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

OF CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA, MONDAY, DECEMBER 7, 1992

Mayor Broun called the meeting to order. Council Members in attendance were Julie Andresen, Barbara Powell, Joyce Brown, Joe Capowski, Mark Chilton, Joe Herzenberg, Alan Rimer and Arthur S. Werner. Also in attendance were Town Manager Cal Horton, Assistant Town Managers Sonna Loewenthal and Florentine Miller, Planning Director Roger Waldon and Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos.

There were no ceremonies.

Item 2 Taxi Permit Appeal Hearing

James Stanford, representing Lacey Reeves, said current Town ordinances concerning the revocation of taxi driver's permits would have a devastating effect on Mr. Reeves' ability to earn a livelihood. Mr. Stanford said that the punishment recommended by the State of North Carolina would allow Mr. Reeves limited driving privileges. He stated that the Town's ordinance took away driving privileges for two years longer than the Department of Motor Vehicles. Mr. Stanford noted that Mr. Reeves was not on duty when he had received the driving the under influence (D.U.I.) conviction. He added that Mr. Reeves had satisfactorily completed an alcohol treatment program. Mr. Stanford requested that the Council consider allowing Mr. Reeves to operate his cab with limited driving privileges, as issued by the State of North Carolina.

Edward Daniels said he had known Mr. Reeves for over two years and had been consistently impressed with Mr. Reeves' conduct, professional courtesy, punctuality and manner. Mr. Daniels also said Mr. Reeves took pride in maintaining his van and equipment. He asked that the Council consider Mr. Reeves' excellent reputation in evaluating the situation.

John Schopper said that Mr. Reeves had provided consistently good and dependable service of his personal vehicle since 1975. Mr. Schopper stated that Mr. Reeves always finished the jobs he started. Mr. Schopper said he was surprised by the proposed penalty. He expressed hope that the Council would lessen Mr. Reeves' proposed punishment by the Town.

Mr. Horton said he had been careful to create a record summarizing the information at Mr. Reeves' hearing. Noting that he had revoked Mr. Reeves' taxi driving permit on November 20th, Mr. Horton stated that this was the only option available under the Town ordinance to the Town Manager.

Council Member Powell suggested that language be added to the ordinance concerning treatment and rehabilitation options other than a three-year license revocation. Council Member Powell said she would support the adoption of Resolution 1b. Noting that taking away a person's livelihood for three years was the present penalty, Council Member Werner said he favored an alternative to the current ordinance. Noting the importance of protecting the public, Council Member Andresen said in many ways she favored the Manager's recommendation. Council Member Andresen also said she thought the three-year revocation term might be shortened to recognize completion of alcohol treatment and rehabilitation programs. Council Member Chilton inquired about Mr. Reeves' status in the event that the ordinance were revised. Mr. Karpinos noted that the revocation would apply for the applicable period of time following conviction. Council Member Chilton inquired whether Mr. Reeves's case would be subject to new regulations if there were enacted. Mr. Karpinos said this was correct.

Noting that the State's alcohol awareness and related programs were among the leading programs in the nation, Council Member Rimer suggested that the Town consider amending its license revocation procedures to conform with those of the State of North Carolina. Council Member Rimer said since the matter involved a man's livelihood, he recommended modifying the Town's existing ordinance or giving Mr. Reeves the benefit of the doubt.

Council Member Capowski noted that approximately one-third of the traffic fatalities in the Town limits in the past twenty years had been alcohol-related. He added that taxicab passengers relied upon taxicab drivers for safety. Council Member Capowski said Mr. Reeves and other cab drivers had a special responsibility for public safety and that the Town Council members were sworn to uphold the safety of citizens. Council Member Capowski also stated that he was glad that Mr. Reeves had successfully completed an alcohol rehabilitation program. Council Member Capowski said he would support the Manager's recommendation and a revision of the revocation ordinance to a period less than three years. Mayor Broun said he wondered whether the existing ordinance was not presently set too rigidly. He suggested modifying the ordinance to a one-year revocation period with proof of completion of an alcohol rehabilitation program. Mayor Broun inquired whether it was possible to draft suggested revised standards in the ordinance. Mr. Horton said yes.

Council Member Andresen stated that a previous Council had been asked to consider a taxi franchise due to an excessive number of traffic tickets by the firm's drivers. Council Member noted that this did not relate to the matter under consideration. Mr. Karpinos noted that the Town's ordinance concerning traffic violation points had been revised approximately four years ago to coincide with State standards. Mayor Broun noted that there appeared to be support for shortening the revocation time period upon completion of an alcohol rehabilitation program.

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

COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 1B.

Council Member Capowski said he did not fully understand how Resolution 1b would related to Mr. Reeves' situation. Mr. Karpinos said under current Town regulations, Mr. Reeves would not be eligible for permit reinstatement until August 26, 1995. He stated that modifying the ordinance might lessen the applicable revocation period. Mayor Broun said the Manager's only option under current ordinances was to revoke Mr. Reeves permit for three years. He inquired when possible ordinance revisions could be presented to the Council. Mr. Karpinos said he anticipated presenting these options at the Council's first meeting in January, 1993. Council Member Andresen asked whether it was correct that the Council was not acting on Resolution 1a. Mr. Karpinos said this was correct. Council Member Andresen inquired about the status of Mr. Reeves in the interim. Mayor Broun said Mr. Reeves' permit would remain suspended. Council Member Andresen asked whether the Manager had taken action to revoke Mr. Reeves permit. Mayor Broun said this was correct.

THE MOTION TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 1B WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

A RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE TOWN ATTORNEY TO PREPARE OPTIONS FOR THE COUNCIL TO CONSIDER TO AMEND THE TOWN CODE TO MODIFY THE REGULATIONS WITH RESPECT TO REVOCATION OF TAXI DRIVERS' PERMITS FOR CONVICTION OF DRIVING WHILE IMPAIRED (92-12-7/R-1b)

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby directs the Town Attorney to prepare for Council's consideration, at its next regular meeting, options to consider to amend the Town Code to modify the present three-year revocation standard for taxi drivers' permits upon conviction of driving while impaired.

This the 7th day of December, 1992.

Item 3 Petitions

Wallace Kuralt, owner of the recently fire-damaged Intimate Bookshop on East Franklin Street, requested the Council's assistance in expediting approvals for reconstruction and new construction of the building. Mayor Broun asked whether it was possible to provide such assistance. Mr. Horton said he believed so, with the item possibly being heard at the Council's February public hearing and action being taken at the second business meeting in February. He also noted that it might be necessary to add an additional public hearing night for development applications in February or March. Council Member Werner said it would be in the community's best interest to move as quickly as possible on the request.

COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER RIMER, TO ACCELERATE THE PROCESS FOR CONSIDERATION OF THE INTIMATE BOOKSHOP'S SPECIAL USE PERMIT.

Council Member Andresen said she supported the proposed motion and Council Member Werner's point about getting the store back in order as soon as possible. Thanking Mr. Kuralt for his restoration actions to date, Council Member Herzenberg noted that the Intimate Bookshop was an important institution in the downtown area.

Council Member Powell said she favored moving with great speed to restore a very successful and vibrant downtown business.

THE MOTION TO ACCELERATE THE SUP REVIEW PROCESS WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Council Member Andresen said she was concerned about the possible joint planning implications resulting from the University Station development proposal. She noted that approximately one thousand units were planned on six hundred and fifty acres in an area north of the rural buffer. Council Member Andresen emphasized that maintaining the rural buffer concept had been key to the Town's planning policies. She noted that the Cooperative Planning Agreement between Orange County and the Town of Hillsborough permitted public water and sewer extensions into an area not designated as urban. She also added that the provision of water and sewer service could endanger that policy. Council Member Andresen stated that the extension of water and sewer service could lead to the approval of many University Station type developments, changing a substantially rural area into an urban one. She stated that most of the proposed open space for University Station consisted of golf courses, wetlands and paved areas. Council Member Andresen added that the Rural Study Character Committee agreement addressed the preservation of rural and residential open space. Council Member Andresen said she applauded efforts to manage growth through county-wide efforts.

