MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN
OF CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA, MONDAY, OCTOBER 28, 1991, 7:30 P.M.
Mayor Howes called the meeting to
order.
Council Members in attendance were
Julie Andresen, Joyce Brown, Joe Herzenberg, Nancy Preston, Alan Rimer, Arthur
Werner and Roosevelt Wilkerson, Jr.
Council Member James C. Wallace was absent. Also in attendance were Assistant to the Mayor Lisa Price, Town
Manager Cal Horton, Assistant Town Managers Sonna Loewenthal and Florentine
Miller, Planning Director Roger Waldon, Parks and Recreation Director Michael
Loveman, Assistant to the Attorney Richard Sharpless and Town Attorney Ralph
Karpinos.
Mayor Howes noted that elections for
Mayor and four seats on the Town Council would occur on Tuesday, November
5th. He urged citizens to exercise
their right to vote. Mayor Howes stated
that the new Council would be seated on Monday, December 2nd.
Mayor Howes said there were no
ceremonies or hearings this evening.
Item 3 Petitions
COUNCIL MEMBER RIMER
MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG, TO REFER A PETITION ABOUT TRAFFIC
SAFETY CONCERNS FROM SOURWOOD AND KING'S MILL NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTS TO THE
TOWN MANAGER. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED
UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
Council Member
Andresen petitioned the Council to move the report from Orange Water and Sewer
Authority Board members up in the agenda, to proceed discussion of resolutions
concerning the Bolin Creek Interceptor.
Council Member Preston expressed her concurrence with the
suggestion. Orange Water and Sewer
Authority board member James Mergner said that board members Riley Wilson and
David Moreau would be in attendance in a few minutes. Mayor Howes noted that the Council had no objection to moving the
OWASA report forward in the agenda.
Council Member
Wilkerson requested that the Town staff provide a report on the landfill search
selection process. He noted that
Ministers for Social and Racial Justice had conducted a survey nationwide
concerning the siting of undesirable public facilities. Council Member Wilkerson said the survey
found that a large percentage of facilities such as landfills were located in
areas having large percentages of minority residents or property owners. Council Member Wilkerson expressed concern
that the property of African-Americans might be condemned for purposes of
siting a landfill. Town Manager Horton
said he would provide a written follow-up report to the Council.
Council Member
Andresen inquired whether it was a good idea for the Council to have a role in
the site selection process at the present time. Council Member Preston said information on the search process
would be helpful to the Council. She
stated that the Landfill Site Selection Committee had been level in its
approach for all possible landfill sites.
Council Member Preston said she was not familiar with the situation
outlined by Council Member Wilkerson.
Council Member Wilkerson said some members of the committee,
particularly African-American members, had expressed concern about the
selection process.
Council Member
Andresen said she had no problem with receiving a status report from the
staff. She expressed hope that the
Landfill Site Selection Committee would conduct the search in a impartial and
fair manner. Council Member Wilkerson
said he was not requesting that the Council become involved in the selection
process. He expressed concern that
there might be efforts made to remove elderly, infirm black residents from
their land to site the proposed landfill.
Council Member Wilkerson said he was simply requesting a written
report. Mr. Horton said he would be
glad to provide a report to the Council.
Council Member Werner
said he agreed with Council Member Andresen that the Council should not be involved
in the selection process. He inquired
about the status of the site selection process. Council Member Werner expressed concern that materials on the
process presented to the Council to date had been very elementary and
generalized in their orientation. He
requested that better information be provided in the future, so that the
Council could provide intelligent answers to citizen inquiries concerning the
landfill process. Mayor Howes noted
that questions concerning the selection process could also be referred to
applicable Town staff or members of the selection committee.
Council Member
Preston stated that activities of the Landfill Search Committee might appear
simplistic to date. She said that the
process had been open to public scrutiny.
Council Member Preston said she was sorry that the Council felt it had
not been apprised of all steps to date.
She noted that one of the committee's charges was to recommend three or
more sites for the proposed landfill.
Council Member Preston stated that the committee was becoming
increasingly involved in detailed analysis of the various proposed sites. She stated that the committee would engage
in more in-depth analyses in the near future.
Council Member Preston said the committee meetings had been open to the
public and the media had followed the proceedings very closely.
Item 4
BP Oil Service Station Special Use Permit
Mr. Horton stated
that the staff had based a resolution of denial on deliberations at the
Council's October 14th meeting. He said
a resolution of denial was before the Council this evening for their
consideration.
COUNCIL MEMBER
WILKERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER RIMER, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 1.
Mayor Howes noted
that the proposal had been discussed by the Council at its October 14th
meeting.
THE MOTION WAS PLACED
ON THE FLOOR AND ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
A RESOLUTION DENYING
A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR TIMBERLYNE BP OIL SERVICE STATION AND CAR WASH
(24K-10) (91-10-28/R-1)
BE IT RESOLVED by the
Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby fails to find that
the Special Use Permit proposed by B.T. Werner, if developed according to the
site evaluation map, dated February 12, 1990;
sketch plan dated November 16, 1990 (revised April 8, 1991); site plan dated September 9, 1990 (revised
April 1, 1991); and the existing
conditions/site activity/landscape protection plan dated February 11, 1991
(revised April 8, 1991), would:
1. Be
located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or promote the
public health, safety, and general welfare; and
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 Sections 18.7 and 18.8, 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; and
4. Would
conform with the general plans for the physical development of the Town as
embodied in the Development ordinance and in the Comprehensive Plan.
The reasons for the
Council's failure to make these findings include the following:
1. Traffic
Impacts: Evidence presented at the
Public Hearing indicates that the proposed development would generate traffic
through an existing residential neighborhood along Kingston Drive, a
substandard street, in a manner that would not maintain public health and
safety, and would not maintain the value of contiguous property.
2. Crime
Potential: Evidence presented at
the Public Hearing indicates that potential for crime in the area of the
proposed site would be increased by the presence of a 24-hour convenience
store, in a manner that would not maintain public safety and general welfare,
and would not maintain the value of contiguous property.
3. Access
and Circulation: Evidence presented
at the Public Hearing indicates that the location and design of the service
station will not result in safe turning movements in and out of the site and
the shopping center in general, and that such unsafe turning movements would
not maintain public health and safety.
4. Comprehensive
Plan: Evidence presented at the
Public Hearing indicates that this proposal would not conform with Chapel
Hill's Comprehensive Plan in that it would not protect the integrity of the
nearby residential neighborhood.
5. Groundwater
Impacts: Evidence presented at the
Public Hearing indicates a potential threat to nearby water supply wells from
possible leakage from underground storage tanks proposed at the site,
representing a potential danger to public health, safety, and general welfare.
6. Driveway
Spacing: The proposal does not meet
the requirement of Section 18.7.15 of the Development Ordinance, which states
that driveways for a service station shall not be located within three hundred
(300) feet of any intersecting street.
7. Access
to Arterial or Collector: The
proposal does not meet the requirement of Section 18.7.15 of the Development
Ordinance which states that a zoning lot for a service station shall have
direct access onto an arterial or collector street.
BE IT FURTHER
RESOLVED that the Council hereby denies the Special Use Permit for Timberlyne
BP Oil Service Station and Car Wash.
This the 28th day of
October, 1991.
Item 5a
Report by Orange Water and Sewer Authority Board Members
James Mergner
introduced Orange Water and Sewer Authority (OWASA) board members Tom McCurdy,
Dave Moreau and Riley Wilson, also in attendance at this evening's
meeting. Mayor Howes noted that the
Town's fifth appointee was Council Member James C. Wallace. Mr. Mergner presented an overview of OWASA's
annual report noting that the utility had 13,000 customer accounts and fiscal
year revenues of approximately $10.9 million.
He stated that average daily water demand was seven million gallons,
with peak capacity of eleven million gallons per day, approaching the water
treatment plant capacity of 12.5 million gallons per day. Mr. Mergner said an average of 5.1 million
gallons of wastewater was treated per day, with a peak treatment capacity of 8
million gallons per day. Mr. Mergner
said that an estimated four years of wastewater treatment capacity remained at
OWASA's plant. He stated that a
contract for expansion of the wastewater treatment plant would be awarded in
the near future. Mr. Mergner said the
second phase of the Bolin Creek interceptor project would be completed by 1996.
