MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE

       TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL, THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 30, 1989

 

Mayor Howes called the meeting to order.

 

Council Members in attendance were:

 

     Julie Andresen     Nancy Preston

     David Godschalk    James C. Wallace

     Joe Herzenberg     Arthur Werner

     David Pasquini     Roosevelt Wilkerson, Jr.

 

Also in attendance were: Assistant to the Mayor Lisa Price, Council Members Elect Joyce Brown and Alan Rimer, Town Manager David Taylor, Assistant Town Managers Sonna Loewenthal and Florentine Miller, Public Safety Director Cal Horton, Planning Director Roger Waldon, Assistant to the Attorney Richard Sharpless, and Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos.

 

Mayor Howes noted that there were no ceremonies or public hear­ings scheduled for this evening.

 

Mayor Howes noted that this evening's meeting was the Council's second regular meeting in November. Mayor Howes noted that the meeting was being held on Thursday due to the National League of Cities meeting earlier in the week. Mayor Howes also noted this evening's meeting would be the last regular meeting for Council Members Godschalk and Pasquini. Mayor Howes noted that Council Members Elect Brown and Rimer would be sworn in on December 4th.

 

Petitions

 

Mayor Howes suggested that the meeting time for December 4th be changed from 7:30 to 8:00 P.M., to allow Chief District Court Judge Patricia Hunt to administer the oaths of office.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER GODSCHALK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WAL­LACE, TO CHANGE THE MEETING TIME ON MONDAY, DECEMBER 4TH FROM 7:30 TO 8:00 P.M. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9‑0).

 

Council Member Herzenberg requested that the Town Clerk advertise the Council's anticipated appointment of an ad hoc tree committee to oversee implementation of the tree protection ordinance.

 

Council Member Preston, noting that the holiday shopping season had recently begun, noted that the Chapel Hill‑Carrboro Chamber of Commerce had launched a campaign encouraging people to shop locally. Council Member Preston said she had found some items listed in catalogs at lower cost locally.

 

Town Manager Taylor requested that item #12 concerning the Orange non‑profit housing corporation, be rescheduled to December 12th.

 

Proposed Rezonings

 

Planning Director Roger Waldon said that this evening's item was a follow‑up to the comprehensive rezoning proposal considered by the Council at their November 13th meeting. Mr. Waldon noted that the proposal would rezone undeveloped areas in the extraterritorial jurisdiction to rural transition in an effort to manage the Town's growth. Mr. Waldon stated that the temporary rezoning would permit the Town to consider the adequacy of public facilities on a Town‑wide basis. Mr. Waldon said that the small area planning process would be complementary to rezoning.

 

Mr. Waldon said that the Town staff would undertake planning pro­cess for six to nine small areas of the Town, establishing where roads need to be widened and other public facilities need to be improved. Mr. Waldon said that at the end of the process, re­quests for more intensive uses would be entertained if adequate facilities are available. Mr. Waldon said it would be possible to have a good handle on infrastructure matters within approxi­mately two months.

 

Mr. Waldon noted that a letter had been received from University of North Carolina Chancellor Paul Hardin, requesting that a por­tion of the Horace Williams tract be referred to the Coordination and Consultation Committee to discuss what should be done with this land. Mr. Waldon said the staff thinks is a reasonable request.

 

Mr. Waldon reviewed what would occur if the rezoning proposal were implemented. He also showed the Town's extraterritorial jurisdiction and urban service boundary on an exhibit map. Mr. Waldon noted that Town Manager Taylor recommended adoption of Ordinance 1B and Resolutions 2 and 3.

 

Council Member Andresen inquired whether the rezoning proposal would inconvenience property owners for three or four months. Mr. Waldon said yes. Council Member Andresen said she appreciat­ed the staff's proposal. Council Member Andresen inquired how much of the Horace Williams tract would be reviewed under the terms of Resolution 3. Mr. Waldon stated that the majority of the tract would be considered. Council Member Andresen said that the Coordination and Consultation Committee should be given an opportunity to discuss the possible uses, but expressed reluc­tance at relinquishing authority over any land. Council Member Andresen requested that the Horace Williams tract return to the Council in March, 1990. Mayor Howes said he did not know if this would be possible. Mayor Howes said the matter would be consid­ered as expeditiously as possible by the Coordination and Consul­tation Committee. Council Member Werner said the Coordination and Consultation Committee could be encouraged to come back in the near future, probably within six to eight months. Council Member Andresen inquired whether September, 1990 would be possi­ble. Council Member Werner said yes.

 

Mr. Waldon noted that the Horace Williams tract is partially located in the Town of Carrboro. Council Member Preston asked whether most of the area under consideration was zoned R‑1 and R‑2. Mr. Waldon said yes.

 

Council Member Preston inquired if the rezoning were denied and sketch plans were approved, and all other conditions were met, whether a parcel could go forward from an R‑1 zoning basis the same as rural transition zoning. Mr. Waldon said that the con­cept would lose a lot of its power under this scenario. Mr. Waldon said that the power of the idea lies in the rezoning ele­ment of the plan. Council Member Preston said she did not agree, since the Town already asks developers to provide adequate infra­structure. Mr. Waldon stated that rural transition zoning allows the Council a reasonable basis to say no until adequate facili­ties are in place. Council Member Preston noted that the Council asks that developers make infrastructure improvements in many cases. Saying that the mass rezoning would cause many problems, Council Member Preston said she could not see the advantage of the rezoning.

 

Council Member Werner inquired whether it was worth doing small area plans if the mass rezoning was not approved.  Mr. Waldon said it made sense to go ahead with the small area plans in any case, since they will prove useful in the future. Council Member Werner asked whether it would be worth the staff time to do small area plans when there is a good chance that the Council would see development in the interim. Mr. Waldon said the types of regulatory tools would remain unchanged.

 

Council Member Pasquini asked whether it was correct that nothing in the proposal stated that property owners would have to wait until March, 1990 to submit development proposals. Mr. Waldon said this was correct.

