjustments to the uses and the ranges based on additional information that may become available during the design stage of the project in developing conceptual Master Plans for both sites.

This the 14^th day of April, 2004.

Item 8 - State Solid Waste Management Plan Three-Year Update

Interim Public Works Director Bill Terry recommended that the Council hear tonight's report and refer questions and comments to the Manager for preparation of the Council's response to the request from Orange County.

Orange County Solid Waste Manager Gayle Wilson gave a brief presentation on key issues related to the plan.  The state had increased the amount of waste landfill over the past several years rather than reducing it, he said, and that state government was apparently not interested or able to contribute funds in any meaningful way toward waste reduction programs.  Mr. Wilson pointed out that Orange County leads the state in waste reduction achievement.  The County continues to propose program improvements, implement modest program expansions, and seek ways to operate more efficiently, he said.  Mr. Wilson reported that fees had remained constant for three years and said they would remain so next year as well.  He welcomed the Council's involvement and input, particularly with regard to waste reduction, and attributed much of the program's success to Town support and leadership.  Mr. Wilson urged Council members to endorse the three-year solid waste plan update so that it could be submitted at the earliest opportunity. 

Mayor Foy described the report as "disappointing," and said that he did not think the Council would endorse it.  The report appeared to run counter to everything the Town had been working toward with waste reduction, he said.  Mayor Foy noted the statement that the long-term goal of 61% diversion was being reaffirmed.  But, he said, the rest of the report says there is no expansion of the types of materials and the sectors that will be served by the recycling program, there will not be an opportunity for collecting co-mingled materials by roll cart, and the changes will preclude possible pay-as-you throw residential waste collection.  How can there be waste reduction if we don't have the ability to expand and improve the program, Mayor Foy asked.

Mr. Wilson replied that the plan included waste reduction and did not prohibit expansions.  But the Commissioners' plan does limit significant expansion in this planning period, he said, and it removes the materials recovery facility. Mr. Wilson said that the Commissioners had altered the reasonable achievable means to get the 61%.  He thought they probably were willing to reconsider those issues in the future. But given their preoccupation with financing issues and the new Countywide fee that's being considered, the Commissioners believe it is reasonable to pause and balance existing service commitments with available resources before committing new resources, Mr. Wilson explained.  He emphasized that he did not mean to speak for the Commissioners but that this is what he believed they were thinking.

Council Member Strom agreed that the report was a major disappointment.  He stated that the Council had been very clear about wanting to pursue pay-as-you-throw options and paper recycling at the curb when the Solid Waste Board representatives had met with them more than a year ago.  This would be going in the absolute opposite direction, he said, characterizing as "incredible" to describe holding tipping fees steady as an accomplishment at the same time that the report proposes a $75 per household fee for Chapel Hill residents to support recycling.  "Something has gone awry," said Council Member Strom.  He expressed deep concern about the request that Chapel Hill pay double or triple to support the landfill and its operations at a time when service requests and requirements were being ignored.

Mr. Wilson replied that the Solid Waste Advisory Board had conveyed Council members' concerns and interests to the County Commissioners, who had taken that under advisement when making their decision.  He said that the tipping fee is a function not only of needed revenue to the County but also of being competitive with other tipping fees in neighboring disposal facilities.  The fee is set higher than the others so that the only waste that's left is that coming from the Town and County, Mr. Wilson explained.  He said that the proposal for fees still contains a significant contribution from disposal for next year, assuming it is adopted as currently proposed. 

Mr. Wilson explained that about $750,000 would still come from disposal to subsidize the recycling program.  The Town of Chapel Hill had always received significantly more in value of services than they have paid in tipping fees, he said, adding that it was not technically accurate to say that the Town had been double charged.  Mr. Wilson pointed out that he was presenting the County Commissioners' plan.  His staff had submitted their recommendations for the plan, as had the Solid Waste Advisory Board (SWAB) and others, he said, and the County Commissioners had decided to support the plan that was currently before the Council.

Council Member Strom pointed out that the Council and staff had in the past discussed changing the non-residential component of waste collection services within Town.  But they had opted to leave that in place because of their commitment to the Solid Waste Plan, he said. Council Member Strom suggested that the Manager bring back options for revisiting the question of the non-residential waste stream because it seemed as though the Town could save money by not being in that business, he said.  Council Member Strom pointed out that there had been concern about that revenue not going to the landfill.  But this seemed like an opportune time to take another look at it, he said.  

Mayor Foy agreed with Council Member Strom, noting that the Town had been honoring its contractual obligation with the County.  But there needs to be some assurance that everyone's contractual obligation is being upheld, he said.

Council Member Strom remarked that the proposed fees for solid waste collection seemed to have a municipal charge that was higher than for a non-municipal charge.  "And that makes absolutely no sense to me whatsoever," he said.  Council Member Strom suggested that picking up recycling along a street in Chapel Hill would be a less expensive than going house to house in the County, and he asked for an explanation of the proposed fees.  Council Member Strom suggested that Mr. Wilson take the message to the Commissioners that the fee ought to be delayed from implementation this year and that there should be a conversation about the overall relationship before people in Chapel Hill are asked to carry more than a fair burden.

Mayor Foy asked if Randy Kabrick and/or Jan Sassaman, the Town's representatives on the Solid Waste Advisory Board (SWAB), would care to comment.  Mr. Sassaman stated that the SWAB agreed with the points the Council had just made about problems with the plan.  Nevertheless, he said, they recommend that Council members approve the plan as amended.  Mr. Sassaman said that the SWAB concurred with the 61% solid waste reduction goal and did support adoption of a waste reduction reuse and recycling fee.  But, if the Council does recommend the plan, the SWAB wanted to point out its significant flaws, he said.

First, Mr. Sassaman pointed out, there is no clear path or schedule in the plan to meet the 61% solid waste reduction goal, particularly with the removal of a provision for a materials recovery facility, for which there had been no articulated reason.  He noted that the plan did not include an integrated fee structure with a prepaid tipping fee concept built into it. The SWAB still supports the fee structure that it presented to the Council last year, he said.