Mr. Mergner said the
Bolin Creek interceptor included approximately eighty miles of connector
mains. He stated that the condition of
the wastewater system had been improved considerably in recent years, including
a relining project for the upstream collector system. Mr. Mergner stated that Jordan Lake could provide up to ten
million gallons of additional water supply per day as a future option for
OWASA. He stated that OWASA would
conduct a technical study for a Jordan Lake water intake structure in the
future. Mr. Mergner stated that water
in Jordan Lake was substantially cleaner than originally projected. He noted that OWASA Board Chairperson Lois
Herring, OWASA Executive Director Everett Billingsley and OWASA Chief
Operations Engineer Katie Kalb were also in attendance at this evening's
meeting.
Council Member Werner
noted that an average of 5.1 million gallons of wastewater were treated daily
at the Mason Farm wastewater plant. He
inquired how an estimate of thirty percent additional capacity for future
development projects had been determined.
Mayor Howes noted that OWASA Board Member Bill Alderholt was also in
attendance this evening. Ms. Kalb
stated approved development projects in Chapel Hill and Carrboro had been
factored into the projected allocation of future wastewater treatment capacity
needs. Council Member Werner stated
that a projected thirty percent increase in wastewater treatment capacity would
have significant implications for other infrastructure such as roadways. Ms. Kalb noted that some of the development
approvals were quite dated. She said
the development and treatment projections had been submitted to the North
Carolina Division of Environmental Management.
Council Member Werner requested that OWASA staff provide revised
estimates for future wastewater treatment capacity needs. Mayor Howes noted that projected figures
might be overly optimistic in light of the current economy.
David Moreau said the
actual growth rate for water treatment demand had been two to three percent per
year over the last decade. He noted
that actual consumption had declined in some years. Dr. Moreau said the rate of growth had slowed considerably in
recent years. Council Member Werner
inquired whether it was correct to surmise that a thirty percent increase in
demand was not anticipated during the next four years. Dr. Moreau said this was correct, noting
that growth during thriving periods was approximately four percent per
year. Council Member Andresen inquired
when Jordan Lake water treatment and consumption would be initiated. Dr. Moreau said this would not occur in the
foreseeable future. Council Member
Andresen inquired whether OWASA was preserving Jordan Lake as a future water
source option. Dr. Moreau said
yes. Council Member Andresen inquired
about the proposed usage of $200,000 for preservation of watershed land
surrounding Cane Creek. Dr. Moreau said
the OWASA Board had requested and budgeted for an initial planning effort to
set priorities for Cane Creek. He noted
that no specific plans had been made for expending the $200,000.
Council Member
Andresen inquired about the status of the stone quarry and asphalt plant on
OWASA-owned land. Mr. Mergner said the
asphalt plant would continue to operate on OWASA land for the foreseeable
future. He stated that a four-party
agreement provided an opportunity for construction of an asphalt plant with a
containment area. Mayor Howes inquired
whether there was any production between the asphalt plant and stone
quarry. Mr. Mergner said there was some
degree of connection. Council Member
Andresen said the stone quarry would be a favorable addition to the water
system. She suggested the formulation
of an agreement acceptable to all parties.
Ms. Kalb stated that the American Stone Quarry was half-owned by
Nello-Teer.
Council Member
Andresen said it would be useful for the Council to receive updated listings of
OWASA's capital improvements periodically, to keep the Council abreast of
OWASA's priorities. Mayor Howes said
the staff could provide copies of these documents.
Council Member Brown
said she was attempting to assimilate information concerning the Bolin Creek
interceptor. Council Member Brown said
the Council had been given information that there had been wastewater discharge
in excess of OWASA's treatment limits.
Mr. Mergner said that the flow had sometimes exceeded the maximum daily
treatment capacity, particularly during periods of heavy precipitation. Council Member Brown inquired whether the
OWASA Board planned to respond to concerns outlined by Lightning Brown. Mr. Mergner said the board had received a
copy of the letter and was willing to respond to Mr. Brown's concerns.
Council Member Brown
inquired whether the estimated cost for the Bolin Creek interceptor was $1.2
million. Mr. Mergner said this was
correct, noting that $1.075 million was for the estimated cost of construction
in 1996, with planning occurring in 1995 at an estimated cost of $125,000. Council Member Brown inquired why one of the
tables in OWASA's capital improvement program listed the project cost as
$2,415,000. Ms. Kalb responded this
cost included the third phase of the project.
Council Member Brown noted that a recent newspaper article had cited a
water usage figure of 9.5 million gallons per day. She inquired whether this was only a one month increase. Mr. Mergner stated that revenues had
exceeded projections for water usage, possibly due to the availability of
additional water from the Cane Creek reservoir. Council Member Brown asked whether water use was decreasing. Mr. Mergner said water consumption had
increased and flow into the treatment facility had decreased, possibly due to
reductions in infiltration.
Council Member Brown
inquired about water conservation measures implemented or discussed by
OWASA. Mr. Mergner said the OWASA board
intended to devote attention to this matter in the future. Dr. Moreau said he had recently presented
cost-effectiveness recommendations to the City of Durham concerning water
conservation programs. Dr. Moreau noted
that twelve states currently required the use of low-flow flush toilets. He noted that a retrofit program with
financial incentives would be necessary for implementaiton. Dr. Moreau said the OWASA Board had taken no
formal action on conservation measures.
He noted that conservation measures would not entail a great deal of
expenditures. Council Member Brown
requested a copy of Dr. Moreau's study concerning City of Durham water
conservation measures.
Council Member Brown
requested a review of OWASA's policy concerning extension of water lines into
central and northern Orange County and the rural buffer. Ms. Herring said the OWASA Board had
requested OWASA staff to outline possible uses for a sixteen inch water
pipeline, including possible extension into the rural buffer. Ms. Herring said the staff report included
very long-term scenarios, with no plans for pipelines in the rural buffer or
northern Orange County. She stated that
pipe lines could possibly be used for emergency water transfer between
jurisdictions. Ms. Herring said further
specifics would be outlined at the joint meeting on December 5th.
Council Member Werner
stated that the Town had developed a good water conservation ethos when
rationing had been necessary. He noted
that when Cane Creek reservoir opened, this ethos diminished considerably. Council Member Werner said he did not know
whether Town residents really wanted to drink water drawn from Jordan Lake in
the future. He stated that renewed
water conservation efforts would push back the need for using Jordan Lake as a
water supply. Council Member Werner
said OWASA could take the initiative in establishing a water conservation
program.
Council Member Werner
inquired whether it was a wise idea to have an asphalt plant in the middle of
an area that would be used as a reservoir in the future. Council Member Werner requested an environmental
impact statement addressing this matter.
Mr. Mergner said careful attention had been devoted to this matter in
the past. Mayor Howes noted that the
community at large was concerned about the location of an asphalt plant in a
water supply watershed. He noted that
if the plant had not been grandfathered, the proposed usage would have been
denied by any governmental body. Mr.
Mergner noted that an environmental impact statement was currently being
prepared in draft form. Council Member
Werner inquired whether the statement would be ready prior to Council action on
the stone quarry's application. Ms.
Herring said yes. She noted that the
asphalt plant in the watershed had been grandfathered and could continue to
function in the foreseeable future. Ms.
Herring noted that the Board had struggled with the pros and cons of plant
operation and had strived to make the plant safer in the future.
Council Member
Andresen said she appreciated the Board's dilemma. She added that the Board could close down the plant since it
owned the land. Mr. Billingsley said
the four-way operating agreement was very complicated, with all parties having
their own agendas. He stated that in a
perfect world, OWASA preferred not to have an asphalt plant in the watershed. Mr. Billingsley noted that the term of plant
operations was limited by the agreement.
