MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE

   TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL, TUESDAY, JANUARY 23, 1990, 7:30 P.M.

 

Mayor Howes called the meeting to order.

 

Council Members in attendance were:

 

          Julie Andresen     Alan Rimer

          Joyce Brown        Arthur Werner

          Joe Herzenberg     Roosevelt Wilkerson, Jr.

          Nancy Preston

 

Also in attendance were: Assistant to the Mayor Lisa Price, Stu­dent Liaison to the Council Bill Hildebolt, Interim Town Manager Sonna Loewenthal, Assistant Town Manager Florentine Miller, Pub­lic Safety Director Cal Horton, Planning Director Roger Waldon, Assistant to the Attorney Richard Sharpless, and Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos.

 

Mayor Howes announced that this evening's Town Council meeting was being cablecasted on Carolina Cable Channel 13, while the proceedings of the Carrboro Town Council would be cablecasted on Channel 4. Mayor Howes also noted that the Council had several difficult issues on this evening's agenda.

 

There were no ceremonies or hearings.

 

Petitions

 

Council Member Werner requested that the Interim Town Manager provide the Council with a follow‑up report on planning and tim­ing of access and sight distance improvements at Cedar Falls Park.

 

Council Member Werner also requested that the Interim Town Manag­er respond to a letter to the Mayor and Council from Dr. Vincent Kopp, Chairperson of the Human Services Advisory Board, request­ing emergency funding for day care services.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG, TO REFER THE MATTER TO THE TOWN MANAGER. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8‑0).

 

Minutes of January 2 and 8, 1990 and Summary of January 6, 1990

 

COUNCIL MEMBER PRESTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER, TO ADOPT THE MINUTES OF JANUARY 2, 1990 AS PRESENTED. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8‑0).

 

Council Member Rimer requested that the summary of January 6, 1990 be revised to reflect his suggestion that fiscal and person­nel impact statements supplement Council decision‑making processes in the future.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER PRESTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WILKERSON, TO ADOPT THE SUMMARY OF JANUARY 6, 1990 AS AMENDED. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8‑0).

 

Council Member Herzenberg observed that Student Liaison to the Council Bill Hildebolt had been in attendance at the January 8th Council meeting. Council Member Herzenberg also requested that the names of all appointees to the Noise Ordinance Monitoring Committee be listed on page 14 of the minutes.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG, TO ADOPT THE MINUTES OF JANUARY 8, 1990 AS AMENDED. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8‑0).

 

South Columbia Street Alternatives

 

Interim Town Manager Loewenthal noted that South Columbia Street improvements had been at the top of the Town's list for improve­ments since 1982, with the St?ite Department of Transportation having funded the project since 1988. Ms. Loewenthal briefly reviewed recent Council discussions concerning South Columbia Street alternatives. Ms. Loewenthal stated that proposed Univer­sity building expansions would generate additional automobile traffic, potentially creating increased traffic congestion and poorer air quality in the vicinity. Ms. Loewenthal observed that one of the trade‑offs to be examined was whether to establish planted medians or to maintain existing trees.

 

Ms. Loewenthal stated that projected traffic volumes in the vi­cinity of South Columbia Street indicated that constructing less than five lanes would not provide an adequate level of service. Ms. Loewenthal added that it was unlikely that the Department of Transportation would approve the construction of a three or four lane road in the area. Ms. Loewenthal also noted that topograph­ical conditions made it impractical to make traffic lanes narrow­er than standard widths.

 

Ms. Loewenthal said that sidewalk installation would cost approx­imately $150,000 if done in conjunction with roadway construc­tion. Ms. Loewenthal stated that eight foot grass shoulders could temporarily be used as sidewalks until funding became available for sidewalks.

 

Ms. Loewenthal suggested that a compromise for bicycle lanes would be to add two foot bicycle lanes to the outside traffic lanes. Ms. Loewenthal stated that the Department of Transporta­tion would not stripe the bike lane if tAis approach were chosen.

 

Ms. Loewenthal observed that Resolution C would request a one year delay, in order to examine South Columbia Street roadway alternatives in greater detail. Ms. Loewenthal added that there could be no guarantee that State Department of Transportation funding would be held in abeyance for this time period. Ms. Loewenthal norea that based on current traffic conditions ana future projections, her recommendation was to expand South Colum­bia Street to four travel lanes, with a center turning lane and fourteen foot wide outside travel lanes, to accommodate bicycles. Ms. Loewenthal briefly reviewed the impact of each of the pro­posed Resolutions.

 

Council Member Preston observed that the Council had been unaware that the Department of Transportation would consider only a five travel lane basic option, with two median options. Council Mem­ber Preston stated that a lot of extenuating circumstances were factored into the Council's South Columbia Street decision‑making process. Council Member Preston expressed concern that the Coun­cil had very limited options due to the constraints established by the Department of Transportation.

 

Council Member Brown stated that cars would detrimentally con­tribute to the environment whether they were moving or standing still. Council Member Brown said she had observed traffic on South Columbia Street between 7:30 and 8:45 a.m. on several re­cent mornings, and had observed no significant traffic conges­tion. Council Member Brown stated that since the number of auto­mobiles and average number of miles driven nationally were in­creasing, the widening of South Columbia Street might only in­crease air pollution in the area. Ms. Loewenthal stated that cars which are idling or moving at less than efficient speed would be most detrimental to air quality.

 

council Member Brown said she had recently reviewed the Goals and Objectives of the Town's Comorehensive Plan. Council Member Brown stated that the staff had not adequately addressed some of the goals and objectives in making its South Columbia Street rec­ommendation. Council Member Brown said she had counted very few automobiles on South Columbia Street which had two or more occu­pants. Council Member Brown highlighted several goals and objec­tives which would not be met by the continued construction of roadways.

 

Council Member James C. Wallace arrived at 8:01 p.m.

 

Council Member Brown expressed concern that not enough was being done to reduce dependency on automobiles as a primary means of transportation. Ms. Loewenthal responded that the Council had considered the adoption of a traffic management ordinance to re­duce dependency on single occupant vehicles. Ms. Loewenthal also noted that the Town was working informally with the University to encourage usage of aiternative transportation.

 

Council Member Andresen noted that the Town staff had worked closely with Department of Transportation staff for approximately one year to develop alternatives for South Columbia Street. council Member Andresen expressed frustration that the Council was not consulted on the matter. Council Member Andresen observed that University officials and hospital administrators favor the widening of South Columbia Street. Council Member Andresen said she was not convinced that widening the road will improve area traffic flow, since major congestion occurs at the foot of the hill on South Columbia Street. Council Member Andresen observed that a University‑commissioned roadway study concluded that a loop roadway system would best serve the Univer­sity's needs. Council Member Andresen said that a loop system might be good for the University, but would not serve the needs of the whole Town.

 

Council Member Andresen stated that the widening of South Colum­bia Street would contradict Town entranceway principles. Council Member Andresen expressed concern that current portions of South Columbia Street are in poor repair and had not received prompt attention by the Department of Transportation. Council Member Andresen expressed a desire to have the option to turn the funds allocated for South Columbia Street back to the Department of Transportation, with the option of expressing what other State roadway projects are Town priorities. Council Member Andresen inquired about the status of Town traffic signal system. Ms. Loewenthal responded that the State Transportation Improvement Program has funding for the Town‑wide traffic signal system. Council Member Andresen observed that the system, when installed, would potentially greatly improve traffic flow in and around the Town.

 

Council Member Wilkerson inquired about the potential traffic impact following completion of the University's proposed building program and the proposed relocation of Manning Drive. Ms. Loewenthal stated that the University only had preliminary esti­mates of traffic volumes after completing its building program. Ms. Loewenthal said she expected that the relocation of Manning Drive would take some of the traffic pressure off of South Colum­bia Street.

 

Council Member Wilkerson observed that improvements to South Co­lumbia Street had been on the Town Council's roadway projects list for approximately eight or nine years. Council Member Wilkerson stated that the Council may have been remiss not to have been more involved in planning for South Columbia Street alternatives, after this process was initiated in the fall of 1988. Council Member Wilkerson suggested that the Council should examine its own role versus that of the staff in handling matters having potentially great long‑term impacts on the Town.