Mr. Sassaman pointed out that the Orange County Landfill would close in 2009.  With a decrease in recycling and no articulated means to reach the 61% waste reduction goal, the need for disposing of material will only increase, he pointed out.  And he characterized having an identified means of dealing with it as an "urgent priority."  Mr. Sassaman asked Council members to give the SWAB detailed guidance on what they wanted incorporated into the plan revision.  They particularly wanted to make sure that these flaws would be rectified in a plan that would be produced within two years, he said.  Mr. Sassaman also recommended that the Council use its influence with the County Commissioners to strengthen the representatives' position.  He said that they agree with Council members, as does the SWAB.

Council Member Ward asked if something was going to change in terms of the ability to transfer solid waste between states and counties.  Mr. Sassaman replied that there had been talk about regional plans for either a waste transfer station or a materials recycling facility.  There had also been talk about some attempt to look at a regional landfill, he said.  With regard to long distance transfer of solid waste, Mr. Sassaman pointed out that the Triangle area was facing some significant violations of ozone and air quality issues. The more trucks on the road the more impact there will be, he pointed out, so it is "a balancing act." 

Mr. Wilson stated that the Triangle J Council of Governments had been coordinating an effort with several other counties to try and identify a host for waste generated in the Triangle J area.  They had received two responses, he said, one from a waste authority in Virginia and another from a county in North Carolina.

Council Member Harrison, noting that emails regarding this issue had begun coming in, emphasized that the Town Council had not originated the idea for the $75 fee.  He agreed with the position that Mr. Sassaman had laid out, he said.  Even though the plan was not satisfactory, Council Member Harrison suggested that the Council endorse it and move on from there.

Council Member Verkerk agreed that this was a very disappointing report. "There is nothing about this report that's admirable" or that meets any of the Town's goals, she remarked.  She asked the Manager to make specific recommendations.

Mayor Foy asked Mr. Horton when he would likely bring a report back with recommendations.  Mr. Horton replied that he would do so quickly since the Town owes that courtesy to the County Commissioners, who had asked the Town to be as prompt as possible.  The staff would attempt to come back at the next regular business meeting, Mr. Horton said.   

Council Member Strom noted that the Town had the opportunity to ask that the auxiliary fee be abandoned for this year.  He inquired about the process for sending such a message.  Mr. Horton replied that if the Council was in agreement they might want to authorize the Mayor this evening to send a letter expressing that thought.  Mr. Horton verified from Mr. Wilson that Orange County would adopt its budget in mid-June.

Mayor Foy stated that he did not think there would be objection to a fee if the fee were for purposes that all had anticipated.  What alarmed him, he said, was that this was an additional expense with nothing in return.  Mayor Foy asked Council members if they wanted to express that concern.  He proposed saying in the letter that the Council understands that it's expensive to operate a recycling program, but they need a lot more information from the County before they will be satisfied that this is an appropriate fee at this time.

Council members agreed by consensus that Mayor Foy should convey that message to the County Commissioners.

Mayor pro tem Wiggins asked Mr. Horton if the Council had ever endorsed a proposal that they disagreed with.  If so, under what circumstances, she asked.  Mr. Horton could recall evenings when the Council had to "hold its nose" to vote in favor of something when there had been no other choices available.  But he could not recall an occasion when the majority of the Council fundamentally disagreed with something and had voted to endorse it, he said.  "The Council has a strong record of voting its conscience," Mr. Horton pointed out.  

Council Member Greene described the following sentence in the plan as particularly troublesome:  "The changes will preclude possible pay-as-you-throw residential waste collection because one of the effects would be increased volumes of recycled materials."  Council Member Greene commented that this was the opposite of everything the Town thinks it stands for.  Council Member Strom asked that the issue of the Town's own non-residential waste stream be addressed in the Manager's report as well.

COUNCIL MEMBER GREENE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER KLEINSCHMIDT, TO REFER COMMENTS TO THE MANAGER AND ATTORNEY FOR A FOLLOW-UP REPORT AND POSSIBLE RECOMMENDATIONS.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Item 9 - Potential Legislative Requests

Mayor Foy pointed out that the Council had been over these ten legislative requests before.  He suggested hearing citizen comment and then opening the meeting up for discussion.  Mr. Karpinos stated that some of the requests were for local bills and others were for statewide bills. 

Joe Herzenberg spoke regarding item 8 as well as two other items regarding gay and lesbian rights that Council Member Kleinschmidt had asked the Council to address.  He mentioned a night in October 1975 when Mayor Howard Lee and members of the Chapel Hill Board of Aldermen, as the Town Council was then called, unanimously passed Chapel Hill's gay rights ordinance, which included protection for gay, lesbian and bisexual Town employees.  Mr. Herzenberg explained that Chapel Hill was one of only a few towns in the Country that had such an ordinance at that time.  He was very proud of the Town Council's for doing that then, he said, and he urged the present Town Council to vote for these items unanimously.

Mayor Foy read item #8:  "A bill to request that the NC General Assembly repeal the Defense of Marriage Act.  The current law provides that out-of-State marriages between persons of the same gender are not valid in North Carolina.  It affects the eligibility requirements that the Town imposes in order for partners of Town employees to receive employment-related benefits, such as assistance in paying for health care insurance."

Council Member Greene expressed hope that the Town would achieve unanimity on Request #8 and the other items. She mentioned an Episcopal bishop, Peter James Lee, who once lived in Chapel Hill and had recently been among those voting on whether or not to ordain a gay bishop. Bishop Lee had justified his vote on procedural grounds, she said, but later, when having to defend his decision back home in Virginia, he had taken solace in remarks by Dr. Martin Luther King.  "Significant change, especially change that involves a new understanding of justice, often comes in a disruptive and disturbing manner," Dr. King had said.