Council Member Werner said it was not an acceptable answer to respond
"it's not a perfect world".
Council Member Werner said it was not a rationale in and of itself to
say the four-party agreement was complicated.
Mr. Billingsley responded that the asphalt plant was an ancilliary use
to the quarry operation. He noted that
the Council would have an opportunity to address the situation in the
future. Mr. Billingsley added that an
environmental impact statement concerning the asphalt plant would be provided
in the future.
Council Member
Herzenberg inquired whether the vote to adopt the OWASA budget had been
unanimous for the past two years. Mr.
Mergner said there had not been unanimous agreement on the budget
document. He added that there had been
spirited discussion of the budget at OWASA board meetings. Mr. McCurdy noted that he had voted against
the OWASA budget both of the last two years.
Council Member Preston inquired about the proposed use of funding for
recreational facilities at Cane Creek.
Ms. Kalb responded that the funds would be used for providing parking,
restrooms, boat storage and a small office for the rental of boats and
dockss. Council Member Preston inquired
people would be able to fish and row on Cane Creek. Ms. Kalb said yes, noting that the activities would reflect those
at University Lake. Council Member Preston
said she had read a letter expressing concern about OWASA's
"yacht". Ms. Herring said the
vessel in question was actually a work boat used in day to day operations at
Cane Creek.
Council Member
Wilkerson requested information on OWASA budget projections for the next five
years. He also requested information
about the benefits package for OWASA employees and the OWASA's Executive
Director's salary.
Mayor Howes expressed
appreciation to the OWASA board members for their willingness to serve the
community. He also said the Town
appreciated the provision of clean water and the treatment of wastewater. Mr. Mergner thanked the Council for their
continuing support of the OWASA Board of Directors.
Item 5b Bolin Creek Interceptor
Mayor Howes noted the
importance of staff interaction in resolving concerns about the Bolin Creek
interceptor line. Dr. Moreau noted that
the OWASA board had recently requested that the Division of Environmental
Management conduct a field investigation of the Bolin Creek sewer line. Dr. Moreau said the OWASA Board had no reservations
about the Council proceeding with a resolution also requesting DEM's
involvement in investigating the Bolin Creek matter. Council Member Werner emphasized the importance of the Council
receiving a first-hand report.
COUNCIL MEMBER
HERZENBERG MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2A.
Council Member Brown
asked whether a public hearing could be included as part of DEM's process. Mayor Howes said he didn't know whether DEM
officials customarily conducted their investigations in this manner. Council Member Andresen requested additional
information on DEM procedures. Mayor
Howes said that when the Council received the report, it might be appropriate
for the Council to call for a public hearing.
THE MOTION WAS PLACED
ON THE FLOOR AND ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
A RESOLUTION CALLING
FOR INVESTIGATION OF THE BOLIN CREEK INTERCEPTOR BY THE DIVISION OF
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT (91-10-28/R-2a)
WHEREAS, information
has been presented to the Council indicating events of manhole overflows along
a stretch of the Bolin Creek Interceptor;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that it requests the N.C.
Division of Environmental Management to investigate the status, condition, and
operation of the interceptor, and to advise the Town Council about potential
threats to public health and safety.
BE IT FURTHER
RESOLVED that, in making its investigation, the N.C. Division of Environmental
Management is requested to review evidence concerning the condition of the
interceptor that has been presented to the Council.
This the 28th day of
October, 1991.
Council Member
Herzenberg suggested modifying resolution b to clarify the scheduling of the
Bolin Creek interceptor project.
COUNCIL MEMBER
HERZENBERG MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2B.
Mr. Mergner provided
a clarification of proposed project phasing, noting that section two of the
project involved construction of a line between Franklin Street and Airport
Road. Mayor Howes said he was not
comfortable with the proposed resolution.
He noted that the OWASA Board would more appropriately address this matter. Council Member Brown said the Town had a
special relationship to the particular problem and a special responsibility to
protect the public. Council Member
Brown encouraged the Council to adopt resolution 2b.
Council Member Rimer
said that by adopting resolution 2a, the Council was identifying whether
perceived problems required action. He
stated that logical needs could be addressed by adoption of resolution 2b. Council Member Rimer suggested that the
Council allow a reasonable amount of time for DEM to response to the OWASA
Board's request for assistance in addressing the Bolin Creek matter. Council Member Andresen said it was prudent
to wait for such a response. She stated
that the Council would look forward to receiving reports from OWASA board
members in the future.
Council Member
Preston inquired whether the OWASA board had recommended changes to the Bolin
Creek capital improvement project
at its most recent
meeting. Dr. Moreau said the OWASA
board had approved a contract selecting a firm to investigate the Bolin Creek
interceptor situation and recommend possible remedies. Dr. Moreau said that funds had been shifted
to address sewage problems along Tanbark Branch. Council Member Wilkerson inquired which project had been impacted
by the shifting of funds. Dr. Moreau
said that funds had been shifted for the replacement of a water line in
conjunction with the bypass project. He
noted that a shift in timing of payments had permitted the Tanbark Branch to be
moved up in terms of priority.
Council Member Brown
said concerns about Bolin Creek had been expressed for the past fifteen
years. She expressed concern that the
Council appeared not to be moving ahead in addressing the matter this evening. Council Member Brown stated that the Council
should develop a timetable for action on the matter. Mayor Howes said the OWASA board was in the best position to put
the Bolin Creek situation in context with DEM officials. He added that the OWASA board wanted to
invest its money in infrastructure in a responsible manner. Mayor Howes said the OWASA board was not
sure of the most appropriate course of action at present. He suggested that resolution 2b could be
considered in the future when additional information had been received.
Council Member Rimer
suggested that the staff develop a response within one month of DEM's response
to OWASA's request for information.
THE MOVER AND
SECONDER AGREED TO WITHDRAW THEIR MOTION.
Item 6
University Power Plant Operation Concerns
Planning Director Roger
Waldon said a preliminary report was before the Council this evening concerning
conditions in the University Power Plant special use permit. Mr. Waldon said the memorandum summarized
four areas of concern including noise, dust, light and violation of environmental
regulations. Mr. Waldon noted that the
plant was still under construction. He
said the staff had reviewed each of the conditions of the special use permit
and listed their status in the Council memorandum. Mr. Waldon said that one condition of the permit, concerning
compliance with environmental regulations, had been clearly violated. He stated that all other conditions had
been, or were in the process of, compliance.
Mr. Waldon said many of the concerns expressed by neighbors of the power
plant went beyond the scope of the special use permit. He said the staff had drafted a resolution
requesting that the University work with the Town and power plant neighbors to
resolve concerns.
Gene Swecker, UNC
Associate Vice-Chancellor for Facilities Management, said that the University
Power Plant project engineer Tom Grisham could respond to any questions by the
Council. Mr. Swecker expressed regret
for any discomfort caused to neighbors by testing at the power plant
facility. He said the University
intended to comply with conditions of the special use permit in the
future. Mr. Swecker stated that the
University had established a single point of contact for complaints concerning
testing at the power plant.
Dr. Pierre Morell,
representing the Power Plant Neighbors Steering Committee, expressed
appreciation to the Mayor and Council for their assistance in addressing safety
and noise concerns at the University power plant. Dr. Morell said the neighbors were especially grateful to Town
Manager Horton, Planning Director Roger Waldon and Planner Beverly
Kawalec. He noted that some unresolved
issues remained. Dr. Morell stated that
the University had a moral commitment for the new power plant to be less noisy
than the one it replaced. He suggested that
the Council adopt an alternate resolution, modifying three items in the staff's
draft. Dr. Morell provided a copy of
the proposed resolution to the Mayor and Council.
Les Lochmann, a
neighborhood resident and member of the Power Plant Neighbors Steering
Committee, said that area residents had been impacted by particulates and
contaminants from the plant. He said a
black, oily substance was eating away paint and fixtures of homes. Mr. Lochmann said residents were
particularly concerned about health effects.
He added that although the University should have an emergency supply of
coal on hand, it should not be uncovered.