Council Member Andresen showed an exhibit map encompassing the majority of Orange County, the rural buffer and water lines. She noted that the proposed University Station development overlapped current open space and rural Orange County. She stated that the University Station development proposal raised important questions about increasing pressure to develop the rural buffer to urban densities. Council Member Andresen noted that residents of the proposed development would be likely to use Chapel Hill services such as roads and the library. She also noted that the area could not presently be annexed by the Town of Hillsborough. Council Member Capowski inquired why this was not possible. Council Member Andresen said the proposed annexation area exceeded State population thresholds for satellite annexation. Council Member Capowski asked whether the area could be annexed by the City of Durham. Mr. Karpinos said this was not possible because Hillsborough was closer to the area in question.

Council Member Werner emphasized the importance of understanding the existing Joint Planning Agreement and getting any differences resolved. Council Member Werner said he was a little hesitant to ask Town staff to perform an analysis of the University Station development since the application was subject to County development regulations. He suggested that Town staff provide answers to questions about rural buffer concerns. Council Member Capowski noted that State utility law addressed the permissibility of limitations of taps on water and sewer service lines. Mr. Karpinos said this was correct, noting that service limitations must be for utility-related reasons. Council Member Capowski inquired whether it was correct that water and sewer lines at the northern edge of the rural buffer could be excluded. Mr. Karpinos said he would need to investigate this matter further.

Noting that Council Member Andresen had raised a number of important questions, Council Member Brown inquired about the implications of the proposed University Station development relative to the Town's property tax base. She inquired about the amount of work involved in staff's responses to the Council's questions. Mr. Horton said the staff could respond to rural buffer questions and related matters, but Orange County staff had the sole review and expertise authority relative to the University Station development. Council Member Brown inquired about the possibility of examining possible impacts of the University Station development on the Town's tax base. Mr. Horton said such an undertaking would take a fair amount of time and would require the staff to make a number of assumptions. Council Member Andresen said she did not see why staff could not prepare a short report on the implications of University Station possibly becoming an urbanized area. Council Member Werner said possible impacts on the Town involved very broad questions. Council Member Andresen said the Town needed to examine some impacts and worst cases. Council Member Andresen also said she did not want the Manager to spend a lot of time on this matter.

COUNCIL MEMBER ANDRESEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG, TO REFER THE MATTER TO THE MANAGER.

Council Member Werner inquired whether the staff's response could be phased to address rural buffer-related questions first, with other questions answered as follow-up, if necessary. Council Member Andresen said she would support this approach. Mayor Broun said the staff could respond to questions about the rural buffer, Joint Planning Agreement and the positions of other local governments. Council Member Werner said another portion was the potential for OWASA to provide water service to northern Orange County.

THE MOTIONER AND SECONDER AGREED TO THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT, WITH STAFF TO PROVIDE INFORMATION ON QUESTIONS ABOUT THE RURAL BUFFER FIRST; THE COUNCIL WOULD THEN RECONSIDER THE NEED FOR ACTION ON OTHER QUESTIONS REGARDING JOINT PLANNING AGREEMENT, POSITIONS OF OTHER LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND THE PROVISION OF WATER SERVICE TO NORTHERN ORANGE COUNTY. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Council Member Herzenberg said a broad coalition of clergy in Durham had requested that the City of Durham draft a handgun control ordinance based on an existing Town ordinance drafted by Town Attorney Karpinos.

Item 4 Boards and Commissions

Mayor Broun noted that the Greenways Commission recommended appointing all thirteen applicants to the Bolin Creek Greenway Advisory Committee. He inquired whether the Council had any concerns about such an approach, such as the fact that there were five applicants from the Hidden Hills neighborhood. Council Member Herzenberg noted that a larger portion of the proposed greenway trail was located in Hidden Hills than the two other neighborhoods. He also stated that two of the applicants from the Hidden Hills neighborhood wished to limit the extent of the trail.

Council Member Powell noted that one of the Hidden Hills neighborhood applicants had requested withdrawal of his application if there were sufficient applications from that neighborhood. Council Member Herzenberg noted that this applicant favored the greenway trail proposal. Council Member Capowski emphasized the importance of having all viewpoints represented on the advisory committee. Mayor Broun concurred. Council Member Chilton said although he appreciated the need for diversity of opinion, he wondered whether the three applicants who had expressed opposition to the proposed trail would contribute anything to the design of the trail. Council Member Powell said it was not appropriate to reject people because of what they believed about the proposed project. Council Member Werner said he did not expect a final cohesive recommendation from the committee. He stated that the committee would likely issue majority and minority reports, with the Council making the ultimate decision on the trail and its possible design.

Parks and Recreation Administrative Officer Bill Webster said the Greenways Commission had discussed the appointment recommendations and thought the benefits of appointing all thirteen applicants outweighed the negatives of having additional representatives from the Hidden Hills neighborhood. He noted that the committee's primary charge was to determine where and how the Bolin Creek greenway trail should be constructed. Council Member Andresen asked who would chair the committee. Mr. Webster said this had not been determined. Council Member Chilton said he stood by his earlier plan to select two representatives from the Hidden Hills neighborhood.

Council Member Capowski suggested appointing all applicants, with the exception of Mr. Barefoot, who had indicated that he wished to serve only if there were insufficient applicants. Council Member Herzenberg requested that Mr. Barefoot be appointed since he favored the proposed trail. Council Member Chilton concurred with the suggestion.

COUNCIL MEMBER CAPOWSKI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER POWELL, TO APPOINT ALL ELEVEN APPLICANTS TO THE COMMITTEE.

Council Member Andresen suggested that the Council consider a chair of the committee. Council Member Herzenberg said Anne Loeb was a good candidate to serve in this capacity. Council Member Brown said she concurred, but indicated that Ms. Loeb should be consulted as to her wishes before being appointed. Council Member Rimer said the committee could decide upon its own chair, with Ms. Loeb serving as convener of the first meeting.

THE MOTION TO APPOINT MICHAEL BAREFOOT, FRED CULBRETH, PAUL DEBRECEZENCY, SUSAN HARTLEY, ANNE LOEB, MICHAEL LOEHR, MARY PENDER, LEONARD ROGOFF, ANDREA ROHRBACHER AND LARRY SLIFKIN WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0), WITH BICYCLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVE APPOINTMENTS TO BE MADE IN THE FUTURE.

Mayor Broun noted that eight applicants were proposed for service on five committees of the Community Response to Violent Crime and Illegal Drug Abuse.

COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER ANDRESEN, TO APPOINT THE EIGHT APPLICANTS. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Item 5 North Forest Hills Park SUP

Parties wishing to testify who were not previously sworn were sworn by the Clerk. Planning Director Roger Waldon reviewed general concerns raised at the public hearing on the special use permit request. Mr. Waldon said the staff's earlier recommendation had been revised to provide electrical service at the proposed park for possible lighting hook-ups in the future.

Parks and Recreation Director Mike Loveman said the total estimated project cost was $162,000. Mr. Loveman also said the provision of a paved path at the park was important for bicyclists, pedestrians and handicapped persons and that the 10 foot width would allow safe passing. He also noted that the path would be used by maintenance vehicles from time to time. Mr. Loveman, acting in the capacity of applicant, said he accepted the proposed conditions of approval. Council Member Andresen asked whether there was any way to invite public comment on future lighting needs at the proposed park. Mr. Loveman said it would be possible for the Parks and Recreation Commission to hold public information meetings on future lighting needs. Mr. Horton said it was unlikely that the park would be lighted unless the lighting were requested by neighbors or vandalism became a problem. Council Member Rimer requested that staff investigate alternate paving techniques for the proposed pathway.

Mayor Broun requested that a letter signed by numerous North Forest Hills residents favoring restrooms and basketball courts be entered into the record of the hearing. The letter is on file in the Clerk's Office.

Harry Watson thanked the staff for responding to neighbor's lighting concerns. He urged neighborhood and Town residents to come together in the interest of all to support the proposed park.

Rebecca Battye suggested that the proposed facility would be more appropriately referred to as a Town, rather than neighborhood, park. Ms. Battye also said that area residents were concerned about the security of their homes. She also expressed hope that a ten-foot wide paved path would not be necessary. Ms. Battye suggested that sidewalks to the park be constructed.

