SUMMARY MINUTES OF A SPECIAL MEETING
OF THE CHAPEL HILL TOWN COUNCIL
WITH THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2001, AT 7 P.M.
Mayor Rosemary Waldorf called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
Council members present were Flicka Bateman, Pat Evans, Kevin Foy, Lee Pavão, Bill Strom, Jim Ward, and Edith Wiggins. Council Member Joyce Brown was absent, excused.
Staff members present were Town Manager Cal Horton, Assistant Town Managers Sonna Loewenthal and Florentine Miller, Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos, Assistant to the Manager Bill Stockard, Planning Director Roger Waldon, and Town Clerk Joyce Smith.
1 - Presentation by the University of North Carolina and Consultants
UNC Task Force Co-convenor Jonathan Howes introduced the other UNC representatives: Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs Sue Kitchen, Vice Chancellor and Senior UNC Counsel Susan Ehringhaus, Task Force Co-convenor Nancy Suttonfield, former Interim Vice Chancellor and Horace Williams project coordinator Jack Evans, Facilities Planning Office representative Peter Chowcheck, Associate Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs Dean Bresianni, Vice President of UNC Healthcare Mary Beck, attorneys Pat Crawford and David Parker, Associate Vice Chancellor for Facilities Services Jennifer Knoll, Associate Vice Chancellor for Facilities Service Bruce Runberg, Coordinator of Local Relations Aaron Nelson, and Linda Convissor. Mr. Howes also introduced members of the consulting team: Adam Gross, Derut Tinani, Jim Wheeler, George Alexi, and Ellen Miller.
Mr. Howes explained that this plan differed from the original land use plan, which had not been a program for development or financing. Noting that the University agreed to consult widely with the community on this project, he stated that tonight’s presentation was a step in that process. Mr. Howes pointed out that there would also be two meeting on campus and a meeting with the Town of Carrboro.
Co-convenor Susan Ehringhaus explained that the University had used the concepts embodied in the JJR plan as a jumping off point for the current plan. She stated that planners had improved upon the original plan by refining it to reduce burdens in several areas: environmental impact, neighborhood setbacks, road network, and scale of the project.
Nancy Suttonfield, Vice Chancellor for Finance and Administration, said that she and Chancellor Moeser view the Town as important stakeholders in the planning process for the Horace Williams property. She added that the University would take the community’s views and reactions into consideration during development of that site.
Consultant Adam Gross emphasized that the plan was a work in progress. He explained that planners had used characteristics of the Town of Chapel Hill and the region as a guide while thinking about what the mission. Mr. Gross said that University planners had developed two visions:
· Strategic Vision. To create a village of mixed uses, including research space and commercialization, that fosters relationships with ongoing work at UNC-CH.
· Master Plan Vision. Using the JJR Plan as a jumping off point, to develop a master plan for the highest and best use of the Horace Williams property over the next 100 years.
Mr. Gross outlined the parameters that the planners used in defining their goals. They asked themselves if the development would:
1. Help better prepare students.
2. Help recruit and retain students.
3. Enable new knowledge.
4. Help recruit and retain faculty.
5. Elevate the quality of life for the people of North Carolina.
Mr. Gross said the planners then developed a series of planning principles to guide them when thinking about the physical development of Horace Williams, Mr. Gross said. These principles are:
1. To develop public/private/government research partnerships to bring complementary resources and opportunities--both fiscal and intellectual--for faculty and students.
2. To help foster the transformation to a digitized environment.
3. To support the movement of UNC to an ever-higher intellectual level.
4. To ensure that the program component and the physical plan are compatible with the community.
Over the past 15 months, Mr. Gross explained, planners had developed a series of early site concepts. He said they also had held meetings with elected officials and made a presentation to the Chapel Hill planning staff. Mr. Gross said they had continued to develop concepts in the spring of 2000. Then, he said, they brought in environmental consultant Tom Cahill and developed engineering concepts and financing models. Mr. Gross stated that the University had wanted the plan to have some grounding in fiscal reality, particularly in relation to environmental issues, before presenting it to the community. He noted that they had presented their work to Chancellor Moeser in September 2000, and had made an interim report to their advisory committee in November.
