MINUTES OF A PUBLIC HEARING HELD BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF

   THE TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL, MONDAY, MAY 21, 1990, 7:30 P.M.

 

Mayor pro‑Tem Preston called the hearing to order.

 

Council Members Julie Andresen, Joyce Brown, Joe Herzenberg, Arthur Werner and Roosevelt Wilkerson were in attendance. Mayor Howes, Council Member Alan Rimer and Council Member James C. 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 this evening's hearing was the second public hearing to be held in the Council's new chambers. Mayor Pro Tem Preston said that the new chamber, particularly the seating arrangement, was a vast improvement over the former chamber. Mayor Pro Tem Preston said that the staff was attempting to correct sound amplification problems in the new chamber.

Mayor Pro Tem Preston requested that speakers be as concise as possible in making their remarks.

 

Cameron‑McCauley Historic District and Conservation District

 

Planning Director Roger Waldon noted that the Town staff would be recommending that two of the proposals before the Council this evening be denied. Mr. Waldon reviewed the Council's previous consideration of the Cameron‑McCauley Historic District proposal. Mr. Waldon said that the staff had sought to achieve a compromise solution concerning the Cameron‑McCauley area. Mr. Waldon stated that no single consensus solution had yet emerged from discussions. Mr. Waldon noted that the Town staff was recommending that the proposal for Cameron‑McCauley historic district designation not be pursued at this time.

 

Mr. Waldon noted that the Cameron‑McCauley area had met the threshold requirements for designation as a historic district. Mr. Waldon said that a variety of mechanisms other than historic districts were available to preserve homes in the area. Mr. Waldon stated that opposition to district formation was significant enough to recommend against formation of an historic district.

 

Historic District Chairperson Lillyan Page noted that there had been a great deal of opposition to the formation of the Town's present historic district.  Ms. Page stressed that the Historic District Commission works with individuals to obtain certificates of appropriateness.  Ms. Page said that only two certificates of appropriateness had been denied in recent times.  Ms. Page stated that the Historic District Commission unanimously recommended that the Cameron-McCauley area, with the exception of the power plant, be designated as an historic district.

 

Mr. Waldon stated that Planning Board Chairperson Bruce Guild was unable to attend this evening's hearing due to a family emergency. Mr. Waldon noted that the Planning Board had numerous discussions and made several motions concerning possible formation of an historic district. Mr. Waldon said that the Planning Board had been unable to make a positive recommendation to the Council concerning formation of an historic district.

 

Mayor Pro Tem Preston inquired whether the Planning Board had considered varying boundaries for the proposed district. Mr. Waldon said yes. Council Member Andresen inquired whether the staff had examined the redrawing of proposed district lines. Mr. Waldon noted that the Historic District Commission had proposed such an alternative, but the staff had not attempted to redraw district lines. Ms. Loewenthal noted that her preliminary recommendation was the district not be established.

 

William C. Fischer, a Pittsboro resident, said he had grown up on, and raised his children on, McCauley Street. Mr. Fischer said he found it unsettling that residents of a historic district would have to get permission to paint their own homes. Mayor Pro Tem Preston noted that the Historic District Commission does not review the color of paint on individual homes.

 

Dr. George Steele, representing Neighbors for a Cameron‑McCauley Historic District, said that the Cameron‑McCauley neighborhood deserved protection. Dr. Steele said he was concerned about the recommendation for denial of district formation. Dr. Steele said that owners of over half of the assessed property in the area had signed a petition favoring formation of an historic district. Dr. Steele said he favored designation of the area as an historic district.

 

Dan Murphy, a resident of the Town's current historic district, expressed concern about the Town's ability to regulate homeowner's decisions concerning changes in property appearance. Mr. Murphy added that a board of ten persons, the Historic District Commis­sion, could determine the desirability of changes to individual properties.