Steven White requested that the Council consider adopting Resolution C. He noted that the required finding that the proposal would maintain or enhance area property values would be a public necessity.

Mary McManis noted that she had lived in the neighborhood for about six years. She requested that the park include a basketball court, swing sets and other types of playground equipment.

William Battye said he would be interested in hearing the Town's legal opinion concerning deed restrictions. He noted that previous legal opinions had set the tone for passive facilities and the provision of no lighting at the proposed park. Council Member Herzenberg requested that the Attorney respond to Mr. Battye's concerns. Mr. Karpinos said that deed restrictions required that development be approved by Security Building Company. He added that Security Building Company had approved the proposed development plan.

Council Member Capowski inquired why the proposed pathway needed to be composed of asphalt. Mr. Loveman said this was the only surface which could provide universal access to persons in wheelchairs and on crutches. Council Member Andresen inquired about the length of the proposed path. Project architect Dick Patton said the path was approximately two hundred feet long. Council Member Andresen said providing a two hundred foot long ten-foot wide path did not make sense. Mr. Loveman said the access path would be curved and would provide access for maintenance vehicles. Council Member Capowski inquired how the staff would respond to a Council request to use non-asphaltic paving materials. Mr. Loveman said alternate paving materials such as Chapel Hill gravel could be used.

Lee Pavao said the Parks and Recreation Commission had been investigating provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act relative to facility accessibility. He noted that the Commission did not like paved surfaces either. Council Member Rimer said provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act would probably require a four-foot wide path. He said that providing a wider path for maintenance vehicles was not a compelling reason to do so. Council Member Rimer suggested that the Council adopt a resolution with a stipulation that paving be minimized as much as possible.

COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER CAPOWSKI, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Council Member Werner said a case had been made for a paved surface for wheelchairs, but one had not been made concerning the need for a ten-foot wide path. Noting that Mr. Patton had additional information on this matter, Mayor Broun suggested that the hearing be reopened. Council Member Capowski noted that a path less than ten feet wide could have problems with the edges of the asphalt chipping.

COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER CAPOWSKI, TO REOPEN THE HEARING. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Mr. Patton said providing a path less than eight or ten feet wide could pose future maintenance problems at the park. Council Member Brown inquired about the width of a standard pick-up truck. Mr. Patton said a typical pick-up truck was eight to ten feet wide. Council Member Brown noted that trucks chipping asphalt would not be a problem with narrower pavement because the wheels would not be on the pavement. Mr. Horton noted that a four-foot wide path would not accommodate wheelchairs. Nancy Cahn said a paved access to the park was needed to accommodate strollers, roller skates and other means of entry to the park.

COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER CAPOWSKI, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

COUNCIL MEMBER RIMER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 1A, WITH A MODIFICATION TO ALLOW THE MANAGER TO EXAMINE THE ISSUE OF PAVING THE ACCESS PATH, WITH A FUTURE FOLLOW-UP REPORT TO THE COUNCIL.

Mr. Horton said a report could be made to the Council during the bid process for the path. Council Member Brown said the park site should have a recycling plan and be the location for a composting facility. Council Member Werner said this was a good idea, but did not need to part of the special use permit. Council Member Powell requested a clarification of Council Member Rimer's earlier request concerning alternate paving materials. Council Member Rimer said he was requesting that the Manager reevaluate paving options and proceed to construct the pathway in the proposed park.

Council Member Werner said stipulation 2b would need to be changed. He added that completing paving of Collums Road at a cost of $4,000 might not be a bad idea. Council Member Capowski said the argument against this was that other paving projects around the Town took higher priority. Mr. Horton noted that the special use permit provisions were consistent with requirements for other developers. Council Member Werner inquired about the funding source for paving of the road. Mr. Horton said the funds would be derived from Parks and Recreation development funds. Council Member Chilton noted that constructing the additional roadway surface could take away from facilities at other parks. Mayor Broun suggested that additional funds for road paving might be allocated in the future. Council Member Werner inquired about the development schedule for the park. Mr. Loveman briefly reviewed the schedule, noting that completion of the facility was targeted for late 1993. Council Member Andresen reiterated the need to examine pathway paving alternatives.

THE MOTION TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2A AS AMENDED WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR NORTH FOREST HILLS PARK (SUP: 24J.A.20) (92-12-7/R-2a)

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that it finds that the Special Use Permit proposed by the Town of Chapel Hill Parks & Recreation Department on property identified as Chapel Hill Township Tax Map 24J, Block A, Lot 20 and Chapel Hill Township Tax Map 24, Lots 33A, 33B, and 33D, if developed according to the site plan dated April 10, 1991 (revised July 14, 1992 and August 11, 1992) and the conditions listed below, would:

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

2. Comply with all required regulations and standards of the Development Ordinance, including all applicable provisions of Articles 12, 13, 14 and 18, and with all other applicable regulations;

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

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

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Town Council hereby approves the application for a Special Use Permit for the North Forest Hills Park in accordance with the plans listed above and with conditions listed below:

Stipulations Specific to the Development

1. That construction begin by December 7, 1994 and be completed by December 7, 1996.

2. Required Improvements (specific to the proposed development):

a. That Collums Road be improved from the existing end of pavement to the Virginia Drive intersection to match the existing paved cross-section (20 foot asphalt and ditch cross-section).

b. That pavement of paths be determined by the Town Manager after evaluating available options and any application legal regulations as well as maintenance requirements.

c. That the facility not be lighted initially, but that electrical lines be extended into the property and stubbed out, to allow lighting in the future if the Town Manager makes a determination that security issues require placement of lights.

d. That more benches be provided in the children's play equipment area, the location and number of the benches to be approved by the Town Manager before issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

Stipulations Related to State and Federal Government Approvals

3. State or Federal approval(s): That any required State or Federal permits or encroachment agreements be approved and copies of the approved permits and agreements be submitted to the Town of Chapel Hill prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

4. NCDOT approval: That plans for improvements to state-maintained roads be approved by NCDOT prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

Stipulations Related to Landscape Elements

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

6. Landscape Plan Approval for Special Use Permit applications: That a detailed landscape plan and landscape maintenance schedule be approved by the Appearance Commission prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. The Landscape Plan shall meet the following minimum buffer requirements:

- Type C buffers along the east, south, and west property lines; and

- Type B buffer along the north property line.

Stipulation Related to Building Elevations

7. Building Elevation Approval for Special Use Permit applications: That detailed building elevations be approved by the Appearance Commission prior to issuance of the Zoning Compliance Permit.

Stipulations Related to Water, Sewer and Other Utilities

8. Fire Flow: That a fire flow report prepared by a registered professional engineer, showing that flows meet the minimum requirements of the Design Manual, be approved prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

9. Utility/Lighting Plan Approval: That the final utility/lighting plan be approved by Orange Water and Sewer Authority, Duke Power, Southern Bell, and the Town Manager, before issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. The property owner shall be responsible for assuring these utilities are extended to serve the development.

Miscellaneous Stipulations

10. Solid Waste Management Plan: That a detailed solid waste management plan, including a recycling plan and plan for management of construction debris, be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

11. Detailed Plans: That final detailed site plans, grading plans, utility/lighting plans, stormwater management plans (with hydrologic calculations), and landscape plans and landscape maintenance plans be approved by the Town Manager before issuance of Zoning Compliance Permit or application for final plat approval, and that such plans conform to plans approved by this application and demonstrate compliance with all applicable conditions and the design standards of the Development Ordinance and the Design Manual.

12. Certificates of Occupancy: That no Certificates of Occupancy be issued until all required public improvements are completed; and that a note to this effect shall be placed on the final plat.

If the Town Manager approves a phasing plan, no Certificates of Occupancy shall be issued for a phase until all required public improvements for that phase are complete; no Building Permits for any phase shall be issued until all public improvements required in previous phases are completed to a point adjacent to the new phase; and that a note to this effect shall be placed on the final plat.

13. Sight Triangle Easements: That sight triangle easements be provided on the final plat.

14. Erosion Control: That a soil erosion and sedimentation control plan be approved by the Orange County Erosion Control Officer before issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

15. Silt Control: That the applicant take appropriate measures to prevent and remove the deposit of wet or dry silt on adjacent paved roadways.

