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

CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA, MONDAY, MAY 14, 1990, 7:30 P.M.

Mayor Pro Tem Preston called the meeting to order.

Council Members in attendance were Julie Andresen, Joyce Brown, Joe Herzenberg, Alan Rimer, Arthur Werner and Roosevelt Wilkerson. Mayor Howes and Council Member Wallace were absent excused.

Also in attendance were: Assistant to the Mayor Lisa Price, 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 Pro Tem Preston noted that the Town staff was in the process of correcting on‑going audio difficulties in the new Council Chamber. Mayor Pro Tem Preston also recognized the presence of Susan Kaufmann of the Chapel Hill Newspaper and Marva Williams of radio station WCHL.

Mayor Pro Tem Preston noted that there were no ceremonies or hearings this evening.

Petitions

Lane Sarber, representing the Mental Health Association of Orange County, requested that the Human Services Advisory Board reconsider his agency's funding request. Dr. Sarber expressed concern that there had been a misunderstanding in information transmitted between his agency and the Human Services Advisory Board. Mayor Pro Tem Preston noted that it would be helpful for Dr. Sarber to provide additional information to the Council prior to the Council's discussion of human service allocations on May 15th.

Ed Holland, 54 Newton Drive, said he was addressing the Council on behalf of twelve families residing on Newton Drive. Mr. Holland said that he and his neighbors were seeking help with dangerous traffic conditions at the corner of Pope Road and Newton Drive. Mr. Holland said that poor visibility in the area, coupled with speeding southbound drivers on Pope Road, contributed to difficult traffic conditions in the area. Mr. Holland requested the Town's assistance in remedying this traffic situation.

COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER, TO REFER THE MATTER TO THE TOWN MANAGER. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (7-0).

Council Member Brown requested that the Council receive a report in the future from the Coordination and Consultation Committee concerning the status of the University's hazardous waste site near Horace Williams Airport. Ms. Loewenthal stated that the Council would receive a report following the Coordination and Consultation Committee's next meeting.

Council Member Brown inquired when and where resolutions from the Boulder Public‑Private Partnership Conference would be made available to citizens. Ms. Loewenthal noted that the public/private partnership board would be meeting in the next few weeks. Ms. Loewenthal said that information concerning the conference could be furnished following this board meeting.

Council Member Rimer noted that representatives of the Carol Woods development had requested inclusion in the Council's hear‑term public hearing calendar. Ms. Loewenthal said that the Carol Woods proposal would be scheduled for the Council's June public hearing.

Ms. Loewenthal requested that agenda item 7, concerning the Maddry property concept plan, be deleted from this evening's agenda. Council Member Herzenberg inquired when this item would return for Council consideration. Ms. Loewenthal said the item would be returned for consideration during the next month or following the Council's summer break.

Minutes of April 10, 16 and 23, 1990

COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WILKERSON TO ADOPT THE MINUTES OF APRIL 10, 1990 WITH TWO SPELLING MODIFICATIONS. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (7‑0).

COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER ANDRESEN, TO ADOPT THE MINUTES OF APRIL 16, 1990 AS PRESENTED. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (7‑0).

MAYOR PRO TEM PRESTON REQUESTED ONE CHANGE TO MINUTES OF APRIL 23, 1990. COUNCIL MEMBER WILKERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER, TO ADOPT THE MINUTES OF APRIL 23, 1990 AS AMENDED. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (7‑0).

Rural Character Study

Orange County Commission Chairperson Moses Carey complimented the Council on their new Council Chamber. Mr. Carey said that the rural character study committee had been in place for approximately two years. Mr. Carey stated that some members of the committee felt that a two-acre minimum lot size in the watershed was sufficient while others said it was not. Mr. Carey noted that the committee had proposed standards for development in the watershed. Mr. Carey said that the focus of the committee had been expanded to include all of Orange County. Mr. Carey said that it would be an onerous task for all concerned to examine all the proposed standards at one time. Mr. Carey stated that some members of the Orange County Commission suggested holding a public hearing on a portion of the recommended standards.

David Berkman, chairperson of the rural character study committee, introduced members of the committee in attendance this evening: Carole Crumley, David Swanson (representing the Town's Appearance Commission), and David Stancil (Orange County Planning Department staff). Mr. Berkman thanked Mr. Stancil for his excellent logistical support of the committee. Mr. Berkman stated that the Orange County Commissioners had pulled together a diverse committee for examination of development standards.

Mr. Berkman observed that developers, farmers, environmentalists and other interest groups were represented on the committee. Mr. Berkman said the group had developed a workable program for the future. Mr. Berkman stated that one of the committee's goals was to develop less burdensome minimum acreage standards while protecting the area's rural character and visual beauty. Mr. Berkman stated that Orange County had contracted with a private consultant to make preliminary recommendations. Mr. Berkman said that many of the consultant's recommendations had practical limitations. Mr. Berkman said the committee had started with these proposals to formulate workable standards. Mr. Berkman said the committee had worked hard to get the input of community groups and residents.

Mr. Berkman observed that land owners willing to set aside a portion of their tract in order to develop five‑acre minimum lot sizes would receive incentives. Mr. Berkman stated that promoting development on larger lots would not take anything away from current landowners. Mr. Berkman said his committee was working on developing a concise draft of guidelines. Mr. Berkman stated that these guidelines would be available in early June.

Council Member Andresen said she appreciated the work of the rural character study committee. Council Member Andresen said she liked the provision of incentives for development of five‑acre minimum lots. Council Member Andresen observed that she was concerned about the permanence of the proposed plan. Council Member Andresen stated that she had spoken to Orange Water and Sewer Authority officials concerning the preplanning of water and sewer lines in the entire rural buffer. Council Member Andresen said it would be impossible to achieve the objectives of the study committee without taking this step. Council Member Andresen expressed concern that the linkage of the purchase of development rights to the purchase of land in the watershed could compound problems of future project approvals. Mr. Berkman stated that the sewering option recommended by the committee would set aside eighty percent of land for open space. Mr. Berkman stated that a recommended receiving area would be located contiguous to the Towns of Carrboro and Chapel Hill, requiring only very short water and sewer service extensions from the existing system. Mr. Berkman said it was not the committee's intention to create a major network of utility linkage in the rural buffer. Council Member Andresen inquired which specific areas of the towns were recommended for linkage. Mr. Berkman stated that the committee had no specifics of the plan at this level of detail.

