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

Council Member Powell inquired whether Home Rule authorization would address Council Member Werner's concerns. Mr. Karpinos said he was not sure whether there was a connection. He noted that the concept of Home Rule made it possible for local governments to undertake certain actions without having to seek State legislative authority. Mayor Broun noted that there were certain restrictions on communities with Home Rule authority. Mr. Karpinos added that the outcome would also be dependent upon how broadly the Home Rule legislation was written. Mayor Broun suggested that the staff could provide additional information on Home Rule in a follow-up report to the Council.

Roland Giduz said implementation of an entertainment and admissions tax would relieve pressure on the property tax. He stated that the two major fears associated with the tax were those of the University and the fear that the State Legislature might not approve the proposed tax. Mr. Giduz inquired whether these were valid reasons for the Council not to proceed with something which they believed in. He also inquired whether Town residents should expect to pay higher taxes on necessities before paying reasonable taxes on luxuries. Mr. Giduz said he opposed the concept of a one percent tax on prepared foods. He added that other communities would likely view the entertainment tax as a reasonable proposal and seek similar legislation. Mr. Giduz stated that it was very unlikely that implementation of a one dollar per ticket admission tax would make the University's athletic events less fiscally competitive. He urged persons supporting the entertainment tax proposal to contact the Mayor and Council, urging their support of the proposal.

Phillip Sullivan said he strongly favored an entertainment tax as a means of reducing the local property tax burden. He added that it was very unlikely that attendees at athletic events would object to an additional one dollar per ticket fee. Mr. Sullivan also expressed his support for the Town's present non-discrimination policy. He inquired whether the term "affectional orientation" as outlined in the proposed new policy included necrophiles and pedophiles. Mr. Sullivan requested that the Council not change the Town's existing non-discrimination policy.

Erik Ose said he favored providing a change in the Town's charter concerning the recall of elected officials. Mr. Ose said he was disgusted by Mr. Sullivan's earlier comments, unfairly characterizing the proposed change in the Town's existing non-discrimination policy. Noting that increasing numbers of students were registering to vote and participating in local elections, Mr. Ose urged the Council not to hold recall elections during summer months.

James McEnery expressed his support for citizen-initiated recall of elected officials. He also expressed his support for a one dollar admission tax as a means of reducing the property tax burden. Mr. McEnery expressed concern that a prepared meals tax could possibly be regressive. Mr. McEnery also said he did not favor the proposed new non-discrimination policy. Stating that the Town had parking problems, Mr. McEnery expressed his support for the proposed Denver Boot local bill as a means of immobilizing parking ticket violators.

Matt Stiegler expressed his support for adding sexual orientation to the Town's non-discrimination portion of the Town charter. Mr. Stiegler said it was not right to terminate an individual's employment because of the person's sexual orientation. He stated that many communities looked to the Town as a leader on local social policy matters. Mr. Stiegler said it was important that the Town's proposed recall election provisions preclude holding such elections during the summer months.

COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG, TO REFER COMMENTS TO THE MANAGER AND ATTORNEY. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

Item 2 Intimate Bookshop Request for Special Use Permit

Mr. Horton requested that newly-submitted materials pertaining to the request be entered into the record of the hearing. Mayor Broun concurred. Planning Director Roger Waldon reviewed the application, noting that an expansion of the requested structure was being requested. He stated that the staff's preliminary recommendation was approval of the request with conditions. Mr. Waldon noted that current regulations did not require fire sprinklers for the main part of the building. He also noted that sprinklers would be required for the basement of the building if it exceeded 2,500 square feet. Noting that the Planning Board was meeting this evening, Mr. Waldon said the Board's recommendation was adoption of Resolution A, approving the proposal with conditions.

Council Member Andresen inquired whether it was correct that the Design Review Board had not reviewed the proposal. Mr. Waldon said this was correct. Council Member Andresen inquired whether drawings of the proposed front facades were available. Mr. Waldon showed the proposed facades. Council Member Werner inquired whether the proposed 14,800 square foot building area included a basement. Mr. Waldon said yes. Council Member Werner inquired about proposed sprinklers in the renovated building. Mr. Waldon said Mr. Kuralt could address this point. Council Member Brown inquired about the status of the Appearance Commission's concerns about glass on the front of the proposed building. Mr. Waldon said the applicant had reacted favorably to the suggestion to add glass to the facade.

Wallace Kuralt stated that the Town's fire department had suggested that sprinklers be provided if there were openings between floors of the proposed building. Noting that he did not know whether the building would have a basement, Mr. Kuralt said sprinklers would be included throughout the proposed structure. Council Member Capowski inquired about estimated costs for sprinklers. Mr. Kuralt said the estimated total cost would be about $30,000. He added that the Town's advisory boards and commissions had provided a number of good suggestions relative to project design. Mr. Kuralt expressed appreciation to the staff and Council for speeding up review of his proposal.