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

17. Non-Severability: That if any of the above conditions is held to be invalid, approval in its entirety shall be void.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Town Council hereby approves the Special Use Permit for the North Forest Hills Park in accordance with the plans and conditions listed above.

This the 7th day of November, 1992.

Item 6 Housing Affordability

Mr. Horton noted that he had recently met with the Chair and the Executive Director of the Orange Community Housing Corporation to discuss affordable housing matters and the Erwin Village affordable housing proposal. He stated that Resolution 3 would call a hearing to discuss issues previously raised regarding housing subsidy programs. Mr. Horton said that staff could put together a good working paper in this regard.

Council Member Capowski said the Council needed to examine the Town's affordable housing policies. Mayor Broun said the Council needed to give the Orange Community Housing Corporation guidance in terms of what the Town's affordable housing policies were. Council Member Andresen inquired when the proposed work session would be held. Mr. Horton said the session was proposed for late January.

COUNCIL MEMBER ANDRESEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER POWELL, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 3. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

A RESOLUTION SETTING A WORK SESSION ON POLICY GUIDELINES FOR HOUSING DEVELOPMENT (92-12-7/R-3)

WHEREAS, the Town of Chapel Hill participated with other member governments in Orange County to establish the Orange Community Housing Corporation, whose purpose is constructing additional housing opportunities for lower-income families in Orange County;

WHEREAS, an opportunity to communicate on policy guidelines for developing lower-income housing development in Chapel Hill is desirable;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council directs the Manager to schedule a work session with the Board of Directors of the Orange Community Housing Corporation in January, 1993 to discuss issues as outlined in the attached Manager's memorandum to Council of December 7, 1992.

This the 7th day of December, 1992.

Item 7 Adjustment to Parking Regulations

Mr. Horton said the proposed ordinance amendment would likely not satisfy all the Council's concerns regarding minimum parking requirements. Mr. Horton noted that the Town Attorney's research had indicated that the Council was limited by State statute in assigning the Manager discretion for reducing parking requirements. He stated that the Board of Adjustment appeared to be the appropriate body for granting exceptions from parking regulations.

Council Member Werner said although he understood the Attorney's legal concerns, the proposed solution appeared to be fairly cumbersome and demanding. He stated that the requirement of getting an eighty percent affirmative vote of the Board of Adjustment to grant an exception was quite demanding. Council Member Werner suggested modifying the ordinance in order to put in a range of parking requirements. Noting that the Board of Adjustment was a quasi-judicial board, Council Member Andresen inquired about the viability of the Council granting exceptions for parking requirements. Mr. Karpinos said it would be unconstitutional for the Council to decide parking requirements on a case-by-case basis outside of the context of a special use permit application. Council Member Brown asked whether there was any mechanism to address Mr. Hoffer's situation this evening. Mr. Horton said there was nothing to prevent the Council from adopting the ordinance and directing the staff to consider additional options in the future.

Council Member Capowski said that if a retail business were happy with less parking and this did not damage other neighboring businesses, additional parking should not be required. Mr. Karpinos said that since the authority for the Council to set minimum parking standards had been established by the General Assembly, the Council could not delegate that authority. Council Member Capowski inquired whether it was possible to grant exceptions based on a simple majority vote of the Board of Adjustment. Mr. Karpinos said this would require a change by the General Assembly. Council Member Rimer noted that several years ago the Planning Board had entertained the idea of reevaluating the entire parking ordinance. He suggested that the Planning staff and Planning Board undertake such a study of the parking ordinance.

Council Member Herzenberg asked whether there was any more immediate way to deal with Mr. Hoffer's parking situation. Mayor Broun said the only suggestion was to adopt Ordinance A, with Mr. Hoffer making an application to the Board of Adjustment in the interim period. Noting that the Board of Adjustment was very thorough in its reviews, Council Member Herzenberg said it was unlikely that Mr. Hoffer's variance request would be granted.

Council Member Andresen said it would not be a simple task to uniformally reduce parking requirements to everyone's satisfaction. Council Member Rimer said an examination of parking policies was being requested, rather than an across-the-board reduction in parking requirements. Council Member Powell requested additional information concerning the application of parking ordinances to individual businesses. Mr. Horton said the Town's Development Ordinance laid out parking requirements for different types and sizes of businesses. He added that the review of regulations might result in recommendations for new parking regulation types and categories. Council Member Capowski said he did not think that action on the proposals would occur quickly enough to address Mr. Hoffer's situation. Council Member Rimer said adoption of Ordinance A would likely result in Mr. Hoffer spending additional money and then have his variance request denied. Council Member Capowski expressed his concurrence.

THE MOTION TO REFER THE MATTER TO THE MANAGER AND PLANNING BOARD FOR RE-EVALUATION OF EXISTING PARKING REGULATIONS WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Item 8 Non-resident Fee for Senior Center Activities

Parks and Recreation Commission Chairperson Lee Pavao said the Commission recommended granting a fee exemption for non-Town residents. Parks and Recreation Director Mike Loveman said non-resident fees ensured equity between residents and non-residents. He stated that it would not be equitable to exempt one group from paying non-resident fees. Mr. Loveman noted that the Town was committed to ongoing support of the Senior Center. He stated that although the Town's non-resident user fee policy could possibly be eliminated in the future, the staff recommended that the current fee policy remain in place.

Robert Seymour thanked the Council for its previous support of the Senior Center, particularly funding for utilities and the completion of the kitchen facility. Mr. Seymour said the requested exemption involved a total of $1,000. He stated that not granting the exemption could possibly jeopardize some sources of support for the Senior Center. Mr. Seymour also said that the rental for the building was two-thirds financed by Orange County with the balance being paid by Friends of the Senior Center. He stated that senior citizens from Carolina Meadows and Fearrington had some sense of ownership of the Senior Center. Mr. Seymour expressed hope that the Council would grant the request for an exemption.

Anne Johnson related a brief tale supporting her request that the Council grant the requested exemption.

Council Member Rimer said he favored not charging the out-of-county fee since he did not find the argument compelling concerning not charging for direct costs. Noting that the Town charged out-of-county fees for other activities such as the use of basketball courts, Council Member Andresen said she was a little concerned about making the proposed exception. She also inquired about the current surcharge for out-of-county residents for senior activities. Mr. Loveman said the fee is 20%, or approximately $4 per person per class. Council Member Andresen inquired whether out-of-county participants would not participate in programs if the additional fee were charged. Mr. Loveman said this would be difficult to determine since programs had only recently been initiated at the Senior Center. Noting that the Town made substantial contributions to Senior Center activities, Council Member Andresen said she hoped that participants from other counties would continue to use the Senior Center.

Council Member Capowski inquired what other non-Town owned facilities had parks and recreation programs. Mr. Loveman said parks and recreation activities were held in various Chapel Hill-Carrboro school facilities and at the ArtsCenter in Carrboro. He noted that non-resident fees were charged for these programs. Council Member Capowski said the Council had been very generous to the Senior Center. Noting that fee waivers were available for those in need, Council Member Capowski said he did not think much program participation would be lost by continuing to charge the fee.

Council Member Chilton said the Town paid relatively little for the operations at the Senior Center. He suggested that the Town should make efforts to nurture the Senior Center as a community resource. Council Member Chilton also said it sent the wrong message to quibble over $1,000. Council Member Brown inquired whether any Senior Center program participants had requested fee waivers. Mr. Seymour said no waivers had been requested to date.

Ralph Paull said twenty to twenty-five percent of new residents to the area were retirees. He stated that residents of Carolina Meadows or Fearrington Village should be able to use the Senior Center as easily as Town residents. Council Member Werner said the Senior Center provided a facility that the Town did not have to provide as a part of its programs. He also noted that the Senior Center was largely operated and administered by volunteer staff. Council Member Werner said he thought the Town would come out ahead by granting the exemption. Noting that the Senior Center was an important community resource, Mayor Broun said he favored waiving the fee. Council Member Herzenberg said not waiving the fee would be penny wise and pound foolish. Council Member Rimer inquired about the number of classes offered at the Senior Center. Mr. Loveman said approximately a dozen classes would be offered. Council Member Rimer asked how many senior programs were offered prior to the opening of the Senior Center. Mr. Loveman said approximately three or four per term.

COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 4. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED BY A VOTE OF 7-2, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS ANDRESEN AND CAPOWSKI VOTING NO.

A RESOLUTION EXEMPTING CHAPEL HILL PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS USING THE CHAPEL HILL SENIOR CENTER FROM PAYING A NONRESIDENT FEE (92-12-7/R-4)

WHEREAS, the Parks and Recreation Commission supports the use of the Chapel Hill Senior Center for the senior citizen programs of the Parks and Recreation Department; and

WHEREAS, the Commission recognizes the Chapel Hill Senior Center as a facility that is predominantly supported by private contributions and that this is a major difference from the other facilities operated directly by the Town for conducting Parks and Recreation Department programs; and

WHEREAS, the Commission believes that it is not appropriate to ask nonresident users of the Senior Center to contribute to its operation and also to pay a nonresident fee to participate in Town-sponsored programs; and

WHEREAS, the Commission believes that an exemption from nonresident fees will assist the Friends of the Chapel Hill Senior Center to become more financially independent and will encourage nonresident parks and recreation programs participants to contribute to the operating costs of the Center;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby approves the exemption of nonresident fees for Chapel Hill Parks and Recreation Department program participants who use the Chapel Hill Senior Center.

This the 7th day of December, 1992.

Item 9 Revisions to Yard Waste Policy

Public Works Director Bruce Heflin provided an overview of proposed changes in the Town's yard waste policy.

Council Member Brown said that yard waste constituted a fairly small component of the Town's waste stream. Mr. Heflin said regulatory backing was being sought so that yard waste and regular refuse would be separated. Council Member Brown inquired about the State's implementation schedule concerning the ban on yard wastes. Mr. Heflin said the State's Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources would conduct regular inspections, although there had been no specific information concerning enforcement of the yard waste ban. Council Member Brown said she did not find any of the proposed options very attractive. She stated that there was adequate time to develop a wider range of options. Council Member Andresen said she was satisfied with option number three. Council Member Werner inquired about the cost of each yard waste container. Mr. Heflin said the containers cost $1,800 to $2,000 each.

Council Member Werner asked whether an interim policy was being suggested. Mr. Heflin said yes, pending the resolution of how to deal with yard waste in a broader and more integrated fashion. Council Member Werner asked when there might be a more permanent policy. Mr. Horton said this could take six months to a year to develop a better sense of direction on key issues. Council Member Werner asked whether there were other uses for the yard waste containers. Mr. Heflin said no other uses had been explored. Council Member Werner said although he was not thrilled with the interim solution, he could support the proposal in the short term. He also said efforts needed to be made to let people know that they did not need to bag leaves at the curbside.

Council Member Powell said although she agreed with the Manager's interim plan, she had problems with the proposed fee schedule wherein weekend and weekday rates for container usage would be doubled. She suggested that fees remain at their current level. Council Member Brown inquired whether an "interim" policy was truly being proposed. Mr. Horton said an interim policy had been developed on the theory that the Council was likely to make long-term changes in yard waste policy,such as implementing composting programs, in the future. He added that a tub grinder might be purchased in the future for use at the landfill. Council Member Brown expressed concern that the Council was going through needless processes, since the State was not going to inspect immediately for yard wastes as of January 1, 1993. She noted that making changes from present methods might mean it would be necessary to change methods in the future as well. Council Member Andresen inquired whether it was correct that individuals could have many small piles of yard waste picked up free of charge. Mr. Horton said this was correct. Council Member Andresen said she supported a stronger public information program and possible purchase of a tub grinder. Council Member Andresen also said she supported adoption of Resolution A.

COUNCIL MEMBER ANDRESEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER RIMER, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 5A.

Council Member Chilton said he concurred with Council Member Brown's concerns about adoption of an interim policy necessitating changes in pick-up procedures on more than one occasion. Council Member Chilton noted that other communities had probably developed systems for the separate collection of yard wastes. Council Member Chilton said he would vote no on the proposed resolution. Council Member Andresen noted that putting a lot of yard waste out into the street could pose a safety hazard which could potentially cause accidents. Mayor Broun noted that rental fees of $10 to $20 were proposed for the new containers. Mr. Horton said this was correct, adding that the current fee of $5 to $8 was for the use of much smaller containers. He added that there was no strong rationale for the proposed $10 and $20 fees for the larger containers. Council Member Brown inquired about the public portion of the process. Mr. Horton said comments could be received on the proposed ordinance if the Council desired. Council Member Brown inquired whether hearings were customarily held on major changes. Council Member Chilton inquired about the Council's understanding on a possible hearing. Mayor Broun said the staff would prepare a proposed ordinance and no hearing would be held on the matter.

RESOLUTION 5A WAS APPROVED BY A VOTE OF 5-4, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS BROWN, CHILTON, HERZENBERG AND POWELL VOTING NO.

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE TOWN MANAGER TO PREPARE AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 8 OF THE TOWN CODE IN ORDER TO BAN COMMINGLING OF YARD WASTES WITH OTHER WASTE MATERIALS FOR DISPOSAL AT THE ORANGE REGIONAL LANDFILL; TO REQUIRE PREPARATION OF YARD WASTES FOR COLLECTION BY THE TOWN; TO ALLOW PLACEMENT OF SMALL PILES OF UNPREPARED YARD WASTE AT CURB FOR COLLECTION; AND TO ESTABLISH A FEE FOR USE OF CONTAINERS - AMENDMENT TO BE EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 1993 (92-12-7/R-5a)

WHEREAS, the North Carolina General Assembly has ratified Senate Bill 111, which prohibits disposal of yard wastes in landfills throughout the State after January 1, 1993; and

WHEREAS, the Orange Regional Landfill presently will prohibit yard wastes that are commingled with other sanitary wastes;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill the Town Manager is authorized to prepare an ordinance to amend Chapter 8 of the Town Code to ban commingling of yard wastes with other waste materials for disposal at the Orange Regional Landfill, such ordinance to provide for yard wastes to be collected if the following conditions are met:

• yard waste materials may be placed at the curb if prepared in tied bundles not heavier than fifty pounds, not more than four feet in length and not more than twenty-four inches in diameter

• yard waste materials may be placed at the curb in rigid containers which are reusable refuse receptacles made of plastic, metal or fiberglass, with a capacity of no more than approximately forty gallons and a loaded weight of no more than sixty pounds; such containers shall be labelled for yard waste, have a tight fitting lid and handles of adequate strength for lifting

• yard waste materials may be placed in a rented container requested from the Town

• loose piles of brush may be placed at the curb for collection if such piles do not exceed a volume of three cubic yards. Larger amounts may be prepared for collection as described above, either bundled or placed in rigid containers.

These provisions will be effective July 1, 1993.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the fee for renting containers for the placement of brush shall be $10/weekday and $20/weekend.

This the 7th day of December, 1992.

Item 10 New Low-Density Zoning Districts

Mr. Horton said staff appreciated the concern and comments of Pearson, Stewart, Margaret Brown and other concerned citizens.

Mr. Waldon said the staff suggested proceeding with the creation of one-acre and five-acre zoning districts. He noted that up to three two-acre lots could be created from individual tracts larger than five acres.

Council Member Andresen noted that the proposal was modeled on zoning for the University Lake watershed. She inquired about applicable assumptions for creating three two-acre lots. Mr. Waldon said a maximum of three lots could be created from any one tract. Council Member Capowski inquired whether staff was recommending that no access be permitted from arterial streets. Mr. Waldon said this was correct. Council Member Capowski asked whether the staff's intent was to limit future driveway cuts as much as possible on arterial roadways. Mr. Horton said this was correct, noting that roadways such as U.S. 15-501 were the primary area of concern. Council Member Capowski asked for an example of a collector street. Mr. Waldon said Culbreth Road.

Margaret Brown thanked the staff for their assistance in considering the low-density zoning proposal. Ms. Brown suggested that the provision in the recommended resolution be revised to grandfather access for existing subdivided lots on roadways such as Smith Level Road. She noted that there were a total of forty-four lots with an average of 2.67 acres in the area.