 

Council Member Werner observed that consideration of South Colum­bia Street alternatives was one of the most difficult issues he had ever dealt with as a Council Member. Council Member Werner expressed concern that the Council had been placed in a lose‑lose situation. Council Member Werner said that arguments for any of the options were fairly good. Council Member Werner said that regardless of which transportation alternatives are adopted, traffic will increase in the South Columbia Street area. Council Member Werner stated that South Columbia Street should be consis­tent with the Town's Entranceway Plan.' Council Member Werner observed that it would cost approximately $2 million to accom­plish this outcome. Council Member Werner said this would not be possible, since a bond referendum would be needed to raise funds for this purpose.

Council Member Werner stated that non‑conventional designs would be needed to address future traffic situations on South Columbia Street and other portions of Town. Council Member Werner ob­served that the State Department of Transportation would need to work more closely with individual communities in the future con­cerning the design of roadways. Council Member Werner said he did not feel compelled to follow one of the Department of Trans­portation's options simply because the Town had been given poor choices.

 

Council Member Herzenberg said he had spent time observi?? traf­fic flow on South Columbia Street. Council Member H?rzenberg said he had not observed any traffic congestion in the area. Council Member Herzenberg observed that some southbound drivers on South Columbia Street exceed the posted speed limit. Council Member Herzenberg said he feared that there would be additional congestion in the area if South Columbia Street were widened. Council Member Herzenberg said he felt that the Council should either leave the area untouched or recommend expansion of the roadway including a twenty‑four foot median. Council Member Herzenberg stated that since no funds were available for the lat­ter option, he recommended that adoption of Resolution C to his fellow Council Members.

 

Council Member Rimer observed that during his tenure on the Entranceways Task Force, that body had examined all the Town's roadways and had thought carefully about whether medians could be installed. Council Member Rimer noted the Department of Trans­portation staff's willingness to develop alternatives. Council Member Rimer expressed his support for a five‑lane roadway op­tion, with median planting in some areas and on‑going negotiation with Department of Transportation officials concerning right‑of‑way, building on experiences gained with the 15‑501 by­pass project. Council Member Rimer indicated that he had spoken to Gina Cunningham recently concerning South Columbia Street al­ternatives. Council Member Rimer stated that Ms. Cunningham com­mented that the Town staff could consult with Department of Transportation staff concerning the siting of med?ans along the expanded roadway. Council Member Rimer said he believed that the widening of South Columbia Street was necessary. Council Member Rimer encouraged the Town staff to further examine the question of who should be responsible for right‑of‑way dedica­tion.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER WALLACE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER RIMER, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION A, THE MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION.

 

Council Member Wallace said that he was not approaching the situ­ation at hand with a great deal Oi enthusiasm. Council Member Wallace stated that traffic was bound to increase in the area, regardless of the types of alternative transportation methods employed. Council Member Wallace observed that in 1962, there was vocal opposition to the widening of South Columbia Street; in 1982, the road was desired, but funding was not available; and in 1990, funding is available and segments of the community have expressed a desire to widen the roadway. Council Member Wallace stated that roadway improvements are also needed along North Car­olina Highway 86 and the portion of South Columbia Street contig­uous to the Carolina Inn and Peabody Hall.

 

Council Member Wallace suggested that improvements to South Co­lumbia Street could be completed after the widening of the road­way was completed. Council Member Wallace strongly urged the Council to proceed with the widening of South Columbia Street, adding that this would result in the Town outdoing the Department of Transportation in its own cleverness. Council Member Wallace said it would cost approximately $10 million to construct the South Columbia Street improvements, which in turn would support University building improvements injecting over $100 million into the local economy.

 

Council Member Preston inquired about the implementation of Coun­cil Member Rimer's proposal to accept the Department of Transpor­tation offer to widen South Columbia Street, with the Town beau­tifying the median in the future. Council Member Rimer said he envisioned the Town having principal responsibility for median plantings and dressing up of the roadway following the widening of South Columbia Street. Council Member Presto? inquired about the feasibility of such an approach. Mr. Small stated that the Department of Transportation had responded positively to proposed design changes on the 15‑501 bypass pro3ect. Mr. Small said that the Department of Transportation response might be similar for south Columbia Street.

 

Council Member Preston requested the staff's professional opinion concerning landscaped medians. Mr. Small noted that construction of medians would necessitate the dedication of a significant ar­ea. Mr. Small added that the location of the median would be dependent on where turning movements would be necessary.

 

Council Member Preston inquired whether the South Columbia Street turning movement study might result in the construction of five traffic lanes, similar to Airport Road. Mr. Small said yes.  Council Member Rimer stated that there was an 800 to 900 foot portion of South Columbia Street where no turning movements would be impeded.

 

Council Member Brown inquired about the feasibility of initiating a program with the State Transportation Board and legislators to change Town priorities from building roads to making funding available for alternative transportation. Mayor Howes noted that the State Legislature had recently approved $9.1 billion for the construction of roads in North Carolina, while apportioning only $5 million for alternative transportation. Mayor Howes said it appeared that achievements in the area of alternative transportation would have to be taken in small increments.

 

Mayor Howes stated his belief that South Columbia Street needed to be widened. Mayor Howes also expressed concern that the op­tions presented to the Council did not reflect the types of al­ternatives requested by the Town.

 

Mayor Howes said that his colleagues at the Research Triangle Regional Transportation Authority had acknowledged that an alter­native public transportation system could not be operated solely on the basis of revenues from the fare box. Mayor Howes also noted that a regional gasoline tax and vehicle registration fee had been rejected by the Legislature as means of funding the re­gional transportation authority.

 

Mayor Howes said that the Council was facing a difficult decision this evening. Mayor Howes stated that his personal opinion was that the Interim Town Manager's recommendation, to widen the roadway. should be followed.

 

Council Member Preston stated that the Council found itself in an untenable position this evening. Council Member Preston observed that a park and ride lot in the southern portion of Town was in the planning stages, to help mitigate dangerous traffic condi­tions in the South Columbia Street area. Council Member Preston said she did not believe that five lanes of concrete were needed in this area.

 

MAYOR HOWES OBSERVED THAT RESOLUTION A WAS ON THE FLOOR FOR A VOTE. COUNCIL MEMBER WALLACE CALLED THE QUESTION.  THE MOTION TO ADOPT RESOLUTION A WAS DEFEATED BY A VOTE OF 3‑6, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS RIMER AND WALLACE AND MAYOR HOWES VOTING TO SUPPORT RESOLUTION A.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION C.

 

Council Member Werner observed that the Council ought to interact closely with the Department of Transportation in proceeding with future South Columbia Street planning processes. Mayor Howes suggested adding language to Resolution C, reflecting the Coun­cil's commitment to work with the Department of Transportation in finding acceptable approaches. Council Member Werner suggested "...the Council will work with the Department of Transportation to review..."  Council Member Rimer expressed concern about the proposed one year review period. Council Member Werner observed that it would be necessary to allocate monies for entranceway improvements, adding that a bond referendum for this purpose could not be held until the fall.

 

RESOLUTION C, AS AMENDED, WAS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY (9‑0).

 

A RESOLUTION REQUESTING THAT THE NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION HOLD FUNDING IN ABEYANCE FOR ONE YEAR TO ALLOW THE TOWN COUNCIL TIME TO FURTHER REVIEW IMPROVEMENT ALTERNATIVES AND TO IDENTIFY FUNDING SOURCES FOR PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS ON SOUTH COLUMBIA STREET (90‑1‑23/R‑lc)

 

WHEREAS, South Columbia Street below Manning Drive has been iden­tified by the Town and the State as a key thoroughfare serving the State, the Town and the University of North Carolina; and

 

WHEREAS, existing and projected traffic volumes indicate that roadway improvements are necessary to maintain a reasonable level of service on South Columbia Street; and

 

WHEREAS, representatives of the Town and the North Carolina De­partment of Transportation (NCDOT) have met and discussed the project needs, scope, costs, and impacts; and

 

WHEREAS, the final results of the NCDOT analyses of the physical impacts and costs of various improvement alternatives were not available to the Town until late 1989; and

 

WHEREAS, the Council has not had adequate time to review the analyses of alternatives nor to identify funding sources for Town cost‑sharing, if necessary; and

 

WHEREAS, the Council greatly appreciates the time and effort ex­pended by the NCDOT in analyzing alternatives, and wishes to thoroughly consider and utilize the findings in coming to a deci­sion on an improvement alternative to endorse;

 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council requests that the NCDOT hold the project funding in abeyance for a period of one year during which the Council will review the project alternatives, impacts, and costs in preparation for taking formal action on the project pri­or to the end of calendar year 1990.