Council Member Powell inquired whether the building's renderings included the Appearance Commission's suggested modifications. Mr. Kuralt said yes, noting that a combination of wood and glass was proposed. Council Member Andresen said the proposed design was attractive. Noting that no additional speakers had signed up to speak on the matter, Mayor Broun inquired whether Mr. Kuralt concurred with the proposed conditions of approval. Mr. Kuralt expressed his concurrence.

COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER POWELL, TO ADJOURN THE PUBLIC HEARING. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY

(8-0).

COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER POWELL, TO REFER THE MATTER TO THE MANAGER AND ATTORNEY. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

Item 3 Public Hearing on Request for Better Wrench SUP

Parties wishing to testify in the matter were sworn by the Town Clerk. Mr. Horton requested that materials pertaining to the application be entered into the record of the hearing. Mayor Broun concurred. Planning Director Roger Waldon reviewed the application, noting that there were three interrelated projects including the Better Wrench car care facility, Mercedes Drive commercial building and Northfield subdivision. He showed an exhibit map, noting that the applicant proposed to comprehensively plan the overall site. Council Member Werner inquired about the proposed alignment of Mercedes Drive. Mr. Waldon detailed the proposed roadway location and orientation. He added that dedicated open space was proposed in the middle of the Better Wrench site. Mr. Waldon also noted that the applicant proposed to keep automobile storage on the site well hidden. He stated that the Planning Board had reviewed a request from an adjoining property owner requesting that a fence be installed along Mercedes Drive. He said the Board did not find this to be an appropriate requirement. Mr. Waldon stated that the Design Review Board had unanimously reviewed the project and recommended expedited processing.

Bridges Pendergraph requested that the applicant be required to install a two hundred and eighty foot fence adjoining his property to prevent pedestrians from Airport Road from cutting through the area.

Runyon Woods said he and Phil Zook were the project's designers. Mr. Woods emphasized that the needs of the business and surrounding neighborhood had been examined carefully and the project had been designed in accordance with these needs. He added that extra large buffers of seventy feet width were proposed, rather than the required twenty feet. Mr. Woods stated that there were at least two very important trees on the site, a large white oak and a specimen holly tree which was eight feet taller than other trees in the area. He showed renderings of the proposed Better Wrench and Mercedes Drive Commercial buildings, noting that the latter would house retail or office uses. Mr. Woods stated that the proposed Northfield subdivision would have homes on one side of Mercedes Drive and parks and open space on the opposite side.

Noting that he did not know whether pedestrians would cut across Mr. Pendergraph's and the Better Wrench properties, Mr. Woods said he did not believe that installation of a fence between the properties should be required as a condition of approval. Mr. Pendergraph said the fence did not need to installed on the property line. Mr. Woods said any visual problems would be addressed with landscaping. Council Member Werner inquired about the required width for the buffer. Mr. Zook said a twenty foot class b buffer was required on Mercedes Drive. Mr. Woods said there were no requirements to put a fence on Mr. Pendergraph's property.

Noting that Glen Heights subdivision had a single entrance and exit, Mr. Woods said he did not think that cul-de-sacs were a good idea. Mr. Woods also said he did not want to create a way to avoid the stop light at Homestead and Airport Roads.

Phil Zook said an engineer had been hired to perform a stormwater management plan for the project. He said the stormwater management study found that runoff could be handled by the proposed site design. Mr. Zook said the overall stormwater management plan would have to be approved by the Town's Engineering Department. Council Member Werner inquired whether there were seventy-eight undeveloped acres to the west of the Better Wrench site. Mr. Woods said this was correct. Council Member Werner said the amount of runoff would increase significantly once development occurred in the area. Mr. Zook noted that the project would be downstream from this development. Mr. Woods said a mat and surface seal would be installed in the middle of the Better Wrench site. He added that oil runoff from the site would be collected in a sand pit and filtered naturally and openly through adjoining parkland.

Council Member Werner inquired about the extent of linkage between the three proposals. Mr. Woods said the applicant would be happy to make changes of plans, if necessary. He added that the notion that any of the projects would be rejected was a little puzzling since really good design work had been performed. Council Member Werner noted that his question had not been intended as a criticism of the proposal. Mr. Woods said the Northfield subdivision was proposed for development following completion of the Better Wrench and Mercedes Drive Building projects. Council Member Andresen inquired where the site drained to. Mr. Zook said Eastwood Lake. Noting that she had recently reviewed drainage on the adjoining Auto Bath property, Council Member Andresen said minor flooding could cause swales on the site to deteriorate fairly quickly. Mr. Woods said he had also walked the sites and found it was unlikely that the drainage channel would be stressed in the future.