Council Member Greene pointed out that the issue was procedural, since it addresses recognizing marriages that have occurred in other states.  But it is also an issue of equal rights, she said.  Council Member Greene stated that she wanted to be "on the side of the future" and would support Council Member Kleinschmidt's petition.

Council Member Harrison expressed hope that the vote would be unanimous.  He pointed out that most people had thought the NC Watershed Protection Act would never pass, but it had done so in 1987.  That bill had come out of Triangle area governments, he said, adding that a rural legislator had taken it on and succeeded.  Council Member Harrison described legislation as "the art of the impossible."  Everything on the list could possibly pass, he said, and he recommended that the Council members believe that and support everything. 

Council Member Strom mentioned the remarkable life stories that citizens had shared at the public hearing when they were advocating for Request #8.  And this had continued ever since through emails, phone calls, and conversations on the street, he said.  Council Member Strom characterized citizens' stories as "moving and compelling and full of hope."  He hoped that support for #8 would be unanimous, he said, and he expressed gratitude to Council Member Kleinschmidt for raising the issue and giving Council members the opportunity to cast a vote for fairness and justice.

Council Member Ward commented that the Council had ten enlightened legislative requests before it.  Even though they might not all be achieved this year, he said, every one of them requires a first step.  Council Member Ward thanked Council Member Kleinschmidt for making him more aware of the same-sex marriage issue and the urgency that it has.  He also thanked those who had testified at the public hearing for taking the time to share their stories.  Council Member Ward stated that he would support discontinuing the "Defense of Marriage Act" because he wanted to create a state that treats all citizens fairly and equally.  Repealing that Act would be one step further along that road, he said.

Mayor pro tem Wiggins remarked that it had never occurred to her that the vote would not be unanimous.

MAYOR PRO TEM WIGGINS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WARD, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION R-15. 

Mayor Foy pointed out that the "Defense of Marriage Act" was a recent legislation of the General Assembly, "One would think that it was a vestige of a less enlightened time," he said.  Mayor Foy explained that the Council was asking the General Assembly to rethink an action that was taken in the 1990s to disenfranchise citizens of this country.  No matter how you approach it, he said, there is only one conclusion.  Mayor Foy described the Act as "a disgrace to our state," and expressed confidence that the Council would unanimously ask to repeal it.  He thanked Council Member Kleinschmidt for bringing the issue to the attention of Chapel Hill as well as the State.

Council Member Verkerk described Request #8 as a "no brainer."

Council Member Kleinschmidt said that ever since he submitted the petition people had told him how proud they were to live in Chapel Hill.  He encouraged all to reflect on the enormous pride that citizens of Chapel Hill have because their Town was willing to engage on an issue that makes so many people uncomfortable and divides so many other communities.  "We're addressing the issue of being a community that respects values of fairness and equality," he said. Council Member Kleinschmidt stated that he had never been more proud of being on the Council and living in the Chapel Hill community.  He thanked the Council and staff, and also the citizens of Chapel Hill for taking on the challenge of discussing this and being in favor of fairness and equality.

Council Member Hill stated that he had always thought the vote would be unanimous.  Chapel Hill had always stood against discrimination, he said, adding that he was proud to help the Town do that now. 

THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING THE TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL’S LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM FOR THE UPCOMING SESSION OF THE NORTH CAROLINA GENERAL ASSEMBLY (2004-04-14/R-15)

WHEREAS, the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill held a public hearing on March 24, 2004, at 7 p.m. in the Council Chamber of Town Hall on proposed items for inclusion in the Town’s legislative program for the 2004 Short Session of the North Carolina General Assembly; and

WHEREAS, the Council conducted a meeting with the Orange County Legislative Delegation on February 20, 2004, to discuss potential legislative issues of interest to the Town;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby transmits the following as its Legislative Program for consideration by the General Assembly in the upcoming Short Session:  

1. A bill to authorize a local public campaign financing program.

2. A bill to authorize the expenditure of open space bond funds outside of the Town’s extra-territorial jurisdiction. 

3. A bill to authorize transfer of development rights into the Town’s urban area in association with conservation easements purchased in rural areas of Orange County. 

4. A bill to allow the Town to enact zoning regulations pertaining to the ratio of bedrooms to bathrooms in residential development.   

5. A bill to extend the time period that a special use permit development can be delayed if the property has been identified as a potential school site. 

6. Enhanced financial support for the provision of Town fire protection services on the campus of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

7.   Bills pertaining to local and regional transportation organizational and funding issues. 

8.   A bill to request that the North Carolina General Assembly repeal the Defense of Marriage Act.

9. Funding mechanism to put overhead power distribution lines underground. 

10. A bill to increase the homestead exemption.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council endorses pursuing other Legislative interests, subject to the opportunities that become available:

This the 14^th day of April, 2004.

Mayor pro tem Wiggins commented that Chapel Hill had not, in fact, always stood against discrimination.  "It was very segregated when I came here," she said. 

Item 10 - Response to Petition regarding the Horace Williams Airport

Mr. Horton noted some corrections in the staff report.  The staff had no advice to give on this subject, he said, since it was a policy matter for the Council to decide.  

Bob Epting, representing the Area Health Education Center (AHEC) program, said that the Horace Williams Airport was vital to the interests of the state because it is an "absolutely critical hub" for the AHEC program.  He pointed out that former UNC President Friday had described the airport as the single post important outreach program of UNC.  Mr. Epting presented information and statistics to support that assertion, adding that he had distributed a longer copy of his remarks to Council members. AHEC could not be moved from Horace Williams Airport to any existing airport without doing grave harm to its ability to exist, Mr. Epting said.

Mr. Epting stated that AHEC could not be closed until an airport closer than RDU was available to provide participating physicians access to AHEC flights. He expressed confidence that UNC would cooperate with local governments and other interested parties to provide a replacement facility.  Matching funds are available on a 95% federal/5% state funding basis, Mr. Epting said.  He noted that it was possible to reach the right result if everyone worked together, and indicated a suggested resolution that he had provided on page six of his materials.