 

This the 23rd day of January, 1990.

 

Council Member Wilkerson stated that the Council was being remiss in its responsibilities when matters such as the alignment of South Columbia Street are delegated to the Town staff. Council Member Wilkerson implored the Council to take the lead in negoti­ations to develop workable alternatives. Mayor Howes observed that the State Legislature is the ultimate decision‑maker on State highways. Mayor Howes stressed the need to work closely with University officials and State legislators.

 

Chapel Hill North Master Plan

 

Planning Director Roger Waldon noted that this evening's proceed­ings were a continuation of the Council's November 3Oth hearing on the Chapel Hill North Master Plan.

 

Mr. Waldon reviewed the application and key features and issues. Mr. Waldon noted that 60% of the square footage would be for of­fice space, with the balance dedicated to commercial uses. Mr. Waldon said there were six major issues surrounding the applica­tion including: buffering of the site, roadway improvements, master plan approval, outparcel usage, provision of a park and ride lot, and project phasing.

 

Mr. Waldon first addressed buffering concerns, noting that the staff recommended that the existing tree line be maintained. Mr. waldon added that staff recommended roadway improvements were reasonable and served to mitigate traffic impacts in the area. Mr. Waldon noted that all roadway improvements were to be includ­ed with the first half of the proposed development and prior to the issuance of certificates of occupancy.

 

Mr. Waldon noted that the Northwood Homeowner's Association had requested that the level of service on North Carolina Highway 86 never drop below level of service D. Mr. Waldon observed that NC 86 already has portion at level of service E. Mr. Waldon added that the applicant had agreed to limit the use of outparcels. Mr. Waldon said it did not appear feasible to prohibit the locat­ing of service stations on outparcels. Mr. Waldon also indicated that although traffic signalization might be desirable along NC 86, this decision would be made by Department of Transportation officials.

 

Mr. Waldon said that requiring a minimum square footage for spe­cial use permit submittal would assure that road improvements could be attached, but would limit project flexibility. Mr. Waldon stated that a minimum size submittal requirement was not recommended by the staff. Mr. Waldon concluded his remarks by stating that the staff had modified language in Resolution C to address concerns of the Council, neighborhood residents and the applicant.

 

Ron Strom, representing Chapel Hill North, said that he and his project partners strongly believed in the concept of master plan­ning. Mr. Strom expressed concern about costly delays in approv­al of the Chapel Hill North project, noting that over $250,000 had been expended to date for architectural and legal fees. Mr. Strom encouraged the Council to adopt Resolution C as presented. Mr. Strom expressed his desire to address three important issues: outparcels, buffers and roadway improvements. Mr. Strom said that conditions nine and nineteen pertaining to outparcels were drafted to ensure integration of outparcels into the master plan, restricting uses to prohi'bit fast food or other drive‑through services. Mr. Strom indicated that he had spoken to environmen­tal engineers about possible groundwater contamination and was informed that siting of tanks downstream from Northwood wells would satisfactorily address this concern. Mr. Strom also noted that Environmental Protection Agency regulations require the in­stallation of monitoring devices in underground gasoline storage tanks.

 

Mr. Strom stated that the mixed‑use ordinance requires the provi­sion of type D buffers. Mr. Strom added that Chapel Hill North was dedicating two acres of open space in the middle of its site and significant amounts of right‑of‑way along NC 86. Mr. Strom said that the provision of right‑of‑way was a far more effective buffering strategy than the meandering buffer requested by Northwood residents.

 

Mr. Strom added that the right‑of‑way dedication would almost assure that future roadway paving would occur on the Chapel Hill North side of the road.

 

Mr. Strom noted that no remuneration was requested from Northwood for the right‑of‑way dedication. Mr. Strom also noted that Chap­el Hill North had agreed to eliminate the curb cut across from the Northwood subdivision main entrance. Mr. Strom also said that preservation of the forested edge would be enhanced by the fact that this road will exist as a five‑lane roadway. Mr. Strom added that he supported the reduction in right‑of‑way by eight feet to attain a minimum buffer of thirty‑eight feet to accommo­date additional setbacks.

 

Mr. Strom requested that the language contained in Resolution C concerning buffering be adopted without alteration.

 

Mr. Strom stated that several of the proposed conditions of ap­proval in Resolution C would assure that the package of off‑site roadway improvements would be established. Mr. Strom noted that traffic along some portions of NC 86 is at level of service E. Mr. Strom said it was his hope that this situation could be im­proved by means of installing a traffic light at the main en­trance to Chapel Hill North and other roadway improvements. Mr. Strom stressed that such improvements, particularly concerning traffic warrants, would require approval by the North Carolina Department of Transportation. Mr. Strom observed that the De­partment of Transportation would require that traffic signals be synchronized to allow the flow of traffic out of Northwood subdi­vision. Mr. Strom concluded his remarks by noting that the traf­fic improvement phasing program would always remain ahead of traffic projections by a factor of 50?, meaning that when the project is 50% completed, all $500,000 of traffic improvements would be in place.

 

Bob Holsinger of Wilbur Smith and Associates noted that the North Carolina Department of Transportation requires six hundred foot spacing between intersections. Mr. Holsinger added that one of the eleven North Carolina Department of Transportation warrant conditions must be met prior to traffic signal installation. Mr. Holsinger observed that most shopping centers meet a condi­tion concerning the interruption of continuous traffic flows. Mr. Strom noted that Chapel Hill North or the Town could apply to the Department of Transportation when seeking a study to deter­mine whether to traffic warrants have been met.

 

Council Member Wilkerson inquired why Resolution C, the Manager's recommendation, prohibited fast food establishments but not ser­vice stations. Council Member Rimer asked whether the applicant was willing to exclude service stations. Council Member Wilkerson inquired about the possible impact of the realignment of Northwood Drive on the Northwood neighborhood. Mr. Waldon stated that it appeared likely that Northwood residents would experience greater difficulty in making turning movements if roadway improvements were not installed in a timely fashion.

 

Mr. Waldon noted that Northwood Drive connects Eubanks Road to NC 86. He added that ther? was a good deal of concern about the potential for cut‑through traffic in the future, due to develop­ment in the northwest area of Town. Mr. Waldon said that the staff proposed to study the northwest area for future access and circulation. Mr. Waldon stated that Northwood Drive could be realigned if the Chapel Hill North master plan were approved.

 

Council Member Wilkerson inquired whether the realignment of Northwood Drive at the west would be the best long‑term solution if Chapel Hill North were approved. Mr. Waldon said yes. Coun­cil Member Wilkerson inqui?ed about the impact on existing hous­ing if realignment occurred to the southeast. Mr. Waldon said it would be desirable to minimize disruption to existing homes. Mr. Waldon provided an overview of roads in the area and possible future roadway connections.

 

Council Member Andresen thanked Council Member Wilkerson for raising insightful questions about potential roadway alignments and impacts. Council Member Andresen inquired when buffering standard recommendations would be completed. Mr. Waldon indicat­ed that the standards were targeted for completion in April. Council Member Andresen expressed concern that thirty foot buff­ers would be completely inadequate for buildings which are six­ty‑five to eighty feet tall. Council Member Andresen asked what would occur if the change in buffering standards occurred in April and a special use permit were submitted after that time. Mr. Waldon responded that development projects are subject to regulations which apply at the time of their approval. Council Member Andresen inquired about the likelihood of attaining buff­ers greater than thirty feet. Mr. Waldon said it was difficult to respond to this query.

 

Council Member Brown inquired about traffic counts along NC 86. Mr. Waldon said he would obtain this information for Council Mem­ber Brown. Council Member Rimer asked about the feasibility of roadway alignment within the proximity of the Duke Power ease­ment. Mr. Waldon said he was not familiar enough with Duke Power requirements in order to respond to this question.

 

Mr. Waldon noted that the Planning Board had not recently consid­ered the Chapel Hill North development proposal.

 

Interim Town Manager Loewenthal said she recommended the adoption of Resolution C.