Council Member Andresen inquired whether it was possible to address Ms. Brown's concern. Mr. Horton said only existing accesses could be continued, with no additional direct accesses. Council Member Capowski inquired which roads on the south side of Town were designated as arterials. Mr. Waldon said U.S. 15-501 and Smith Level Road. Council Member Brown said creating the lots would be compatible with the southern small area plan. Council Member Brown also noted that she did not support conditional use rezoning because it involved an expensive and lengthy process. Council Member Brown said she recommended adoption of the staff's proposal. In response to the Council's concerns about access, Mr. Karpinos suggested adding the words "no direct access" to the proposed ordinance.

COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER ANDRESEN, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 2, AS AMENDED.

Council Member Andresen said the proposed ordinance was a reasonable compromise given previous agreements not to zone the land in the area very densely.

THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CHAPEL HILL DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE TO CREATE NEW, LOW DENSITY ZONING DISTRICTS (92-12-7/O-2)

WHEREAS, the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill has considered the proposed amendments to the Chapel Hill Development Ordinance creating new, low density residential zoning districts (Residential-LD1 and Residential-LD5), and finds that the amendments are appropriate due to changed or changing conditions in a particular area or in the jurisdiction generally and achieves the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED as follows:

SECTION I

AMEND Subsection 3.1.8 of the Chapel Hill Development Ordinance to read as follows:

3.1.8 Residential Districts (R-6, R-5, R-4, R-3, R-2, R-2A, R-1, R-1A, R-LD1, R-LD5)

The Residential (R-) districts are intended to provide for residential development of appropriate intensities consonant with the suitability of land, availability of public services, accessibility to major activity centers and transportation systems, and compatibility with surrounding development.

SECTION II

ADD new columns to Section 12.3 of the Chapel Hill Development Ordinance, Schedule of Use Regulations to read as follows:

Uses R-LD1 R-LD5

Use Group A

Accessory Use Customarily Incidental to a

Permitted Group A Principal or Special Use A A

Agriculture, Non-Livestock (see Article 12.4) A A

Agriculture, Livestock (see Article 12.4) -- A

Cemetery S S

Dwelling, Single Family P P

Dwelling, Two Family-Including Accessory Apartment P P

Dwelling, Two Family Duplex -- --

Dwelling, Multi-Family--3 to 7 Dwelling Units -- --

Dwelling, Multi-Family--over 7 Dwelling Units -- --

Essential Services P,A P,A

Home Occupation A A

Mobile Home, Class A P P

Mobile Home, Class B P P

Mobile Home Park -- --

Outdoor Skateboard Ramp (see Article 12.6) A A

Use Group B

Accessory Use Customarily Incidental to a

Permitted Group B Principal or Special use A A

Adult Day Care Facility S,A S,A

Business, Office-Type -- --

Child Day Care Facility (See Article 12.6) P,A P,A

Clinic -- --

Club -- --

College or University -- --

Fine Arts Educational Institution -- --

Fraternity or Sorority Dwelling -- -- Funeral Home -- --

Group Car Facility S S

Hospital -- --

Hotel or Motel -- --

Place of Worship (See Article 12.6) P P

Public Cultural Facility P,A P,A

Public Use Facility P,A P,A

Research Activities -- --

Residence Hall -- --

Residential Support Facility -- --

Rooming House -- --

School, Elementary or Secondary (see Article 12.6) P P

Shelter -- --

Tourist Home -- --

Use Group C

Accessory Use Customarily Incidental to a Permitted

Group C Principal or Special Use A A

Automotive Repair Less Collision Service & Painting -- --

Automotive Repair -- --

Automotive, Trailer, and Farm Implement Sales or Rental-- -- Bank -- --

Barber Shop/Beauty Salon -- --

Business, Convenience -- --

Business, General -- --

Business, Wholesale -- --

Car Wash -- --

Extraction of Earth Products -- --

Hangar, Medical Aircraft -- --

Kennel -- --

Landfill -- --

Maintenance and/or Storage Facility -- --

Manufacturing, Light -- --

Parking, Off-street A A

Park/Ride Terminal S S

Personal Services -- --

Place of Assembly-Up to 2,000 seating capacity A A

Place of Assembly-Over 2,000 seating capacity -- --

Public Service Facility S S

Publishing and/or Printing -- --

Accessory Radio or TV Transmitting +/or Receiving

Antenna A A

Radio or TV Transmitting and/or Receiving Facility -- --

Recreation Facility, Non-profit P P

Recreation Facility, Commercial -- --

Service Station -- --

Supply Yard -- --

Temporary Portable Building, Construction-Related A A

Temporary Portable Building, Other than Construction-

Related -- --

Veterinary Hospital or Clinic -- --

Vocational School -- --

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant -- --

Window, Drive-In, as an accessory use to a

Permitted Principal Use -- --

SECTION III

AMEND Section 12.6.1 of the Chapel Hill Development Ordinance to read as follows:

12.6.1 Each of the following principal uses shall be permitted in R-LD5, R-LD1, R-1A, R-1, R-2A, R-2 zoning districts only if the zoning lot on which such use is located fronts on either an arterial or collector street:

a) Place of Worship

b) School, Elementary or Secondary

c) Public Cultural Facility

d) Child Day Care Center

SECTION IV

AMEND the first paragraph of Section 12.6.2 of the Chapel Hill Development Ordinance to read as follows:

Outdoor Skateboard ramps shall be permitted as an Accessory Use ("A") in the R-6, R-5, R-4, R-3, R-2, R-2A, R-1, R-1A, R-LD1, and R-LD5 zoning districts only if:

SECTION V

AMEND the last paragraph of Subsection 13.6.2 of the Chapel Hill Development Ordinance to read as follows:

Where a zoning lot is in a R-LD5, R-LD1, R-1A, R-1, R-2A, or R-2 zoning district and is part of a subdivision approved as a cluster development (see Section 17.8), the minimum lot width requirement specified in Section 13.11 may be reduced by twenty percent (20%).

SECTION VI

INSERT two new lines to Section 13.8 of the Chapel Hill Development Ordinance establishing the maximum number of dwelling units per acre of gross land area for R-2A to read as follows:

R-LD5 .02

R-LD1 1

SECTION VII

AMEND the last paragraph of Subsection 13.9.6 of the Chapel Hill Development Ordinance to read as follows:

Where a zoning lot is in a R-LD5, R-LD1, R-1A, R-1, R-2A, or R-2 zoning district and is part of a subdivision approved as a cluster development (see Section 17.8), the minimum interior setback specified in Section 13.11 for the zoning district may be reduced to eight (8) feet. Such reduction shall not be permitted where the interior lot line forms a boundary of the subdivision.

SECTION VIII

AMEND the last paragraph of Subsection 13.9.8 of the Chapel Hill Development Ordinance to read as follows:

Where a zoning lot is in a R-LD5, R-LD1, R-1A, R-1, R-2A, or R-2 zoning district and is part of a subdivision approved as a cluster development (see Section 17.8), the minimum solar setback specified in Section 13.11 for the zoning district may be reduced to ten (10) feet. Such reduction shall not be permitted where the north lot line forms a boundary of the subdivision.

SECTION IX

ADD new rows to Subsection 13.11.1 of the Chapel Hill Development Ordinance, Use Group A, Schedule of Intensity Regulations to read as follows:

R-LD1 43,560 125 0 19 .047 .90 .78 .020 30 16 19 29 35

1 22 .058 .87 .74 .021 30 16 19 29 35

2 23 .062 .86 .73 .022 30 16 19 29 35

R-LD5 217,800 250 0 10 .025 .91 .82 .015 30 16 20 29 35

1 12 .028 .90 .81 .015 30 16 20 29 35

2 13 .031 .90 .80 .015 30 16 20 29 35

SECTION X

ADD new rows to Subsection 13.11.2 of the Chapel Hill Development Ordinance, Use Group B, Schedule of Intensity Regulations to read as follows:

R-LD1 43,560 125 0 6 .019 .93 .85 NA 30 16 20 29 35

1 8 .022 .92 .83 NA 30 16 20 29 35

2 9 .023 .92 .82 NA 30 16 20 29 35

R-LD5 217,800 250 0 6 .019 .93 .85 NA 30 16 20 29 35

1 8 .022 .92 .83 NA 30 16 20 29 35

2 9 .023 .92 .82 NA 30 16 20 29 35

SECTION XI

ADD new rows to Subsection 13.11.3 of the Chapel Hill Development Ordinance, Use Group C, Schedule of Intensity Regulations to read as follows:

R-LD1 43,560 125 0 6 .019 .93 .85 NA 30 16 20 29 35

1 8 .022 .92 .83 NA 30 16 20 29 35

2 9 .023 .92 .82 NA 30 16 20 29 35

R-LD5 217,800 250 0 6 .019 .93 .85 NA 30 16 20 29 35

1 8 .022 .92 .83 NA 30 16 20 29 35

2 9 .023 .92 .82 NA 30 16 20 29 35

SECTION XII

AMEND Subsections 13.11.1, 13.11.2, and 13.11.3 of the Chapel Hill Development Ordinance to add the following footnote to the reference in each section to the Zoning District R-LD5:

"Existing lots of record as of December 7, 1992 which are subsequently rezoned to R-LD5 can be subdivided to create up to three (3) lots of not less than two (2) acres gross land area in size each; provided, however, the remaining land shall be developed with a minimum lot size of at least five (5) acres gross land area for each lot, and provided that no lot created under this exemption shall have access onto an arterial street."