Council Member Andresen reiterated her earlier concerns about sewer service in the rural buffer, noting that conditions could change very quickly in the future. Mr. Berkman said that the committee and he appreciated Council Member Andresen's concerns and would include her thoughts in the development of future recommended standards. Mr. Berkman observed that the committee had agreed to clarify the possibility of making the purchase of development rights available to interested parties.

Council Member Rimer said that the range of open space required ranged from zero to eighty percent. Council Member Rimer said he was particularly concerned about impervious coverage issues. Council Member Rimer observed that a variety of alternative sewage treatment systems were being used in New England. Council Member Rimer said one area in the northeast had prohibited adjoining connections to its sewer system. Council Member Rimer said he would discuss this matter further with the Town Attorney. Council Member Rimer said he shared Council Member Andresen's concern that some developers might want to tap onto the existing utility system. Council Member Werner inquired whether the committee had envisioned the possible expansion of Chapel Hill or Carrboro by annexation. Mr. Berkman said the committee's study is based on no changes in political boundaries. Mr. Berkman said he did not think that possible future annexations would change the committee's decision to recommend any options or change their effectiveness. Mr. Berkman thanked the Council for their comments. Mr. Berkman added that the committee would be meeting later in the week.

Mayor Pro Tem Preston stated that the resolution before the Council called for the Town to participate in a June 27th joint public hearing concerning the rural character study. Mayor Pro Tem Preston said that the resolution proposed the formation of a study group following the hearing. Mr. Berkman said that the rural character study committee would like the opportunity to work with the study group. Mr. Berkman said the committee would like to share its insights to date with members of the study group. Mr. Berkman said the rural character study committee would offer its support and assistance to the study group.

Mayor Pro Tem Preston inquired where the hearing would be held. Mr. Berkman said the hearing would occur at the Phillips Junior High School on Estes Drive in Chapel Hill.

Carole Crumley said she would be delighted to have the opportunity to work with elected officials in determining standards for the rural character study. Ms. Crumley said that the rural character study committee had spent a great deal of time explaining the goals of the committee to County landowners and residents. Ms. Crumley stated that some County residents were concerned that the areas outside of Chapel Hill and Carrboro would be left out of the process. Ms. Crumley said the Rural character study committee had frequently heard that there is mistrust of the proposed guidelines, with County landowners continuing to feel left out of the process. Ms. Crumley said that the committee represented these landowners and had worked to develop their confidence. Ms. Crumley urged the Council to make clear the charge of the study group, in or?er that it did not countermand the recommendations of the rural character committee. Ms. Crumley said the committee was working actively to bridge many misunderstandings concerning possible development in the rural buffer and watershed.

Mayor Pro Tem Preston said she was sensitive to the concerns of County landowners and residents. Mayor Pro Tem Preston said that the Council believed in very open government rather than encouraging the bypassing of public processes.

Council Member Andresen said she appreciated how the committee had worked with landowners as part of its work in arriving at draft development standards. Council Member Andresen observed that the ultimate decision for future standards rested with the elected officials of Carrboro, Chapel Hill and Orange County. Ms. Crumley stated that the rural character study committee had been meeting regularly over the past two years. Ms. Crumley said that the committee wanted to get some mutually agreeable initial development guidelines in place in the near future. Council Member Andresen said she wanted to grant the study group with the ability to make recommendations on rural character standards. Ms. Crumley said she did not want to risk undercutting the confidence gained to date with County landowners.

COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 1. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (7‑0).

A RESOLUTION CALLING A JOINT PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED CONCEPTUAL GUIDELINES AND POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS AND ON THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE JOINT PLANNING AGREEMENT AND ON PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE JOINT PLANNING AGREEMENT (90‑5‑14/R‑1)

WHEREAS, the Rural Character Study Committee has recommended changes to the Joint Planning Area Land Use Plan and to the Joint Planning Agreement; and

WHEREAS, amendments to the Joint Planning Agreement and the Joint Planning Land Use Plan must be adopted by all three participating jurisdictions in order to take effect;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that a public hearing is called for June 27 to consider the Conceptual Guidelines and the Policy Recommendations which have been recommended by the Rural Character Study Committee.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Orange County Board of Commissioners and the Carrboro Board of Aldermen are requested to name representatives from those boards to meet with representatives from the Chapel Hill Town Council subsequent to the June 27 Hearing. The purpose of this group would be to discuss the recommendations of the Rural Character Task Force, the comments made at the Public Hearing, and agree on a common strategy for implementing the objectives of the Rural Buffer policy. Such agreement would become effective only upon adoption by each of the three elected boards as amendments to the Joint Planning Land Use Plan and the Joint Planning Agreement.

This the 14th day of May, 1990.

Special Use Permit Modification for The Pavilion

Planning Director Roger Waldon said that the Manager's recommendation on this proposal was contained in the Council's agenda materials for this evening. Mr. Waldon briefly addressed issues raised at the Council's April 16th public hearing. Mr. Waldon stated that the proposal was for a mixed‑use development at the intersection of Franklin and Church Streets and around the corner at Rosemary Street. Mr. Waldon showed an exhibit outlining the comparable elevations of the University Square shopping facility and the proposed Pavilion project. Mr. Waldon said the two projects were of similar scale, when the recommended architectural features were included. Mr. Waldon noted that the applicant was requesting the modification of height regulations to incorporate this element.