 

Ann Weeks, 104 Autumn Lane, President of Northwood Homeowner's Association said she was concerned about buffer types and width, traffic impact, and turning movements. Ms. Weeks said that by approving the master plan, three of the four findings would be met, with the Town having to prove that the fourth condition was not met at the time of special use permit submittal. Ms. Weeks stated that the Northwood homeowners had met in October to elect a board. Ms. Weeks said the board was directed to make sugges­tions about the Chapel Hill North proposal. Ms. Weeks indicated that the board met with Mr. Strom on December l7th. At that time, Mr. Strom indicated that other than dedication of eight additional feet of right‑of‑way, the balance of neighborhood con­cerns could not be addressed at that time. Ms. Weeks indicated that the Board was somewhat discouraged at this response an? chose to reconvene on January l3th.

 

Ms. Weeks said that buffers along NC 86 should be naturally vege­tated and at least thirty feet wide at all points. Ms. Weeks stated that the buffer should meander to a width of at least sev­enty‑five feet at one point. Ms. Weeks encouraged the Council not to postpone buffering and traffic concerns until the special use permit stage.

 

Ms. Weeks said she appreciated the difficulties of working with the Department of Transportation, but felt that the installation of a traffic signal at the main entrance to Chapel Hill North was essential. Ms. Weeks noted that Resolution C would require that traffic improvements be place prior to construction phasing. Ms. Weeks said she appreciated the developer's willingness to have no fast food or drive‑through banks on the outparcels. Ms. Weeks requested that language be included prohibiting gas stations on the outparcels.

 

Town Attorney Karpinos clarified the finding of fact process for master plan projects. Mr. Karpinos stated that if the special use permit submittal were in compliance with the approved master plan, it would be necessary to present substantial evidence that the findings had not been met.

 

Larry Benninger, 109 Autumn Lane, said he was concerned about the proposed siting of gas stations. Mr. Benninger stated that fed­eral regulations require that new tanks be constructed of im­proved materials to prevent leakages. Mr. Benninger said it was his professional opinion as a registered geologist that "down­stream" is not a useful concept in the Piedmont, relative to the location of storage tanks. Mr. Benninger stated that no detailed geological study of the area had been performed.

 

Mr. Benninger also expressed concern about the bottlenecking of traffic on NC 86 between Weaver Dairy Road and Homestead Road. Mr. Benninger expressed concern that since portions of the road­way are currently at level of service E, this roadway could not serve future demands. Mr. Benninger stated that construction of Chapel Hill North should be postponed until sufficient roadway capacity exists.

 

David Jones, 3202 Whitfield Road, said he was mainly concerned about traffic congestion and safety. Mr. Jones also expressed concern that the word "requirement" had been changed to "guide­lines" in Resolution C. Mr. Jones recommended that the Council strongly consider using language proposed by Northwood residents, since it was clean and simple. Mr. Jones also expressed concern that the inclusion of gas stations in Chapel Hill North would not be beneficial in maintaining the health and welfare of the gener­al public.

 

Arnie Vesalind, 107 Hunter Hill Road, said he was concerned that Resolution C does not require adequate roadway improvements. Mr. Vesalind based his conclusions on previous memoranda and state­ments from Town and developer representatives concerning roadway improvements. Mr. Vesalind stated that the proposed improvements offered in Resolution C were inadequate. Mr. Vesalind ' expressed concern that the Master Plan, once approved, could not be unilat­erally amended in the future. Mr. Vesalind stated that the mixed‑use ordinance requires that traffic impacts be mitigated. Mr. Vesalind said that‑the proposed roadway improvements will not adequately mitigate traffic impacts.

 

Fred Simon, 209 Hunter Hill Road, stated that the current peak hour volume on NC 86 is 1,596 vehicles per hour, corresponding to a level of service "E". Mr. Simon observed that a total of fif­ty‑eight accidents were reported on NC 86 between Weaver Dairy and Homestead Road last year.

 

Robert Langenback, 108 Autumn Lane, said he did not see the need for the Chapel Hill North development, since there are several existing vacancies around the Town. Mr. Langenback expressed concern that taxpayers would ultimately pay the bill for the con­struction of Chapel Hill North. Mr. Langenback asked the Council to consider what, if anything, was positive about the Chapel Hill North proposal.

 

Council Member Rimer inquired whether Chapel Hill North was agreeable to the exclusion of gas stations from its development proposal. Mr. Strom responded that if this were the only item preventing the adoption of Resolution C, his willingness to con­cede the point would be different. Mr. Strom said his response would be contingent upon what other changes to Resolution C were requested.

 

Council Member Werner observed that the gas stations currently nearest the Chapel Hill North site are on the other side of Home­stead Road. Council Member Werner said he thought it would be a mistake to continue to make people drive down NC 86 to Homestead Road to access a gas station.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER PRESTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER RIMER, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION C.

 

Council Member Herzenberg requested an amendment to item 12 on page 4, strengthening the language to read "provided that". Council Member Wilkerson proposed that the second sentence on page 5 be changed to remove the word "would" and add the word "shall". Town Attorney Karpinos noted that some factors could come into play whereby the Council's future flexibility could be limited. Mr. Karpinos suggested that the Council's motion in­clude the language "the Council receives the Manager's memorandum and adjourns the hearing." Council Member Preston and Council Member Rimer, the motioner and seconder, agreed to include this language.

 

Council Member Andresen requested that Resolution C be amended to require "harmonious architectural standards and criteria for the Chapel Hill North project".

 

Council Member Werner requested that the last sentence in condi­tion number nine be amended to read: "landscape should include retention of existing buffer material unless specifically modi­fied in subsequent special use permits."

 

Council Member Wilkerson suggested that condition #19 be amended to included service stations as a permitted use. Mayor Howes suggested that the Council could vote on this matter as an amendment.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER WILKERSON OFFERED THE INCLUSION OF SERVICE STA­TIONS AS A PERMITTED USE AS AN AMENDMENT TO THE MAIN MOTION. COUNCIL MEMBER ANDRESEN SECONDED THE MOTION.

 

Town Attorney Karpinos noted that such an amendment could not be enforced without the consent of the applicant.

 

THE MOTION TO ADOPT THE AMENDMENT FAILED, BY A VOTE OF 4‑5, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS ANDRESEN, BROWN, HERZENBERG AND WILKERSON VOTING IN FAVOR OF THE AMENDMENT.

 

Council Member Brown inquired about the Town's level of service standard for roadways. Mr. Waldon stated that the Council had established level of service D as a minimum standard. Mr. Waldon noted that portions of NC 86 are currently operating at level of service E, below the Council directed minimum acceptable stan­dard. Council Member Brown expressed concern about traffic safe­ty in the area. Council Member Brown added that she would find it difficult to approve a project in an area where traffic condi­tions are currently unsafe and could become worse in the future.

 

Mr. Waldon noted that the Council had discussed the concept of establishing an adequate public facilities ordinance. Mr. Waldon added that specific legislative authority would be needed to im­plement such an ordinance.

 

Council Member Brown inquired about State and Federal regulations and permits for air quality. Council Member Werner noted that there are currently no such requirements, but such regulations would probably be in place prior to special use permit issuance for Chapel Hill North.

 

Council Member Rimer proposed that Resolution C be amended to require all roadway improvements be completed by the time a cer­tificate of occupancy is issued for the first half of the project, rather than when the first half of the project is occu­pied. Council Member Rimer stated that it was clear that the developer was willing to make payments in lieu for traffic signalization improvements. Council Member Rimer suggested that the developer and the Town could request traffic warrant studies from the Department of Transportation. Mr. Holsinger proposed that the Town might more appropriately request the signalization study, since the developer had agreed to make a payment‑in‑lieu arrangement.

Council Member Werner noted the possible realignment of Northwood Drive was not addressed in the motion. Council Member Werner inquired how the Council could ensure that something would occur to address this situation. Mr. Waldon responded that the situa­tion would be further examined as a part of the small area plan­ning process. Council Member Werner responded that the situation appeared to be a fairly specific problem needing resolution. Mayor Howes suggested that a separate resolution could possibly be introduced to handle this concern. Ms. Loewenthal noted that the Northwood subdivision is not in the Town limits.

 

Council Member Andresen noted that the Chapel Hill North proposal had been improved considerably since its initial introduction to the Council. Council Member Andresen said she was still very uncomfortable with the thirty foot buffering requirement. Coun­cil Member Andresen also expressed concern about permitting gas stations to locate in Chapel Hill North.

 

Council Member Wilkerson said he could not vote in favor of the proposal due to the same two concerns expressed by Council Member Andresen. Council Member Wilkerson expressed concern that Chapel Hill Gateway, a recent mixed‑use project submittal, had many of the same issues as Chapel Hill North, but had received less fa­vorable treatment by the Council since local property owners were not involved in this project.