 

Council Member Godschalk said he was pleased with the staff pro­posal for small area plans and that there is a detailed implemen­tation schedule. Council Member Godschalk added that he had se­rious questions whether wholesale rezoning is currently needed. Council Member Godschalk said the rezoning process would be com­plex and expensive. Council Member Godschalk said he supported taking no action this evening on Resolution 1, denying rezoning.

 

Council Member Wilkerson, citing State General Statute 168.7.5 requested that the Council grant him permission not to vote on this matter this evening due to a technical glitch in his person­al position.

 

Council Member Andresen said she was disappointed in Council Mem­ber Godschalk's position, since she felt that the staff had ad­dressed the primary concern of property owners, possible delays in the development of property. Council Member Andresen said that if the Council did not rezone now, they would be acting in a shotgun manner in the future. Council Member Godschalk said he would rather wait until adequate information was available, rath­er than proceeding with widespread rezoning.

 

Council Member Wallace said that the precise length of time in­volved was not the critical issue. Council Member Wallace also noted that the State, not the County could grant any requests for tax abeyance. Council Member Wallace said such requests would not be granted. Council Member Wallace expressed doubt that many property owners would seek to initiate development projects under current zoning categories.

 

Mayor Howes said that given the current real estate market, he did not think there was a very strong argument for downzoning being precedent to small area plans. Mayor Howes added that the idea of growth management is not dead in Chapel Hill.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER PRESTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER GODSCHALK, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 1, DENY THE REZONINGS.

 

Council Member Andresen stated that support for downzoning ap­peared to be dwindling. Council Member Andresen said she favored the concept. Council Member Godschalk said that current staff could be used to pull together the plans over a two and a half year period. Mayor Howes said it was delusional to think that downzoning further would happen in the future. Mayor Howes said that if Resolution 1 passed this evening, the Council would be unlikely to downzone in the future.

 

Council Member Wilkerson, saying he was aware of the seriousness of the matter, asked the Council to excuse him from voting on Resolution 1. Council Member Wilkerson said he was asking to be excused due to a legal technicality involving private interests. Town Attorney Karpinos noted that the Council could vote or agree by consensus to Council Member Wilkerson's request. Mayor Howes polled the Council for their opinion and announced that the Coun­cil agreed by consensus to Council Member Wilkerson's request to be excused from voting.

 

RESOLUTION 1 FAILED BY A VOTE OF 4‑4, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS GODSCHALK, PRESTON, WALLACE AND MAYOR HOWES VOTING YES, AND COUN­CIL MEMBERS ANDRESEN, HERZENBERG, PASQUINI AND WERNER VOTING NO, AND COUNCIL MEMBER WILKERSON EXCUSED FROM VOTING BY COUNCIL CON­SENSUS. THE RESOLUTION, BY THIS ACTION CARRIED OVER FOR CONSID­ERATION AT THE COUNCIL'S DECEMBER 12TH MEETING.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER GODSCHALK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PRESTON, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2.

 

Council Member Andresen stated that she would like to see the item returned to the Town staff for additional alternative pro­posals. Mayor Howes inquired whether there would be any problem if Resolution 2 were passed without the rezonings being imple­mented. Town Manager Taylor said he did not foresee any prob­lems. Mr. Waldon stated that the staff would make another report to the Council in January, 1990. Noting that Resolution 1 would carry over to the December 12th meeting, with a new Council seat­ed, Council Member Werner suggested that the matter be further discussed at that time. Council Member Godschalk stated that Resolution 2 only requested the establishment of an implementa­tion schedule. Council Member Werner said staff time would be better spent by waiting to see the outcome of the Council vote on December 12th. Mayor Howes noted that he supported the concept of small area planning.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER GODSCHALK WITHDREW HIS MOTION.  COUNCIL MEMBER PRESTON CONCURRED.

 

Mayor Howes noted that the Council would revisit the issue on December 12th.

 

Chapel Hill North Master Land Use Plan

 

Town Manager Taylor requested that the agenda item and all its attachments be entered into the record of the hearing. Mayor Howes concurred with his request.

 

Planning Director Roger Waldon stated that the Chapel Hill North Master Plan had last been before the Council on August 29th. Mr. Waldon stated that the proposal sought to develop 630,000 square feet on a forty acre tract at Weaver Dairy Road and NC 86. Mr. Waldon stated that the Town's Development Ordinance allows the Council to approve a master plan for the site, with development occurring pursuant to the approval of special use permits. Mr. Waldon said the site would develop in phases.

 

Mr. Waldon stated that there were four key issues for the Coun­cil's consideration: roads, buffers, outparcels, and a park & ride lot. Mr. Waldon also noted that the site contained a possi­ble hotel site and that there are four outparcels contiguous to the site, two on NC 86 and two on Weaver Dairy Road.

 

Mr. Waldon stated that a map in the Council's materials showed the proposed location of a two hundred vehicle park and ride lot. He added that the Town would make application to the Urban Mass Transportation Administration for partial funding of the facili­ty­

 

Mr. Waldon noted that the applicant proposes the use of class D buffers around the Chapel Hill North site. He noted that some speakers at the August 29th hearing had requested that seven­ty‑five foot, rather than thirty foot, buffers be required for the site. Mr. Waldon noted that the thirty foot requirement would apply following the ultimate widening of NC 86 to five lanes with curb, gutter and sidewalk. Mr. Waldon said that the buffer could have various widths, with a minimum of thirty feet of vege­tation and some windows of visibility.

 

Mr. Waldon stated that the staff's suggested roadway improvements were the same as those recommended on August 29th, with Chapel Hill North being responsible for one‑half of the necessary widen­ing of NC 86 and compatible improvements to Weaver Dairy Road. Mr. Waldon also noted that a traffic signal upgrade is suggested at NC 86 and Weaver Dairy Road. Noting that the Council had pre­viously instructed the staff to derive a formula for roadway im­provements relative to the phasing of the project, Mr. Waldon said the staff had arrived at a reasonable formula, tied to the total number of trips at peak hour and by project phases. Mr. Waldon said the formula contained some margin for error as build‑out occurs.