Mr. Waldon said that the Planning staff would follow up on a suggestion by Robert Joesting that height limitations in the downtown area be differentiated from those in other parts of the Town. Mr. Waldon noted that Resolution A was the same one recommended by the Interim Town Manager at the Council's April public hearing. Mr. Waldon concluded his introductory remarks by stating that the proposed project appeared to be useful and attractive and was innovative in its inclusion of a public plaza.

Mayor Pro Tem Preston inquired about the nature of a shadow easement. Mr. Waldon stated that the proposed project met solar setback requirements, but would cast a shadow on the North Carolina Pharmaceutical Association building. Mayor Pro Tem Preston inquired how this situation would be addressed. Mr. Waldon said that the developers of The Pavilion had acknowledged that the shadow from their project would be cast onto the North Carolina Pharmaceutical Association property. Mr. Waldon noted that the provision of a shadow easement is not required by the Town's Development Ordinance. Mayor Pro Tem Preston inquired about the use of a siamese connection to the sprinkler system. Mr. waldon explained that siamese connections are fire hose connections on the outside of a building that permit fire trucks to pump water into a fire‑involved building as an auxiliary water supply.

Mr. Waldon stated that the applicant proposed roll‑out trash compactor as the preferred refuse collection method. Mr. Waldon stated that if this approach were pursued, it would be necessary to use a private contractor. Mayor Pro Tem Preston said she hoped that the applicant was willing to incorporate language concerning recycling into the conditions of approval.

Mayor Pro Tem Preston inquired whether recycling had been discussed during the negotiation of conditions of approval. Mr. Waldon said such provisions had not been discussed to date, nor were they covered in the proposed conditions of approval.

Joe Hakan, the applicant's representative inquired what types of measures the Council would like to see and how recycling was being handled by other office buildings in the area. Mayor Pro Tem Preston responded that some buildings were currently participating on a voluntary basis.

Council Member Rimer inquired whether it was possible to accommodate an area for recycling pick‑up within The Pavilion site. Mr. Hakan said there was an area underneath the building which could possibly be used for this purpose. Council Member Rimer suggested that materials such as paper and cardboard could be separated. Mr. Hakan said his client would attempt to accommodate the Council's wishes concerning recycling efforts. Council Member Rimer said he preferred that the applicant initiate recycling efforts on a voluntary basis rather than making them a condition of approval. Council Member Werner said he concurred that making recycling a condition of approval did not appear to be fair to the applicant. Mayo? Pro Tem Preston said he hoped that the applicant would set aside some space for recycling.

Council Member Brown inquired about the plausibility of having composting drums for handling kitchen wastes. Mr. Hakan said that the Orange County Health Department would need to establish guidelines for efforts of this type.

Mayor Pro Tem Preston requested that the applicant identify a proposed location for recycling on its final plans. Council Member Werner indicated his concurrence, adding that this was a better approach than making recycling a condition of special user permit approval. Council Member Werner stressed the need to establish standards for commercial recycling prior to making recycling a condition of a development approval. Council Member Werner noted that recycling is currently the responsibility of individual business owners rather than buildings as a whole.

Council Member Andresen inquired why private, rather than Town, refuse collection would be necessary. Mr. Waldon said that the Town did not have the proper equipment to collect from the project's containers. Council Member Andresen stressed the importance of thinking about proper technologies for future refuse collection needs. Council Member Andresen said she wanted to ma?e sure that the proposed public plaza would come to fruition. Council Member Andresen said she did not see a specific condition of approval concerning this element. Council Member Andresen requested that Mr. Karpinos draft an additional condition of approval concerning the provision of a public plaza.

Mayor Pro Tem Preston inquired whether the applicant's representative agreed to the proposed conditions of approval. Mr. Hakan, the developer's representative, said yes.

COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER, TO ADJOURN THE HEARING. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (7‑ 0).

COUNCIL MEMBER RIMER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WILKERSON, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2A.

Council Member Brown expressed concern about the addition of vehicle trips in the downtown area. Council Member Brown said that an additional 4,487 vehicle trips per day were proposed by current development in the immediate vicinity of The Pavilion. Council Member Brown said that there is currently an air pollution and traffic congestion problem in the downtown area. Council Member Brown inquired what was being done to address the need for traffic reduction in the downtown area. Mr. Waldon said that The Pavilion would generate more automobile trips in the downtown area. Mr. Waldon added that the level of service would remain within recommended levels of service, with the exception of Church and Franklin Streets. Mr. Waldon said a traffic signal would remedy this situation. Mr. Waldon added that approximately 1,900 vehicle trips per twenty‑four hours were estimated for The Pavilion.

Council Member Rimer said it would be possible for the Council to deny project approval on the basis of additional traffic generated. Council Member Rimer observed that the site had generated a fairly large volume of traffic when it served as a major department store. Council Member Rimer stated that additional work was needed on traffic modelling, particularly in the downtown area. Council Member Rimer observed that some intersections could be improved from level of service "f" to level of service "c" or "b" via the installation of traffic signals.

Council Member Brown inquired when the Town staff would have additional suggestions concerning traffic reduction in the downtown area. Council Member Werner interjected that Mayor Howes had previously stated that "a little traffic congestion downtown is a good thing." Mr. Waldon said that there were several philosophical approaches to addressing traffic congestion downtown. Mr. Waldon said the most obvious was to encourage the use of automobile alternatives via incentives such as express lanes for mass transit and the provision of free bus passes.

Mr. Waldon said the Council had previously considered mandating that all new developments reduce vehicle trips by twenty percent. Mr. Waldon stated that this idea had been set aside in favor of encouraging more compact development. council Member Brown inquired about the number of proposed employees at The Pavilion. Mr. Waldon said he was uncertain of this figure, adding that parking space requirements had been based on building square footage. Mr. Waldon observed that the applicant had met current parking requirements.