Chris Hudson, a regional representative for the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association, discussed some of the positive aspects of aviation airports and shared information on communities that had decided to support their airports on an "open space development buffer" basis.  Mr. Hudson mentioned two such airports in Maryland, and others in South Carolina and California.  There were more, he said, but there was not enough time to review them during this presentation.  Mr. Hudson agreed to provide written information about the other airports.  He asked Council members to nurture and preserve the Horace Williams Airport and its green space for the benefit of the community.

Russell Day read from a letter he recently wrote to the News and Observer in reaction to an article by columnist Ann Blye.  It was "patently counterproductive for a landlocked city to eliminate or suffer elimination of this modern invention that an airport is," he said.  Mr. Day expressed opposition to eliminating the Horace Williams Airport and said that statistics do not support the fear of having airports near schools.  He stressed that a decision had to be made about whether the airport would be part of the transportation infrastructure of the Town.  The University had been inconsistent about whether or not they would close it, he said, adding that UNC obviously was having a lot of trouble giving the airport up.

Mayor Foy proposed that the most important piece of information before the Council tonight was at the bottom of page one of the agenda item. "On October 10, 1989," he read, the Town Council unanimously adopted a resolution which stated the Council's position that the airport, pending its relocation, be designed as 'private,' be closed to non-University operations between the hours of 9:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m., and be continuously monitored as to the volume, aircraft type, and purposes of aircraft operations."  Mayor Foy noted that the resolution had also asked "that UNC continue to enhance the safety of air operations, and affirm the Council's desire 'that air operations at the airport, other than those for public purposes, be carefully limited until they are relocated.'"

Mayor Foy noted that the Council had subsequently taken actions to endorse that position and that there had been no alteration in that position.  So the issue before them this evening was whether they want to take some action that differs from the 1989 action, or endorse the 1989 resolution, or take no action at all, said Mayor Foy. 

Council Member Hill explained that he had initiated this discussion because he wanted to know where the Council stood and how it got there.  Being new on the Council, he had been confused about UNC's request that the Town move forward on discussions of Chapel Hill North with a the airport there.  "It doesn't appear that the airport is going to close for sure," he pointed out.   Council Member Hill asked Mr. Karpinos to explain the status of the closing of the Horace Williams Airport.

Mr. Karpinos stated that he was not very knowledgeable about this.  There was a bill passed in 2002, he said, and one provision of that bill said that UNC shall not close the Airport prior to January 1, 2005.   The second provision was that, prior to moving Medical Air, Incorporated from the Horace Williams Airport, the Chancellor shall consult with the Joint Legislative Commission on Governmental Operations regarding the feasibility, cost and impact on AHEC services, Mr. Karpinos said.  That is what the legislature did in 2002, and that is essentially the legal status of it at this point, he explained.

Council Member Hill verified that Mr. Karpinos had not found any indication that that consultation between Chancellor Moeser and the Joint Commission had occurred. He pointed out that the Town had spent much time and money over the past ten years on different zoning schemes in reaction to different possible configurations.  Council Member Hill suggested that the Council consider postponing any further consideration of Carolina North until the airport issue has been resolved.  He distributed a resolution to that effect that he had prepared.

Council Member Strom asked Mr. Hudson to comment on the process for relocating the airport.  He had been concerned about the status of the airport, he said, but it was clear that this had turned into a significant stumbling block for the Carolina North project.  Council Member Strom expressed concern about the future uncertainties.  What could happen if a piece of land were identified for the airport to move to, he asked Mr. Hudson.  What is that process like?  Mr. Hudson replied that with a typical airport project with federal funding at 95%, the minimum expense would be the full environmental study.  He said that it would take a minimum of five years to have an airport constructed and operating.  This does not include the time it takes to identify the site, Mr. Hudson said.  Council Member Strom remarked that it would be at least five years after a site has been identified and agreed upon before the first flight would take off.  Mr. Hudson agreed that this was an accurate average estimate.

Council Member Kleinschmidt noted that Council Member Hill's estimated Town expenses of  "tens of thousands of dollars per year" might be low.  He proposed that the Town had spent more than that, noting that several costly reports had been done on this issue.  Council Member Kleinschmidt wondered if the UNC plan that the Council was scheduled to see would not come to fruition because UNC will not be able to move the airport for five years. Mayor Foy replied that the Town did not know the answer to that.  The Council might need to ask the University some questions, he said, noting that Council members' knowledge was based only on what they had read in the newspaper.

Council Member Verkerk asked about the procedure for considering the resolution. She that would feel uncomfortable voting on something she had just received tonight, she said.  Mr. Karpinos replied that the Council would have to unanimously agree to consider the resolution.   The Council's procedures would reasonably be read to suggest that it should be carried over for consideration at the next meeting if a Council member objected to it being considered tonight, he explained.  Mr. Karpinos pointed out that these were the Council's procedures and that they must determine their comfort level with following those procedures with this resolution. 

Mayor pro tem Wiggins expressed surprise that her fellow Council members were saying that they were just realizing that the airport's status had an impact on the planning for Horace Williams.  It had been there all along, she said, noting that the Council had asked its legislative delegation in January or February about the process for addressing the issue.  She had told reporters a long time ago that the outcome of Carolina North was still uncertain because the status of the airport was uncertain, she said.

Mayor pro tem Wiggins proposed that Council members consider whether Carolina North would take another form if the airport remained.  If the legislature says that the airport must stay then the University probably will have an alternative plan to Carolina North, she pointed out.  Mayor pro tem Wiggins recommended taking action on what the resolution really means.  The Council had agreed that the staff would have minimal involvement in the discussion and planning for Carolina North, she said, and staff involvement so far had been due to committees the Council had created.  If the Council doesn’t keep creating committees then this resolution is really moot, Mayor pro tem Wiggins remarked.

Council Member Kleinschmidt asked what would happen when an application comes in.  Mayor pro tem Wiggins replied that it was unlikely an application would come in anytime soon.