 

Margaret Taylor, President of the Chapel Hill Alliance of Neighbor­hoods, read a letter from Mr. Bob Stipe, who was unable to attend the meeting.  Ms. Taylor stated that Mr. Stipe was an attorney degreed in city planning, who had previously served on the faculty of the Institute of Government and as director of the State's Division of Archives and Natural History.  Ms. Taylor said that Mr. Stipe had also served on the National Trust for Historic Preservation Board of Directors.  Mr. Stipe said that the Town staff recommendation to deny the historic district was too simple an answer to a complex issue. Mr. Stipe noted that making a recommendation based on popularity was wrong. Mr. Stipe's statement noted that historic district formation had been reinforced by several court decisions. Mr. Stipe stated that anticipated problems with district guidelines had been exaggerated. Mr. Stipe noted that he had been the originator of the conservation district concept and stated his opinion that a conservation district was not appropriate for the Cameron‑McCauley area. Mr. Stipe said failing to amend the zoning atlas to permit historic district formation would send the wrong message to area residents.

 

Dr. Jim Dobbins said that examples of unacceptable items had been outlined at a historic district educational meeting. Dr. Robbins said that aluminum siding and "four seasons" rooms had been cited as examples of unacceptable home improvements. Dr. Robbins said he was proud of the Old Salem historic‑district in Winston‑Salem. Dr. Dobbins said he opposed the formation of a Cameron‑McCauley historic district, since it would be degrading for individual property owners to seek permission to make improvements to their own property. Dr. Dobbins urged the Council not to adopt a historic district in the area.

 

Don McChesney said he had resided in the Cameron‑McCauley neighbor­hood since 1968. Mr. McChesney said he supported the formation of an historic district. Mr. McChesney said a variety of residents live in the neighborhood. Mr. McChesney said the formation of a conservation district would not be as effective as designation of the area as an historic district. Noting that the State Division of Archives and Natural History had recommended formation of the district, Mr. McChesney urged the Council to follow through on this recommendation.

 

Steve Dobbins said he resided in the Cameron‑McCauley area. Mr. Dobbins noted that individual property owners have financial responsibility for maintaining their own properties. Mr. Dobbins said that the necessary threshold for formation of a historic district had not been met. Mr. Dobbins said that the guideline prohibiting the use of aluminum siding appeared to be an unfair restriction. Mr. Dobbins stated that the formation of the district was not needed to address a specific threat or problem. Mr. Dobbins requested that the Council not place undue burdens on area residents.

 

Jim Webb said he was serving his third term on the Town's Historic District Commission.  Mr. Webb noted that Mr. Stipe had been one of his students at the University.  Mr. Webb said he could not improve on Mr. Stipe's earlier statement.  Mr. Webb said that the Historic District Commission did its best to assist property owners with certificates of appropriateness applications.

 

Gene Swecker, Associate Vice-Chancellor for Facilities Management at the University, said that the University had been a good steward of its properties over the years. Mr. Swecker stated that the inclusion of University properties in the historic district was not useful. Mr. Swecker requested that the Council not include any University property in a proposed historic district.

 

Elizabeth Johnson said she had resided in Chapel Hill since 1968. Ms. Johnson said she resided at the corner of Pittsboro Street and University Drive. Ms. Johnson said she was overwhelmed by the diversity and charm of the Cameron‑McCauley neighborhood. Ms. Johnson said the formation of a historic district was a good idea.

 

John Sanders, 1107 Sourwood Drive, said he had been a resident of the Town for thirty‑two years. Mr. Sanders also noted that he serves as the Chairperson of the University Buildings and Grounds Committee. Mr. Sanders said the nature and function of the University boiler plant and the Carolina Inn would require externally visible changes in the future. Mr. Sanders said the University had been a responsible custodian of its historic properties. Mr. Sanders requested that the Council exclude University properties from any proposed historic district.

 

Keith Burridge said he strongly supported the formation of a Cameron‑McCauley historic district. Dr. Burridge said the designation would help to preserve and protect the neighborhood. Dr. Burridge expressed concern that five homes on Pittsboro Street had been demolished during the past year. Dr. Burridge suggested that a compromise could be reached by formulating less stringent historic district guidelines. Dr. Burridge also suggested redrawing the proposed historic district boundaries. Dr. Burridge requested that his statement and proposed revised district boundary map be included in the record of the hearing. Both are on file in the Town Clerk's Office.

 

Shirley Clapham, a resident property owner of Cameron Avenue, said she was speaking on behalf of those who had signed a petition protesting the formation of a historic district. Ms. Clapham noted that many residents of the protest petition were long‑time residents of the neighborhood. M$. Clapham said that the proposed historic district was composed of many different neighborhoods. Ms. Clapham said many of the problems of the Cameron‑McCauley area were not design‑related. Ms. Clapham requested that the Council permit individuals to continue with their own creativity by voting no on the historic district proposal.