Council Member Brown expressed concern that there might be demand for another parking deck in the downtown area in the future. Council Member Brown inquired about any provisions for use of renewable energy sources in the project. Mr. Hakan said that there are no economically viable renewable energy systems currently available for this type of project. Council Member Brown said that the retail component of the project might be a good solar project. Council Member Brown said she hoped that solar features could be incorporated into the project. Council Member Brown noted that solar consultation services are provided free of charge by North Carolina State University. Mr. Hakan said he would investigate these possibilities in the hope that it would be economically viable to pursue further.

Council Member Herzenberg said there were at least two reasons to support The Pavilion's special use permit modification request: tax base diversification and the project's conformity with the Comprehensive Plan's objective of revitalizing the downtown area.

COUNCIL MEMBER ANDRESEN PROPOSED A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO RESOLUTION 2A, ADDING CONDITION TWENTY‑FOUR, WHICH WOULD REQUIRE THAT THE COUNCIL REVIEW ANY FUTURE PROPOSAL TO REDUCE THE SIZE OF THE PUBLIC PLAZA. COUNCIL MEMBER ANDRESEN'S AMENDMENT ALSO PROPOSED THAT CONDITIONS 24 AND 25 BE RENUMBERED TO 25 AND 26, TO INCORPORATE THE NEW CONDITION OF APPROVAL. COUNCIL MEMBERS RIMER AND WILKERSON, THE MOTIONER AND SECONDER, CONCURRED WITH THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.

Council Member Werner said he wished to emphasize Council Member Herzenberg's reasons for recommending project approval. Council Member Werner noted that there is an inherent conflict between increasing traffic in the downtown area and diversification of the tax base.

Mr. Hakan, the applicant's representative, said he was agreeable to the conditions of approval outlined in Council Member Andresen's friendly amendment.

Council Member Wilkerson said that the applicant had been working to meet the wishes of the Council.

THE QUESTION WAS CALLED AND RESOLUTION 2A, AS AMENDED, WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (7‑0).

A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR A MODIFICATION TO THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR THE PAVILION (90‑5‑14/R‑2a)

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that it finds that the Westcourt at Franklin/Rosemary buildings proposed by Davidson and Jones Development Corporation, representing First Orange Limited Partnership, on property identified as Chapel Hill Township Tax Map 85, Block M, Lots 17, p/0 of 19, and 20, if developed according to the preliminary site plan dated December 5, 1989 and the conditions listed below, would:

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

2. Comply with all required regulations and standards of the Development Ordinance, including all applicable provisions of Articles 12, 13 and 14, and the applicable specific standards contained in Section 18.7 and 18.7.2, and with all other applicable regulations;

3. Be located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property, or be a public necessity; and

4. Conform with the general plans for the physical development of the Town as embodied in the Development Ordinance and in the Comprehensive Plan.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Council that it finds in this particular case that public purposes are satisfied to an equivalent or greater degree, and approves the following modification:

1. Modification of Subsections 13.11.2 and 13.11.3 of the Development Ordinance for this development to allow an architectural feature of the building and the stairwell structure at The Pavilion on Franklin to exceed the 67-foot height limit.

These findings are conditioned on the following:

1. That construction begin by May 14, 1991 (one year from the date of approval) and be completed by May 14, 1992 (two years from the date of approval).

2. That a signed agreement with the N.C. Pharmaceutical Association for a vehicular cross‑easement for use of the parking lot and driveways be approved by the Town Manager and recorded at the Orange County Register of Deeds Office prior to issuance of the Zoning Compliance Permit.

3. That a signed agreement with the N.C. Pharmaceutical Association for a shadow easement be approved by the Town Manager and recorded at the Orange County Register of Deeds Office prior to issuance of the Zoning Compliance Permit.

4. That the development's streetscape plan be coordinated with the Town's streetscape study recommendations, and that the plaza area include benches, some of which must face the streets.

5. That the developer complete a physical investigation and analysis, to be approved by the Town Manager, of the stormwater pipes in Franklin Street from this development down to the low point near Mallette Street. Should the investigation and analysis reveal deficiencies, then the upgrade of this portion of the stormwater facilities shall be the responsibility of the developer.

6. That a Fire Department siamese sprinkler connection and associated fire pump for the sprinkler system be provided as a part of this development. The location of the sprinkler connection shall be approved by the Fire Department prior to issuance of a Building Permit.

7. That additional right‑of‑way be dedicated along the site's frontage on West Rosemary Street and Church Street. This additional right‑of‑way should, at a minimum, include the existing sidewalk and be recorded prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

8. That control of the access on West Rosemary for Phase I be dedicated to the Town, and that the dedication be recorded at the Orange County Register of Deeds Office prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

9. That Church Street be improved, on the west side along the frontage of Lots 19 and 20, to provide half of a 27-foot roadway with curb and gutter and sidewalk to Town standards.

10. The project developer shall provide a payment-in-lieu for the installation of a traffic-actuated traffic signal at the intersection of Church Street and West Franklin Street. The payment-in-lieu will be held by the Town until a traffic signal(s) is warranted and installed or until 3 years after the project site is completely developed, whichever comes first. The traffic signal warrant study will be based on the actual traffic conditions near the site upon furl development and including ambient traffic and not on projected estimates. The determination will be based on the guidelines of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices published by the Federal Highway Administration. If a traffic signal(s) is not warranted, the payment‑in‑lieu shall be refunded to the project developer. If the actual cost of an installed traffic signal(s) is less than that amount provided for the installation of that signal(s), the surplus will be refunded to the project developer.

The payment‑in‑lieu shall be in the amount of 100% of the estimated cost of the proposed traffic signal(s).

The project developer is responsible for providing the cost estimate, and design of the proposed traffic signal(s); subject to the approval of the Town Manager.

11. That a note be placed on the final plans indicating that refuse collection will be by way of a private service. A binding document shall be recorded at the Orange County Register of Deeds Office specifying private refuse collection for this development.