Mr. Lochmann stated that condition number eight of the University's
special use permit precluded outside storage of coal. He requested clarification of whether the uncovered pile would be
permitted to remain on the site.
Helen Urquhart said
she resided diagonally from the power plant in the direction of pressures
releases. Ms. Urquhart said the plant
was suited to an industrial, rather than residential, area. She expressed concern that the special use
permit did not refer to residential neighborhoods or environmental
concerns. Ms. Urquhart stated that
ninety percent of the Town's tax base was residential. Ms. Urquhart stated that she had called the
911 emergency operations center on October 18th, to express concern about high
decibel levels. Ms. Urquhart said the
estimated decibel level was 144 at its peak.
Ms. Urquhart said she was still experiencing ringing in her ears from
this incident ten days ago. Ms.
Urquhart also said she had a persistent cough which might be related to
activities at the power plant. She
expressed concern that the impact of pressure releases stretched beyond the
immediate neighborhood. Ms. Urquhart
said residents had not been informed by the University of the extent of the
pressure releases. She said that the
Town should be more sensitive to neighborhoods and their residents.
Council Member Werner
inquired whether the University had an on-site environmental engineer for the
power plant. Mr. Swecker said that the
University had a project engineer (Mr. Grisham) on the site and was in frequent
contact with DEM officials. Council
Member Werner suggested that the University consider having an environmental
engineer on the site to coordinate matters between neighborhood residents and
University and DEM officials. Mr.
Grisham stated that many of the problems brought to the attention of the
University in the last month would preclude the resolution capabilities of a
single individual. He said one of the
more pressing issues was the matter dust and particulates falling onto houses
in the area. Mr. Grisham said a
consulting firm from Massachusetts was assisting the University in this
matter. He also noted that the
University's Geology Department was assisting with efforts to address concerns
about vibrations. Council Member Werner
reiterated his suggestion that the University have a single party who's sole
responsibility was to address environmental concerns at the power plant. Mr. Swecker said this was a good
suggestion. He added that University
officials would further explore this possibility.
Council Member Werner
requested an overview of the coal pile storage situation. Mr. Swecker stated that the Appearance
Commission had approved the use of grass covering over the pile, rather than a
structure. Council Member Werner asked
whether the Appearance Commission had authority to make this modification. Mr. Waldon said no. Mr. Swecker noted that the transfer of
non-emergency usage coal occurred between two storage silos and the existing
boiler plant. Council Member Werner
inquired why the emergency coal storage pile could not be covered
expeditiously, since it appeared that fugitive coal dust was blowing down wind
on to neighborhood residences. Mr.
Swecker said it was possible to cover the coal storage pile.
Mr. Grisham noted
that the University had recently sprayed the coal storage pile as a short-term
solution to the problem. He noted that
the substance had been recommended by the University's chemical consultant as a
short-term solution to coal dust problems.
Council Member Werner said the solution appeared only partially
successful. Mr. Grisham responded that
the coal pile was used for emergency purposes and therefore had not been turfed
over. Council Member Werner inquired
about operational differences between the old and new power plant
facilities. Mr. Grisham responded that
the coal pile for the new facility was about sixty percent larger. He also noted that the Cameron Glen
neighborhood had not existed when the initial power plant had been constructed.
Council Member Werner
inquired whether it was correct that it would not be possible to grass over the
emergency coal storage pile until the old power plant was shut down. Mr. Grisham said this was correct. Council Member Werner inquired how long it
would be before the existing power plant would be closed. Mr. Grisham estimated that the plant would
be closing by the end of March, 1992.
Council Member Werner inquired what other types of dust and particulates
might be falling in the Cameron Glen area.
Mr. Grisham said his personal speculation was that the materials were
fugitive coal dust and construction dust.
Council Member Werner inquired when more specific information on this
matter would be available. Mr. Grisham
said about one week.
Council Member Rimer
asked whether it was possible that fugitive coal dust was blowing through from
fan areas. Mr. Grisham said no, noting
that several visible emission tests had established that this was not a
problem. Council Member Rimer asked
whether the coal pile was operated with an underfeed. Mr. Grisham said no, noting that a front-end loader was
utilized. Council Member Rimer inquired
whether the lacquer would stop all dust fallout. Mr. Grisham said the primary problem was one of timing, with
construction vehicles on the site causing pulverization of some coal on the
site. Council Member Rimer inquired
whether the emergency coal pile would likely remain undistrubed. Mr. Grisham said this was correct. Council Member Rimer noted that attempts had
been made to relieve the potential for fugitive dust. He inquired about the ash-loading situation. Mr. Grisham responded that ash problems were
not occurring at the power plant facility.
He added that difficulties were being encountered in cooling the
dust.
Council Member Rimer
said Council Member Werner's idea about having an environmental engineer on
site was an excellent one. Council
Member Andresen emphasized the need to resolve environmental concerns. Council Member Andresen inquired whether the
plant would be quieter when in full operation.
Mr. Swecker said that many of the new facilities would be inside or
enclosed. He said the plant had been
designed to reduce noise as much as possible.
Council Member Andresen said she sincerely hoped this was the case. Council Member Andresen said it was very
much in the University's interest to satisfactorily resolve the problem. Mr. Swecker said it was the University's
desire to have the situation worked out properly.
Council Member
Andresen asked whether any conditions in the special use permit addressed noise
and vibration. Mr. Horton responded
that the Town's noise ordinance was broad enough to cover compliance
matters. He added that no provisions
were broad enough to handle vibration concerns. Council Member Andresen inquired about the University's efforts
to deal with fly ash disposal.
Mr.Swecker responded that Herb Paul, the Operations Manager at the
University Physical Plant, was in contact with a firm that purchased fly ash
for reuse.
Council Member Brown
asked whether the new plant would comply with the Town's noise ordinance. Mr. Swecker responded that the University
would endeavor to comply with the ordinance.
He added that persons with noise concerns had contacted Mr. Grisham or
one of the members of his staff. Mr.
Grisham said it was difficult to ascertain what would occur in the long term
concerning noise levels at the power plant.
He said the University was vigorously pursuing concerns about noise and
vibrations in the power plant area.
Council Member Brown inquired stipulation number eight of the special
use permit required a structure for coal storage. Mr. Grisham responded that the project design had shown outside
coal storage piles. He added that the
community did not want large coal storage silos in the neighborhood.
Council Member Brown
asked what was being sprayed on the coal piles, how it might effect the
neighborhood, and whether the sprayed product could have adverse impacts on
neighborhood residents. Mr. Grisham
said he was sure of the trade name of the product, but it would not have any
adverse impact on area residents. Mr.
Grisham said he could furnish detailed information on the lacquer-type
product. Council Member Brown requested
clarification of stipulation number three of the power plant's special use
permit, concerning the provision of detention basins. Mr. Grisham said the basins were a detailed review item required
for the project's zoning compliance permit.
Mr. Horton said Town staff had reviewed the design, and inspected the
construction of, the detention basins.
Council Member Brown inquired about the State's involvement with
detention basins. Mr. Horton said there
was none, adding that Town staff responded to situations on an
exception/complaint basis. Mr. Grisham
said the ponds were designed far in excess of necessary capacity, with the
ponds never being more than one-quarter full.
Council Member Brown
inquired about alternative methods for disposal of fly ash. Mr. Grisham said a lengthy report had been
submitted in 1987 outlining various possibilities for fly ash disposal. He noted that some states do not allow fly
ash to be used in concrete or concrete blocks.
Mr. Grisham said the University had contacted some firms concerning the
disposal of fly ash. Jim Mergner said
that Reuse Technologies had contracted with the University for fly ash. Mr. Mergner said the firm developed the use
of ash in products other than structural fill.
Mr. Mergner said the $21 per ton cost of disposing of fly ash was a
disincentive to its continued production.
Mr. Mergner noted that efforts to market and develop fly ash derived
products were continuing.
Council Member Werner
noted that efforts to reuse power plant ash in concrete for buildings had been
unsuccessful to date. Council Member
Brown inquired about toxicity concerns.