 

Baird Grimson, 407 Ransom Street, said he supported the formation of a Cameron/McCauley historic district.  Mr. Grimson said that approximately twice as many owners had signed in favor of a district than those who opposed district formation.  Mr. Grimson urged the Council to have the foresight to vote for a historic district.

 

Alice Ingram said that historic districts are an outmoded planning tool. Ms. Ingram said that zoning regulations were needed to preserve the Cameron‑McCauley area. Ms. Ingram said three major issues face the neighborhood in the future: maintenance of neighborhood character, building height restrictions, and the widening or extension of Pittsboro Street.

 

Dr. Art Aylsworth, a resident of Browbridge Lane, said his property was not included in the proposed historic district boundary. Dr. Aylsworth said this non‑inclusion was his only problem with the proposed designation. Dr. Aylsworth said he agreed with Dr. Burridge's earlier comments concerning the neighborhood's unique character. Dr. Aylsworth said Town residents had done an excellent job of preserving the beauty and character of the community. Dr. Aylsworth said he hoped that the Council would adopt the district with new boundaries. Alternatively, Dr. Aylsworth requested that properties adjoining the district boundary be given the option of inclusion.

 

Ed Cockrell, a resident of the West Cameron Avenue area, said he had resided in Town for over fourteen years. Mr. Cockrell said he favored adoption of Resolution B. Mr. Cockrell said he wanted to see better sidewalks, cleaner streets, better traffic flow on Ransom Street, and improved cleanliness of fraternities in the area.

 

Claire Vaughn, president of the Chapel Hill Preservation Society, said the Cameron‑McCauley neighborhood was worthy of protection. Ms. Vaughn noted that contributions given to the Preservation Society on behalf of sorority and fraternity renovations would have covenants attached. Ms. Vaughn urged the Council to work with the Preservation Society in making the Cameron‑McCauley area worthy as a historic district.

 

Kenneth Putnam said he had been a Town resident since 1944, said there was nothing historic about his residence at 3 Putnam Court. Mr. Putnam noted that he had been on the Town's Board of Aldermen during the 1950's. Mr. Putnam said he opposed the imposition of unnecessary regulation on Town residents. Mr. Putnam said he hoped that the Council could work out a positive solution other than the formation of a historic district.

 

Pauline Grimson, 407 Ransom Street, said that Chapel Hill is an attractive and unique community.  Ms. Grimson said she enjoyed being within walking distance of the University and the downtown area.  Ms. Grimson said that the recently compiled historical significant study demonstrated the historical significance of the neighborhood.

 

Isabelle Lewis, a resident of Mallette Street since 1956, said a petition to designate the Cameron/McCauley area had been initiated in 1976.  Ms. Lewis said the real question before the Council was whether or not to act to preserve the Cameron‑McCauley neighbor­hood. Ms, Lewis said the neighborhood is pedestrian‑oriented, convenient, beautiful and neighborly. Ms. Lewis said the creation of a historic district would help the Town reach some of its goals in the Town's Comprehensive Plan.

 

Helen Urquhart, 426 West Cameron Avenue, said she supported the formation of an historic district. Ms. Urquhart added her vigorous opposition to conservation districts or other alternatives to historic districts. Ms. Urquhart expressed concern that Town planners had been unable to adequately identify significant differences between historic districts and their alternatives. Ms. Urquhart said that the first two neighborhood information meetings should have been planned in conjunction with neighborhood resi­dents, prior to the hiring of a historic preservation consultant. Ms. Urquhart noted that some neighborhood residents had elected not to sign either petition, since they could not obtain definitive answers to their questions.

 

Richard Mann, a resident of University Drive, said he supported the formation of the proposed historic district.

 

Charlie Nelson said the Town's character is quite unlike that of any other community. Mr. Nelson, citing his attendance at a joint meeting of the Appearance Commission, Planning Board and Town Council, said that a University official had chosen not to respond to a question concerning the acquisition of property by the University in the Cameron‑McCauley area. Mr. Nelson said many prominent members of the community had voiced their support of the continued residential existence of the Cameron‑McCauley neighbor­hood. Mr. Nelson urged the Council to approve formation of a cameron‑McCauley historic district.