 

Mr. Waldon noted that the limited use of outparcels was a desir­able objective. He added that the applicant was voluntarily pro­hibiting drive‑through uses with the exception of banks. Mr. Waldon briefly reviewed the effects of Ordinances A through D, noting that the Town Manager recommended adoption of Ordinance C. Mr. Waldon stated that the long set 0? conditions of approval in the Ordinance were setting the framework for conditions of ap­proval for individual phases of the project.

 

Inquiring about the timing of roadway improvements, Council Mem­ber Werner asked whether roadways would be constantly torn up throughout construction of the project. Mr. Waldon responded that roadway improvement projects could be broken into discrete pieces to minimize disruption.

 

Noting that traffic on NC 86 between Weaver Dairy Road and Home­stead Road is quite heavy, Council Member Andresen asked whether this area had been taken into account when considering the Chapel Hill North proposal. Mr. Waldon responded that improvements to this section of roadway would be handled by the North Carolina Department of Transportation or future developers in this immedi­ate area.

 

Council Member Andresen asked whether there were any recent traf­fic counts for the Weaver Dairy/Homestead portion of NC 86. Mr. Waldon responded that traffic counts had not been conducted re­cently in the area, although the situation could be examined in the near future. Council Member Andresen asked whether gasoline stations are permitted on outparcels. Mr. Waldon said that gas stations are permitted in areas having mixed‑use zoning.

 

Council Member Andresen said that thirty feet is not a very wide buffer, she inquired what had been the guiding principle in ar­riving at this recommended width. Mr. Waldon said that buffer widths will vary, based on landscape performance standards. Mr. Waldon noted the importance of screening parking areas with buff­ers. Mr. Waldon said that efforts were being made to arrange the site so that parking is hidden as well as possible by berms and plantings.

 

Council Member Wilkerson inquired whether Timber Hollow and Shadowood were good examples of thirty foot buffers. Mr. Waldon responded that the width of buffer should be considered within its own context. Council Member Godschalk inquired whether Mr. Waldon could provide any good examples of quality thirty foot buffers. Mr. Waldon said he could not, but noted that examples of good buffers are offered by Duke Power on Homestead Road and the Municipal Operations facility on Airport Road.

 

Council Member Werner asked Mr. Waldon to comment on the apparent conflict between the objectives of the buffer/entranceway plan and windows of visibility. Mr. Waldon said that buffers are not intended to render development invisible, but are meant to soften the effect of development by screening parking areas and related uses.

 

Council Member Pasquini inquired whether buffers would always be at least thirty feet in width. Mr. Waldon said yes. Council Member Pasquini inquired whether the proposed conditions of ap­proval addressed the phasing of development. Mr. Waldon said that the resoLution was silent on this point. Mr. Waldon noted that mixed‑use developments are ultimately tied to local develop­ment market conditions.

 

Council Member Pasquini noted that it was possible that some ap­proved portions of the tract might never be developed. Council Member Pasquini said he appreciated the restriction on fast food establishments. Council Member Pasquini also said he was not persuaded that good visibility of structures is essential on entranceways to the Town.

 

Mr. Waldon said that architectural performance standards dictate that buildings in the master plan should work together and be of similar design, resulting in an integrated and coordinated man­ner.

 

Ron Strom, representing Chapel Hill North, read a letter from Dr. Robert Reinheimer, a resident of Northwoods, supporting the ef­forts of developers of Chapel Hill North. Mr. Reinheimer's let­ter stated that Chapel Hill North is a well‑conceived project which will enhance property values in the area. Dr. Reinheimer's letter also stated that a thirty foot buffer along NC 86 would be adequate.

 

Dr. Reinhimer's letter also expressed the desire for easy access onto NC 86 from Northwood. Dr. Reinheimer, noting that Chapel Hill North would be an attractive addition to the area, asked that the Council approve the project.

 

Mr. Strom said that it had been approximately three years since the mixed‑use ordinance had been put into place, and nearly that long since plans for Chapel Hill North had been brought to the attention of Town planning staff. Mr. Strom stated that he and his associates had spent many hours on plans for the project, meeting with Northwood residents and listening to their concerns.

 

Mr. Strom said he was pleased to inform the Council that Resolu­tion C was a negotiated document, wherein no one received 100% of what they had sought. Mr. Strom said that the goals and intent of the mixed‑use ordinance had been preserved and enhanced in the resolution. Mr. Strom noted that Chapel Hill North had agreed to make $500,000 in off‑site improvements.

 

Mr. Strom added that a proposed curb cut near the entrance to Northwood had been eliminated. Mr. Strom requested that the Council adopt Resolution C this evening. Mr. Strom also request­ed that if the Council implemented an impact fee ordinance in the future, Chapel Hill North would receive credit for contributions made prior to enactment of the ordinance.

 

Council Member Andresen noted that Chapel Hill North had agreed to donate additional right of way, making it unnecessary for right‑of‑way to be taken from Northwood frontage. Council Member Andresen inquired whether additional pavement would be needed on the Northwood side of the street. Mr. Strom noted that actual design work had not been completed, but that the current center line sits within the sixty foot right‑of‑way. Addressing Mr. Strom as a resident of Northwood, Council Member Andresen in­quired whether buffering was important to Mr. Strom. Mr. Strom said yes, that buffering was important. Mr. Strom noted that the bulk of road widening was intended to occur on the Chapel Hill North side of the road. Council Member Andresen inquired how much of the proposed project would be brought back to the Council in the near future. Mr. Strom said he had no idea right now, since he and his associates were still talking to potential prop­erty users such as banks and theaters. Mr. Strom stated that since many small components were to be integrated, it was diffi­cult to say when individual submittals would occur.

 

Council Member Andresen inquired whether Mr. Strom was planning to be the owner of the project. Mr. Strom said yes, noting that his group would play the role of master developer. Mr. Strom added that he did not know how long the group would remain owner of the project.