Mr. Gross noted that the 900+ acre site was only a mile and a half from Franklin Street. He pointed out that the bell tower on the main campus is visible from the Horace Williams site. Noting that that the site is almost twice the size of the University’s main campus and many times the size of Downtown Chapel Hill, Mr. Gross said that planners had used Chapel Hill streets (Franklin, Columbia, Rosemary, Henderson, Mallet and Cameron) as “form-givers” for their work.
Mr. Gross listed other significant form-givers: the two creeks running through the site, the airport, setbacks from property lines, and existing buildings. He noted the series of different zones and stated the notion of rezoning the entire property to one zone for this type of development would need to be revisited.
Mr. Gross displayed a plan that had been developed during the 1998 JJR study. He explained that the new plan is more compact and takes up less land (30% of the site rather than the 56% proposed by the JJR plan). Mr. Gross showed diagrams comparing the two plans. He pointed out that one of the mixed-use areas had been pulled more toward the center of the site on the revised plan. Mr. Gross also showed how the new plan would make roads more compact and would reconnected them so as to make them more compatible with the neighborhood. He noted that land use had stayed consistent with the JJR plan, and repeated that the biggest difference between the two plans was the amount of open space that the new plan retains (530 rather than the 260 acres).
Mr. Gross explained that planners had used a “smart growth” approach, which means that the Horace Williams development would:
· Be more Town-centered and compact.
· Be transit-oriented and pedestrian-oriented.
· Have a greater mix of housing, commercial use, and retail uses.
· Preserve open space and environmental amenities.
Mr. Gross pointed out that the proposed street network follows the natural terrain, which has some significant slopes and water forms. He showed slides of what some of the roads would look like, and indicated where a dedicated bus line might parallel the existing train line. He showed the pedestrian network of Horace Williams and bike trails that would connect Chapel Hill to Carrboro. Mr. Gross also pointed out where formal open sites might be, as well as large open spaces.
Mr. Gross listed the University’s goals for stormwater retention:
· Minimum disturbance of site.
· Work with the natural contours.
· Limit removal of existing natural vegetation.
· Keep building and parking envelope as compatible as possible.
· Maintain riparian buffer.
· Maintain natural hydrologic cycle.
· No net increase in volume of runoff.
· Avoid unnecessary impervious surfaces.
· Maintain recharge of rainfall to groundwater.
· Provide retention beds to mitigate stormwater.
· Maintain infiltration for existing vegetation.
Mr. Gross showed conceptual diagrams of how drainage would work. He noted that the stormwater plan includes steep slopes and green spaces as water retention areas. He said that there would be a series of self-reliant and self-contained small villages, which would be tied in with retail and transit. Mr. Gross showed drawings of those villages, including the buildings for research and the related companies that UNC wants to work with. He indicated where structured parking would be built incrementally over time, and outlined where the roads would go and pointed to the natural landscape buffer on Airport Road. Mr. Gross also showed where the town center, playing fields, office buildings, 2500-car parking structure, and office space with retail on the ground floor would be located.
Mr. Gross noted that they were at the preliminary stages of housing discussions but stated that they would be able to get 2000-3000 units of housing in the area, depending on their sizes and uses. He said that the site would have traditional streets, which would be compatible with the character and spirit of Chapel Hill. Mr. Gross added that the recommended program would include:
· 5,000,000 square feet or institutional research
· 2,300,000 square feet for residential
· 120,000 square feet for retail
· 31,000 square feet for civic/community
· 8,251,000 square feet total
2 - Questions by the Mayor and Town Council
Council Member Strom inquired about number of parking spaces needed to accommodate 45,000 trips per day. Mr. Tinani replied that the gross numbers were 3.25 spaces per thousand for the research buildings. He compared that to 4-5 per thousand at Research Industrial Park. Mr. Tinani noted that 5.8 square feet times 3.25 gives about 18,000 spaces. He explained that the residential component would be 1-1/2 spaces per unit and emphasized that the majority of parking would be structured rather than spread out over the land.
Council Member Strom said that he was trying to get a sense of the impact on the Town of that number of vehicles and the scale of the proposed residential and research space. He inquired about the total number of parking spaces, and Mr. Tinani estimated it at 22,000-23,000 spaces.
Mayor Waldorf confirmed that 45,000 road trips per day was considered a cap and that the plan was to stay below that.
Council Member Bateman, pointing out that school overcrowding was an increasing issue, asked if the University had considered the impact on the schools. Mr. Howes pointed out that the site was adjacent to an elementary, a middle school and a high school. He added that planners would discuss this issue with the school system once they have better figures. Council Member Bateman pointed out that the elementary school already is overcrowded. She noted that projections for the middle and upper schools are that they would be overcrowded in a decade or so.