 

Hugh Mortashed said he had written a letter to the Council and Historic District Commission expressing his support of a historic district. Mr. Mortashed urged the Council to read his letter of support.

 

Sue Field, 113 Kenan Street, said she enthusiastically supported the formation of a historic district. Ms. Field said the Cameron­McCauley neighborhood is a charming area worthy of preservation.

 

Scott Smith noted that the local chapter of Phi Kappa Sigma had been established in 1856.  Mr. Smith said that Phi Kappa Sigma had contributed $2,700 to the American Diabetes Association this year.  Mr. Smith added that the fraternity was still in the process of receiving approval for funding of improvements to their house.  Mr. Smith said he supported the formation of a historic district.

 

Helen Urquhart read a letter from Dumock Maurice, 409 West Cameron Avenue, stating that nothing short of historic district formation would prevent University and commercial expansion in the future.

 

Mrs. Dimmick, the owner of the Mallette‑Wilson House, built in 1845, urged the Council to designate the area as a historic district. Ms. Dimmick said that very few homes in the area are less than fifty years old.

 

Mayor Pro Tem Preston requested that a letter from Dr. Henry Clark be entered into the record of the hearing. A copy of Dr. Clark's letter, supporting district formation, is available in the Clerk's office.

 

Mark Carey, 9 St. James Place, said he had moved back to Town in January. Mr. Carey said he graduated from the University in 1962. Mr. Carey noted that he had lived in Salisbury, North Carolina, where he served as a member of the Historic Salisbury Foundation. Mr. Carey stated that eight historic districts had been established in a community of 20,000 with the help of Mr. Bob Stipe. Mr. Carey stated that approximately two thousand persons per year tour one of Salisbury's historic areas. Mr. Carey said the establishment of a Cameron‑McCauley historic district would be a wonderful asset for the Town.

 

Ruth Morris, 400 Ransom Street, said she was fortunate to live in the Pritchard House, one of the most historic homes in Town. Ms. Morris said she had moved into an apartment in the home in 1967, after having previously resided in Town from 1929 to 1939. Ms. Morris noted that the home was built in 1908. Ms. Morris said she ardently supported the formation of an historic district in the area.

 

Charlotte Adams, a Town resident since 1927, said she strongly supported formation of an historic district. Ms. Adams stated that her home in the area was built in 1940.

 

Mayor Pro Tem Preston expressed appreciation for the comments by this evening's speakers. There were no questions from the Council.

 

Ms. Loewenthal noted that a protest petition opposing the formation of an historic district had been received by the Town. Ms. Loewenthal stated that if the petition were found to be valid, it would require seven Council votes, rather than five, to establish a historic district. Ms. Loewenthal noted that the standing of the petition would be determined prior to the Council's June 11th meeting.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER, TO REFER THE MATTER TO THE MANAGER AND ATTORNEY.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (6-0).

 

Closure of Woodbine Drive

 

Engineering Director George Small briefly described the circum­stances leading to the recommended closure of Woodbine Drive. Mr. Small noted that the potential for conflicting turning movements in the area was quite high. Mr. Small noted that the initial request for closure had been received from the Department of Transportation over one year ago. Mr. Small stated that there was no consensus for the closure of Woodbine Drive at that time.

 

Mr. Small noted that the situation was revisited following the initiation of the u.s. 15‑501 Bypass project. Mr. Small said a recent twenty‑four hour traffic count on Woodbine Drive had counted 233 vehicles. Mr. Small noted that the word "permanently" should be removed from the Town Manager's preliminary recommended resolution of closure. Mr. Small noted that the closure of the right‑of‑way was not intended, since the Town did not propose to abandon the underlying road right‑of‑way.

 

Council Member Andresen inquired about the reason for not abandon­ing the easement. Mr. Small said the only objective of the request was to preclude through traffic. Mr. Small noted that there was no reason to abandon the right‑of‑way. Council Member Andresen inquired about the possibility of reopening the roadway in the future. Mr. Small stated that the staff wished to leave as many options as possible open in the future.