Council Member Werner said toxicity had not been a problem.
Council Member
Preston inquired why the Appearance Commission had not required a type c buffer
for the power plant. Mr. Swecker
responded that the type c buffering requirement had been reduced by the
Appearance Commission. Council Member
Andresen said the Appearance Commission had spent a lot of time discussing
landscaping aspects of the project, but did not remember the Commission
departing from the type c buffering requirement. Mr. Horton said the staff could provide additional information on
this matter.
Council Member
Preston inquired what recourse the Town had if concerns of neighbors were not
adequately addressed. Mr. Horton said
if the University could meet the terms of the special use permit, it could
request a modification from the Council or the Town could initiate legal
proceedings to remedy the situation.
Mr. Karpinos said this was correct.
Council Member
Preston inquired about the proposed time frame for completion of tests at the
power plant. Mr. Grisham stated that
testing would likely be completed by December 15th. Council Member Preston asked whether the University had been
fined for non-compliance with environmental regulations. Mr. Mergner said the University had entered
into a special order by consent with the Division of Environmental Management,
reducing the requirement for level of treatment. He said that five violations at a fine of $1,000 each had been
reported to the Division of Environmental Management.
Council Member
Wilkerson said he was particularly concerned about physiological damage to area
residents. He expressed hope that
remedies to existing problems would be initiated as soon as possible. Council Member Wilkerson expressed
appreciation to the University for its efforts to initiate problem-solving
efforts. He also noted the need to
clear up miscommunications or non-communication between Town and University
officials.
Council Member Rimer
inquired a benchmark decibel level had been established for the existing
University power plant. Mr. Swecker
said he was not sure that there was one.
Mr. Grisham added that attempts had been made on several occasions to
establish such a benchmark. He said the
range was quite broad. Mr. Grisham said
testing at the plant had generated a significant amount of noise. Council Member Rimer noted that the new
plant had different harmonics than the older facility. He suggested that University officials
attempt to simulate noises as best as possible. Mr. Swecker said this was an excellent idea.
Douglas McFadden, 408
Westwood Drive, said no one in the neighborhood from the existing power plant,
with the exception of coal shipments being made to the facility. Mr. McFadden expressed concern that the new
plant was louder than the existing one.
He noted that University officials had made a number of promises over the
summer concerning relocation of student housing at Odum Village. Mr. McFadden also said that light pollution
was a problem for neighborhood residents.
He suggested that film needed to be applied to glass at the power plant,
in addition to staff turning on and off lights at the facility.
Council Member
Andresen inquired whether the Council wished to adopt the language suggested by
Dr. Morell. Council Member Brown
suggested that the Council add a provision to the resolution requesting a
monthly report on the power plant to the Council.
COUNCIL MEMBER
ANDRESEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 3, AS
REVISED.
Council Member Brown
suggested inserting the word "quiet" rather than "quieter"
in the resolution. Council Member
Werner said it was not possible to assure no impact by the new facility. He also emphasized the importance of
utilizing enforceable wording. Council
Member Werner said that terminology was very important for enforcability
purposes.
THE MOTION WAS PLACED
ON THE FLOOR AND ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
A RESOLUTION
REQUESTING THE UNIVERSITY TO WORK WITH THE TOWN AND THE NEIGHBORS OF THE POWER
PLANT TO ADDRESS THE PROBLEMS OF NOISE FUGITIVE PARTICULATE MATTER, APPEARANCE,
HEALTH AND SAFETY AND THE STIPULATIONS OF THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT RAISED BY THE
CONSTRUCTION AND CONTINUED OPERATION OF THE UNIVERSITY POWER PLANT
(91-10-28/R-3)
WHEREAS, the
University of North Carolina applied for, and the Town of Chapel Hill granted,
in June, 1986, a Special Use Permit for the use and development of a power
plant on the south side of Cameron Avenue; and
WHEREAS, it was
recognized that the power plant was a public necessity and that locating it on
Cameron Avenue was a necessity; and
WHEREAS, it was
recognized that the presence of a power plant in a residential neighborhood
would put certain strains on the
neighborhood that would call for extraordinary measures to be taken by
the University; and
WHEREAS, the Town and
the University have strived both during consideration of issuing the Special
Use Permit and subsequently to formulate and carry out plans for the power
plant that would insure that it have the least possible adverse impact on the
adjoining neighborhoods and the Town as whole; and
WHEREAS, the Power
Plant Neighbors presented a petition to the Town Council on October 10, 1991,
requesting the Town Council to assist in implementing "solutions to the
immediate problems and to initiate a process to ensure a satisfactory end
result," and
WHEREAS, it is
desirable that the University not only comply with the provisions of the
Special Use Permit, but also consider the general needs and welfare of its
residential neighbors;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council requests
the University:
to
schedule regular meetings with neighbors of the plant during its construction
and testing to discuss problems of noise, dust, and lighting; and
to take
immediate action to mitigate the problems of noise, fugitive particulate matter
and light generated by the construction or operation of the power plant; and
to agree to meet regularly with
representatives of the Town to monitor
site conditions until the construction phase is complete and all conditions of the Special Use Permit have been complied with fully.
BE IT FURTHER
RESOLVED that the Town Manager shall provide a monthly status report on the
University Power Plant to the Mayor and Town Council.
This the 28th day of
October, 1991.
Item 7 Tandler Homeownership
Assistant Town
Manager Florentine Miller said several Tandler homeowners were in attendance
this evening. She briefly reviewed the
staff's memorandum to the Council. Ms.
Miller said that Tandler homeowners were requesting that the Council not
implement a policy of early second mortgage repayment. She also noted that one of the intents of
the Tandler programs was to have owner-occupied homes.
Council Member
Andresen inquired whether it was correct that if the Town did not use an option
to buy a house, it would be sold at market value. Ms. Miller said this was correct. Council Member Andresen asked if the homes could be offered at a
lower rate to someone else. Ms. Miller
said this was correct. She noted that
the staff's recommendation was to allow homeowners to use the free market for
resale of their homes.
Maureen Detweiler
said that Tandler homeowners appreciated the opportunity to be homeowners. She stated that homeowners were particularly
concerned about the owner occupancy provision related to having one year to sell
their homes due to changing market conditions.
Mayor Howes noted that Tandler homeowners were in no different position
than conventional homeowners in this regard.
Ms. Detweiler said the primary difference was the proposed limitation of
one year. She requested that the
Council enact a different provision on this point. Ms. Detweiler also said homeowners were concerned about simple
versus compound interest on second mortgages.
She said that homeowners wanted the Town to recapture its investment,
but requested that simple interest be used.
Ms. Detweiler said the Town more than double its investment under this
scenario. Ms. Detweiler noted that
homeowners were living in a subsidized neighborhood. She suggested that steps needed to be taken to alter this perception. Mayor Howes inquired whether Ms. Detweiler
had any specific suggestions in this regard.
Ms. Detweiler said she had no suggestions this evening.
Theo Camwell said she
appreciated the opportunity to own a home in Tandler. Ms. Camwell said she had been told a variety of things by
Capricorn-Isler concerning the terms of sale for Tandler homes. She requested that the Council be sensitive
to the concerns of Tandler homeowners.
Mayor Howes stated that from its inception, the Tandler program tried to
open up opportunities for homeownership.
He expressed regret about the stigma of the home subsidy situation. Council Member Rimer stated that some of his
students had evaluated the Tandler program compared to simple projects of this
type. He stated that from the student's
standpoint, there had been no stigma of subsidized housing. He suggested that Tandler residents
encourage the local media to produce stories about the unique character of
their neighborhood.
Randolph Russell said
he was heartened by the staff's recommendations with the exception of the
matter of owner-occupancy. Mr. Russell
said in his signed purchase agreement he did not waive the right to rent his
property. He said that owner occupany
requirements had not been outlined in the Tandler purchase agreements. Mr. Russell expressed concern that period of
one year had been somewhat arbitrarily selected. He requested that the provision for owner-occupancy be revised.