SECTION XIII

AMEND Subsection 17.8.3.b of the Chapel Hill Development Ordinance to read as follows:

17.8.3 b) Minimum lot width requirements specified in Section 13.11 for R-LD5, R-LD1, R-1A, R-1, R-2A, and R-2 zoning districts may be reduced by twenty percent (20%).

SECTION XIV

AMEND Subsection 17.8.3.d of the Chapel Hill Development Ordinance to read as follows:

17.8.3 d) Minimum interior setback requirements specified in Section 13.11 for R-LD5, R-LD1, R-1A, R-1, R-2A, and R-2 zoning districts may be reduced to eight (8) feet except where the interior lot line forms a boundary of the cluster development.

SECTION XV

AMEND Subsection 17.8.3.e of the Chapel Hill Development Ordinance to read as follows:

17.8.3 e) Minimum solar setback requirements specified in Section 13.11 for R-LD5, R-LD1, R-1A, R-1, R-2A, and R-2 zoning districts may be reduced to ten (10) feet except where the north lot line forms a boundary of the cluster development.

SECTION XVI

INSERT new lines to Subsection 17.9.2 of the Chapel Hill Development Ordinance, Minimum Recreation Area, establishing the minimum recreation area that must be provided or dedicated as part of a subdivision in the R-LD5 and R-LD1 zoning districts to read as follows:

Zoning District Recreation Space Ratio

R-LD5 .040

R-LD1 .050

SECTION XVII

That all ordinances and portions of ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.

This the 7th day of December, 1992.

Item 11 Status of Community Response to Violent Crime

and Illegal Drug Abuse

Mayor Broun said the reports of the individual committees were set out in the memorandum before the Council. He noted that the committees were making significant progress in their activities.

Item 12 Consent Agenda

Mayor Broun requested removal of items b and j.

COUNCIL MEMBER RIMER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER CAPOWSKI, TO ADOPT THE CONSENT AGENDA, EXCEPTING ITEMS B AND J. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

A RESOLUTION ADOPTING VARIOUS RESOLUTIONS AND AN ORDINANCE (92‑12‑ 7/R‑6)

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

a. Minutes of November 9 and 16.

b. Scheduling a public forum (January 2Oth) and a public hearing (February 16th) on legislative matters (R‑7a).

c. Revised meeting room use policy (R‑8).

d. Release of economic development funds to Triangle J Council of Governments (R‑11).

e. Drug elimination grant project ordinance amendment (0‑3).

f. Asphalt and tack bid award (R‑12).

g. Designation of authorized signatures for tax deposit bank account (R‑13).

h. Preservation of rail corridors (R‑14 , 15) .

i. Transfer of utility easement to OWASA (Freedom House) (R‑16).

j. Parking on sidewalks (R‑17a).

k. Closure of drainage easement in Franklin Hills subdivision (R‑18).

This the 7th day of December, 1992.

A RESOLUTION CONCERNING THE USAGE OF TOWN HALL MEETING ROOMS AND

THE COURT ROOM IN THE EAST FRANKLIN STREET POST OFFICE BUILDING

(92-12-7/R-8)

WHEREAS, an open and democratic government process places an emphasis on the importance of free and open meetings;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council adopts the following policy concerning the usage of Town Hall meeting rooms (1st, 2nd and 3rd floor conference rooms, training room and Council Chamber) and the Courtroom in the East Franklin Street post office building:

Meetings shall be scheduled in the following priority order:

1. Town Council meetings

2. Meetings sponsored by the Mayor or Council Member(s)

3. Other meetings of official Town boards, committees, commissions, task forces and, for the Courtroom only, court-related matters

4. Town-sponsored activities

5. Meetings of other local, state and federal governmental

officials and bodies

6. Groups sponsoring programs of a non-commercial nature (including local precinct meetings).

All non-governmental programs must be free of charge and open to the public. Governmental meetings shall be open to the public as required by law.

Limited membership groups, such as denominational groups, partisan political groups (except partisan precinct meetings which are permitted by State law) and labor organizations will not normally be permitted to reserve Town meeting rooms on a regularly recurring basis, but may apply in writing to the Town Clerk for occasional use.

Organizational representatives must agree to be responsible for any damage done to facilities and equipment. Extra chairs, screens, blackboards, etc. may be provided by the user and must be removed immediately following the meeting or activity. Commercial use of meeting rooms is not permitted.

This the 7th day of December, 1992.

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING RELEASE OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FUNDS

(92-12-7/R-11)

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 1992 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 $2,617.81 share of these funds to the Triangle J Council of Governments at the earliest possible time in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 900, House Bill 1340, Section 180 of the 1992 Session Laws.

This the 7th day of December, 1992.

AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE PUBLIC HOUSING DRUG ELIMINATION GRANT PROJECT ORDINANCE (92-12-7/O-3)

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

SECTION I

The project authorized is the Drug Elimination Grant as approved by the Council on June 8, 1992; funds are as contained in the grant agreement between the Town and by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), accepted by the Council on October 28, 1991.

SECTION II

The Manager of the Town of Chapel Hill is hereby directed to proceed with the project within the terms of the agreement document(s), rules and regulations of the U.S Department of Housing and Urban Development, and the budget contained herein.

SECTION III

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

Current Budget Amended Budget

Drug Elimination Grant $136,000 $187,000

SECTION IV

The following amounts are appropriated for the project:

Current Budget Amended Budget

Staff Salaries $ 76,050 $ 76,050

Police Overtime Salaries $ 25,284 $ 52,740

Security Improvements 0 $ 18,000

Equipment and Supplies $ 1,166 $ 6,710

Travel and Training $ 14,500 $ 14,500

Scholarship Fund $ 10,000 $ 10,000

Van Rental $ 9,000 $ 9,000

TOTAL: $136,000 $187,000

SECTION V

The Finance Director is hereby directed to maintain within the Project Fund sufficient specific detailed accounting records to provide the accounting to HUD as required by the agreement(s) and federal regulations.

SECTION VI

Funds may be advanced from the General Fund for the purpose of making payments as due. Reimbursement requests should be made to HUD in an orderly and timely manner.

SECTION VII

The Manager is directed to report annually on the financial status of each project in Section IV and on the total revenues received.

SECTION VIII

Copies of this grant project ordinance shall be entered into the minutes of the Council and copies filed within five days of adoption with the Manager, Finance Director and Clerk.

This the 7th day of December, 1992.

A RESOLUTION AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR ASPHALTIC CONCRETE AND TACK COAT (92-12-7/R-12)

WHEREAS, the Town of Chapel Hill has solicited formal bids by legal notice in The Chapel Hill Newspaper on October 15, 1992, in accordance with G.S. 143-129 for Asphaltic Concrete and Tack Coat for street patching; and

WHEREAS, the following bids have been received and opened on November 4, 1992, at 3:00 p.m.