 

Council Member Pasquini inquired what types of retail uses were envisioned in the project. Mr. Strom said that car dealerships and discount stores were not envisioned in the proposed project, since these types of uses would not enhance the Town's entranceways. Mr. Strom stated that retail sites would be han­dled sensitively and with attention to architectural taste to achieve the antithesis of what one would think of as a strip center. Mr. Strom noted that retail establishments would be gen­erally upscale in nature.

 

Council Member Preston said she liked the retail uses envisioned by Mr. Strom. Council Member Preston expressed confidence that the developers of Chapel Hill North would serve as good stewards of the land. Council Member Preston inquired whether neighbor­hood residents had been invited to recent Chapel Hill North meet­ings and whether the residents had any concerns other than en­trances and buffers. Mr. Strom responded that there had been an informal gathering after the August 29th hearing, which had re­sulted in some modifications being made to the proposed master plan.

 

Alan Rimer noted that the Planning Board had held one informal discussion about buffering and highway alignment relative to Chapel Hill North. Mr. Rimer said that the Board concluded that a variable buffer of thirty feet seemed entirely reasonable, since the intent was to hide cars, not buildings. Mr. Rimer stated that pine trees, rather than buffers, currently exist in the Chapel Hill North site area. Mr. Rimer stated that buffers and berms will have to be installed on the site.

 

Town Manager Taylor said he recommended the adoption of Resolution C.

 

Libby Vesilind, a member of Northwood Homeowners Association Board, said that there appeared to be lack of public control over the timing of development. Ms. Vesilind stated that her associ­ation opposed the adoption of resolutions A, B or C, principally due to safety concerns. Ms. Vesilind said that the existing two lanes of NC 86 with a turning lane would be inadequate to accom­modate traffic in the area after development. Ms. Vesilind noted that the neighborhood wants roadway improvements in place prior to development of Chapel Hill North. Ms. Vesilind expressed agreement with Council Member Andresen and Mr. Waldon that the traffic impact from Chapel Hill North would extend south on NC 86 beyond Weaver Dairy Road. Ms. Vesilind stated that there are twenty‑two driveways located along the mile corridor of NC 86 south of Weaver Dairy Road. Ms. Vesilind stated that Chapel Hill Police Department statistics indicate that eleven accidents oc­curred on NC 86 between Homestead and I‑40 in 1988, compared to fifty‑four to date during 1989. Ms. Vesilind expressed concern that the North Carolina Department of Transportation had no fund­ing available to improve NC 86. Ms. Vesilind said that infra­structure should be allowed to catch up to development.

 

Ms. Vesilind said she also opposed Chapel ?ill North since the Town's mixed‑use ordinance is currently under review.

Ms. Vesilind urged the Council to take the broadest possible view of Resolution C, since Chapel Hill North met bare minimum re­quirements for buffering and other requirements. Ms. Vesilind also stated that the appeal for a window of visibility was questionable, since site topography would permit site vegetation to remain undisturbed. Ms. Vesilind also urged the Council to require a seventy‑five foot buffer, in order to provide a forest appearance, making slanted cuts for passing traffic. Ms. Vesilind stated that safety was minimally addressed by gradual roadway improvements.

 

Ms Vesilind said she agreed with the restriction on fast food and related uses in outparcels. She also asked that the council not permit convenience stores or gas stations. Ms. Vesilind con­cluded her remarks by asking those in the audience supporting her statements to rise.

 

Fred Simon, 209 Country Road, said that Chapel Hill North would impact contiguous properties. Mr. Simon stated that NC 86 is the key element in infrastructure supporting the Chapel Hill North development. Mr. Simon showed a diagram of the area, noting that turning left from Eubanks Road onto NC 86 at 7:45 a.m. is very difficult. Mr. Simon said that the proximity of entrances to traffic signals will cause problems, since the area is already congested.

 

Mr. Simon questioned why piecemeal project construction should be allowed in Chapel Hill North, noting that financing for the project might be considered questionable.

 

Mr. Simon showed a map detailing driveways on NC 86. Mr. Simon said that many of driveways are blind or located on curves. Mr. Simon noted that his wife had recently been involved in a nine car accident in this area. Mr. Simon concluded his remarks by stating Chapel Hill North is located on a traffic artery in need of improvement. Mr. Simon said he thought the proposed project was a bad idea.

 

Larry Benninger, 109 Autumn Lane, said it was undesirable to locate gas stations and fast food outlets on outparcels. Mr. Benninger said he had concerns about gas stations: curb cuts and proximity to water wells in the Northwood neighborhood. Mr. Benninger added that he did not think that Chapel Hill North would maintain or enhance property values in his neighborhood. Mr. Benninger said that already traffic conditions in the Northwood area would probably only become worse.

 

David Jones, 3202 Whitfield Road in the Stoneridge neighborhood, said he was concerned about the state of NC 86 and the conditions of approval which would give the developer of making phased im­provements. Mr. Jones also expressed concern that it would be a long time before 316,500 square feet of the project are occupied, the point at which roadway improvements would need to be complet­ed. Mr. Jones said that improvements to NC 86 were needed imme­diately, but North Carolina Department of Transportation improve­ments could take up to seven years to complete.

 

Michael Follo, 104 Autumn Lane, said he was not against the de­velopment per se, since everyone has a right to develop property and the developers had shown good faith. Speaking as a geolo­gist, Mr. Follo saw he was concerned about the possible siting of gasoline stations in Chapel Hill North. Mr. Follo said he moved into Northwood in August and had found it unsafe to ride his bi­cycle to work along NC 86. Mr. Follo said public safety should take precedence over all other considerations in this situation.

 

Charles Johnston, a resident of Whitfield Road, noted that resi­dents of Northwood should not blame Chapel Hill North for bad planning in the past. Mr. Johnston stated that a sensible solu­tion would be to close the entrance at Northwood Drive and NC 86 and install a traffic signal at Eubanks Road. Mr. Johnston, not­ing that he had formerly owned the proposed Chapel Hill North site, stated that he had fought the present alignment of Inter­state 40.