Mayor Foy stated that the recent change was that the airport issue could be resolved by AHEC operating out of another facility, such as RDU.  If the legislature permitted that, then it was possible that UNC could close the airport relatively quickly, he said.  Mayor Foy pointed out that the information the Council was receiving tonight indicated that AHEC could not operate out of RDU.  If true, that presents significant financial difficulty to UNC Hospitals, he said.  Mayor Foy recommended asking the University directly about their plans for the airport.  He said that Council Members Hill and Kleinschmidt had raised valid questions about where the Town was headed with the plan as it now stands.

Mayor pro tem Wiggins asked how the University could answer that question when it was the Legislature that would make that determination.  Mayor Foy suggested that the Council inquire about what kind of communication had taken place between UNC and the Joint Legislative Committee.  What progress had been made, and what proposals had the University made that had been rejected or were under consideration, he wondered. 

Council Member Harrison suggested asking UNC how they were going to deal with the Joint Legislative Commission of Government Operations, predicting that the latter would be victorious if there was a conflict.  He said that the General Assembly was obligated to act on this bill through this commission, which had been appointed and would soon begin meeting. He proposed that the Council advise UNC to start dealing promptly with the Joint Legislative Commission of Government Operations.

Council Member Greene told Council members that she had mentioned to a reporter that the Town Council did not know the fate of the airport.  She remembered wondering at the time why no one else had been troubled by this, she said.

Council Member Greene stated that it seemed less likely now that UNC would have the airport closed in time to develop Carolina North on their schedule.  She agreed with Council Member Hill's proposal not to accept anything from UNC regarding the Horace Williams property until there had been a resolution on the airport.  Council Member Greene expressed concern about Chapel Hill's, adding that the Town should not discuss a plan if they don’t know whether it's even feasible.  Council Member Greene added that she was not sure, at this point, if the Council should see UNC's concept plan the first week of May.

Mayor pro tem Wiggins pointed out that the Legislature had taken control of the airport.  She could not imagine that UNC would submit an application in its present form with the airport issue unresolved, she said.  Mayor pro tem Wiggins recalled asking questions about the status of the airport when the Council met with its legislative delegation.  She thought that Rep. Verla Insko had replied that the Committee had been gathering information that had been overwhelmingly in support of keeping the airport for AHEC's sake. "That was a big flag right there," said Mayor pro tem Wiggins, adding that UNC was unlikely to submit a plan to the Town until the status of the airport was settled. Mayor pro tem Wiggins pointed out that the Director of AHEC and the new director of Healthcare Services were in support of keeping the airport where it was.  She could not imagine that UNC representatives at that level would communicate a sentiment to the Legislature that the chancellor did not support, Mayor pro tem Wiggins said. 

Council Member Hill agreed that this issue had been unresolved for a long time.  That was the whole point, he said.  Since it was going to change shape, he did not think the Council needed to spend any more time on it until the questions were resolved.

Council Member Strom stated that the common perception was that the Council was in favor of having the airport close.  This is not the official position of this Council, he said, and he proposed leaving their official position exactly where it is right now while the airport issue is being sorted out.  The resolution made sense to him, Council Member Strom stated, and added that he did not understand why Council members were being criticized for not allocating resources to a project "that has a major monkey on its back."

Council Member Strom agreed with Mayor pro tem Wiggins that Carolina North probably would take another form if the airport remains.  That was why the Town should not spend public resources on evaluating and engaging until they know what the final plan and the outcome on the legislative involvement will be, he said.  Council Member Strom expressed gratitude that Mr. Hudson had come to tonight's meeting and clarified the five-year timeline.  It takes pressure off the community if it's going to be status quo for five years, Council Member Strom pointed out. 

Mayor pro tem Wiggins replied that it might not be status quo for five years if the University plans around it.  And Council Member Hill's resolution should be directed toward the Council, she said, because the staff already has a directive from the Council.  Mayor pro tem Wiggins stressed that it was the Council that had initiated work in response to Council or citizen concerns. So the Council should tell themselves to refrain because the staff only follows their direction, she said.

Mayor Foy said that he did not view the resolution as changing anything, but merely affirming what the Council had said.  So he did not see it as controversial for the Council, he said.

Mayor pro tem Wiggins reminded Council members that they had received a petition tonight to gather more information and set up forums.  "How would this resolution cause us to respond to that petition," she asked.  Mayor Foy replied that the Manager would have to take the resolution into account when advising the Council on how to respond to that petition.  Things were in flux right now and the Town needs information from UNC about what their best projections are for this project, said Mayor Foy.  He pointed out that it was not unusual for the Council to see projects that cannot come to fruition for one reason or another.  "This one just happens to be extremely large," said Mayor Foy.

Council Member Ward said that the University seemed to have believed that issues with the Legislature would be resolved by January 1, 2005, and they would then proceeded with Carolina North.  But, over the last year, the administration at UNC had come to realize the economic importance of the Horace Williams Airport, he said.  Council Member Ward agreed that the resolution was an affirmation of where the Council already stood.  He asked that the "whereas no consultation appears to have taken place" clause be eliminated because there was no certainty that it was true.  Deleting that clause would not change the resolution and would keep the Council from saying something that might not be accurate, Council Member Ward noted.

Council Member Verkerk asked to delete the word "unreimbursed" and Mr. Horton suggested also removing the word "annually," since the amount spent each year had varied.

Mayor Foy read the remaining sentence:  "In planning activities for the Horace Williams property the Town has expended tens of thousands of taxpayer dollars over the past decade working toward unrealized plans for the Horace Williams property."

Several Council members remarked that it now understated the amount of money the Town had spent.

