MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA, WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 19, 1994 AT 7:30 P.M.

Mayor Broun called the meeting to order. He noted that Council Member Barbara Powell was unable to attend this evening's hearing due to an employment-related obligation in Greenville this evening.

Council Members in attendance were Joyce Brown, Joe Capowski, Mark Chilton, Pat Evans, Lee Pavão, Jim Protzman and Rosemary Waldorf. Also in attendance were Town Manager Cal Horton, Assistant Town Managers Sonna Loewenthal and Florentine Miller, Planning Director Roger Waldon, Development Coordinator Jennie Bob Culpepper, Senior Transportation Planner David Bonk and Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos.

Item 1 Hearing on Proposed South Columbia Street Improvements

Town Engineer George Small stated that the Council had asked the staff to examine current conditions and possible improvements to South Columbia Street. He said that staff had found that the roadway was currently functioning reasonably well, with a typical service level of "c", deteriorating to level of "d" during peak hours. Mr. Small stated that Town staff had a number of fruitful discussions with State Department of Transportation (D.O.T.) officials about possible alternatives for South Columbia Street. He noted that D.O.T. officials suggested a minimum of four lanes, with two travel lanes in each direction. Council Member Waldorf asked whether D.O.T's recommendation was for a minimum of four travel lanes without a median. Mr. Small stated that the D.O.T. recommended a four-foot wide raised median along most of the proposed four-lane roadway.

Britton Sanders, a resident of Coolidge Street, said the Town would eventually need to expand South Columbia Street to four lanes due to increasing traffic volumes in the area.

Elaine Barney said the proposal for additional new traffic lanes was not favored by residents of the South Columbia Street area. Ms. Barney urged the Council to bear in mind that the University and UNC Hospitals had an obligation to explore responsible alternatives, such as providing park and ride lots and free shuttle services, to constructing new roads.

Ed Carlstein said traffic was not that heavy on South Columbia Street and therefore street widening was not necessary. Mr. Carlstein stated that wider roads would serve as a magnet to attracting more cars to South Columbia Street. He also expressed concern that the Department of Transportation might not live up to its agreement concerning the preservation of area stone walls and trees.

Karyn Traut said she favored the provision of bicycle paths and foot paths along South Columbia Street in lieu of additional travel lanes. Ms. Traut stated that her husband had been very fortunate to survive an auto/bicycle accident as a bicyclist on South Columbia Street. She requested that the Council install a shoulder along South Columbia Street to accommodate a bicycle lane and foot paths.

Tom Traut urged the Council to keep South Columbia Street as simple and safe as possible by adding bikeways and walkways rather than travel lanes.

Area resident Nanette Mengel said she also owned a rental house on Purefoy Road. Ms. Mengel also said she favored additional bicycle lanes and sidewalks, rather than additional travel lanes. She expressed concern that the North Carolina Department of Transportation had recently taken down a stone wall in the Purefoy Road area and not properly restored the wall.

Gerhard Lenski said three groups, commuters from Chatham County, developers and UNC Hospital administrators, stood to benefit from the proposed widening of South Columbia Street. He also stated that Town taxpayers had the most to lose relative to the possible roadway widening. Mr. Lenski suggested that the University consider building park and ride lots and providing free shuttle from the area south of Town, rather than widening South Columbia Street.

Kimberly Brewer, a resident of Purefoy Road, said although Chatham County was likely to be a high growth center in the near future, serious traffic demand management needed to take place. She stated that the provision of park and ride lots did not offer a complete answer to the area's traffic problems. Ms. Brewer suggested that one possibility was to have both lanes of South Columbia operate in a northerly direction during peak morning traffic and in a southerly direction during evening peak traffic hours. Ms. Brewer expressed hope that it would be possible for the Council and area residents to preserve the area's strong sense of community and neighborhood.

Peter Todd, representing the Orange County Greens, urged the Council not to approve the widening of South Columbia Street to four lanes. Mr. Todd said it was of paramount importance to provide bicycle lanes, walkways and a turning lane where appropriate.

Ruby Sinreich, representing the Transportation Board and Design Review Board, said the South Columbia Street area was very unsafe for bicyclists. Ms. Sinreich also stated that a reversible traffic pattern was feasible.

Mary Ellen Jones, 604 South Columbia Street, said she hoped the Council would not authorize the widening of South Columbia Street to four lanes. Noting that she could very easily cross South Columbia Street most mornings with the exception of two peak periods of about twenty minutes each. Ms. Jones suggested that the University investigate the construction of park and ride lots, the use of reversible traffic lanes and the staggering of arrival times for staff members. She also urged the Council to use its imagination in making South Columbia Street a safer area for bicyclists and pedestrians.