 

Mr. Johnston said that NC 86 is dangerous between Homestead and Weaver Dairy Roads and needs attention by North Carolina Depart­ment of Transportation officials. Mr. Johnston said he thought the proposed plans for Chapel Hill North were very feasible. Mr. Johnston suggested that the shopping center be buffered from the Northwood neighborhood.

 

Mr. Strom said he accepted the conditions of project approval outlined in Resolution C.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER GODSCHALK, TO ADJOURN THE HEARING. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANI­MOUSLY (9‑0).

 

Council Member Godschalk inquired whether additional curb cuts were proposed along NC 86. Mr. Waldon responded that the master plan indicated the proposed location of curb cuts. Mr. Waldon noted that a maximum of two curb cuts would be permitted along NC 86.

 

Council Member Andresen noted that she had come to the meeting this evening prepared to vote in favor of Chapel Hill North. Council Member Andresen said she had been consistently concerned about buffering of the project. Council Member Andresen stated that neighborhood residents had done a excellent job of bringing traffic concerns to the Council's attention this evening. Coun­cil Member Andresen stated that public safety concerns had not been adequately addressed. Council Member Andresen also suggest­ed that phasing should be examined within the context of mixed‑use plans.

 

Council Member Werner expressed concern that the phasing of road­way improvements was too ill‑defined. Council Member Werner said specific solutions were needed for NC 86 improvements.

 

Council Member Wilkerson stated that no attention had been given to how Northwood residents would access NC 86. Council Member Wilkerson said that the proposed Eubanks Road solution was inade­quate.

 

Council Member Godschalk stated that any roadway improvements were based on peak hour trips multiplied by a factor of one and a half, meaning that developers would pay for 150% of needed im­provements. Council Member Werner said he concurred about the fairness of the approach, but the resolution lacked a program for the use of these funds. Council Member Godschalk inquired wheth­er Council Member Werner sought an additional condition in the resolution, outlining Town roadway priorities. Council Member Werner said this is what he sought, along with a minimum special use permit size. Council Member Werner inquired why payment in lieu for roadways had been proposed. Town Manager Taylor said this option had been offered by the developer. Town Manager Tay­lor noted that the staff had tried not to be specific about road­way and traffic signal improvements. Council Member Godschalk inquired whether it would be possible for the Town to use its own funds for roadway improvements, if a priority system were adopted with guarantees by the developer. Town Manager Taylor said this would be possible.

 

Council Member Wallace said that payment in lieu would fall far short of anticipated construction costs. Council Member Wallace stated that is was difficult to get payment in lieu translated into action. Council Member Wallace said payment was a means of delaying road improvements while project construction proceeded.

 

Mayor Howes, noting that he did not think a compromise would be reached by the Council this evening, stated a motion was in or­der.

 

Council Member Pasquini noted that buffering and phasing concerns needed to be addressed in addition to traffic concerns.

 

Council Member Preston said she was inclined favorably toward the project, expressed concern about Northwood access and suggested that traffic signalization was possible in the future.

 

Council Member Wilkerson said he would be inclined to vote against Chapel Hill North if a vote were taken this evening. Council Member Wilkerson stated that some matters, including buffering, remained to be resolved. Council Member Wilkerson noted that he was pleased about the input of the Planning Board about buffering.

 

Mayor Howes noted that there were nineteen proposed conditions of approval, with the number gradually increasing.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER PASQUINI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WILKERSON, TO REFER THE MATTER TO THE TOWN MANAGER.

 

Town Manager Taylor suggested that the Council make a motion to reopen the public hearing and recess it to January 23, 1990 to ' accept any new evidence and then close the hearing at that time.

 

Mayor Howes said it bothered him that close to two hours had been spent on the hearing this evening, this being the fourth time that the Council had held a two hour hearing on this proposal. council Member Godschalk said he intended to vote against reopen­ing the hearing, since the Council had the power to move ahead on the matter at present. Council Member Godschalk said the Town Manager and developer had done fruitful work on the conditions of approval for the project. Council Member Godschalk said that concerns raised this evening could be addressed by the Council and staff in the very near future. Mayor Howes stated that the Council should be prepared to vote and make amendments when com­ing to the table at the January 23rd meeting.

 

Council Members Pasquini and Wilkerson agreed to withdraw their earlier motion.

 

Council Member Werner stated that Chapel Hill North was one of the most major project proposals to come before the Council in the last four years. Council Member Werner said he did not feel that the amount of time devoted to the project had been dispro­portionate nor had the Council's time been wasted.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WAL­LACE, TO REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED 8‑1, WITH COUNCIL MEMBER GODSCHALK VOTING NO.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WAL­LACE, TO RECESS THE HEARING. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9‑0)‑

 

COUNCIL MEMBER PASQUINI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WILKERSON, TO RECESS T?E HEARING TO JANUARY 23, 1990. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9‑0).

 

Nomination to Parks and Recreation Commission

 

COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PRESTON, TO NOMINATE TONY HATCHER BY ACCLAMATION. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED BY ACCLAMATION.

 

Proposed Parking Facility

 

Council Member Wallace said that the Council committee had re­ceived thirteen inquiries from contractors concerning the pro­posed parking facility. Council Member Wallace noted that five of the contractors had been interviewed, with two finalists se­lected from this group. Council Member Wallace stated that a contract for the project had been derived from consultations with Town Manager Taylor, Public Safety Director Horton and local ar­chitect Michael Hining.

 

Council Member Wallace noted that Mr. Horton was directing the staff efforts to plan the parking garage project, including ways to obtain extensive public participation and to achieve efficient operations of the facility. Council Member Wallace noted that Mr. Hining had been employed by the Town to design the project and to work through the related processes. Council Member Wal­lace noted that if Resolution 5 were adopted, Town Manager Taylor could sign the contract entering into an agreement for design of the parking facility.

 

Ken Jackson, speaking on behalf of the Citizen's Volunteer Park­ing Committee, said he appreciated the opportunity to address the Council. Mr. Jackson said the committee was composed of local citizens who live and work in the downtown area. Mr. Jackson stated that the group had fourteen active members. Mr. Jackson thanked Mr. Horton for his information and input with the commit­tee's efforts. Mr. Jackson said the committee hoped that a pub­lic plaza and parking facility could come to fruition, in order that people would be attracted to shop downtown with greater fre­quency. Mr. Jackson said the committee requested that the Coun­cil approve the contract with the architect in the best interest of those wanting to visit and shop in downtown Chapel Hill.