Council Member Greene suggested saying "Therefore be it resolved that the Town Council and the staff shall be…"

COUNCIL MEMBER HILL PRESENTED A RESOLUTION, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER STROM.  THE MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

A RESOLUTION REGARDING ALLOCATION OF TOWN RESOURCES FOR CONSIDERATION OF CAROLINA NORTH (2004-04-14/R-14)

WHEREAS, the current planning for the proposed Carolina North development assumes the closing of the Horace Williams Airport; and

WHEREAS, the Legislature has required that the Horace Williams Airport remain open until at least January 1, 2005; and

WHEREAS, the health care of thousands of North Carolinians throughout the State depends on the continued vitality of the AHEC program that flies out of the Horace Williams Airport; and

WHEREAS, State law requires that prior to any move of AHEC from the airport, the Chancellor of UNC consult with the Joint Legislative commission on Governmental Operations regarding the feasibility, cost, and impact on the effectiveness of AHEC’s services; and

WHEREAS, UNC, UNC Hospitals, and the Legislature have not resolved the long-term question on the location of AHEC’s airport; and

WHEREAS, in planning activities for the Horace Williams property, the Town has expended tens of thousands of taxpayer dollars over the past decade in working toward unrealized plans for the Horace Williams property;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council directs the Council and Town staff to be extremely cautious with the allocation of Town resources toward the proposed Carolina North project until UNC, UNC Hospitals, and the Legislature have resolved the status of the airport.

This the 14^th day of April, 2004.

Mayor pro tem Wiggins asked Jonathan Howes why UNC had not fixed the counter at the airport.  It had been broken since April 2003, she said.  Mr. Howes replied that it costs $50,000 to repair that counter and that it had been sent off twice to be fixed and had come back both times not working. UNC was continuing to try to get it working, Mr. Howes explained.

Item 11 - Recommended 2004 Downtown Improvement Project

Mr. Horton recommended that the Council authorize the staff to make additional street lighting improvements. Once Duke Power activates the Downtown streetlights there will be immediate demands for extension of that quality lighting, he said.  Mr. Horton recommended taking that project on as a segment of Streetscape.

COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WARD, TO ADOPT R-16.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (5-0).

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE TOWN MANAGER TO REQUEST THAT DUKE POWER COMPANY INSTALL NEW STREET AND PEDESTRIAN LIGHTS IN TWO SECTIONS OF WEST FRANKLIN STREET INDICATED ON THE ATTACHED MAP AND AS SPECIFIED ON THE DOWNTOWN STREETSCAPE LIGHTING PLAN, AND TO UTILIZE $95,000 of THE REMAINING $96,000 BALANCE OF 1996 STREETS AND SIDEWALKS BOND FUNDS FOR These LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS (2004-04-14/R-16)

WHEREAS, the Council adopted the Downtown Streetscape Master Plan as part of the Town’s Comprehensive Plan; and

WHEREAS, lighting improvements are a fundamental part of the Town’s Downtown Streetscape Master Plan; and

WHEREAS, $96,000 currently exists in bond funding to implement a portion of the Streetscape Master Plan; and

WHEREAS, the Council has received a report from the Town Manager describing a plan for lighting improvements as well as four alternative plans for possible construction by Town labor forces in 2004; and

WHEREAS, available Town resources permit implementation of only one of the five options;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council authorizes the Town Manager to submit a Specialty Lighting Request to Duke Power Company for the installation of Phase Two street and pedestrian lighting in two sections of West Franklin Street as indicated on the attached map, and to allocate $95,000 of the remaining $96,000 balance of the 1996 Streets and Sidewalks bond funds for these proposed lighting improvements.

This the 14^th day of April, 2004.

Item 12 - Establishment of a New Downtown

 Economic Development Organization

Mr. Horton stated that the Downtown Steering Committee had included Mayor Foy and himself, UNC Vice Chancellor Nancy Suttenfield, UNC Trustee Roger Perry, and Downtown Commission Members Charles House, Betty Kenan and Diana McMahon.  They had begun meeting in November 2004, he said, with the objective of bringing forward recommendations a new Downtown Economic Development Organization.  The Committee had completed its work and had submitted recommendations for the Council's consideration, Mr. Horton said.  He stated that the key elements they were asking the Council to authorize would put forward the new organization with operations beginning on July 1, 1005. 

Mr. Horton asked the Council to authorize the Town Attorney to provide the legal services necessary for establishing the new organization.  He also asked them to instruct the Manager to allocate $70,000 from the General Fund budget and $70,000 from the Downtown Tax District Fund in the budget proposal for 2004-05.  The last request was for the Town Clerk to advertise applications to serve on the Board of the new organization, Mr. Horton explained.  He said that the new organization's mission, taken from the heart of the Comprehensive Plan, was to "bring the resources of the Town, University, and Downtown community together to maintain, enhance, and promote Downtown as the social, cultural and spiritual center of Chapel Hill through economic development." 

Mr. Horton noted that the University might provide a staff person from the Business School or the Private Enterprise Institute to get the organization started.  That would allow the new Board to begin work immediately rather than having to spend a long time conducting a search, he said.  Mr. Horton explained that the Council would appoint two members of the seven-member board and that those appointees could be Downtown property owners or business owners. 

Mr. Horton recommended that two additional Board members also be a business owner and a Downtown property owner, so that all four would be from those categories.  He told Council members that the University would appoint two members and would contribute $70,000.     Those six Board members would appoint a seventh, he said, adding that Board members' terms would be staggered so there would be experienced people in office at all times. Mr. Horton conveyed the Committee's belief that the organization had great promise.  He pointed out that this was a different approach to bringing economic attention to the Downtown.

Charles House said that the Downtown Commission was very enthusiastic about the proposal.  He thanked Mayor Foy, Mr. Horton and the other members of the Committee for all their hard work.  Mr. House described the plan as a potential win-win situation for all.  He drew the Council's attention to the last paragraph in a letter of thanks from the Commission.  That paragraph suggested that the slate of candidates for the new Commission reflect Downtown property and business owners. Mr. House asked the Council to consider allowing the Downtown Commission to put forward a slate of candidates for consideration.