Mr. Gross remarked that a similar project had built a school as part of its development. Noting that there were sites within the project destined for civic buildings, he suggested that one of those could become an additional school if the demand were there.
Council Member Bateman asked the Town Attorney how residential growth on the property would be affected if the Town were to adopt the proposed Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance. Mr. Karpinos replied that a residential development would be required to receive a certificate from the school system saying that there were adequate schools before it could receive approvals from the Town. Council Member Bateman asked for clarification on whether this development would be exempted. Mr. Karpinos replied that the ordinance as it has been drafted does exempt University dormitory housing and housing reserved for senior citizens. Any other residential housing, he explained, would be required to go through the process under the ordinance. Council Member Bateman expressed relief that some of the civic buildings could be used for schools.
Mayor Waldorf added support for Council Member Bateman’s suggestion that the University engage in serious conversations about projections and numbers. She noted that the Town has repeatedly found itself behind the curve in terms of school capacity.
Council Member Foy asked for more information about the project’s financing background. He inquired about the tax and/or payment-in-lieu implications and wondered how the Town would acquire revenue to support the added infrastructure. Consultant Ellen Miller replied that much of the development would consist of private enterprises that would be normal businesses from a tax point of view.
Mayor Waldorf asked if the University would enter into an agreement with the lessee to make a payment-in-lieu of taxes equivalent to the tax rate. Ms. Miller replied that the precise structure had not been determined. She added, though, that the concept and the result were what Mayor Waldorf had outlined.
Council Member Foy asked if housing would be privately owned and/or leased from the University. Ms. Miller replied not necessarily, adding that it was contemplated that it be institutional housing but that some of it might be available for private citizens. This was a level of detail that they had not yet reached, Ms. Miller said. Council Member Foy asked if they had contemplated, for example, that someone would pay the equivalent of whatever the property taxes were. Ms. Miller replied that they would do so in the private type of housing (i.e. not a dormitory).
Mr. Gross referred to a “married student graduate housing crisis,” but noted that they had never discussed having undergraduate housing in this project. Ms. Ehringhaus stated that if the University entered into a lease agreement with a company that wanted to establish a research facility at Horace Williams then they would expect that facility to be on the tax rolls.
Mayor Waldorf asked if these questions would be settled through a Memorandum of Agreement or a zoning ordinance. Ms. Ehringhaus replied that was the philosophy and the expectation.
Council Member Ward suggested that the University make its housing similar to its employment opportunities by including affordable housing.
Council Member Wiggins asked if the University had identified other land for the Town’s municipal facility. Mr. Howes replied that the University had thought long and hard before earmarking the current municipal facility’s land for development. He said that the University wanted to help the Town facilitate moving that facility but do not yet know exactly how that would be done.
Mayor pro tem Pavão asked what the University plans to build over the next 10-25 years on the Horace Williams tract. Mayor Waldorf added, “or even in the next three years.” Ms. Miller replied that they did not yet know, adding that development often is slow within the first five to ten years until there is growth of several hundred thousand square feet. She emphasized that this relates to the kinds of uses and needs that arise.
Mayor pro tem Pavão acknowledged that major growth would not occur before 20 years but expressed surprise that the University did not have some idea of what they might start with in five years. Ms. Miller replied that some of the pods were divisible and that pieces can be thoughtfully and prudently developed one at a time. Mr. Gross mentioned a research park at the University of Virginia, which was built out in five or six years. Mayor pro tem Pavao asked if they might build research space first and then housing later. Mr. Howes remarked that they were, at this point, merely trying to decide how to remediate the old landfill and the chemical waste disposal.
Mayor Waldorf mentioned a development agreement between the Town and the University. She said that the Town/Gown Committee had worked on this, and asked if it still was the kind of arrangement the University had in mind. Mr. Howes replied that the University would need an agreement as a basis for approaching the Town when they are a little further along in the planning stages.
Council Member Pat Evans expressed concern that there would not be adequate recreation space at ultimate build-out. She asked if the Town and University could use some of the fifty-year land for baseball and soccer fields in the interim. Mr. Gross replied that the University intended to have as many such fields as possible, but noted that the site is very hilly. He commented that it would be in everyone’s interest to get as much active open space as possible to share with the Town.