C. C. Mangum Nello Teer

I-2 Asphaltic Concrete 24.00/Ton 25.75/Ton

H-B Asphalt 24.00/Ton 25.75/Ton

Tack Coat (AC-20) 1.50/Gal 2.00/Gal

Tack Coat (CRS-2) 1.50/Gal 2.00/Gal

Total $58,050.00 $63,650.00

WHEREAS, the additional costs to the Town caused by the difference in distance between the C. C. Mangum plant and the Nello Teer plant are estimated to be approximately $11,600; and

WHEREAS, the year-round availability of hot-mix asphalt is important to the Town's ability to maintain its street system;

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

This the 7th day of December, 1992.

A RESOLUTION ENDORSING EFFORTS TO PRESERVE ALL CORRIDORS WITHIN DURHAM, ORANGE AND WAKE COUNTIES (92-12-7/R-14)

WHEREAS, in 1989 the Boards of Commissioners in Durham, Orange and Wake Counties each passed resolutions creating the Research Triangle Public Transportation Authority, (d/b/a Triangle Transit Authority); and

WHEREAS, in accordance with Chapter 160A, Article 26 of the NC General Statutes, The Triangle Transit Authority was chartered as a unit of local government by the Secretary of State on December 1, 1989; and

WHEREAS, the Triangle Transit Authority was created to finance, provide, operate and maintain a safe, clean, reliable, convenient, energy efficient, economical and environmentally sound public transportation system for Durham, Orange and Wake Counties; and

WHEREAS, with the support and funding of the State and local units of government, the Triangle Transit Authority will be receiving a Federal Transit Administration grant to initiate planning for a future fixed guideway transit system as a component of a multi-modal public transportation system; and

WHEREAS, the work associated with this grant will identify potential fixed guideway transit corridors which will undergo further evaluation during the Federal Transit Administration Major Capital Investment Planning Process which may follow this study; and

WHEREAS, all active and inactive rail corridors throughout the three county area have the potential of functioning as part of the network for the multi-modal public transportation system; and

WHEREAS, the multi-modal public transportation system may include corridors, rights-of-way and/or easements which permit pedestrian access, non-motorized and motorized vehicular transportation; and

WHEREAS, the removal of grade separated crossings in corridors and potential rights-of-way diminishes the ability and value of the corridor or right-of-way to function within the network.

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

1. Endorses efforts to preserve all rail corridors within Durham, Wake and Orange Counties.

2. Commends the Public Transportation and Rail Division of the NC Department of Transportation for its current efforts and encourages continued work on the preservation of all active and inactive rail corridors for use as part of the network of the multi-modal public transportation system.

3. Encourages State agencies and units of local government to participate in the preservation of rail corridors and other such rights-of-way to which may provide current and future pedestrian access and non-motorized vehicular linkages to the multi-modal public transportation system.

This the 7th day of December, 1992

A RESOLUTION ENDORSING EFFORTS TO PRESERVE ALL HIGHWAY RAILROAD GRADE SEPARATIONS WITHIN DURHAM, ORANGE AND WAKE COUNTIES (92-12-7/R-15)

WHEREAS, the Triangle Transit Authority was created to finance, provide, operate and maintain a safe, clean, convenient, energy efficient, economical and environmentally sound public transportation system for Durham, Orange and Wake Counties; and

WHEREAS, with the support and funding of the State and local units of government, the Triangle Transit Authority will be receiving a Federal Transit Administration grant to initiate planning for a future fixed guideway transit system as a component of a multi-modal public transportation system; and

WHEREAS, the Triangle Transit Authority Board of Trustees has established a policy encouraging the preservation of all active and inactive rail corridors for use as part of the network of the multi-modal public transportation system; and

WHEREAS, the removal of grade separated crossings in corridors and potential rights-of-way diminishes the ability and value of the corridor or right-of-way to function within the network.

NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Chapel Hill Town Council that the Council:

1. Endorses efforts of the Triangle Transit Authority to preserve all highway railroad grade separations for all active and inactive rail lines within Durham, Wake and Orange Counties.

2. Encourages the North Carolina Railroad, the CSX Transportation Company, the Norfolk and Southern Railroad Company and the North Carolina Department of Transportation to preserve current grade separations and to discourage new at-grade crossings of rail lines.

This the 7th day of December, 1992.

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE TRANSFER OF A UTILITY EASEMENT TO THE ORANGE WATER AND SEWER AUTHORITY TO SERVE FREEDOM HOUSE (92-12-7/R-16)

WHEREAS, the Orange Water and Sewer Authority (OWASA) requires the dedication and recording of utility easements as part of its approval of water and sewer line extensions; and

WHEREAS, Freedom House proposes to connect to the existing sewer line on Town property and OWASA requires dedication of a 30-foot easement for said connections;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Town Manager is authorized to execute an agreement to transfer and to record such transfer of utility easements on land which is owned by the Town of Chapel Hill as described in the attached memorandum and drawing.

This the 7th day of December, 1992.

A RESOLUTION CLOSING A DRAINAGE EASEMENT IN SECTION 1-A, FRANKLIN HILLS SUBDIVISION (92-12-7/R-18)

WHEREAS, closing this drainage easement would not be contrary to the public interest; and

WHEREAS, the subject drainage easement is unnecessary for existing and/or foreseeable stormwater management needs; and

WHEREAS, there is an existing drainageway and easement which now adequately handles the stormwater run-off in the immediate area;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby adopts this order permanently closing an existing drainage easement approximately 360 feet long by 30 feet wide located on Lots 21, 23, 25, and 32 as shown on the recorded plat for Franklin Hills Subdivision, Section 1-A, said lots also being known as Lots 10, 12, 14 and 21, Block A; as shown on Orange County Tax Map 78; said closure shall be shown on a plat to be provided by the owners of the affected lots, approved by the Chapel Hill Engineering Department and recorded with the Orange County Registrar of Deeds.

This the 7th day of December, 1992.

Mayor Broun said he pulled item b to point out that the public forum had been rescheduled to January 21st from the original date of January 20th, due to a conflicting community event. Council Member Herzenberg requested that the Chapel Hill Historical Society

be notified of the change. Mr. Horton said the staff would do so.

COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 7A. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

A RESOLUTION REGARDING PUBLIC FORUMS TO RECEIVE CITIZENS' REQUESTS ON THE BUDGET, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM, USE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT GRANT FUNDS, FUTURE USE OF THE PRESENT LIBRARY AND LEGISLATIVE MATTERS (92-12-7/R-7a)

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

1. Reschedules to 7:30 p.m. on Thursday, January 21, 1993 the public forums and hearing previously scheduled for January 20th to receive citizens' comments on preparing the 1993-94 budget, 1993-98 Capital Improvement Program, and 1993 Community Development grant application; and regarding future use of the present Library building.

2. Schedules public forum for 7:30 p.m. on Thursday, January 21, 1993, and a public hearing for 7:30 p.m. on February 16, 1993, to receive citizens' comments on potential requests to the General Assembly for local bills in 1993.

This the 7th day of December, 1992.

Council Member Capowski said he supported continuing the Town's existing prohibition of parking on sidewalks. He said that such a ban was not inhospitable to visitors.

COUNCIL MEMBER CAPOWSKI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 17A. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MANAGER TO CONTINUE A PROGRAM TO DISCOURAGE PARKING OF VEHICLES ON SIDEWALKS (92-12-7/R-17a)

WHEREAS, parking vehicles on sidewalks poses a hazard to pedestrians, forcing them to walk in the streets; and

WHEREAS, the Council desires to improve public safety by eliminating the practice of parking vehicles on sidewalks; and

WHEREAS, the Council adopted a resolution on May 11, 1992 authorizing the Manager to institute a program to discourage sidewalk parking; and

WHEREAS, that program has been effective in limiting sidewalk parking in most situations; and

WHEREAS, through public education, the placement of signs at the problem locations, the placement of physical barriers, and the issuance of citations, it is expected that parking on sidewalks during University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill home football games in the 1993-94 season will be greatly reduced; and

WHEREAS, a report will be presented to Council on the effectiveness of the program at the end of the 1993-94 football season;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby authorizes the Manger to continue a program to discourage the practice of parking vehicles on sidewalks, with an evaluation report to be submitted following the 1993-94 University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill football season.

This the 7th day of December, 1992.

There were no comments on information reports nor was there a need for an Executive Session. The meeting concluded at 11:23 p.m.