Virginia Knapp, speaking on behalf of the Chapel Hill-Carrboro Chamber of Commerce, commended the Council for the dedication and work that they had devoted to Downtown issues.  The Chamber wholeheartedly supported the work of the Steering Committee and the Manager's recommendation, she said.  Ms. Knapp encouraged Council members to consider the Downtown Commission's slate of candidates, as Mr. House had recommended.  The Chamber was committed to supporting the new organization and its mission and looked forward to working with each of the partners, she said.  Ms. Knapp commented that the new organization was the embodiment of progress and change in the Downtown. She described the recommendation as a bold step in the right direction and expressed appreciation for the Council's support of it.   

Council Member Ward asked Mr. House about potential funding for the Downtown Commission. Mr. House replied that without funding the Commission would become an advocacy committee, raising funds on its own.  The Commission had talked with the Chamber of Commerce about the possibility of staff support, he said.  Mr. House told Council members that the Commission might continue performing some tasks that the new commission will not wish to do.

Mr. Horton pointed out that the Council would not be limited only to the slate put forward by the Downtown Commission.  They could consider applicants as they arise, he said. 

COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER STROM, TO ADOPT R-17.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ACTIONS NECESSARY TO ESTABLISH A NEW DOWNTOWN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION (2004-04-14/R-17)

WHEREAS, The Town Council of the Town of Chapel Hill received and discussed a report from the Mayor’s Downtown Task Force on October 8, 2003; and

WHEREAS, following discussion, the Council authorized the appointment of a Chapel Hill Downtown Steering Committee, composed of members from the Town and the University and downtown representatives, to further explore creation of a new downtown economic development organization; and

WHEREAS, the Committee conducted a series of meetings beginning in November, 2003 and concluding in March 2004; and

WHEREAS, the recommendations of the Committee are summarized in Attachments 1, 2, and 3 of the memorandum to the Council dated April 14, 2004: (1) Chapel Hill Downtown Steering Committee: Summary of Final Decisions; (2) Downtown Chapel Hill: Foundational Elements (Revised); and (3) Draft Downtown Chapel Hill Unified 501(c)3 Organization; and

WHEREAS, the Council wishes to proceed with the establishment of the new downtown economic development organization; and

WHEREAS, the Council wishes to receive further citizen comment on the proposed organization as a part of its budget development process;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Town Council of the Town of Chapel Hill, North Carolina that:

• the Town Attorney is authorized to provide legal services necessary for establishment of the new organization;
• the Manager is instructed to include an allocation of $70,000 in the 2004-05 General Fund budget proposal and $70,000 in the 2004-05 Downtown Service District Fund budget proposal for the new organization;
• the Town Clerk is directed to advertise the Council’s intent to make its appointments to the Board of Directors of the new organization on the following schedule:

¨ Advertisement placed in local newspapers beginning April 18 through May 16.

¨ Nominations placed on Council’s agenda for May 24.

¨ Appointments placed on Council’s agenda for June 14.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council requests that Chancellor Moeser appoint the University’s representatives on the Board of Directors and take such other actions as are necessary for the University to participate in the new organization so that operations may begin by July 1, 2004.

This the 14^th day of April, 2004.

Item 13 - Response to Petition regarding the Possible Creation

 of Student Seats on Town Advisory Boards and Commissions

Council Member Ward asked the Council to pass this item on in a way that would allow various boards to see it and reply.  They had arrived at a number of interesting ideas and vexing questions and would appreciate the Council's and advisory boards' input, he said.   

COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK MOVED, SECONDED BY MAYOR PRO TEM WIGGINS, TO ADOPT R-18.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

A RESOLUTION REFERRING COMMENTS OF THE TOWN COUNCIL AND THE REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE TO STUDY THE POSSIBLE CREATION OF STUDENT SEATS ON TOWN ADVISORY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS TO TOWN ADVISORY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS (2004-04-14/R-18)

WHEREAS, the Council at its November 24, 2003, Council meeting received and referred a petition requesting that student seats be provided on Town advisory boards and commissions; and

WHEREAS, on January 12, 2004, the Council created a Council Committee to study this issue, with Mayor pro tem Edith Wiggins, and Council Members Mark Kleinschmidt and Jim Ward; and

WHEREAS, the Council Committee suggested that a committee be formed that included representation from the University, the Town’s two high schools, as well as current members of up to three Town advisory boards; and

WHEREAS, the Committee to Study the Possible Creation of Student Seats on Town Advisory Boards and Commissions was formed, and met on March 18 and 25 and April 1, and formulated a list of possible methods for creating student seats on Town advisory boards and commissions;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council refers the comments from the Council’s April 14, 2004 discussion as well as the suggestions set out by the Committee’s report to the Council of April 14, 2004, to each of the Town’s advisory boards and commissions (with the exception of the Personnel Appeals Committee), the Town Attorney, and the Town Information Officer for comments and suggestions on the best possible method of creating student seats on Town advisory boards and commissions.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the advisory boards and commissions are requested to place this issue on their next agenda and report back to the Council as quickly as possible.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that when advisory boards schedule this issue on their agenda for discussion, that the members of this Committee be notified so that those interested might attend and participate in that discussion.

This the 14^th day of April, 2004.

Item 14 - Consideration of OI-4 Zoning District Review Procedures

Mayor Foy pointed out that this had first come on the agenda in March but the Council had not considered it at that time. 

Chapel Hill resident Joyce Brown requested a modification to the transportation section of the OI-4 zone created in the spring of 2001 and to the subsequent development plan transportation stipulations, which were passed in October 2001.  Ms. Brown explained that the transportation section of the development plan modification #2 did not give much idea of whether the goal of mitigation of traffic impacts was being met.  She stated that the one-inch thick section was too long and so technical that it was difficult to understand.  The section included numerous tables and numbers that are hardly intelligible to the ordinary citizen, said Ms. Brown. 