Council Member Bateman expressed hope that any new municipal sites would include the Animal Protection Society as well as the Town’s municipal operation. Mr. Howes replied that his references to “the municipal yard” encompassed all of the uses that are present there.
Council Member Bateman asked if the plan assumes that the airport will remain functional. Mr. Howes replied that it did. Council Member Bateman asked the consultants if they had found that people do not mind living and working next to airports. Ms. Miller cited other similar facilities where she said it was considered an advantage to have an airstrip. She stressed that it was not a deterrent.
Council Member Bateman asked for an indication of the flight pattern on the map, as well as the civic sites where schools might be located. Mr. Howes indicated the flight patterns and Mr. Tinani showed where the civic sites might be.
Mayor Waldorf noted that viewing the airport as an asset indicated that the University planned on having significantly more activity there in the future. Ms. Miller replied that those partnerships already are forming so it is unlikely that there would be more growth. She explained that she had meant that an airstrip is not a deterrent and that airports have been used as marketing assets in other similar parks. Ms. Miller added that virtually none of the companies in Charlottesville use the airport even though it had been an important marketing tool there.
Council Member Foy asked how many acres were attributed to the airport. Mr. Tinani replied that it was 170 acres, 116 of which are runway.
Council Member Foy asked if the total tract was 979 acres plus the airport. Mr. Tinani said that it was, adding that 24% of the site would be occupied by buildings and roads. Mr. Tinani explained that 170 acres had been committed to the airport and the physical plant. What had changed, he said, was the amount of land the University would be developing. Mr. Tinani stressed that the University would not touch the 256 additional acres that had been proposed in the JJR plan.
Council Member Foy asked what assurance the University would give the Town that the land not being developed in this project would not be developed in the future. He also inquired about what would become of the airport if it were no longer used. Mr. Howes replied that the University had no plans to alter the use of the airport. If that changed, he explained, the University would discuss it with the Town. He added that eventual plans for the undeveloped land would be part of a development agreement with the Town.
Council Member Foy noted that the 116 acres being counted as open space actually are part of the airport. He asked about getting assurance that the amount of open space contemplated in this plan would be permanent. Mr. Howes recommended putting that on the table when the Town and the University negotiate.
Council Member Ward noted that the University’s stated goal was to elevate the life of the people of North Carolina. He suggested adding the goal of elevating the life for people in Chapel Hill, Carrboro and Orange County. Council Member Ward then asked where 45,000 daily trips would be coming from and going to. Traffic consultant George Alexi replied that an estimated 50% of those trips would come from the northeast, outside of Chapel Hill. He added that a large proportion of trips (about 30%) would be by transit from the south and emphasized the need for improved transit in that direction. Ten percent, Mr. Alexi said, would come from the east and west.
Council Member Ward asked about the 60-acre home site that is on the property. Ms. Ehringhaus replied that this site had not been intended as part of the master plan. She added, however, that this was not an absolute decision, noting that 24 acres of the site was developable land.
Council Member Bateman expressed concern that the civic sites were not large enough for schools. Mr. Gross indicated larger civic sites in other areas of the plan. He pointed out that the University was open to the idea of building schools because this would fit into the model they have in mind.
Mayor Waldorf noted that there would be schools at Southern Village and Meadowmont. She remarked that there should be discussions about reserving the right amount of land in the right place for that purpose, stressing that this issue should not be left vague.
Council Member Bateman recommended that the University talk with the school board and then make schools part of their presentation. Mr. Gross agreed.
Mayor Waldorf asked if the University had done any calculations regarding the load on the water and sewer system. She asked if 8.25 million square feet would be sufficient. Mr. Tinani replied that OWASA had told the University that there was enough capacity for both water and sewer. Mayor Waldorf asked for clarification of whether this included future growth, and Mr. Tinani explained that OWASA had said they could provide water as and when it was needed over the next 25 years. He said that they had not yet done a computer model, but had been told that it could be done by tapping into the existing sewer lines and water supply. Mayor Waldorf requested that the Town receive any written information regarding this. Mr. Gross suggested getting the University, OWASA and the Town’s planning staff together to talk about the issue. Mayor Waldorf also requested copies of the slides shown tonight, and Mr. Gross agreed to provide a disk of the presentation.