 

Council Member Godschalk noted that Mr. Jackson had been very active in the debate surrounding the use of parking lot number one. Council Member Godschalk, noting that he had been receiving the minutes of the committee, observed that many of the group's members had opposed Rosemary Square and had brought suit against that proposal. Mr. Jackson stated that this was correct. He noted that the committee consisted of a good cross‑section of Town citizens. Mr. Jackson stated that the group normally met at Village Bank and would welcome input from any interested par­ties.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER PRESTON MOVED,     SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER

ANDRESEN, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 5.

 

Council Member Werner noted that three of the four council mem­bers serving on the committee felt strongly about the inclusion of commercial activities in the facility. Council Member Werner suggested changing the second sentence in the contract to delete the word "may" and substitute the word "shall". Both Council Member Preston and Council Member Andresen were agreeable to this change in language.

 

Council Member Godschalk inquired whether the project architect had experience in the design of parking garages. Council Member Preston stated that Wilbur Smith and Associates had previous ex­perience with parking lot structures. Council Member Preston noted that Mr. Hining's strengths lie in designing the project and integrating it into the downtown area.

 

Mr. Hining stated that he had never personally designed a parking structure, but wilbur Smith and Associates had previously con­structed similar projects.

 

Council Member Godschalk inquired whether the project would pay for itself. Mr. Hining responded that this would be a function of what was included in the project. Council Member Godschalk asked how the project would be financed. Mr. Hining said this had not been determined. Council Member Werner noted that a fi­nancial feasibility study would be conducted in the future.

 

Council Member Godschalk inquired about a sign he had seen at the NCNB Plaza parking garage, offering parking at $1 per day. Town Manager Taylor said this rate applied only at night, with $5 be­ing the standard day rate at the facility.

 

THE MOTION, AS AMENDED, CHANGING THE WORD "MAY" TO "SHALL" WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9‑0).

 

A RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONTRACT FOR ARCHITECT/ENGINEER SERVICES AND A DESIGN DEVELOPMENT PROCESS FOR A PARKING FACILITY (89‑11‑30/R‑5)

 

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council approves:

 

     (a)  the contract for architect/engineer services with Michael Hining, and

 

     (b)  the design development process for development of a parking facility and appurtenant facilities

 

as recommended by the Council Committee on Parking Lot Number One and Related Matters in their report dated November 30, 1989.

 

This the 30th day of November, 1989.

 

Council Member Wallace stated that a definition of who would pay for what would be made in the future.

 

Coates Drainage Petition

 

Town Engineer George Small stated that a request had been re­ceived for cost‑sharing by the Town for stormwater drainage im­provements at 304 West Franklin Street. Mr. Small noted that some of the Council Members had visited the site. Mr. Small stated that the project had presented an opportunity for the Town to get drainage improvements in the area. Mr. Small noted that the Town has a drainage assistance program which is mainly used for residential drainage situations, providing labor and equipment for small scale improvements.

 

Mr. Small said that the program was not intended to address situ­ations such as the one presented in Mr. Coates petition. Mr. Small noted that if the Council chose to provide financial assis­tance to Mr. Coates, it would be important to agree on what costs were covered. Mr. Small suggested that any assistance granted could come from Town stormwater management funds.

 

C. J. (Joe) Coates said a memorandum had been forwarded to the Council concerning his situation. Mr. Coates stated that storm sewer pipe at 304 West Franklin Street had been undersized, dete­riorated, and obsolete at the inception of his project. Mr. Coates showed several pictures of drainage pipe at his site to the Council.

 

Mayor Howes inquired whether flooding would still occur in the area following installation of the new drainage system. Mr. Small said flooding would be less likely to occur. Mr. Coates said that during a heavy rain approximately one month ago, pipes on a Franklin Street junction box had been filled to capacity, while a 54" pipe on his site had been only one‑quarter filled at that time. Mr. Coates noted that he had copies of invoices available documenting the additional costs of drainage at his site.

 

Council Member Godschalk inquired whether the staff had deter­mined if the system improvements would result in community bene­fits beyond the site. Town Manager Taylor said that this deter­mination had not been made. Mr. Taylor noted that Mr. Small would work out a fair distribution of costs between Mr. Coates and the Town.

 

Council Member Wilkerson inquired about the criticality of timing in reimbursing Mr. Coates. Mr. Coates stated that all improvements had been made at his own expense. Mr. Coates said he would like to achieve a resolution before the end of the year, if possible.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER GODSCHALK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WAL­LACE, TO REFER THE MATTER TO THE TOWN MANAGER, REQUESTING THAT THE STAFF MEET WITH MR. COATES TO ACHIEVE A MUTUALLY AGREEABLE RESOLUTION. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9‑0).

 

Cable Television

 

Assistant to the Town Manager Greg Feller said that this eve­ning's report was being made in response to a request of the Council at their July 10th meeting. Mr. Feller said that Caroli­na Cable is aware of the concerns of its customers and is working to address these difficulties. Mr. Feller stated that the Town Manager recommended that the Council receive the report now and the staff will report back to the Council as appropriate.

 

Council Member Andresen inquired when the franchise agreement between the Town and Carolina Cable would expire. Mr. Feller said the agreement would expire in 1994. He added that negotiations for the agreement would begin two to three years in advance.

 

Randy Houser, General Manager of Carolina Cable, thanked the Council for extending the time in which to make system improve­ments. Mr. Houser stated that several operational changes had been recently initiated by Carolina Cable, including answering telephones until 9:00 p.m. Mr. Houser also noted that telephone operators had received instruction in certain technical elements, thereby improving service response times. Mr. Houser also said that surge protection for the cable system would be provided in the near future for areas such as Cedar Fork Trail. Mr. Houser also noted that construction of cable television in the Chesley, Chandler's Green, Tandler and other subdivisions had been recent­ly completed.