Allan Stutts
expressed concern about the matter of second mortgage simple interest. Mr. Stutts said that Tandler officials had
indicated that simple interest would be employed.
Council Member
Andresen inquired whether banks traditionally employed simple or compound
interest. Mr. Horton responded that
banks traditionally employed compound interest. Council Member Andresen said there appeared to be general
agreement on the matter of shared appreciation. She stressed the need for homeowners to get fair benefit from the
homeownership program. Council Member
Andresen said that doing away with shared appreciation was a reasonable course
of action. Council Member Wilkerson
said he had a problem with compound interest, feeling that it was an undue
burden to homeowners. Council Member
Andresen inquired about the difference to the Town. Mr. Horton said the only difference would be the rate of return
to the Town. Council Member Wilkerson
said the Town was not involved in the program to make money. Mr. Horton said he would not argue that
receiving a return was a necessity to the Town. Council Member Andresen said the intent of the program was to get
some return for the Town. Council Member
Wilkerson said the Town receiving a return was unjust in light of the total
program explanation to purchasers.
COUNCIL MEMBER
HERZENBERG MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PRESTON, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 4.
Ms. Miller noted that
a $25,000 second mortgage having an interest rate of six percent, would differ
by about $1,000 per year, depending upon whether simple or compound interest
was employed. Mayor Howes said it
appeared to be the consensus of the Council that simple rather than compound
interest should be used. Council Member
Brown suggested making the occupancy provision more flexible. Mayor Howes noted that this provision noted
the Town's right only, providing a little more flexibility.
RESOLUTION 4, AS
REVISED, WAS PLACED ON THE FLOOR AND ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
A RESOLUTION
AUTHORIZING THE MANAGER TO MAKE CHANGES TO THE TANDLER HOMEOWNERSHIP PROGRAM
(91-10-28/R-4)
WHEREAS, the Council
adopted the basic program concepts for the Tandler Program by Resolution
87-3-23/R-9 on March 23, 1987 and Resolution 88-5-9/R-9 on May 9, 1988; and
WHEREAS, the Council
considers it appropriate to make adjustments to the program to respond to the
concerns of the owners of Tandler homes, and to address the evaluation provided
by Dr. Michael Stegman and Dr. Michael Luger in the 1990 report, "An
Evaluation of Chapel Hill's Affordable Homeowner Demonstration Program;"
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED that the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill hereby modifies the
Tandler Homeownership Program, and restates Resolutions 87-3-23/R-9 and
88-5-9/R-9 as follows in its entirety:
Basic Eligibility
Criteria
. Income: Sell homes to buyers with incomes less than
or equal to 80% of median area income to the greatest extent feasible; sell
homes to buyers with incomes between 81% and 100% of median only as a last
resort, after appropriate HUD review.
. Requirement
to Live or Work in Chapel Hill: For
one year preceding date of application.
. Bedroom
Size: According to the following
chart:
No. of Persons
# of Bedrooms Minimum Maximum
2 1 4
3 2 7
. Financial
Requirements:
a. maximum 28% of gross income for principal,
interest, taxes, insurance.
b. maximum
36% debt-to-income ratio.
c. Asset
limitation.
d. Savings;
and credit history.
e. Lender criteria to determine who is able to
purchase homes.
Preference
Categories
. Families
who are first-time homebuyers, and who live or work in Chapel Hill.
. Other families who live or work in Chapel
Hill.
. Other households who live or work in Chapel
Hill.
Recapture
Provisions
. The
second mortgage from the Town accrues 6% annual simple interest, due upon sale.
. The
owner shall be required to pay the Town the 6% interest on the second mortgage
to the extent that the fair market value of the house exceeds the original
sales price.
- OR -
Recapture
Provisions (for participants in
North Carolina Housing Finance Mortgage Assistance Program)
. The
third mortgage from the Town accrues 6% annual simple interest, due upon sale.
. The
owner shall be required to pay the Town the 6% interest on the third mortgage
to the extent that the fair market value of the house exceeds the original
sales price, plus the amount owed to the North Carolina Housing Finance Agency.
. This
recapture provision only applies to property owners participating in the North
Carolina Housing Finance Mortgage Assistance Program.
Resale Provisions
. The
Town has a right-of-first-refusal to buy back the house or to find another
qualified purchaser, with market value setting the purchase price. The Town intends to exercise the
right-of-first-refusal only in limited situations. The objective is not to retain all the houses for future
occupancy by low-income families. The
Town could use the right-of-first-refusal to assist future low-income buyers if
it chose, in cases of forced sales by lenders due to owner's default, or to
prevent potential abuses of the program.
. The
Town has the right to approve refinancing of the first mortgage.
Repayment
Provisions
. The
Town may allow early repayment of the Town's second mortgage, with 6% annual
simple interest calculated on the declining balance of principal.
Occupancy
Provisions
. Require
buyers to be owner-occupants of the homes.
. Homes could
be rented by the owners to tenants for up to one year; after that period, the
Town has the right to have the second mortgage due and payable to the Town.
BE IT FURTHER
RESOLVED that the Council authorizes the Manager to make the necessary program
adjustments to the Tandler Administrative Manual and distribute the Manual to
purchasers of Tandler homes, and to negotiate and execute any necessary changes
in the legal documents between the Town and the homeowners.
This the 28th day of
October, 1991.
Item 8 Report by Historic District Commission
Historic District
Commission Chair Mark Perry said the Commission had handled forty-one
certificate of appropriateness applications during fiscal year 1990-1991. He briefly reviewed the Commission's
activities, noting that preservation of historic structures increased the value
of properties in historic districts, increasing the Town's tax base. Mr. Perry said that historic districts also
served as a source of pride for area residents. Mr. Perry said he was especially proud of the Commission's survey
of historic districts throughout Orange County.
Council Member
Andresen inquired whether the Historic District Commission was recommending the
rewriting of any guidelines. Mr. Perry
said that little substantive change was recommended. He also noted that the Commission had spent a good deal of time
discussing artificial siding usage in historic districts. Council Member Andresen asked whether
revisions to guidelines were needed.
Mr. Perry said the Commission needed to address the issue of how to
handle applications for new buildings in historic districts. Mr. Perry said he wanted to see more public
attention given to the work of the Historic District Commission, to further the
cause of preservation. Council Member
Andresen asked whether the Commission wished to consider the simplification of
guidelines. Mr. Perry said a new
simplified application would be considered by the Commission in the near
future. Council Member Preston thanked
Mr. Perry for his succinct report.
Council Member Preston said she was pleased with the Town's recently
attained certified local government status.
She said the Commission was doing a very good job. Mr. Perry thanked the
Council for its support. He also
expressed appreciation for the fine staff work of Planner Beverly Kawalec.
Item 9 Presentation of Audit Report
_________________
said Deloitte and Touche had issued its annual audit report and management
letter to the Mayor and Council.
Mr. __________________ said the
audit found no material weaknesses in the Town's financial practices. He briefly reviewed the contents of the
audit report. Mr. ________________ said
the auditor's opinion was unqualified.
He also stated that the Town continued to be in good financial condition. Mr. _________________ said the best gauge of
condition of the Town was undesignated balance. He noted that the Town's undesignated balance was in the range of
6% to 9.7%, while the State of North Carolina recommended a range of 8% to
10%. Mr. ________________ said total
equity in the General Fund had remained fairly stable. Mr. ______________ stated that he would be
happy to respond to any questions by the Council.
Council Member Werner
inquired whether one of the audits findings concerning pay rates involved the
payment of incorrect rates or forms not signed by the Town's Personnel
Director. Mr. _____________ said the
matter concerned lack of signatures, rather than incorrect pay rates. Council Member Andresen inquired whether Mr.
______________ had any comments on ehterprise funds such as the Transportation
Fund. Mr. _________________ said no,
noting that the only previous problem in the Transportation Fund had involved
tying down inventories.
COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER
MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PRESTON, TO RECEIVE THE AUDIT REPORT AND
REFER IT TO THE TOWN MANAGER. THE
MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
Item 10 Mini-Park Design at Fire Station #3
Parks and Recreation
Director Mike Loveman briefly reviewed the proposed design. He said the Council had approved the
proposed park as part of the Town's Comprehensive Plan at its October
14th meeting. Mr. Loveman reviewed key
access points to the point. He stated
that the park would cost approximately $2,800 for materials. Mr. Loveman noted that the work could be
completed by Parks and Recreation and Public Works staff. Council Member Rimer noted that credit for
the design should be given to Planning Director Roger Waldon. Council Member Rimer said he was not
enamored with the idea of paving with concrete. He requested that the staff investigate alternate paving
materials such as paver blocks. Council
Member Andresen said a non-concrete surface would be more inviting to park
users.
COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER
MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 5.
Council Member
Preston requested that the staff investigate the possibility of using park
benches made out of recycled materials.
Mr. Loveman said the staff would follow up on this request.
THE MOTION WAS PLACED
ON THE FLOOR AND ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
A RESOLUTION
APPROVING A DESIGN PLAN AND CONSTRUCTION/FUNDING SCHEDULE FOR A MINI-PARK AT
FIRE STATION #3 (91-10-28/R-5)
WHEREAS, a mini-park
has been included in the study of the East Franklin Street Corridor, and this
study is part of the Town's Comprehensive Plan, and;
WHEREAS, the
Appearance Commission and the Parks and Recreation Commission have approved a
design plan for the park which would enhance pedestrian access and provide an
attractive seating area, and;
WHEREAS, discussion
of funding for the park can be included in the budget process for FY 1992-93;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby
approves the recommended design plan for a mini-park at Fire Station #3, and
resolves that funding for the project will be considered in the budget
discussions for FY 1992-93.
This the 28th day of
October, 1991.
Item 11 Cable
Television
COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER
MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER RIMER, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 6.
Council Member
Wilkerson distributed an article from The Wall Street Journal to the
Council, noting that the Federal Communications Commission was considering
allowing telephone companies to enter into the cable television market. He inquired whether the Council wanted to
write a letter of support concerning this proposal. Council Member Wilkerson said he would provide additional
information and make suggestions on the matter in the future.
RESOLUTION 6 WAS
PLACED ON THE FLOOR AND ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY
(8-0).
A RESOLUTION CALLING
A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE CITIZENS' COMMENTS REGARDING THE PERFORMANCE OF
CAROLINA CABLE AND REGARDING THE COMMUNITY'S CABLE-RELATED NEEDS (91-10-28/R-6)
BE IT RESOLVED by the
Town Council of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby calls a public hearing for
7:30 pm on Monday, February 3, 1992 in the Council Chamber at Town Hall, 306
North Columbia Street, to receive comments from citizens of the Town of Chapel
Hill regarding the performance of Prime Cable Income Partners, LP, doing
business in the Town of Chapel Hill as Carolina Cable; and to receive citizens'
comments regarding the community's cable-related needs.
This the 28th day of
October, 1991.
COUNCIL MEMBER
WILKERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION
7. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY
(8-0).
A RESOLUTION REGARDING
ESTABLISHMENT OF A CHAPEL HILL CABLE TELEVISION ADVISORY COMMITTEE
(91-10-28/R-7)
BE IT RESOLVED by the
Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby authorizes the
Manager to seek applications for appointment to a Cable Television Advisory
Committee to be appointed by the Council.
The Committee shall
be responsible for making recommendations to the Council to identify the future
cable-related needs and interests of the community, and reviewing the
performance of cable operators franchised by the Town in accord with procedures
and standards in the Town Code, the franchises issued by the Town and federal
law.
The Committee shall
include one or more members of the Council and 7 to 10 other citizens appointed
by the Council.
The Committee members
shall have initial terms of three years, and may be reappointed in accord with
the Council's Procedures. The Council's
intent is that the Committee would complete its work by the end of 1995.
This the 28th day of
October, 1991.
Item 12 Quarterly Reports
There were no reports
from Council liaisons.
Council Member Rimer
noted that the average response time for fire calls had increased by
thirty-five percent. Mr. Horton said
this figure was attributable to more precise measurement of time. He said new benchmarks for response time
would be established during the current fiscal year.
There were no
additional reports or questions.
Item 13 Transportation Board Appointment
Ruby Seinrich was
appointed to the Transportation Board.
The vote tally was as follows:
Ruby Seinrich 5 Votes (
)
Stephen Manton 2 Votes ( )
Belinda Wells 1 Vote ( )
Original voting
ballots are on file in the Town Clerk's Office.
Item 14 Pay and
Classification Amendment
Mayor Howes said the
Mayor and Council were generally pleased with the performance of the Manager
and Attorney. He said the Council was
recommending that the Manager's salary be increased from $75,000 to $79,000 and
the Attorney's salary be increased from $70,000 to $73,000.
Helen Urquhart urged the
Council not to adopt the proposed salary increases and accompanying
benefits. She stated that raises had
been granted last year and did not need to be annual events.
Bill Thorpe said the
Town was growing. He said the Council
undertook several critical actions including the annual budget. Mr. Thorpe said the Council appointed two
positions and set salaries for them. He
urged the Council to restrain itself fiscally.
Mickey Ewell said he
was concerned about the direction the Town was taking. Mr. Ewell said it was difficult to fire
someone and equally difficult to not grant a pay increase to someone who was
doing a good job. He stated that the
merit raise process needed to be reevaluated.
Mr. Ewell said taxpayers were being asked to foot the bill for the
Manager's and Attorney's salary increases.
Council Member
Wilkerson said he would vote against the proposed salary increases. Council Member Wilkerson said he already
spoken to the Manager and Attorney about his intentions. Council Member Wilkerson said his vote was
not a reflection on the performance of the Manager or Attorney. He noted that he was pleased with the
performance of both individuals.
COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER
MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PRESTON, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 1. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED BY A VOTE OF 7-1,
WITH COUNCIL MEMBER WILKERSON VOTING NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
THE POSITION CLASSIFICATION AND PAY PLAN (91-10-28/O-1)
BE IT ORDAINED by the
Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby amends the
"Ordinance Establishing a Position Classification and Pay Plan and
Longevity Plan for Employees of the Town of Chapel Hill and Bonds of Officials
Beginning July 1, 1991 (91-5-28/O-4) as follows:
Section IV, Part B,
DELETE the lines:
No. Salary
Town Manager 1 75,000
Town Attorney 1 70,000
And ADD the lines:
Town Manager 1 79,000
Town Attorney 1 73,000
This the 28th day of
October, 1991.
Item 15 Consent Agenda
Council Member Brown
requested that item e be removed from the consent agenda.
COUNCIL MEMBER
HERZENBERG MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PRESTON, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 9,
EXCEPTING ITEM E. THE MOTION WAS
ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
A RESOLUTION
APPROVING VARIOUS RESOLUTIONS AND AN ORDINANCE (91-10-28/R-9)
BE IT RESOLVED by the
Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby adopts the
resolutions and ordinance as submitted by the Town Manager in regard to the
following:
a.Minutes
of October 14, 1991.
b.Calling
public hearing on commercial recreation use development ordinance text
amendment (R-10).
c.A
resolution calling a public hearing on the small area planning process (R-11).
d.A
resolution assuming cable television rate modification authority regulation to
the extent permitted by law (biennial resolution pursuant to Town Code) (R-12).
f.Release
of funds to Triangle J Council of Governments (R-14).
g.Acceptance
of drug elimination grant funds (R-15).
This the 28th day of
October, 1991.
A RESOLUTION CALLING
A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AMENDING SECTIONS OF THE DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE
REGULATING COMMERCIAL RECREATIONAL FACILITIES (91-10-28/R-10)
BE IT RESOLVED by the
Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council calls a Public Hearing to
consider proposed changes to Articles 2, 3, 12, and 18 of the Chapel Hill
Development Ordinance that regulate Commercial Recreational Facilities.
BE IT FURTHER
RESOLVED that the Hearing be scheduled for Tuesday, January 21, 1992 at 7:30 pm
in the Chapel Hill Town Hall Council Chamber.