 

Council Member Brown stated that she was concerned about traffic conditions in the area and permitting service stations on the site. Council Member Brown said that the proposal env?sioned covering almost thirty acres with buildings and parking lots. Council Member Brown noted that she did not see how the value of contiguous property would be enhanced by approval of such a pro­posal.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER RIMER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WILKERSON, TO RECONSIDER THE PREVIOUS AMENDMENT CONCERNING THE LOCATION OF GAS STATIONS ON THE SITE.

 

Council Member Werner stated that eliminating gas stations as a permitted use would be unlikely to change the vote on the project.

 

THE MOTION TO RECONSIDER FAILED BY A VOTE OF 3‑6, WITH COUNCIL

 

MEMBERS ANDRESEN, RIMER AND WILKERSON SUPPORTING THE MOTION.  ‑

 

Town Attorney Karpinos requested that applicant provide a state­ment of concurrence with the proposed conditions of approval. Mr. Strom said he supported the modifications to Resolution C introduced by the Council this evening.

 

THE MAIN MOTION, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION C, WAS PL?CED ON THE FLOOR FOR CONSIDERATION. THE MASTER PL?N FOR CHAPEL HILL NORTH WAS APPROVED BY A VOTE OF 5‑4, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS ANDRESEN, BROWN, WALLACE AND WILKERSON DISSENTING.

 

A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR A MASTER r$ND USE PLAN FOR CHAPEL HILL NORTH LIMITED PARTNERSHIP (17‑10) (90‑1‑23/R‑2c)

 

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that it finds that the Master Land Use Plan proposed by Mr. Ron Strom representing Chapel Hill North Limited Partnership, on property identified as Chapel Hill Township Tax Map 17, Lot 10, if devel­oped according to the Master Land Use Plan ‑ Conceptual Plan, dated September 23, 1988, revised May 1, 1989 and the Design Guidelines statement dated April 11, 1989, and conditions listed below, would:

 

     1. Maintain the public health, safety and general welfare;

 

     2.   Maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property; or be a public necessity; and

 

     3.   Conform to the Comprehensive Plan.

 

These findings are conditioned on the following:

 

1.   That an application for a Special Use Permit for development of at least one phase be accepted by the Town Manager by January 23, 1992 (two years from date of approval) or the above Master Land Use Plan shall automatically expire.

 

2.   That the Master Plan and development program be so modified so as to be consistent with the mixed‑use threshold require­ments of Section 4.3.2 of the Development Ordinance; and that the maximum floor area for the site not exceed 633,400 square feet.

 

3.   That utility extension plans be approved by OWASA as part of the application for a Special Use Permit for Phase One

 

4.   That a Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan for the en­tire 40‑acre tract, using the Town's Hydros Model, be ap­proved by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning compliance Permit for Phase One.

 

5.   All primary driveways should be built so as to accommodate public transit vehicles.

 

6.   That adequate transit stops, with shelters and/or benches, be provided as appropriate.

 

7.   That the applicant, upon submittal of a Special Use Permit to construct any portion of the proposed office uses, pre­pare, for approval by the Town, a Transportation Management Plan for the office project. This Transportation Management Plan should include provisions to reduce automobile traffic and encourage the use of alternative modes of transporta­tion. The exact scope of this plan will be agreed upon by the Town Manager and the applicant prior to its preparation.

 

8.   That the applicant agrees to make available to the Town suf­ficient land within the site to enable the Town to develop a 200‑space park and ride lot. Area sufficient to accommodate this proposed lot is designated on the applicant's site plan; however, the Town and the applicant may agree to relo­cate the site. Terms of this acquisition shall be as fol­lows:

 

     a.   Prior to January 23, 1991 (one year from approval of the Master Plan), the Town of Chapel Hill will decide whether or not to exercise an option to acquire the property, subject to approval of the Urban Mass Transit Administration.

 

     b.   The applicant will grant the Town a right of first re­fusal with respect to the proposed park and ride lot area. This right of first refusal must be converted to a purchase agreement within thirty days of written no­tice from UMTA as to whether or not the Town's applica­tion for funds to acquire such lot has been approved. Failure to convert to a contract within such period shall render the right of first refusal null and void.

 

     c.   Right of first refusal shall be terminated, unless re­newed by applicant, within one year of Master Plan ap­proval.

 

     d.   Once Master Plan has been approved, the Town will pro­ceed at once to make application for UMTA funding for the park and ride lot. Applicant will cooperate with the Town in the various processes necessary prior to application, including providing information that would be needed for appraisal, surveys, and the creation of a shared countercyclical use agreement, access agreement, and maintenance agreement. The Town will bear any and all costs associated with its right of first refusal to acquire said park and ride lot.

 

     e.   If the Town decides to acquire the park and ride lot site, it shall pay to the applicant just compensation for the site as determined in accordance with applica­ble federal property acquisition procedures. If the applicant and the Town are unable to reach agreement on the amount of just compensation, then the Town and the applicant shall each designate an appraiser and the two appraisers shall select a third appraiser. The apprais­ers shall determine the amount of just compensation using the standards set forth in Chapter 40A of the North Carolina General Statutes. The Town and the ap­plicant will then be bound by the amount of just com­pensation agreed to by at least two of the three ap­praisers if the Town decides to acquire the property. The Town and the applicant shall each bear the cost of the appraiser each has selected and shall jointly bear the cost of the third appraiser.

 

9.   That a set of landscape and architectural performance stan­dards be developed to assure general compliance with the Town's Master Lan?scape Plan for Entranceways Corridors along N.C. 86, with full compliance to the Class "D" buffer be demonstrated to the Town Manager and the Appearance Com­mission for each phase of development.

 

     These performance standards should address harmonious archi­tectural standards for the whole project, and architectural criteria for buildings and out‑parcels, and how adequate screening of parking and service areas from N.C. 86 can be achieved. The standards may include: terracing or lower­ing/raising of parking areas; specific earth berm designs; specified vegetation; utilization of over‑sized vegetation when appropriate. Landscape plans should include retention of existing vegetation as buffer material, unless specifi­cally modified under a Special Use Permit. '

 

10.  That any required State.or Federal permits be approved and copies of the approved permits be submitted to the Town of Chapel Hill prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit for each phase of development, if applicable.

 

11.  That the following roadway improvements be made, or that a payment‑in‑lieu be provided equivalent to the improvements, (including design of said ‑ improvements) and that these im­provements be in place prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for any building in a phase for which improvements are required (to be determined by the Council on issuance of each Special Use Permit, in accordance with the guidelines contained in condition 12, below).

 

     a)   N.C. 86:

 

          1.   That additional right‑of‑way to create a 100' ROW to accommodate four through travel‑ways, curb and gutter, left turn lanes, bike lanes, and sidewalk be dedicated along this site's frontage.

 

          2.   That 1.5 lanes of additional travel‑way and four feet of bike lane with curb and gutter be con­structed along this site's frontage.

 

          3.   That a five‑foot sidewalk be constructed along this site's frontage.

 

          4.   That a payment‑in‑lieu be made for the design and installation of traffic signals at the intersec­tion of the main road entrance or the northern entrance. At such time as the warrants for a traf­fic signal can be met, the Town of Chapel Hill will request installation of such signals by the state Department of Transportation.

 

     b) Weaver Dairy Road:

 

          1. Dedication of one‑half of a 90‑foot right‑of‑way.

 

          2.   One‑half of a 65‑foot cross‑section, with curb and gutter, be installed.

 

          3.   A sidewalk provided along the north side.

 

          4.   Design and improvements to the traffic signal at the intersection of N.C. 86 to provide a minimum of an 8‑phase operation.

 

12.  That all road improvements to N.C. 86 and/or Weaver Dairy Road deemed necessary to mitigate traffic impacts on these roads connected with each Phase be in place and accepted for maintenance prior to any Certificates of Occupancy being issued for that specific phase.

 

     As a general guide, the level of road improvements required to accompany any phase shall be determined by the following formula: % of total road improvements required = % of total peak hour trips generated x 1.5.

 

     Provided that:

 

          Highest priority is assigned to the improvements in­volving widening of N.C. 86.