 

Mayor Howes said his office had received numerous complaints con­cerning cable service. Noting that there was still room for ser­vice improvement, Mayor Howes added that he was beginning to re­ceive some favorable comments about Carolina Cable responsive­ness. Council Member Preston observed that one of her neighbors was delighted about new cable services coming on‑line.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER GODSCHALK, TO RECEIVE THE REPORT ON CAROLINA CABLE SERVICES. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9‑0).

 

Mr. Feller read a letter from Carolina Cable, outlining the fu­ture availability of three new programming channels including Home Team Sports, American Movie Classics and TNT. Mr. Feller noted that adoption of the franchise change on first reading was recommended to the Council.

 

Mr. Houser stated that programming on three local access channels would be consolidated to permit the addition of the three new services.

 

Council Member Wallace inquired whether it was correct that the cable franchise ordinance provides that writ?en notice must be given up to ninety days in advance of programming changes. Mr. Houser said this was correct.

 

Council Member Wallace noted that six local access channels had been originally requested at the time of initial franchise nego­tiations.

 

Mr. Houser noted that efforts were underway to have additional programming on the University access channel.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER PASQUINI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER, TO APPROVE ORDINANCE 2 ON FIRST READING. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9‑0).

 

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ORDINANCE GRANTING A FRANCHISE TO VIL­LAGE CABLE, WHICH FRANCHISE WAS TRANSFERRED TO PRIME CABLE INCOME PARTNERS (89‑11‑30/0‑2)

 

WHEREAS, by letter dated November 9, 1989, the General Manager of Carolina Cable on behalf of Prime Cable Income Partners LP, has requested a franchise modification so that additional programming can be added;

 

BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby amends the ordinance, as amended, granting a fran­chise to Prime Cable Income Partners L.P. as follows:

 

Except as provided below, the cable television franchise holder may combine (1) public access programming, (2) the home shopping guide/ consumer/business/leased access programming and (3) local origination programming on one channel in basic service tier 1. In such event, the franchise holder shall add to the tier 3 basic service non‑premium (non‑pay channel) programming emphasizing sports or entertainment such as some Team Sports.

 

Provided, that the Town of Chapel Hill retains the right, upon written notice to the franchise holder 90 days in advance, to require that the public access, home shopping guide/consumer/business/leased access and local origination pro­gramming be provided on separate channels pursuant to the fran­chise amendment adopted January 10, 1983.

 

All other franchise provisions, except as modified herein or sub­sequently amended, shall remain in effect.

 

This the 30th day of November, 1989. (First reading)

 

Library Automation

 

Assistant Town Manager Sonna Loewenthal stated that acquiring the library automation system would allow the staff to expedite the check‑out process permitting the staff to spend more time with patrons, keep up with circulation of materials and minimize the loss of materials. Ms. Loewenthal stated that the field had been narrowed from four vendors to two, with Innovative Interfaces submitting the superior proposal, although it did not submit the low bid. Ms. Loewenthal also noted that Innovative Interfaces provided all five requested modules, while Dynix had only provid­ed four.

 

Ms. Loewenthal said that following the review of specifications, a smaller system was recommended to address the needs of the li­brary through the year 1993. Ms. Loewenthal noted that additions could be made incrementally as needed. Ms. Loewenthal also stat­ed that performance guarantees would need to be met before the final payment was made to the vendor. Ms. Loewenthal suggested that an escrow system could be used, whereby a third party could maintain programming codes for the automation system.

 

Ms. Loewenthal added that a grant would cover 25% of the cost of the system. She also noted that the Library Board of Trustees recommended that Innovative Interfaces be used as the vendor for the system.

 

Noting that Innovative Interfaces was the higher of the two bids, Council Member Godschalk inquired what differences there would have been in the Dynix system. Ms. Loewenthal responded that this matter was not explored further, since the system would have been too small and would have become obsolete. Council Member Godschalk, noting that great strides were being made in computer programming, suggested that the best way to proceed was to buy commercial software packages instead of using a turnkey system. Ms. Loewenthal said that the Library automation consultant, Sue Epstein, could address these concerns. Council Member Godschalk said he wanted to know whether the Town had any alternatives to a turnkey system. Ms. Epstein responded that a turnkey system was needed, since the type of system being automated was very com­plex. Ms. Epstein noted that commercially available software would not be upgradeable to meet the Town's own needs.

 

Council Member Godschalk said he would vote against the resolu­tion, since he was unconvinced that now is the correct time to be investing in the Innovative Interfaces type of system.

 

Council Member Wallace said it was not desirable to pay opportu­nity costs over the next four years. Council Member Wallace said that in effect the Town was currently losing money in the way some library operations are handled. Council Member Wallace said that automation of library efforts in the near term would be use­ful.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER PRESTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WILKERSON, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 7. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED 7‑2, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS GODSCHALK AND PASQUINI VOTING NO.

 

A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING OF CONTRACT FOR LIBRARY AUTOMATION SYSTEM (89‑11‑30/R‑7)

 

WHEREAS, the Town of Chapel Hill has solicited formal bids for a library automation system and equipment; and

 

WHEREAS, the following bids have been received and opened on April 12, 1989:

 

     Dynix Corporation            $223,155

     Inlex                        $345,228

     Unisys                       $355,208

     Innovative Interfaces        $360,055

 

and

 

WHEREAS, the bids and proposals were subjected to an extensive evaluation process resulting in a determination that the bid of Innovative Interfaces, Inc. was the bid which most closely pro­vided the system capabilities specified by the Town; and

 

WHEREAS, a phase one installation of 30 terminals in the existing library will temporarily accommodate library service needs; and

 

WHEREAS, the new library may require additional terminals in the new library, resulting in an additional phase two installation cost of approximately in 1997;

 

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chap­el Hill that the Town accepts the bid of Innovative Interfaces, Inc., not to exceed a total of $276,500 for a library automation system and for related equipment.