 

Mayor Pro Tem Preston inquired whether the Department of Transpor­tation or neighborhood residents had brought the matter to the Town's attention. Mr. Small added that residents had contacted the Town after the beginning of Bypass construction. Mr. Small noted that the construction of the Bypass would not be affected by the possible closure of Woodbine Drive.

 

Council Member Werner inquired whether the Department of Transpor­tation had standards concerning the proximity of service roads to other major roadways. Mr. Small said yes, noting that if the construction of Dobbins Drive were to take place today, the situation would be much different.

 

Marlene Droegmueller said that the proposal for closure had been made by the Town Engineering Department in August, 1988. Ms. Droegmueller noted that the construction of Fordham Boulevard was more directly impacting individual residents than had been originally anticipated. Ms. Droegmueller noted that more accidents were occurring at the intersection of Fordham Boulevard and Manning Drive due to non-standard traffic maneuvers in the construction area.  Ms. Droegmueller said traffic on Woodbine Drive had increased greatly since the beginning of the Fordham Boulevard project.  Ms. Droegmueller urged members of the Council to park at the intersection of Woodbine and Manning Drives to study the traffic situation.

 

Ms. Loewenthal said her preliminary recommendation was to close Woodbine Drive to traffic.

 

Bill Daniell, 908 Coker Drive, said his neighborhood would be adversely impacted by the closure of Woodbine Drive. Mr. Daniell said he had originally signed a petition to close Woodbine Drive, but after reflecting, it became clear that there would be adverse traffic consequences along his street. Mr. Daniell expressed concern that the closure of Woodbine Drive would result in traffic being funneled along Coker Drive to reach Manning Drive. Mr. Daniell said that Coker Drive was not designed as a traffic artery. Mr. Daniell said he was particularly concerned about the safety of children in the area. Mr. Daniell said it was his observation that there is not a traffic problem on Woodbine Drive at present. Mr. Daniell suggested delaying the closure of Woodbine Drive until a traffic problem arose. Mr. Daniell said he favored the creation of a buffer or sound screening, but felt that the closure of woodbine to divert traffic was not fair and equitable.

 

Danny Moffie, 904 Coker Drive, said his home is at the southwest corner of Woodbine and Coker Drive. Mr. Moffie said his major concern was safety. Mr. Moffie said he had seen two traffic accidents in the area within the last year. Mr. Moffie said that if Woodbine Drive were closed, the problems would only be transfer­red from Woodbine to Coker Drive.

 

Gretchen Vickery said she sympathized with both points of view. Ms. Vickery noted that major trees are located up to the right-­of‑way on area streets. Ms. Vickery inquired whether there were any alternatives to the closure of the roadway. Ms. Vickery expressed concerned that some drivers were making illegal U‑turns along the Bypass.

 

Ellen Ross, 904 Woodbine Drive, expressed concern that two drivers had made illegal U‑turns in the vicinity of Woodbine Drive, almost colliding with her husband's vehicle. Ms. Ross note? that there had been thirty‑five trucks on Woodbine Drive during a one hour period earlier in the day. Ms. Ross expressed concern that there was a dangerous traffic situation on Woodbine Drive.

 

Ms. Crisp, 806 Kings Mill Road, requested that Woodbine Drive not be closed. Ms. Crisp noted that if access were prevented from Woodbine Drive and the Botanical Garden, access to Kings Mill Road residents would be very limited. Ms. Crisp urged the Council not to close Woodbine Drive.

 

Gene Cole said he and his wife had a contract to purchase the Ross home on Woodbine Drive.  Mr. Cole said that the basic issue was safety.  Mr. Cole noted that he took exception to an earlier remark that Woodbine Drive was safer for children than Coker Drive.

 

Jim Johnston, 618 Morgan Creek Road, expressed concern that entry onto the Bypass was becoming increasingly hazardous.  Mr. Johnston stated that Manning Drive was one of the few places were it was possible to access the Bypass safely. Mr. Johnston suggested the installation of additional traffic signals in the area. Mr. Johnston said that overall problems would not be solved by the closure of Woodbine Drive.

 

Mayor Pro Tem Preston inquired whether alternatives to the closure of Woodbine Drive had been explored. Mr. Small said the relocation of the intersection was not viable due to property ownership considerations.