12. That final plans for the location of refuse container(s) be at one consolidated location, serving both sites, and be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of the Zoning Compliance Permit. A potential future location for Town refuse collection shall be identified on the final plans and approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

13. That final plans show location of a loading space, preferably not on Franklin Street.

14. That parking lot plans, indicating that 28 spaces at the Rosemary site will be provided and reserved for the employees of the Pavilion on Franklin, be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of the Zoning Compliance Permit.

15. That final plans for Pavilion on Rosemary demonstrating compliance with Town recreation space standards be approved by the Parks and Recreation Commission prior to issuance of the Zoning Compliance Permit.

16. That a Landscape Protection Plan shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

17. That a bus stop and amenities be shown on the final site plan and be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of the Zoning Compliance Permit.

18. That adequate sight distance be provided at the West Rosemary Street entrance/exits, and at the Church Street entrance/exit.

19. That a work zone traffic control plan be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

20. That detailed building elevations be approved by the Appearance Commission prior to issuance of the Zoning Compliance Permit, and that the Appearance Commission shall ensure that the following actions are taken in the design of the building elevations:

a) Provide attractive building frontages that create inviting indoor and outdoor spaces usable from the sidewalk and street.

b) Maintain pedestrian interest by replacing blank walls and other dead spaces with display spaces and other similar features at the ground level.

c) Large or continuous wall planes shall be avoided. Reduction of size and bulk by dividing the building mass into smaller‑scale components is highly encouraged.

d) Restraint shall be used in the number of different building materials used.

e) Building materials similar to those in predominant use on the street, or nearby, shall be used.

f) Wall detailing shall recess glass surfaces in shadow as deeply as possible ‑ highly reflective materials that create glare are to be avoided.

g) Architectural detailing of windows, doors, and ornaments shall be harmonious and complement each other and the building as a whole.

21. That a lighting plan, sign plan, and landscape plan including a landscape maintenance plan be approved by the Appearance Commission prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

22. That any proposal which entails encroachment (such as sidewalks, benches, landscaping) on N.C. Department of Transportation's right-of-way be approved by N.C. Department of Transportation prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

23. That the final utility/lighting plan be approved by OWASA, Duke Power, Southern Bell, Public Service of N.C. and Carolina Cable and the Town Manager before issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

24. That final plans are to be approved by the Town Manager before issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit (detailed site plan, utility, grading and stormwater management plan, right‑of-way/easement plats, fire flow report, landscape plan and landscape protection plan) conform to the approved preliminary plans and demonstrate compliance with the above conditions and the design standards of the Development Ordinance and the Design Manual.

25. That the Council review any future proposal to reduce the size of the public plaza.

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

27. If any of the above conditions is held invalid, this approval shall be void.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council hereby approves the application for the Pavilion Modified Special Use Permit in accordance with the plans and conditions listed above.

This the 14th day of May, 1990.

Durham‑Chapel Hill Cooperative Planning Work Group

Council Member Werner noted that the work group had been meeting during the past year at the initiative of the Mayors of Chapel Hill and Durham. Council Member Werner stated that joint planning for the U.S. 15‑501 corridor had been discussed, as had other topics of mutual interest. Council Member Werner said these topics included the New Hope Corridor and transportation and roadway plans.

Council Member Werner said it had recently been suggested that the group be formalized. Council Member Werner said the agreement was modelled on the Triangle J cooperative planning agreement with Durham City and County. Council Member Werner said the work group would be composed of two elected officials each from Chapel Hill, the City of Durham, and Durham County. Council Member Werner noted that the work group was purely a discussion group which would not take votes. Council Member Werner read the text of the proposed resolution into the record. This text follows the motion to adopt below.

Council Member Andresen said the work group concept was a very good idea to deal with matters of mutual concern. Mayor Pro Tem Preston observed that if the agreement had been in place earlier, it might have been used to deal with a variety of recent issues.

Council Member Werner noted that the next meeting of the group would occur on May 16th at 4:00 p.m. at Durham City Hall.

COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 4. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (7‑0).

A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A DURHAM/CHAPEL HILL COOPERATIVE PLANNING WORK GROUP (90‑5‑14/R‑4)

WHEREAS, the Mayors of Durham and Chapel Hill have established a discussion group to enhance communication among elected officials of Durham and Chapel Hill; and

WHEREAS, the Triangle J Council of Governments has encouraged local governments in the Triangle J Region to adopt "Resolutions of Cooperation," formalizing cooperative planning discussions; and

WHEREAS, officials from the Town of Chapel Hill, the City of Durham, and Durham County have proposed the form for such an agreement between these three governments;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Chapel Hill Town Council that the Council adopts the attached "Resolution of Cooperation."

This the 14th day of May, 1990.

RESOLUTION OF COOPERATION

A resolution of cooperation between the City of Durham, North Carolina, the County of Durham, North Carolina, and the Town of Chapel Hill, North Carolina, relating to land use planning along and near jurisdictional boundaries.

WHEREAS, all three governing bodies seek to have appropriately planned development for their respective areas; and

WHEREAS, Durham County, the City of Durham, and the Town of Chapel Hill desire to foster good relations; and

WHEREAS, officials from all three jurisdictions have met jointly to discuss their mutual concerns;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, in order to foster and maintain a system of sound land use planning and regulations which can be relied upon by the public and private owners of and as a basis for investment decisions, the protection of the environment and a climate conducive to healthy economic and social growth and development of our three jurisdictions, by mutual consent it is agreed by the governing bodies of the City of Durham, the County of Durham, and the Town of Chapel Hill that:

(1) A Durham/Chapel Hill Work Group will be established, made up of two representatives from each of the three elected bodies of Durham City, Durham County, and Chapel Hill, along with one representative from each jurisdiction's Planning Board. This Work Group will meet at regular intervals to discuss issues of common concern to the three jurisdictions, and to serve as a mechanism for exchange of information between the elected boards. The location of the Work Group meetings will alternate between Durham and Chapel Hill, with a representative of the host community serving as chairman.