 

          All improvements are completed by the time the first half of the project (in terms of square feet of floor area) is issued a Certificate of Occupancy;

 

          If a particular phase, along with road improvements, represents development that would cause impacts suffi­cient to force Level of Service on impacted roads ana intersections to drop below Level of Service D at peak hour, such impacts would be grounds for denial of a Special Use Permit for that phase;

 

          If Level of Service on nearby roads and intersections is already below Level of Service D at peak hour, then if a phase, along with road improvements, represents development that would worsen Level of Service, such impacts would be grounds for denial of a Special Use Permit for that phase;

 

          Provided, however, that the total package of road im­provements required of this development to mitigate traffic impacts will not exceed the requirements speci­fied by Master Plan approval.

 

13.  That the applicant's plans for the Special Use Permit incor­porate the following into the physical design of the commer­cial and/or office areas:

 

     "significant landscaped pedestrian‑ways;

 

     architectural design of the commercial area to be as pedestrian‑oriented as possible, including building offsets, main entry courts, pedestrian amenities and appropriate foundation landscaping; and

 

     "appropriate site, architectural and landscape criteria for any out‑parcels to achieve overall consistency and harmony with the overall development.

 

14.  That the "north entrance" be shifted so as to be a minimum of 600 feet south of the intersection of Eubanks Road; and, that the "main entrance" be a minimum of 500 feet south of the "north entrance".

 

15.  That the "right‑in/right‑out only" access on N.C. 86 direct­ly across from Northwood Drive be deleted.

 

16.  That the site's access from Weaver Dairy Road along the eastern property line be a public street, and provide access to the Cheek property to the east, and be designed so as to provide for a Class "Cw buffer between the road and the Cheek property.

 

17.  That no vehicular driveway or street connection be made to Sedgewood Drive and Old University Station Road until Sedgewood Drive and Old University Station Road are built to Town standards and accepted by the Town for maintenance.

 

18.  That the applicant consider a dedication to the Town's Greenway system for a pedestrian, non‑motorized vehicle easement along the site's frontage with Interstate 40 and within the Duke Power Company transmission line easement.

 

19.  That the outparcels so designated on the Master Land Use Plan ‑ Conceptual Plan be restricted to prohibit fast food type commercial use, and any non‑banking retail use requir­ing a drive‑thru window facility.

 

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council hereby approves the ap­plication for Chapel Hill North Limited Partnership Master Land Use Plan in accordance with plans and conditions listed above.

 

This the 23rd day of January, 1990.

 

Small Area Plans

 

Planning Director Roger Waldon noted that a two‑step process was proposed, involving data gathering, analysis and consultation with the Planning Board. Mr. Waldon stated that the Resolution before the Council requested approval of a process and schedule for small area plans.

 

Planning Board Chairperson Bruce Guild stated that the Planning Board had reviewed and endorsed the small area planning process proposal at its January 22nd meeting. Mr. Guild noted that the Planning Board encouraged the inclusion of public input as early as possible in the process. Mr. Guild also noted that the phase two small area plans should be initiated after the first phase had been completed.

 

Council Member Andresen said that the proposed timing of small area planning appeared to be appropriate.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER ANDRESEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG, TO ADOPT THE PROPOSED SCHEDULE AND PROCESS FOR SMALL AREA PLANS. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9‑0).

 

A RESOLUTION SETTING FORTH A PROCESS AND A SCHEDULE FOR DEVELOP­ING SMALL AREA PL$NS FOR THE UNDEVELOPED AREAS OF CHAPEL HILL AND THE URBAN SERVICES AREA (90‑1‑23/R‑3)

 

WHEREAS, on December 12, 1989 the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill adopted a resolution directing the Manager to develop a pro­cess and schedule for preparing small area plans over the period from January, 1990 to June, 1990; and

 

WHEREAS, the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill desires to under­take a planning process to revise the Town's 1986 adopted Land Use Plan for areas within the Urban Services Area to include a plan to show how public facilities could be extended to accommo­date new development;

 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council directs the Manager to proceed with the following process and schedule:

 

Step One

 

Identify existing conditions February ‑ June 1990

 

Presentation to Council June 1990

 

Step Two

 

Prepare Concept Plans for first

group of small areas    July 1990 - June 1991

 

Presentation to Council June 1991

 

Public Hearings and Council

consideration for inclusion in

the Land Use Plan and

Joint Planning Agreement     Fall 1991

 

Prepare Concept Plans for

second group of small areas  July 1991 - March 1992

 

Presentation to Council March 1992

 

Public Hearings and Council

consideration for inclusion

in the Land Use Plan and

Joint Planning Agreement     March - June 1992

 

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that it is the Council's intent that the Town will work closely with Orange Water and Sewer Authority and with neighboring jurisdictions, particularly Orange County, pur­suant to the Memorandum of Understanding with Orange Water and Sewer Authority and the Joint Planning Agreement.

 

This the 23rd day of January, 1990.

 

Desig Guidelines

 

Mr. Waldon noted that copies of the proposed Design Guidelines had been distributed to the Council recently. Mr. Waldon added that the document would be widely distributed in the near future. Mr. Waldon reviewed the proposed composition of a Design Review Board.

 

Council Member Werner said it would be unusual ?0 solicit appli­cants for the Design Review Board prior to holding a public hear­ing on the proposed guidelines. Council Member Werner suggested that volunteers could be solicited later in the process. Council Member Werner stressed the importance of establishing the board in such a manner as to eliminate actual or apparent professional conflicts of interest. Mr. Waldon responded that Council Member Werner's suggestion to delay appointment of the Design Review Board could be accomplished by amending the Resolution before the Council. Mr. Waldon noted that a number of current Town advisory board members currently declare their property interests and ex­cuse themselves from voting as appropriate.

 

Council Member Wilkerson inquired how much time could be saved by following the Design Review Board process. Mr. Waldon responded that the principal benefit derived will be better designed projects. Mr. Waldon said this would result in fewer projects having to go back through the approval process. Council Member Wilkerson observed that the Design Review Board would contribute to the more effective use of staff time. Mr. Wa?don concurred with this observation.

 

Council Member Andresen inquired what other boards had evaluated the proposed Design Guidelines. Mr. Waldon said that if the Council called the public hearing, the staff would make presenta­tions to other advisory boards concerning the proposed guide­lines. Council Member Andresen inquired about the proposed length of service of the Design Review Board. Mr. Waldon stated that the status of the Board would be reviewed on a continual basis to monitor its utility.

 

Council Member Brown expressed concern that design professionals rather than citizens at large were being asked to serve on the board. Council Member Brown stated that the Chapel Hill Land Use Committee was composed of intelligent local residents who called on appropriate experts for advice as needed. Council Member Brown requested that the Council reconsider the composition of the Design Review Board.

 

Council Member Rimer noted that there would be an opportunity for citizen input at the Council's public hearing. Council Member Rimer stated that the Town's advisory boards and commissions are composed of a balance of interested citizens.

 

Mayor Howes invited advisory boards and commissions to forward their recommendations on the proposed Design Guidelines to the Council.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG, TO CALL A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED DESIGN GUIDELINES. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9‑0).

 

A RESOLUTION INITIATING ADJUSTMENTS TO DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SYSTEM (90‑1‑23/R‑4)

 

WHEREAS, the Council intends to adjust its system of reviewing development applications in order to better assure compliance of new development with provisions of the Comprehensive Plan;

 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council calls a Public Hearing for 7:30 p,m. on Monday, March 19, 1990 to consider amendments to Article 25 of the Chapel Hill Development Ordinance to establish a Design Review Board.

 

This the 23rd day of January, 1990.

 

Parking Lot #1

 

Michael Hining, project architect, presented a brief program sum­mary, noting approximately three hundred and twenty standard parking spaces were proposed for construction. Mr. Hining noted that the top level of the facility would be designed as a public plaza. Mr. Hining also stated that the main structure would be designed to fit in a U‑shaped service drive. Mr. Hining said the project would have two and a half levels of parking spaces, with a setback of fifteen feet from the brick wall on Rosemary Street. Mr. Hining also said that the plaza level would be set back from the parking structure. Mr. Hining stated that permission to go ahead with the schematic design for the project was being re­quested this evening.

 

Council Member Brown commended Mr. Hining, Mr. Horton and those

 

involved in the proposed design of the project for a job well done.  Council Member Brown said she was unable to support the project due to her personal principles.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER PRESTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 5. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED BY A VOTE OF 8‑1, WITH COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN DISSENTING.