Transportation Board member Paul Killough said he was interested in the curb and gutter portion of plans for South Columbia Street. Mr. Killough said the Department of Transportation's requirement of two foot gutter section interfered with bicycle lanes. He urged the Council to eliminate four feet of impervious surface by not requiring additional guttering along South Columbia Street.

William Pearlman said an emphasis should be placed on increasing mass transit facilities rather than increasing the incentive for automobiles to come into the Town.

Joan Bartel, a 14-year resident of South Columbia Street, presented petitions from neighborhood residents opposing possible widening of South Columbia Street. Ms. Bartel expressed concern that South Columbia Street was not adequately maintained, with rocks falling off rock walls in the area. She stated that there were a number of illegal structures in the right-of-way of South Columbia Street which needed to be removed.

Mary Turner Lane, a resident of the Westwood neighborhood, stated that area residents had not changed their opinion during the last four years about their opposition to the widening of South Columbia Street. Ms. Turner Lane said that although South Columbia Street was quite busy for some periods in the morning, at lunch time and in the evening, the remainder of the time there was not much traffic on the street. She requested that the Council protect the last human-scale roadway entrance into the Town.

Barry Lentz, 179 Tradescant Drive, a UNC Medical School employee, said he rode his bicycle to and from work each day. Mr. Lentz suggested that the improvements to South Columbia Street include bicycle lanes and park and ride facilities.

John Kent said he supported bicycle facilities on South Columbia Street and agreed with the need for the corridor to be human scale.

Council Member Brown said South Columbia Street did not have serious traffic difficulties. She stated that a number of other area roadways had more acute traffic problems. Council Member Brown also said that the North Carolina Department of Transportation had not been very responsive to park and ride and carpooling programs in the past. She inquired whether the Town had adequate fiscal resources to go forward with bicycle lanes and sidewalks along South Columbia Street without benefit of State funds. Noting that D.O.T. had recently provided grants for a number of local transit-related projects, Mr. Horton said he believed it would be worthwhile for the Town to pursue funding options with the Department.

Stating that the Town had experienced a number of traffic-related disputes with the Department of Transportation, Council Member Brown suggested the possibility of the Council meeting with D.O.T. officials before proceeding with the South Columbia Street feasibility study. Noting that D.O.T. administered programs state-wide and South Columbia Street was totally located within Town limits, Mayor Broun suggested that Town staff convey the Council's wishes concerning South Columbia Street to D.O.T. staff.

Council Member Capowski requested a staff clarification concerning the projected number of turning movements along South Columbia Street. Mr. Small stated that computer software projected expected delays in traffic movements along South Columbia Street. Council Member Capowski said he questioned whether the neighborhood's residents needed to be disturbed due to an average of one car making a turning movement every three minutes. He inquired how widening South Columbia Street would impact traffic bottlenecks at the intersection of South Columbia, U.S. 15-501 and the bypass. Mr. Small stated that this was a different situation which would not be improved by the widening of South Columbia Street.

Noting that the Department of Transportation had said it would not agree to construct a three-lane road on South Columbia Street, Council Member Capowski inquired whether a five-lane road was less dangerous than a three-lane roadway. Mr. Small stated that the ultimate project width was based on predicted roadway capacity. He added that it was hard to say whether or not D.O.T. would study the possibility of a three-lane roadway. Council Member Capowski suggested that the Town and University continue to encourage the use of the "J" bus route to the University campus area.

Council Member Brown suggested that the Council consider whether it was more desirable to have three continuous lanes along South Columbia Street or two lanes with turning lanes as needed. Council Member Capowski said he concurred.

Mayor Broun said traffic counts bore out that there were no major traffic problems on South Columbia Street. He also noted that there were problems for bicyclists and pedestrians in the area.

Mayor Broun also stated that it would be useful to encourage motorists to slow down in the area.

Council Member Chilton said he continued to oppose the four-lane roadway option for South Columbia Street. He also suggested that the Council might consider moving ahead with bicycle and pedestrian improvements on South Columbia Street without State D.O.T. funding.

Council Member Brown suggested that the Council consider requesting that D.O.T. not route NC 86 through the Town.

Council Member Protzman stated that the three-lane option was less appealing than having two lanes on South Columbia Street. Council Member Protzman said he would support two travel lanes with bicycle lanes and sidewalks. He requested that staff comment on entranceway plans in its follow-up report to the Council.