 

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Town Manager is authorized to purchase terminals and related equipment locally and to reduce the amount of the Innovative Interfaces contract accordingly.

 

This the 30th day of November, 1989.

 

Acceptance of Manager Resignation/Designation of Interim Manager

 

Council Member Herzenberg suggested that the words "with regret" be added to resolution 8.1.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 8.1. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANI­MOUSLY (9‑0).

 

A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE RESIGNATION OF DAVID R. TAYLOR AS TOWN MANAGER (89‑11‑30/R‑8.1)

 

BE IT RESOLVED by the Town Council of Chapel Hill that the Coun­cil hereby accepts, with regret, the resignation of David R. Tay­lor as Town Manager effective December 31, 1989.

 

This the 30th day of November, 1989.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PASQUINI, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 8.2. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9‑0).

 

BE IT RESOLVED by the Town Council of Chapel Hill that the Coun­cil hereby appoints Sonna M. Loewenthal as Interim Town Manager effective January 1, 1990 pursuant to N.C.G.S. 160A‑150.

 

This the 30th day of November, 1989.

 

Trolley Advertising

 

Transportation Director Bob Godding stated that the Town staff was responding to a request from the Downtown Commission Corpora­tion requesting interior advertising on the two downtown trol­leys. Mr. Godding said that advertising rates would be the same as for the Town's bus system. Mr. Godding noted that the Down­town Commission staff would administer the advertising program.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER GODSCHALK, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 9. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANI­MOUSLY (9‑0).

 

A RESOLUTION TO AMEND THE TRANSPORTATION USER FEE POLICY TO IN­CLUDE RATES FOR TROLLEY ADVERTISING, AND TO AUTHORIZE THE MANAGER TO EXECUTE A CONTRACT AMENDMENT WITH THE DOWNTOWN COMMISSION TO ALLOW A TROLLEY ADVERTISiNG PROGRAM (89‑11‑30/R‑9)

 

WHEREAS, the Town has entered into an agreement with the Chapel Hill/Carrboro Downtown Commission Corporation to provide for pub­lic services including trolley shuttle services; and

 

WHEREAS, the Council has previously adopted a User Fee Policy for the Transportation Department; and

 

WHEREAS, the Downtown Commission has determined that there is some demand for interior advertising on the trolleys and has re­quested that the Town work with them to develop a program to al­low such advertising;

 

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

 

That the User Fee Policy for the Transportation Department be amended to include the following advertising rates for trolley advertising:

 

TROLLEY ADVERTISING

 

     Location                Rate per month

 

     Rear Deck, middle            $500

     Rear Deck, side              $250

     Door Transom, rear           $350

     Door Transom, front          $200

 

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Manager be authorized to execute an amendment to the service agreement with the Downtown Commis­sion to provide for a program of advertising in the Trolleys, and for the net revenue from the program to be transferred to the Downtown Commission to cover the cost of administering trolley advertising, trolley promotion, and the capital improvements pro­gram included in the service agreement.

 

This the 30th day of November, 1989.

 

Consent Agenda

 

COUNCIL MEMBER GODSCHALK MOVED; SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PRESTON, TO ADOPT THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9‑0).

 

A RESOLUTION ADOPTING VARIOUS RESOLUTIONS (89‑11‑30/R‑10)

 

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

 

     a.   Authorizing Deed of Trust regarding public housing im­provements funded with federal grant (R‑11).

 

     b.   Awarding contract for "mat and seal" paving improve­ments to five streets (R‑12).

 

This the 30th day of November, 1989.

 

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION AND RECORDING OF DEC??RATION OF TRUST (89‑11=30/R‑11)

 

WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions o the United States Housing Act of 1937, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) provides financial assistance to public housing agencies; and

 

WHEREAS, the Town of Chapel Hill (PHA) has entered into an Annual Contributions Contract or Amendment thereto with HUD in order to receive such assistance; and

 

WHEREAS, HUD has required, as a condition to the provision of such assistance, the execution and recording of a Declaration of Trust;

 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the PHA as follows:

 

     Section 1. That the Chairman or Vice Chairman is hereby authorized and directed to execute the Declaration of Trust for Project No. NC 1,2,4,5 on the for? prescribed by HUD, and the Secretary is hereby authorized and directed to impress the seal of the Authority thereon and attest to it.

 

     Section 2. The Secretary is directed to cause said Declaration of Trust to be recorded in the appropriate office of public records of the County in which the Project is located. After recording, the Secretary is directed to transmit said document, together with one certified copy thereof to the Department of Housing and Urban Development.

 

               RECORDING OFFICER'S CERTIFICATION

 

I, David R. Taylor, the duly appointed, qualified, and acting Secretary of the Town of Chapel Hill (PHA), do hereby certify that the above Resolution No. 89‑11‑30/R‑11 was properly adopted at a regular or special meeting properly held on November 30, 1989.

 

In testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and the seal of the Town of Chapel Hill (PHA), this 30th day of November, 1989.

 

     (SEAL)                       ___________________________

                                      Signature

 

 

 

A RESOLUTION AWARDING A CONTRACT AND ACCEPTING BID FOR MAT AND SEAL STREET IMPROVEMENTS (89‑11‑30/R‑12)

 

WHEREAS, the Town of Chapel Hill has solicited formal bids by advertisement in The Chapel Hill Newspaper on October 29, 1989, in accordance with G.S. 143‑129 for mat and seal improvements; and

 

WHEREAS, the following bids were received and opened on November 9, 1989:

 

Bidder                                  Amount

 

Riley Paving Company                  $15,658.40

REA Construction Company                   $21,160.00

Lee Paving Company                    $24,799.52

Propst Construction Company           $26,492.32

 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Town accepts the low bid of Riley Paving company in the amount of $15,658.40 and awards the contract for mat and seal improvements on five Town streets as outlined in plans and specifications.

 

This the 30th day of November, 1989.

 

Town Manager Taylor noted that there was no need for an Executive Session this evening.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER PASQUINI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER GODSCHALK, TO ADJOURN. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9‑0).

 

The Council meeting stood adjourned at 11:48 p.m.