Council Member Andresen suggested that the Auto Bath site be checked for compliance with erosion and drainage regulations. She inquired whether sewer service would ultimately be provided to the Northfield subdivision lots. Mr. Woods said yes, adding that sewer service to the Northfield subdivision would allow lower cost future sewer tie-ins for ten to twelve lots in the adjoining Glen Heights subdivision. Council Member Andresen said she appreciated the special use process, as it tended to result in very good development. Council Member Capowski inquired about the location of the sewer line for the project. Mr. Woods said the line was parallel to Airport Road. Council Member Capowski inquired why sewer connections for Glen Heights were so expensive. Mr. Woods said this was primarily attributable to topographical conditions. Council Member Capowski inquired about time limits for special use permits and subdivision approvals. Mr. Waldon said the normal starting time limit for special use permits was two years, while a final subdivision plat approval normally needed to occur within one year of a preliminary plan approval.

Council Member Capowski expressed concern that the Better Wrench and Mercedes Drive projects might be completed while the Northfield subdivision was not completed. Mr. Woods said this although this could happen, he urged the Council to adopt the preliminary plat approval request to assure neighbors of the developer's intent to construct homes in the area. Mr. Zook noted that substantial fees had been paid for the subdivision application. Mr. Woods noted that if the subdivision were sold to another builder, they could attempt to maximize the number of lots to be built.

Council Member Capowski asked whether it was correct that the tenant of the proposed office building was unknown. Mr. Woods said this was correct, adding that the location might be a good one for office or retail uses. Council Member Brown requested that staff provide additional information on a proposed pedestrian easement in its follow-up report. Mr. Horton said the staff would do so.

Noting that there were no additional speakers, Mayor Broun inquired whether the applicant agreed to the proposed conditions of approval. Mr. Woods said yes.

COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER TO ADJOURN THE PUBLIC HEARING. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY

(9-0).

COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON, TO REFER THE MATTER TO THE MANAGER AND ATTORNEY. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Item 4 Mercedes Drive Building SUP Request

Mr. Waldon requested that his earlier comments be incorporated into the record of the hearing. He noted that the Appearance Commission had concerns about proposed project landscape plans, the Planning Board was concerned about the form and size of the proposed building and the Transportation Board suggested that the applicant provide a bus shelter. He noted that the bus shelter had been incorporated into the Manager's recommendation, but was not included in the Planning Board recommendation. Mr. Woods said his comments from the previous hearing applied. Mayor Broun noted that there were no citizen comments on the application.

Council Member Brown inquired whether proposed bike paths and sidewalks were both four feet wide. Mr. Waldon said yes. Council Member Brown inquired whether bicycle lane widths would be consistent along NC 86 North. Mr. Horton said bicycle lane widths were still being determined. Council Member Brown inquired whether it would be possible to accommodate five-foot wide bicycle paths. Mr. Waldon said the intention was to fit the paths with recent improvements made on Airport Road. Mr. Waldon said he was not sure how the improvements would fit along Homestead Road.

Noting that there were no additional citizen comments, Mayor Broun inquired whether the applicant agreed to the proposed conditions of approval. Mr. Woods said yes.

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

COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON, TO REFER COMMENTS TO THE MANAGER AND ATTORNEY. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Item 5 Public Hearing on Northfield Subdivision Request

for Preliminary Plat Approval

Mr. Waldon requested that his earlier comments be incorporated into the record of the hearing. Council Member Brown inquired about the concerns of the Parks and Recreation and Greenways Commissions about the signing of pedestrian easements. Mr. Waldon said it was an oversight if this was not covered in the proposed conditions of approval. Council Member Brown inquired about the staff's comment on Mr. Pendergraph's request for a fence. Mr. Horton said there was nothing in the law to require the installation of a fence. Mr. Woods requested that his earlier comments be incorporated into the record of the hearing. Noting that there was no additional public comment, Mayor Broun inquired whether the applicant concurred with the proposed conditions of approval. Mr. Woods said yes.

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

COUNCIL MEMBER CAPOWSKI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER, TO REFER COMMENTS TO THE MANAGER AND ATTORNEY. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Item 6 Springcrest Subdivision Phase III & IV Annexation

Mr. Horton said the subject tract contained approximately seventeen acres. He noted that there services could be provided to the area without significant additional costs. Mayor Broun noted that there was no citizen comment on the matter. Council Member Rimer inquired whether it was correct that a subdivision had recently been approved in the area. Mr. Waldon said the Council had approved the Birch Meadow subdivision on February 8th. Council Member Andresen noted that roads planned through subdivisions were sometimes not constructed.

COUNCIL MEMBER RIMER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER POWELL, TO REFER THE MATTER TO THE MANAGER AND ATTORNEY. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

There was no additional staff information, citizen or Council comment on the proposed annexation of open space for Springcrest subdivision, Phases III and IV.

COUNCIL MEMBER POWELL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON, TO REFER THE MATTER TO THE MANAGER AND ATTORNEY. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

The hearing concluded at 9:38 p.m.