Ms. Brown remarked that the Town was being "drowned in paper" rather than being given the information necessary to assess the traffic situation on UNC's main campus.  She asked the Council to direct the staff to bring back language to modify the transportation section of OI-4 that would require the University to present an annual report to the Council.  This report should be short, clear, and concise, using language easily understandable to citizens on the identified impacts, proposed mitigation measures, and implementation plans, and whether what is being done is working to mitigate adverse traffic impacts so far, said Ms. Brown.  She also requested that if any adjustments were deemed necessary the Town Manager would report those to the Council at a regular Town Council meeting.  

Diana Steele read a petition from the Coalition of Neighbors Near Campus (CNC) and the Neighborhoods for Responsible Growth (NRG).  The petition requested changes to the OI-4 zoning and asked the Council to add two additional findings necessary for approval.

Mayor Foy, noting that this was not the first time the Council had discussed this item, encouraged Council members to reach a conclusion on how to proceed.

Council Member Harrison expressed support for having the Planning Board make a recommendation rather than a review.  He also endorsed "with enthusiasm" the proposal that Joyce Brown had brought forward.  Council Member Harrison agreed that a short, pointed bulletin from UNC would help everyone understand what was being done on campus.

Council Member Strom expressed support for all of the points listed in the agenda item, Elaine Barney's attachment #1, and Ms. Brown's suggestions.  Council Member Strom proposed combining these with what Ms. Steele had presented tonight about a public view of projects and recommendations.  He said that all were constructive changes and recommended that the Council determine a process for enacting them.

Mayor Foy ascertained from Mr. Karpinos that the process would be an amendment to the LUMO.  The general procedure would be to call a public hearing and have the public comment on proposals that the Council could adopt, Mr. Karpinos explained.  These would include referral to the Planning Board for a recommendation.  Mr. Karpinos pointed out that the OI-4 district had been developed in a collaborative process with the University.  There had been some discussion about talking to UNC about this as well, he said.  Mr. Karpinos stated that the Council could initiate a process to mend the LUMO, refer it to the staff and the Planning Board, conduct a public hearing and proceed to act on it.

Council Member Ward expressed support for all of the suggestions received this evening and earlier.  They were reasonable and constructive recommendations that would improve the process, he said.  Council Member Ward suggested forwarding the suggestions to UNC for a response before getting into a formal zoning change.  He predicted that the University would be mainly supportive.

Council Member Strom ascertained from Council Member Ward that he would not perceive the University's rejection of a section as a "deal stopper" but as an opportunity to work difficulties out beforehand rather than at a pubic forum.  Council Member Strom asked Council Member Ward if he would be opposed to also setting the process in motion to initiate a zoning amendment.  Council Member Ward inquired about the schedule for a public hearing.  Mr. Horton replied that the hearing probably would be in the fall.  Council Member Ward agreed that initiating the process and asking the Mayor to start a conversation with UNC could be done simultaneously if that timeframe was acceptable to the Council. 

Council Member Kleinschmidt agreed that a formal transmission to UNC would be appropriate.  He also agreed that the Council should go ahead with the process.  The University seems to understand that the ad hoc approach does not work, said Council Member Kleinschmidt, stressing that he did not want people to perceive this as an adversarial process.  Everyone recognizes that amendments to OI-4 must be made, he said.  Council Member Kleinschmidt agreed that all of the proposed changes seemed reasonable.

Mayor pro tem Wiggins asked Council Member Greene, who had originally petitioned the Council about the 90-day timeframe, if she had anything in mind other than adding a concept review and more than 90 days. Council Member Green replied that the Town needed both, noting that one of the suggestions on the list was to allow more time for perimeter zones.  The Council should consider that there might be a change in the interior of campus that will have such a tremendous transportation impact on the exterior that it might need longer attention, she said.  Council Member Greene said that at the moment, however, she just wanted to thank the staff for making a good start.  She asked that both changes be included and that the Planning Board be given two meetings for consideration.

Mayor pro tem Wiggins asked if there had ever been a complete answer given to why 90 days was insufficient.  She suggested that the Town analyze the process so that a longer review period would not just give them more time to repeat what they did before.

Council Member Greene suggested making it 90 business days or 90 days when the Council is sure to be in session.

Council Member Kleinschmidt agreed with Mayor pro tem Wiggins that the Council would not want to repeat any dysfunctional problems. 

Mayor Foy recommended asking the staff to either explain what the process was or to initiate a process.  Mr. Karpinos recommended that the Council allow the staff to bring back a resolution giving the Council the ability to call a hearing and establish a date for that hearing.  The staff would explain the process, he said, and the Council could adopt the resolution identifying the date for the hearing.  The Council would refer that to the staff and Planning Board for a recommendation, said Mr. Karpinos. 

Mayor Foy said that he thought the staff had already sent the list to UNC.  Mr. Horton could not recall whether they had or not, but pointed out that Jonathan Howes and Linda Convissor faithfully insure that the University has such matters called to their attention.  Mayor Foy recommended that the Council, for now, request a proposed procedure from the staff and see what percolates through the University in the interim.  Council members agreed by consensus.         

THE ISSUE WAS REFERRED TO STAFF TO BRING BACK A RESOLUTION SETTING OUT A PROCESS TO PROCEED AND ESTABLISHING A DATE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING.  ADOPTED BY CONSENSUS.

Item 15 - Appointment to the Community Design Commission

The Council appointed Jonathan Whitney to the Community Design Commission.

	Council Members
Community Design Commission		Foy	Greene	Harrison	Hill	Kleinschmidt	Strom	Verkerk	Ward	Wiggins	TOTAL
Nancy Morton
Brandon Perkins
Martin Rody
Jaclyn Taafee
Jonathan Whitney		X	X	X	X	X	X	X	X	X	9

Item 16 - Petitions: None.

Item 17 - Request for Closed Session to Discuss Property

Acquisition, Personnel, and Litigation Matters

COUNCIL MEMBER KLEINSCHMIDT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK, TO GO INTO CLOSED SESSION.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

The meeting adjourned at 10:40 p.m.