3 - Questions and Comments from Citizens
Alison Weiner, representing the Orange County Commissioners for Affordable Housing Task Force, noted that the average price of new homes during 2000 was more than $270,000, which means that one needs to earn between $85-100,000 per year to afford one, she said. Ms. Weiner pointed out that a UNC housekeeper who earns about $17,000 per year could not afford any of the Town’s one-, two- or three-bedroom rental units at the 1998 market rate. Those who earn about $42,000/year, Ms. Weiner said, could afford only 14% of the homes sold in 1998 and only 50% of the three-bedroom rental units. She noted that the University was finding it increasingly difficult to hire staff because of the lack of affordable housing and that UNC students were finding it difficult to find affordable off-campus housing.
Ms. Weiner pointed out that UNC has an extraordinary opportunity to accommodate all members of its community with the Horace Williams tract. She asked the University to ensure that the housing needs of all its campus community members were addressed and to share in responsibility for acquiring, designing and constructing affordable housing with the local community. Ms. Weiner asked the University to extend its public commitment to “a bed for every head” for additional students in two ways:
· Extend this commitment to include additional staff and faculty and to provide additional housing for the existing student population.
· Request that the University collaborate with Orange County to develop a comprehensive housing plan for anticipated increases in staff and faculty.
Ms. Weiner, explaining that she worked near the planning staff at the University, expressed deep appreciation for the planning process that she said had been done with the best of intentions. She emphasized, though, that affordable and diversified housing must become a significant, integral part of the Horace Williams plan and of the University agenda in general. Ms. Weiner asked for the Town Council’s support in calling on the University to help solve the affordable housing crisis.
Council Member Foy agreed with Ms. Weiner’s suggestion, noting that a recent data book listed the average house in Chapel Hill at more than $300,000. Council Member Evans commented that numbers in the data book were drawn from zip code areas that skew the numbers upward.
Joe Herzenberg, representing the Greenways Commission, noted that there is a greenway through the Horace Williams tract along the Chapel Hill side of the railroad tracks. He explained that it connects the Bolin Creek Trail with other trails farther north. Mr. Herzenberg asked the Town Council to support keeping that trail.
James Carnahan, founder of The Village Project (which advocates for sustainable land use and transportation), pointed out that there were 25,000 estimated employees for the Horace Williams project. Noting that most of these employees would be coming from elsewhere, he suggested addressing the question of where they would be coming from and how they would get to Horace Williams. Mr. Carnahan also suggested working toward alternatives to the 45,000 trips per day. As an environmentalist, he said, he was impressed with how much would be preserved, and with the low impact development, preservation of streams, stormwater management and impervious surface issues. Mr. Carnahan cautioned, however, that this development would not be a “village” but a huge employment center containing small villages. He noted that air quality impacts on surrounding neighborhoods would be enormous. Mr. Carnahan suggested finding alternative ways for people to come and go from the site and advised planning for where they would all live.
Ruby Sinreich outlined some of what had been contained in the JJR plan, which she had helped develop. She said that public input had not figured into the new plan in terms of housing and transportation. Commenting that the Horace Williams property should be an opportunity for the University to take more responsibility for housing, Ms. Sinreich expressed disappointment that there would be no undergraduate and non-faculty/staff housing.
Ms. Sinreich asked if the University planned to link the pace of development to transit. She asked to hear more about how transit would work and to see more detail in the sketches. Ms. Sinreich advised against making this like the “centennial campus,” which she felt was cold and impersonal. She remarked that the Horace Williams development would affect the Town more than the Meadowmont development, and expressed concern about the Town’s lack of control over the project.
Dan Coleman stated that Town roads would not be able to handle 45,000 trips per day, adding that his lungs could not take that even if the roads could. Mr. Coleman urged the University to supply an integrated traffic impact plan for the Town, along with a traffic management program to keep roads manageable and citizens’ health in tact. Mr. Coleman pointed out that the University’s presentation had not mentioned the “very problematic” hazardous waste site on the tract and suggested that the Council urge the University to continue the remediation process there. Mr. Coleman also recommended finding a way to get the University to provide more housing. He suggested asking UNC to build housing first since that need was so critical.
Johnny Randall asked the University to commit to creating dedicated nature preserves to prevent future development in significantly natural areas. He also requested that the University commit to conservation easements in other areas.