This the 28th day of
October, 1991.
A RESOLUTION
EXPRESSING APPRECIATION TO THE SMALL AREA PLAN WORK GROUP AND RECEIVING THEIR
RECOMMENDED SMALL AREA PLAN FOR THE SOUTHERN AREA, AND CALLING A PUBLIC HEARING
ON THE RECOMMENDED PLAN FOR JANUARY 21, 1992 AND REFERRING THE RECOMMENDED PLAN
TO VARIOUS ADVISORY BOARDS (91-10-28/R-11)
WHEREAS, the Small
Area Plan Work Group has worked diligently since December, 1990, to produce a
recommended Small Area Plan for the Southern Area; and
WHEREAS, the Small
Area Plan Work Group has spent many hours listening to interested citizens and
discussing with each other many diverse ideas on how the Southern Area should
be protected and developed; and
WHEREAS, the Small
Area Plan Work Group has produced a recommended Plan for the Council's
consideration; and
WHEREAS, the Town
Council wants to hear the views of all interested citizens and advisory board
members on this Plan;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council sincerely
thanks the members of the Work Group for all the time and thought and effort
and energy that they have put into producing the recommended Plan.
BE IT FURTHER
RESOLVED that the Council receives the recommended Plan for further
consideration.
BE IT FURTHER
RESOLVED that the Council calls a public hearing on the recommended Small Area
Plan for the Southern Area for January 21, 1992, and refers the recommended
Plan to the Transportation Board, the Parks and Recreation Commission, the
Greenways Commission and the Human Services Advisory Commission for their
recommendations.
This the 28th day of
October, 1991.
A RESOLUTION ASSUMING
CABLE TELEVISION RATE MODIFICATION AUTHORITY FOR TWO YEARS TO THE EXTENT
PERMITTED BY LAW (91-10-28/R-12)
WHEREAS, Section
10-85 of the Town Code provides that the Town Council is to decide every two
years whether to assume rate modification authority pursuant to the Town's
ordinance in Chapter 10 of the Town Code on cable television franchises;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council assumes, to
the extent permitted by the law, cable television rate modification authority
pursuant to the Town Code from the effective date of this resolution until the
effective date of a resolution to be adopted by the Council between September 1
and November 30, 1993 concerning rate modification authority.
This the 28th day of
October, 1991.
A RESOLUTION
AUTHORIZING RELEASE OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FUNDS (91-10-28/R-14)
WHEREAS, in North
Carolina the Lead Regional Organizations, as voluntary organizations serving
municipal and county governments, have established productive working
relationships with the cities and counties across the State; and
WHEREAS, many
counties and cities continue to need assistance in pursuing economic and
community development opportunities, but federal assistance in the form of
intergovernmental revenues has been severely curtailed in recent years; and
WHEREAS, the 1991
General Assembly has again recognized this need through the appropriation of
$864,270 to help the Lead Regional Organizations assist local governments with
grant applications, economic development, community development, and to support
local industrial development and other activities as deemed appropriate by
their local governments; and
WHEREAS, these funds
are not intended to be used for payment of members' dues or assessments to a
Lead Regional Organization or to support funds appropriated by the member
governments; and
WHEREAS, in the event
that a request is not made by a unit of government for release of these funds
to our Regional Council, the available funds will revert to the State's General
Funds; and
WHEREAS in Region J
funds in the amount of $48,015 will be used to carry out the economic
development plan approved by the COG Board of Delegates and especially to
improve the economy of the counties and towns of the Region by strengthening
ties to and consequently benefits of the Research Triangle Park;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Town requests the
release of its $2,642.47 share of these funds to the Triangle J Council of
Governments at the earliest possible time in accordance with the provisions of
Chapter 689, House Bill 83, Section 19 of the 1991 Session Laws.
This the 28th day of
October, 1991.
____________________________________
(Signature)
Mayor
SEAL
____________________________________
(Signature)
Witness
A RESOLUTION
AUTHORIZING THE ACCEPTANCE OF A PUBLIC HOUSING DRUG ELIMINATION PROGRAM GRANT
FROM THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (91-10-28/R-15)
WHEREAS, the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has made funds available to
public housing agencies to assist in the elimination of drug-related crime from
their communities; and
WHEREAS, it is in the
interest of the Town of Chapel Hill to initiate drug prevention, intervention
and referral to treatment programs for its residents of public housing; and
WHEREAS, the
Department of Housing and Community Development's Drug Elimination Plan was
approved by HUD in the amount of $136,000;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby
authorizes the Manager to accept the Drug Elimination Plan grant from the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development and to make all necessary
assurances.
This is the 28th day
of October, 1991.
Council Member Brown
requested a clarification concerning reappropriation of $136,000 for capital
projects. Mr. Baker said he did not
have detail on the entire amount. He
noted that approximately $400,000 per year was allocated for small capital
improvement projects. He noted that
timing of projects sometimes necessitated carry over into subsequent fiscal
years. Council Member Preston said some
of these funds could be used for sidewalks.
COUNCIL MEMBER
PRESTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER RIMER, TO ADOPT CONSENT AGENDA ITEM
E. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY
(8-0).
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND
"THE ORDINANCE CONCERNING APPROPRIATIONS AND THE RAISING OF REVENUE FOR
THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JULY 1, 1991" (91-10-28/O-2)
BE IT ORDAINED by the
Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Budget Ordinance entitled "An
Ordinance Concerning Appropriations and the Raising of Revenue for the Fiscal
Year Beginning July 1, 1991" as adopted on July 8, 1991 be and the same is
hereby amended as follows:
ARTICLE I
CURRENT REVISED
APPROPRIATIONS BUDGET INCREASE DECREASE BUDGET
GENERAL FUND
Mayor 64,384 822 65,206
Town Manager
Administration 481,714
1,528 483,242
Information Serv. 241,751 518 242,269
Personnel 387,837 2,895 390,732
Legal
129,911 462 130,373
Planning
634,153 358 634,511
Engineering 494,324 3,496 497,820
Housing & Comm.Dev. 123,997 5,250 129,247
Public Works
Administration 197,884 28 197,912
Construction 256,658 121 256,779
Streets 1,231,175
298,621 1,529,796
Internal Serv. 1,082,227 8,481 1,090,708
Sanitation 2,068,003 26,808 2,094,811
General Serv. 763,506
33,543 797,049
Police
Support Serv. 1,030,110
2,327 1,032,437
Detective
487,705 53 487,758
Fire
Suppression 1,398,565 56 1,398,621
Prevention
108,215 65 108,280
Parks & Recreation
Administration 268,605
20,079 288,684
Parks Maintenance 526,198 1,453 527,651
Library 946,122
4,905 951,027
Non-Departmental 2,732,697 10,639 2,743,336
TOTALS 15,655,741 422,508 16,078,249
CURRENT REVISED
APPROPRIATIONS BUDGET INCREASE DECREASE BUDGET
LANDFILL
FUND 2,598,500 255,885 2,854,385
PUBLIC
HOUSING FUND 842,210 29,902 872,112
PARKING FACILITIES
BOND FUND 276,000 70,000 346,000
TRANSPORTATION FUND
Administration 539,994
2,180 542,174
Maintenance
737,192 120 737,312
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
FUND 713,112 471,437 1,184,549
ARTICLE II
CURRENT REVISED
REVENUES BUDGET INCREASE DECREASE BUDGET
GENERAL FUND
FUND BALANCE 740,000
422,508 1,162,508
PUBLIC
HOUSING 842,210 29,902 872,112
LANDFILL FUND
FUND BALANCE 300,000
255,885 555,885
PARKING FACILITIES
BOND FUND
FUND BALANCE 0 70,000 70,000
TRANSPORTATION FUND
FUND BALANCE 210,000 2,300 212,300
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
FUND
FUND BALANCE 311,112 471,437 782,549
This the 28th day of
October, 1991.
No Executive Session
was required.
The meeting stood
adjourned at 11:41 p.m.