(2) The role, purpose, and function of the Work Group will be to enhance coordination and consultation among the governments. This will not be a decision‑making body, and no votes will be taken.

(3) The list of issues to be discussed by this Work Group shall include but not be limited to the list that appears as Attachment 1 to this resolution.

(4) The administrative staffs of the jurisdictions shall report to their respective Boards on a timely basis, mutually exchange and review zoning requests, special use permits, subdivisions, site plans or annexations requested for land fronting on any of the corridors and within areas of mutual interest.

(5) The administrative staffs of each jurisdiction shall pursue cooperative efforts to coordinate plans for improvements to the public rights‑of‑way in the corridors or areas of mutual interest. Such plans shall include streetscape plans, landscaping projects, sign regulations unique to the corridor or roadway construction or any development regulations specifically designed for the corridor or area of mutual interest.

(6) The administrative staffs of each jurisdiction shall pursue cooperative efforts to coordinate long range land use plans.

(7) The objectives of this cooperation are to:

(a) Seek compatible uses of land and natural resources;

(b) Achieve a smooth transition between areas of development within each jurisdiction;

(c) Provide appropriate entryway into each jurisdiction from the other; and

(d) Encourage orderly development and the efficient delivery of urban services which will maintain and enhance property values in each jurisdiction.

Adopted by the City of Durham: (date)

Adopted by Durham County: (date)

Adopted by the Town of Chapel Hill: May 14, 1990.

Distribution in each Jurisdiction:

Mayor and Council/Chairman and Board of Commissioners

Planning Board

Manager

Attorney

Planning Director

Triangle J Council of Governments

Attachment 1:

ISSUES OF COMMON CONCERN

I. Coordinating Land Use Plans

A. Residential Density Patterns

B. Location of Commercial Uses

C. Structure of Mixed Use Regulations

II. Courtesy Review of Development Proposals

A. Notification and Update

B. Opportunity for comment regarding potential impacts

III. Transportation Issues

A. Thoroughfare Plan

B. Transit

C. Bikeways

D. Transportation Improvements Program Priorities and funding

V. Greenways/Open Space

A. Landscaping 15-501 Corridor

B. New Hope Corridor Planning

V. Annexation

A. Information Exchange

B. Monitor Provision of Services

Calling a Public Hearing for Rezoning of Hart Property

Mr. Waldon said that several parcels of land along the Fordham Boulevard corridor would have access changes as a result of the widening of that roadway. Mr. Waldon stated that Dr. Hart's property currently had access to the bypass. Mr. Waldon said that future access would be limited to Lanark and Hayes Roads, through residential areas. Mr. Waldon noted that this change in conditions warranted reconsideration of the parcel's zoning.

Mr. Waldon said the staff recommended that the Council call a public hearing to consider rezoning of the Hart property. Mr. Waldon said that very important planning principles were involved in considering this matter. Council Member Andresen inquired what type of zoning would be recommended by the Planning staff. Mr. Waldon said that a range of options would be presented to the Council at the proposed hearing.

Council Member Rimer noted that the Planning Board had considered a development proposal for Dr. Hart's land in 1986. Council Member Rimer stated that Dr. Hart did not proceed with development due to on‑going negotiations about access and related matters.

Mr. Waldon noted that Dr. Hart's property was currently zoned for commercial uses. He added that there would be significant changes to access and circulation in the near future. Mr. Waldon said a possible reconsideration of current zoning was warranted on this basis.

Council Member Werner inquired about the possible use of a small area plan. Mr. Waldon responded that commercial services, particularly those in neighborhoods, ought to be considered for small area plans. Mr. Waldon noted that the staff would return with a range of zoning recommendations to the Council in the event of a public hearing on this matter.

Council Member Werner observed that Dr. Hart's situation involved a somewhat more serious step than normally taken by the Council. Council Member Andresen said she favored calling a public hearing since commercial uses did not appear to be appropriate in this area in the future.

Dr. Steven hart said he lives about seventy yards from the subject parcel and has his office approximately forty yards away. Dr. Hart said that the Planning Board passed a motion to initiate development of his property in 1986. Dr. Hart said this was followed shortly thereafter by the Department of Transportation's plans for roadway expansion in the area. Dr. Hart said that potential investors in the initial project backed away when access became an issue. Dr. Hart observed that there still was access to and from his property. Dr. Hart added that Department of Transportation officials felt that his parcel is a commercial property. Dr. Hart said that the timing of events was potentially difficult to his financial health. Dr. Hart thanked the Council for the opportunity to address them on his concerns.

Council Member Werner inquired whether Dr. Hart had access via Glen Lennox Shopping Center. Dr. Hart said yes. Mayor Pro Tem Preston inquired whether this access was via a private arrangement, rather than an easement. Dr. Hart said yes. Council Member Brown inquired whether it was correct that Dr. Hart did not desire a public hearing. Dr. Hart said this was correct, since holding a public hearing would more or less determine that rezoning of the property was necessary. Council Member Andresen inquired whether Dr. Hart was proposing an office building on the site. Dr. Hart said yes, noting that other commercial uses would also be possible. Dr. Hart said it would be detrimental for the property to be rezoned to any residential category.

Mayor Pro Tem Preston inquired whether Dr. Hart could pursue his current development plans if a public hearing were called for June 18th and property were rezoned to Neighborhood Commercial zoning. Town Attorney Karpinos noted that Dr. Hart could present a proposal for development at any time. Council Member Rimer inquired whether the applicant would have to resubmit his application if the zoning were changed and the applicant's submitted plan conformed with development standards. Mr. Karpinos said this would be necessary if the applicant's development plan had expired. Dr. Hart said he was faced with an unusual hardship due to the many years and dollars which had gone into his development proposal.

Council Member Herzenberg said he had never before voted against holding a public hearing. Council Member Herzenberg said it would be untimely to call a public hearing in this case.

COUNCIL MEMBER ANDRESEN MOVED ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION 5. THE MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.