 

A RESOLUTION APPROVING A PROGRAM FOR DEVELOPMENT OF A PARKING FACILITY AND AUTHORIZING SCHEMATIC DESIGN WORK (90‑1‑23/R‑5)

 

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

 

     (a)  Receives the report of the Council Committee on Parking Lot Number One and Related Matters transmitting a pro­gram for development of a parking facility and public plaza, with provision for limited commercial develop­ment, at the site of Parking Lot Number One, said re­port dated January 23, 1990; and

 

     (b)  Authorizes the architect/engineer for the project, Mi­chael J. Hining, AIA, to prepare schematic designs based on the development program.

 

This the 23rd day of January, 1990.

 

Public Safety Director Cal Horton stated that a preliminary budg­et of $3.5 million was proposed for construction of the facility. Mr. Horton observed that the Council Committee on Parking Lot Number One and Related Matters and ultimately the Council would make specific choices of how the funds would be allocated.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER WILKERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PRESTON, TO ADOPT THE PROPOSED BUDGET ORDINANCE. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9‑0).

 

AN ORDINANCE TO ADOPT A PROJECT ORDINANCE FOR A PARKING FACILITY AND PUBLIC PL?ZA (90‑1‑23/0‑I)

 

BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that, pursuant to Section 13.2 of Chapter 159 of the General Statutes of North Carolina, the following capital project ordinance is hereby adopted:

 

                           SECTION I

 

The project authorized is the construction of 325‑350 parking spaces and a public plaza on Town‑owned land known as Parking Lot Number One and the adjacent parking area and lawn at the rear of the Old Post Office, in the one hundred block of East Rosemary Street.

 

                          SECTION II

The Manager of the Town of Chapel Hill is hereby directed to pro­ceed with the project within the terms of Resolutions 89‑7‑10/R‑7 and Resolution 89‑11‑30/R‑5, authorizing the Manager to take var­ious actions in connection with the project, and consistent with the budget contained herein.

 

                          SECTION III

 

The following revenues are anticipated to be available to com­plete this project.

 

     Bond Proceeds           $3,500,000

 

                          SECTION IV

 

The following amounts are appropriated for the project:

 

     Surveys and Technical Services           65,000

     Construction                          2,700,000

     Bond Issuance Expenses                  500,000

 

     Total                                 $3,500,000

 

                           SECTION V

 

Copies of this project ordinance shall be entered into th? minutes of the Council and filed with the Manager, Finance Direc­tor, and Clerk.

 

This the 23rd day of January, 1990.

 

Cost‑sharina for Coates Drainaqe Proiect   "

 

Town Engineer George Small noted that the Council had previously directed the Town staff to work with M?. Coates to allocate the costs of significant drainage improvements undertaken at 304 West Franklin Street. Mr. Small noted that such costs have customari­ly been the sole r?sponsibility of those developing the property. Mr. Small stated that if requests similar to Mr. Coates' were received in the future, developers would have to meet certain criteria prior to receiving financial assistance.

 

Mayor Howes said it was good idea for Mr. Small to establish that a precedent was not being set for situations of this type.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER ANDRESEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER, TO AUTHORIZE PAYMENT TO MR. COATES FOR DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS AT 304 WEST FRANKLIN STREET. THE MOTION WAS ADOP?ED UNANIMOUSLY (9‑0).

 

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE TOWN MANAGER TO REIMBURSE MR. C.J. COATES, THE DEVELOPER OF PROPERTY AT 304 W. FRANKLIN STREET, IN THE AMOUNT OF $13,661 FOR A PORTION OF THE DECUMENTED COSTS OF RENOVATION THE STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM ON HIS PROPERTY WHICH SERVES AND BENEFITS THE COMMUNITY‑AT‑LARGE (90‑1‑23/R‑6)

 

WHEREAS, the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill has received a petition requesting reimbursement for a portion of the costs of drainage improvements on and adjacent to property at 304 W. Franklin Street; and

 

WHEREAS, portions of the drainage system passing through the property at 304 W. Franklin Street collect and convey stormwater from areas of the Town Center outside the property; and

 

WHEREAS, this area of the Town has a history of periodic flooding which has resulted in property damage and public inconvenience; and

 

WHEREAS, significant portions of the existing system were found to be deteriorated and in need of imminent replacement; and

 

WHEREAS, the drainage system renovations completed by the devel­oper of 304 W. Franklin Street will mitigate flooding in this area of Town to the benefit of the community; and

 

WHEREAS, the Town has an existing stormwater management and drainage account established to fund drainage improvements which can be shown to improve existing drainage problems and mitigate flooding in the community; and

 

WHEREAS, because the Town does not have a comprehensive drainage policy now, this issue is being considered as an individual case, not as a policy issue;

 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council authorizes the Town Manager to reim­burse Mr. C. J. Coates, the developer of 304 W. Franklin Street, in the amount of $13,661.00 for a portion of the documented costs of renovating the storm drainage system on his property which serves and benefits the community‑at‑large, upon the execution by Mr. Coates of an agreement satisfactory to the Manager and Town Attorney stipulating that said drainage is a private system; that the Town is not responsible for maintaining same; and holding the Town harmless against any claim arising out of any injury related to said private system.

 

This is the 23rd day of January, 1990.

 

Town Flag Design Process

 

Ms. Loewenthal stated that the resolution before the Council re­quested that the Mayor appoint a small committee to review design sketches for a Town flag.

 

Council Member Andresen suggested holding a design contest. Council Member Herzenberg said such contests had not been suc­cessful in the past.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER PRESTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG, TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CREATION OF A TOWN FLAG REVIEW COMMITTEE. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9‑0).

 

A RESOLUTION REGARDING DESIGN OF A FLAG FOR THE TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL (90‑1‑23/R‑7)

 

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Couneil authorizes the Mayor to appoint a Flag Design Committee to develop recommendations to the Council after the Committee receives citizens' suggestions and comments. The Committee is to include members of the Council, the Mayor's Assistant, two mem­bers of the Appearance Commission and citizens at large.

 

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council authorizes retaining a graphic artist to assist the Committee at a cost up to $500.

 

This the 23rd day of January, 1990.

 

Nominations to Planning Board

 

COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PRESTON, TO NOMINATE ALL FOURTEEN APPLICANTS. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9‑0).

 

Noise Ordinance Monitorinq Committee

 

Mayor Howes noted that the resolution would change the proposed composition of the Noise Ordinance Monitoring Committee, increas­ing the number of neighborhood, student and fraternity/sorority members.

 

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

 

Mayor Howes noted that the committee still required two Universi­Sy of North Carolina Administration representatives and one mem­ber of the business community.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER RIMER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER ANDRESEN, TO APPOINT DEAN FREDERIC SCHROEDER AND ACTING PUBLIC SAFETY DIRECTOR JOHN DeVITTO AS THE UNIVERSITY'S REPRESENTATIVES AND MR. ERWIN SHATZEN AS THE ADDITIONAL BUSINESS COMMUNITY REPRESENTA­TIVES ON THE NOISE ORDINANCE MONITORING COMMITTEE. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9‑0).

 

Mayor Howes said he would appoint a convenor for the Noise Ordi­nance Monitoring Committee in the near future.

 

Appointments to Ad Hoc Tree Committee

 

Council Member Herzenberg requested that appointments be deferred this evening.

 

Advisory Board Appointment Schedule

 

COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER ANDRESEN, TO ADOPT THE PROPOSED APPOINTMENT SCHEDULE AS SUBMITTED. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9‑0).

 

A RESOLUTION REGARDING THE PROCESS FOR CONSIDERING APPOINTMENTS TO TOWN ADVISORY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS (90‑1‑23/R‑9)

 

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby adopts the following schedule for appointments to Town Advisory Boards and Commissions:

 

     May 14th      Community Appearance Commission

                   Greenways Commission

                   Parks and Recreation Co?nission

 

     May 29th      Housing Advisory Board

                   Human Services Advisory Board Personnel              Appeals Committee

 

     June 11th     Board of Adjustment

                   Historic District Commission

                   Transportation Board

 

     June 25th     Orange Water and Sewer Authority

                   Planning Board

 

This the 23rd day of January, 1990.

 

Quarterly Reports

 

Council Member Preston stated that consultants were being inter­viewed for the Orange County landfill search and the regional solid waste volume reduction study. Council Member Preston also noted that applications for the landfill search committee were being received and reviewed.