 

Ms. Johnston, 618 Morgan Creek Road, inquired about the possibility of installing speed bumps in the area. Mr. Small said he was not aware of speeding problems in the area. Mr. Small added that State statutes prohibit the use of speed bumps on public streets.

 

Council Member Andresen requested that the staff address concerns of the potential closing of Woodbine Drive in its follow‑up memorandum to the Council.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER, TO REFER THE MATTER TO THE MANAGER AND ATTORNEY. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (6‑0).

 

SUP Application for The Ballet School of Chapel Hill

 

Parties wishing to present evidence were sworn. Ms. Loewenthal requested that the agenda item and related attachments be entered into the record of the hearing. Mayor Pro Tem Preston concurred with the request.

 

Planning Director Roger Waldon noted that the application met all conditions except one. Mr. Waldon said that the staff's request to save one large oak tree on the site would make it impossible to meet buffering requirements. Mr. Waldon said the Manager recom­mended that the request for a special use permit modification be approved.

 

Gretchen Vickery, the project applicant, said that evergreen and flowering vines would provide adequate buffering. Ms. Vickery said she was delighted by the cooperation of the Town staff on her proposal.

 

Mr. Waldon noted that the Planning Board had recommended approval of the request for modification.  Ms. Loewenthal said her preliminary recommendation was the adoption of Resolution A, approving the request for modification.

 

Council Member Brown inquired whether strategies to maximize energy resources had been discussed with the applicant.  Mr. Waldon said such a request had not been made yet, but the applicant could be asked to address this request. Ms. Vickery said the shading area of the building was extraordinary. Ms. Vickery added that ceilings in the facility would be approximately sixteen feet high.

 

Mayor Pro Tem Preston inquired whether Ms. Vickery accepted the conditions of approval outlined in Resolution A. Ms. Vickery said yes.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN, TO REFER THE MATTER TO THE MANAGER AND ATTORNEY. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (6‑0).

 

     Request for Deadline Extension by Greenfields

 

Parties wishing to present evidence were sworn. Ms. Loewenthal requested that the agenda item and related attachments be entered into the record of the hearing. Mayor Pro Tem Preston concurred with the request.

 

Mr. Waldon said that the Greenfields mixed‑use development project was originally approved by the Town in 1985, with a completion time limit of June 30, 1989. Mr. Waldon noted that one additional twelve month time limit extension was requested and granted administratively. Mr. Waldon said there was no construction underway on the site at present. Mr. Waldon noted that the Town Manager's preliminary recommendation was to deny the request for a time limit extension. Mr. Waldon stated that it was difficult to find that the project had proceeded with due diligence. Mr. Waldon noted that the proposed floor area for the project would exceed standards permitted by the Town's Development Ordinance.

 

David Swanson, representing the applicant, said he had not attended the Planning Board meeting at which the extension request was discussed. Mr. Swanson said that the Town staff had initially recommended to the Planning Board that the time extension request be approved.

 

Mr. Swanson distributed a summary to the Council. outlining transactions concerning the Greenfields project over the past few years. Mr. Swanson said that numerous inquiries concerning the property had been received. Mr. Swanson said his client was interested in selling the property and working with the Town.  Mr. Swanson said that the ramifications for the property owner were significant if the time extension request were denied.  Mr. Swanson noted that the owner was willing to negotiate on some points of the conditions of project approval.

 

Mr. Waldon noted that the Planning Board had recommended that the request for time extension be denied.  Ms. Loewenthal said her preliminary recommendation was the adoption of Resolution A, denying the applicant's request.

 

Mayor Pro Tem Preston inquired about the consequences of denying the requested modification. Mr. Waldon noted that the completion time limit expired on July 1, 1990. Mr. Waldon added that the permit would still be alive, since the recorded special use permit would encumber the land. Mr. Waldon said that building permits could not be issued until the permit was modified or a new application were submitted.

 

Mayor Pro Tem Preston requested a statement from Mr. Swanson concerning the proposed conditions of approval. Mr. Swanson said he preferred that the request for a time limit extension be granted.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN,

TO RECESS THE HEARING TO JUNE 11TH AND REFER THE MATTER TO THE MANAGER AND ATTORNEY. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (6‑0).

 

The hearing concluded at 11:03 p.m.