Human Services Advisory Board Performance Agreements

Dr. Vincent Kopp, Chairperson of the Human Services Advisory Board, reviewed the performance agreements before the Council. Dr. Kopp said that funding requests totalling $114,000 had been received, with funding totalling $73,000 recommended to the Council. Dr. Kopp said a total of eighteen proposals had been received from seventeen agencies. Dr. Kopp said that the Human Services Advisory Board recommended entering into the performance agreements outlined in the Executive Summary to the Council. Dr. Kopp noted that agencies traditionally return to the Town for funding requests on an annual basis. Dr. Kopp said that some members of the Human Services Advisory Board felt that some agencies could find other sources of funding in the community. Dr. Kopp noted that contingency funding had been included in the Board's recommendation to accommodate off‑cycle funding requests. Dr. Kopp commended Julia Mack, Human Services Coordinator, for her service to the board.

Council Member Andresen commended the Human Services Advisory Board for an excellent report.

Council Member Wilkerson inquired about the Board's rationale for not funding the Orange County Mental Health Association project. Dr. Kopp said that the association's request for funding and related financial information was unclear. Dr. Kopp added that the association also had not sought assistance from other community resources. Council Member Wilkerson inquired whether the matter should be referred from the Council to the Human Services Advisory Board for further consideration. Dr. Kopp said this would be a prudent course of action. Council Member Wilkerson said he was pleased with the Board's excellent report. Council Member Wilkerson added that he aspired for the Town to follow Boulder, Colorado's model in funding human service agencies.

Council Member Werner said the Board's report was very useful. Council Member Werner inquired whether there should be a way to encourage groups to combine services or whether the enthusiasm of volunteers for individual agencies overrode other considerations. Dr. Kopp said that individual specialized agencies tend to get larger. Dr. Kopp added that there was no doubt that the allocation process could be made easier for all actors. Dr. Kopp observed that he felt more comfortable with the current allocation approach rather than changing to a centralized approach.

Mayor Pro Tem Preston inquired about the Board's recommendation concerning alternate community funding resources. Dr. Ford said that some agencies have human service programs with a large social component. Dr. Kopp said these programs might pursue funding from the Town's Parks and Recreation Department. Dr. Kopp also stated that agencies such as the Dispute Settlement Center might consider collecting fees from some of their clients.

Mayor Pro Tem Preston thanked Dr. Kopp and the Human Services Advisory Board for their report and continued hard work. Mayor Pro Tem Preston noted that human service performance agreements would be discussed at the Council's May 15th budget work session.

1990 Community Development Grant

Housing and Community Development Director Tina Vaughn said that the Town's community development final statement was before the Council for its consideration. Ms. Vaughn noted that the proposed total program cost was $228,000. Ms. Vaughn briefly reviewed the four proposed program elements. Ms. Vaughn noted that the Housing Advisory Board recommended that funds originally proposed for administrative costs be expended for direct programs. Council Member Andresen inquired whether these funds could be used for housing improvements. Ms. Vaughn said yes, noting that funding for administrative costs could be transferred from the Town's General Fund.

Council Member Andresen inquired whether the Tanyard Branch project was intended as a stopgap measure or as a permanent solution to flooding problems. Ms. Vaughn said the project would initially cover an open ditch area. Ms. Vaughn stated that the actual drainage improvement project would be quite expensive, as it would involve the acquisition of several easements.

Council Member Rimer inquired whether both HUD and Town priorities were used in determining public housing rehabilitation projects. Ms. Vaughn said yes, noting that the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development reviews the Town's applications and determines what projects to fund.

COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WILKERSON, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 6. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (7‑0).

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SUBMISSION OF A FINAL STATEMENT FOR A 1990 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ENTITLEMENT GRANT (90‑5‑14/R‑6)

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council authorizes the Interim Town Manager to submit the Final Statement for the Community Development Program, as described in the Interim Manager's memorandum to the Council dated May 14, 1990 to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, including all understanding, assurances, and certifications required therein, for a program of $282,000 grant and $6,000 program income in Community Development Entitlement Funds.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council endorses as a concept plan the general spending plan for 1990‑1992 as contained in the Interim Manager's memorandum to the Council of April 2, 1990; such spending plan to be refined each year into a proposed Final Statement for submission to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Interim Manager is hereby designated as the authorized representative of the Town to act in connection with submission of the Final Statement and to provide such additional information as may be required.

Appointments to Appearance, Greenways and Parks and Recreation Commissions

Council Member Andresen spoke in favor of appointing Nancy Gabriel to the Appearance Commission. Council Member Andresen said that Ms. Gabriel had been actively attending Council meetings. Council Member Herzenberg urged the Council to appoint Michael Brown to the Appearance Commission. Council Member Herzenberg cited Mr. Brown's contribution as a productive, active and generous citizen.

The Council appointed: Michael Brown, Nancy Gabriel and Joan Page to the Appearance Commission; Glenn Mitchell and Margaret Scarborough to the Greenways Commission. No appointment was made to the Parks and Recreation Commission. This appointment will be carried over to the Council's May 29th meeting. Copies of appointment ballots are available in the Clerk's Office.

Nominations to Housing Advisory Board, Human Services Advisory Board and Personnel Appeals Committee

Council Member Herzenberg nominated all applications received to date. Mayor Pro Tem Preston also nominated Barbara Booth‑Powell to the Housing Advisory Board.

Consent Agenda

Council Member Herzenberg requested that item "e" be temporarily removed from the consent agenda.

COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG, TO ADOPT THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (7‑0).

A RESOLUTION ADOPTING VARIOUS RESOLUTIONS AND AN ORDINANCE (90‑5‑ 14/R‑7)

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

a. Bids for asphalt and tack coat (R-8).

b. Bids for resurfacing of streets (R-9).

c. Bids for electronic fareboxes (R-10).

d. Contract for 1989-90 audit. Mayor Howes. (R-11).

e. Request for noise ordinance amendment (0‑1)

This the 14th day of May, 1990.