 

Ms. Loewenthal said she would be happy to respond to any of the council's questions concerning quarterly reports.

 

Southern Community Park

 

Ms. Loewenthal stated that preliminary planning work had been completed for the site. Ms. Loewenthal noted that the site plan­ners had concluded that all desired facilities could not be ac­commodated on the initial fifty acre site. Ms. Loewenthal said she recommended authorizing purchase of the additional twen­ty‑eight acres with funds from the sale of 1989 open space bonds.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER WALLACE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER ANDRESEN, TO AUTHORIZE PURCHASE OF THE LAND. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9‑0).

 

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF APPROXIMATELY 28 ACRES BOUNDED BY THE SITE OF THE FUTURE SOUTHERN COMMUNITY PARK, U.S. 15‑501, DOGWOOD ACRES AND THE FUTURE L?UREL HILL PARKWAY (90‑1‑23/R‑IO)

 

WHEREAS, the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill wishes to build a southern community park; and

 

WHEREAS, the Council also wishes to include on the site a fire station, a park/ride lot, entranceway buffers and buffers between the park facilities and the adjacent residential development; and

 

WHEREAS, the addition of the approximately 28‑acre site described above and identified on Orange County tax maps as a portion of Tax Map 7.126.A.4J, as a would increase the number of facilities that could be accommodated and greatly improve the quality of the site design.

 

BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Manager is authorized to acquire the 28‑acre tract de­scribed above for a sum of $23,500 per acre and according to the terms of the option contract dated January 17, 1990.

 

This is the 23rd day of January, 1990.

 

Consent Agenda

 

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

 

A RESOLUTION ADOPTING VARIOUS RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES

(90‑1‑23/R‑Il)

 

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

 

     a.   Van bucket truck bids (R‑12).

     b.   Aerial truck bids (R‑13).

     c.   Packer body bids (R‑14).

     d.   Traffic control ordinance (0‑2).

     e.   A resolution calling a public hearing concerning minority building construction contracts (recommended hearing date: February 19) (R‑15).

     f.   A resolution authorizing the revision of dates on the Town Seal (R‑16).

     g.   An ordinance setting the salary of the Interim Town Manager (0‑3).

     h.   Response to petition regarding buffers.

     i.   Response to traffic safety concerns at Franklin Street and Estes Drive.

     j.   Tandler Homeownership Status Report.

 

This the 23rd day of January, 1990.

 

A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING A BID AND AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR A VAN BUCKET TRUCK (90‑1‑23/R‑12)

 

WHEREAS, the Town of Chapel Hill has solicited formal bids by legal notice in The Chapel Hill Newspaper on October 8 1989, in accordance with G.S. 143‑129 for a van bucket truck to be used by the Public Works Department; and

 

WHEREAS, the following bids were received and opened on October 18, 1989:

 

Vendor                                     Bid Price

 

Map Enterprises, Inc.                      $31,444.00

Burlington, N. C.

 

Owsley & Sons, Inc.                        $33,450.00

Fort Mill, S. C.

 

Altec Industries, Inc.                     $33,618.00

Birmingham, AL

 

Baker Engineering Co.                      $34,043.00

Richmond, VA

 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Town accepts the bid of Map Enterprises, Inc., in the amount of $31,444.00 for a van bucket truck to be used by the Public Works Department.

 

This the 23rd day of January, 1990.

 

A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING A     BID FOR A 52' AERIAL    TRUCK

(90‑1‑23/R‑13)

 

WHEREAS, the Town of Chapel Hill has solicited formal bids by legal notice in The Chapel Hill Newspaper on October 29, 1989, in accordance with G.S. 143‑129 for an aerial truck; and

 

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

 

Vendor                                     Bid Price

 

Altec Industries, Inc.                     $68,371.00

Birmingham, AL

 

Owsley & Sons, Inc.                        $71,862.00

Fort Mill, S.C.

 

U.S.I. Equipment Co.                       $75,505.00

Charlotte, N. C.

 

Baker Engineering Co.                      $79,012.00

Richmond, VA

 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Town accepts the bid of Baker Engineering Company in the amount $75,042.00 for the purchase of an aerial truck.

 

This the 23rd day of January, 1990.

 

A RESOLUTION ACCEF?ING BIDS FOR THE PURCHASE OF ONE REAR‑LOADING PACKER BODY (90‑1‑23/R‑14)

 

WHEREAS, the Town of Chapel Hill has solicited formal bids by legal notice in The Chapel Hill Newspaper on November 5, 1989, in accordance with G.S. 143‑129 for the purchase of one rear‑loading packer body; and

 

WHEREAS, the following bids have been received and opened on No­vember 13, 1989:

 

Vendor                                     Total Cost

 

Cavalier Equipment Company                 $17,685.00

Roanoke, VA

 

Quality Equip. Supply Co.                  $18,992.00

Charlotte ,NC

 

Sanco Corporation                          $19,832.00

Winston‑Salem, NC

 

Simpson Equipment Company                   $19,999.00

Wilson, NC

 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Town accepts the lowest responsive bid of Simpson Equipment Company in the amount $19,999.00 for one rear‑loading packer body.

 

This the 23rd day of January, 1990.

 

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 21 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES (90‑1‑23/0‑2)

 

BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill:

 

                           SECTION I

 

That Section 21‑13 of the Town Code of Ordinances, "right‑of‑way and stop regulations" is amended by inserting the following therein, in appropriate alphabetical order:  '

 

Throuqh Streets                       Stop Streets

 

Devonshire Place                      Karin Court

 

Piney Mountain Road                   Riggsbee Road

 

Riggsbee Road                         Devonshire Place

 

                          SECTION II

 

That Section 21‑11 (B) (2) of the Town Code of Ordinances, "Twenty‑five (25) miles per hQur on the following streets:" is amended by inserting the following therein in appropriate alpha­betical order:

 

Devonshire Place

 

Karin Court

 

                          SECTION III

 

This ordinance shall be effective on Monday, March 12, 1990.

 

                          SECTION IV

 

All ordinances and portions of ordinances in conflict with this ordinance are hereby repealed.

 

This the 23rd day of January, 1990.

 

A RESOLUTION TO ESTABLISH A VERIFIABLE PERCENTAGE GOAL FOR PAR­TICIPATION BY MINORITY BUSINESSES IN THE AWARDING OF BUILDING CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS AWARDED PURSUANT TO N.C.G.S. 143‑128 (90‑1‑23/R‑15)

 

WHEREAS, the North Carolina General Assembly enacted Chapter 480 and Section 74.17 of Chapter 770 of the 1989 Session Laws, there­by rewriting North Carolina General Statute 143‑128; and

 

WHEREAS, N.C.G.S. 143‑128(c) requires each city, county or other public body to adopt, after notice and a public hearing, an ap­propriate verifiable percentage goal for participation by minori­ty businesses (as defined in that statute) in the total value of work for building contracts the costs of which exceed one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) and which are awarded pursuan? to N.C.G.S. 143‑128;

 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council calls a public hearing for February 19 at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Town Hall to re­ceive public comment on a proposed verifiable percentage goal for minority business participation in the award of major building construction contracts.

 

This the 23rd day of January, 1990.

 

A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE OFFICIAL TOWN SEAL TO CORRECT THE DATE OF THE TOWN'S INCORPORATION (90‑1‑23/R‑16)

 

WHEREAS, the Town of Chapel Hill was incorporated in the year 1819; and

 

WHEREAS, the present Town Seal incorrectly shows the incorpora­tion date as 1851;

 

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED'that the Town Seal be corrected to read 1819 as the date of incorporation.

 

This the 23rd day of January, 1990.

 

AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING THE SA?$RY OF THE INTERIM TOWN MANAGER (90‑1‑23/0‑3)

 

BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the salary of the Interim Town Manager shall be set at $70,500, ef­fective Januarv 1, 1990, and that, upon resumption of the previous duties (a the end of the period of service as Interim Manager), any salary increases to which the incumbent would have otherwise been entitled shall be paid.

 

This the 23rd day of January, 1990.

 

Executive Session

 

Mayor Howes indicated that a brief Executive Session would be needed this evening, but no report would follow.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER WALLACE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER, TO MOVE INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANI­MOUSLY.

 

The regular meeting adjourned at 11:35 p.m.