William Wood noted that his property taxes had gone up 300% in ten years. He said that the only thing he was getting for that was garbage pick-up. Mr. Wood pointed to his property on the map and noted that it was bordered on two sides by the University. He stated that he was very concerned about buffers, and requested information about plans for the nearby road, creek and 200 year-old cemetery.
Mayor Waldorf agreed to allow the University’s master planners to respond to Mr. Wood’s questions at a later date.
Council Member Bateman requested that the Council be given copies of that response.
Louis Taff asked why this project was being done now and why it would be focused on biological sciences as opposed to other sciences. He also asked exactly what types of facilities would be built there and if there would be functions available to the public. Mr. Taff asked for more information about traffic and parking, such as how many cars per hour would be added to Airport Road.
Jeff Herrich expressed concern about the open-endedness of the plan, and suggested using public transportation to help control traffic.
Scott Hinson encouraged the Town Council to think about open spaces and spaces for schools with playgrounds and ball fields. He also wondered how big Airport Road would become and what the impact would be on the lives of citizens who live in that area.
4 - Additional Questions and Comments from Council Members
Council Member Ward asked how an additional 45,000 trips would fit into the transit plans for the main campus. Mr. Alexi replied that a very large portion of trips that go to the main campus would be by transit. He explained that parking would get tighter on the main campus, so the transit relationships between the two campuses would be critical to the plan. Mr. Alexi noted that there would be more than 60,000 trips per day if it were developed as a typical suburban development.
Mr. Alexi stressed that UNC is committed to trip reduction strategies and is showing that commitment in the way they are dealing with transportation on the main campus. He said that the University is coming to the table with shared funding for improved transit, improved park and ride, and housing on the main campus. Mr. Alexi stated that these were all new approaches to transportation.
Council Member Ward said that he was still curious about how the development would use the rail corridor with a bus line versus Airport Road. Mr. Alexi replied that the first portion of the development would rely on adding more and improved bus service on Airport Road as almost a continuous shuttle. Over time, he said, there would be a regional transportation plan that would include a fixed guideway connection that would carry more people faster.
Council Member Ward asked if space was being set aside for a fixed guideway from the north. Mr. Alexi replied that the University would provide the right-of-way and corridors for a connection on the site. He noted, though, that there are restrictions against putting a fixed guideway through the western part of Chapel Hill. Council Member Ward requested that planners quantify the volume and impact of this development. Mr. Alexi agreed, noting that it would be a shared responsibility and the University would not presume to run rail tracks or bus lines through neighborhoods.
Mayor Waldorf stated that this must be a mutual inquiry. She said that the Council needed real numbers to be able to get it fixed in their minds. Mayor Waldorf noted that the development would require park and ride decks and enormous increases in the level of transit service. Mr. Alexi agreed that this needed to be done jointly and that it was time to begin that dialogue.
Council Member Wiggins asked Mr. Howes how the University would deal with the toxic waste site. She asked if there had been any evidence that the waste had moved from University property. Mr. Howes explained that there were two sites—an old landfill and a chemical waste facility. He said that the University had been working on plans to deal with both and would share those plans with the Town. He added that these must be dealt with before the project can be economically viable.
Mr. Howes pointed out that this was “a work in progress.” He said that there were two meetings scheduled on campus with faculty and staff and that UNC would be glad to have anyone there who would like to come. Adding that they would soon be meeting with Carrboro’s elected officials and with the school board, Mr. Howes stressed that planners would address questions raised tonight as they move forward in the process. Mr. Howes stated that a written report covering all that had been presented tonight was available at the back of the room.
Council Member Bateman requested that someone answer the question raised by Mr. Taff regarding motivation. Mr. Howes replied that some of that answer can be found in the report and had been part of the presentation. He explained that as the University expands and changes the opportunity for collaboration with the private sector was becoming more apparent. He said that this was one reason why the University began to look at the Horace Williams property.
Mr. Howes noted that UNC was keenly aware of the housing issues and would address those. He characterized the property as an under-performing and under-utilized asset for the community as well as the University. He said that the University was striving to find a productive way to employ this asset. Mr. Howes added that the University could not accommodate all of the things that it needed to do on its on-campus property because it is nearly built-out.
Mayor Waldorf thanked University representatives for their response to community needs, housing, environmental concerns, transit needs, and fiscal issues. She also thanked them for addressing citizens' comments and for being candid about what they know and do not know.
The meeting adjourned at 9:28 p.m.