A RESOLUTION AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR I‑2 ASPHALTIC CONCRETE, H‑B ASPHALT AND TACK COAT (90‑5‑14/R‑8)

WHEREAS, the Town of Chapel Hill has solicited formal bids by legal notice in The Chapel Hill Newspaper on April 11, 1990, in accordance with G.S. 143‑129 for Asphaltic Concrete, H‑B Asphalt and Tack Coat for street patching; and

WHEREAS, the following bids have been received and opened on April 19, 1990:

I.2 Asphaltic Tack Coat Tack Coat

Vendor Concrete H‑B Asphalt AC‑20 CRS‑2

C.C. Mangum $20.54 $18.45 $ .70 $ .75

Lee Paving 22.00 21.00 .55 .50

Nello Teer 25.90 24.80 1.90 1.90

REA Const. 19.00 19.00 1.25 N/A

Riley Paving 22.00 21.00 .55 .50

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Town accepts the bid of Nello Teer Company in the amounts as stated above in the tabulation.

This the 14th day of May, 1990.

A RESOLUTION AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR RESURFACING OF STREETS (90‑ 5‑14/R‑9)

WHEREAS, the Town of Chapel Hill has solicited formal bids by legal notice in The Chapel Hill Newspaper on April 11, 1990 in accordance with G.S. 143‑129 for the resurfacing of streets; and

WHEREAS, the following bids were received, opened and publicly read on April 19, 1990:

Surface Layer Patching

Asphalt Concrete Grand

Vendor Total Total Total

Riley Paving $190,281.75 $1,1000.00 $191,381.75

Lee Paving 203,721.47 2,500.00 206,221.47

C. C. Mangum 224,635.32 3,750.00 228,385.32

B & B Paving 227,995.25 3,240.50 231,235.75

Nello L. Teer 226,281.00 6,750.00 233,031.00

Barnhill Constr. 230,120.92 4,975.00 235,095.92

Rea Construction 239,995.00 4,900.00 244,895.00

Alternate I

Utility Adjustment

Manholes Valve Boxes

Vendor Total Total Grand Total

Riley Paving $ 8,550.00 $11,625.00 $20,175.00

B & B Paving 11,430.00 12,750.00 24,180.00

C. C. Mangum 10,350.00 14,375.00 24,725.00 Barnhill Constr. 10,575.00 14,687.50 25,262.50

Nello L. Teer 11,970.00 16,625.00 28,595.00

Lee Paving 11,250.00 18,750.00 30,000.00

Rea Construction 15,750.00 21,250.00 37,000.00

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council accepts the April 19 base bid of Riley Paving for street resurfacing in the amount of $191,381.75 received in response to the Town's request for bids published April 11 and opened April 19 in accord with G.S. 143‑129.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Manager is authorized to execute a contract with Riley Paving in the amount of $191,381.75 and to initiate and sign change orders that will increase the amount of street resurfacing work within the budgeted amount.

This the 14th day of May, 1990.

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF ELECTRONIC FAREBOX EQUIPMENT (90‑5‑14/R‑10)

WHEREAS, the Town of Chapel Hill has solicited formal bids by legal notice in The Chapel Hill Newspaper on April 1, 1990 in accordance with G.S. 143‑129 for the purchase of electronic farebox equipment; and

WHEREAS, the following bid was received and opened on April 23, 1990:

Vendor: General Farebox, Inc.

Unit Price Total

18 CENTSaBILL Fareboxes $ 4,945.00 $ 89,010.00

1 Auditran portable vault 7,150.00 7,150.00

1 Data Transmission system 25,800.00 25,800.00

$121,960.00

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Town accepts the bid of General Farebox, Incorporated for electronic farebox equipment in the amount of $121,960.

This the 14th day of May, 1990.

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A CONTRACT FOR CONDUCTING THE 1989‑90 AUDIT (90‑5‑14/R‑11)

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby authorizes the Mayor the sign a contract with the firm of Deloitte and Touche for preparation of the annual audit for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1990.

This the 14th day of May, 1990.

Council Member Herzenberg said that one of the problems with the Town's current noise ordinance is that requests such as the one by Phillips Junior High School have to be considered by the Council.

COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER, TO ADOPT CONSENT AGENDA ITEM E. THE MOTION WAS Adopted UNANIMOUSLY (7‑0).

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING Chapter 11 OF THE TOWN CODE OF ORDINANCES REGRADING NOISE CONTROL FOR A SPECIAL EVENT TO BE HELD ON MAY 23, 1990 BETWEEN 6:00 P.M. AND 8:00 P.M. (90‑5‑10/0‑1)

WHEREAS, Phillips Junior High School is sponsoring a Writing Festival, and a portion of that event will be an outdoor picnic, with amplified music from 6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m., to be held on the track behind the school; and

WHEREAS, a change in Chapter 11 of the Town Code of Ordinances regarding the time during which a permit to use sound amplifying equipment outdoors and to exceed the normal sound levels, would be required to approve this request; and

WHEREAS, outdoor amplified music at the proposed time and location will have little impact on non-participants;

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that Chapter 11 of the Town Code of Ordinances is hereby amended as follows:

SECTION I

Amend Section 11‑39 (d) (3) as follows:

(3) Daytime/Evening sound levels in excess of sixty (60) dB(A) will be permitted upon the issuance of a permit and allow sound levels exceeding those set above as follows:

Wednesday 75 dB(A)

(6:00 p.m. ‑ 8:00 p.m.)

SECTION II

Section I of this ordinance shall be in effect only on May 23, 1990 between 6:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m.

This the 14th day of May, 1990.

COUNCIL MEMBER RIMER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG, TO ADJOURN THE COUNCIL'S REGULAR MEETING AND MOVE INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (7‑0).

The meeting was adjourned at 10:29 p.m.

No report followed the Executive Session.