COUNCIL MEMBER PAVÃO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER CAPOWSKI, TO REFER THE MATTER TO STAFF. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

Item 2 Public Hearing on U.S. 15-501 Corridor Study

Senior Transportation Planner David Bonk briefly reviewed the U.S. 15-501 corridor study before the Council this evening. He noted that the proposed corridor study did not go into much detail about alternative transit strategies. Mr. Bonk noted that the study recommended a phase two study. He stated that the staff's preliminary recommendation was to initiate a phase two study as soon as possible.

Council Member Evans inquired about "congestion pricing". Mr. Bonk said this incorporated various elements such as tolls, with drivers being assessed a fee for use of very heavily travelled corridors.

Mike Waldroup, a member of the U.S. 15-501 Corridor Steering Committee, said a large amount of development was projected along the corridor in the near term. He urged the Council to suspend final action on the matter until the corridor follow-up study was released.

Martin Rody, representing the Planning Board, said the Board had discussed the matter in great detail and recommended approval of the staff's report and recommendations. He also stated that the Board recommended initiation of the phase two study as soon as possible.

Richard Franck stated that the estimated total cost of the study would be between $80 million and $100 million. He stated that the staff's report did not recommend an urban freeway for the U.S.

15-501 corridor. Mr. Franck noted that the report promoted internal circulation and the use of alternate transit along the corridor. He suggested that the Council carefully examine proposed future land uses and the possibility of an overlay zone.

Pat Carstensen, President of the Cross-County Community Association, said circulator roads were very important. She stated that "congestion pricing" might be useful for Pope Road. Ms. Carstensen also stated that the second phase of the study might offer desirable new alternatives for addressing traffic concerns.

Linda Convissor said she was quite disappointed by the staff's report and lack of specific recommendations concerning the U.S. 15-501 corridor. She stated that printing a list of businesses and homes which might be impacted by the proposed roadway alignment was irresponsible. Ms. Convissor also said she hoped that the Council would defer its decisions until proposed new businesses along the corridor were in operation.

Sierra Club Member Paul Aloisio said use of the U.S. 15-501 was closely linked to proposed land uses. Mr. Aloisio expressed his support for the conditions outlined in Resolution B concerning an overlay zone. He also suggested that the Town and City of Durham work with the Triangle Transit Authority to develop additional public transit options.

Sierra Club Member Ed Harrison stated that when major highways did not work well, people tended to use local streets as an alternative. Noting his interest as an avid bicyclist, Mr. Harrison said it was quite difficult to traverse many of the Town's side streets on a bicycle. He suggested that the Council consider adopting elements of the Planning Board and Transportation Board recommendations concerning the U.S. 15-501 corridor.

Diane Bloom, representing the Alliance of Neighborhoods, expressed concern that the corridor study did not reference peripheral roadways which were directly impacted by the functioning or malfunctioning of U.S. 15-501. She also said that the Alliance suggested that the Council strongly consider the function and safety of side roads as a part of the decision-making process. Ms. Bloom said she believed that the staff's recommendation concerning flexible levels of service would guarantee more high-speed cut-through traffic in neighborhoods adjoining the U.S. 15-501 corridor.

Council Member Capowski inquired whether bus service was provided from the Eastgate area to the Duke University campus. Council Member Chilton said the Blue Line followed a similar route. Mr. Franck noted that Elliott Road would be the closest stop to Eastgate on the Blue Line. Council Member Capowski asked whether the Blue Line was heavily used by commuters to Duke University. Mr. Horton said the route was heavily used compared to other routes.

Council Member Brown inquired about the definition of a transportation overlay zone. Mr. Bonk stated that overlay zones entailed additional alternative transit-related requirements for the impacted area. He noted that the zones involved a whole range of regulations and guidelines. Council Member Brown inquired whether the City of Durham had discussed transportation overlay and management zones. Mr. Bonk stated that a private cooperative effort had been initiated to investigate viable alternative transit strategies. Council Member Brown inquired about the scope of the phase two study. Mr. Bonk said the report would provide much greater detail than the initial report. Council Member Brown inquired about the City of Durham's discussions to date. Mr. Bonk said the applicable City advisory boards had reviewed the proposal as part of an overall plan. Council Member Brown asked whether the City of Durham's resolution would be similar to the ones proposed to the Council. Mr. Bonk said this was difficult to evaluate.

Council Member Evans said the greatest amount of traffic gridlock along the Town's portion of the corridor was occurring at the partial cloverleaf intersection of U.S. 15-501 and I-40. Noting her prior participation in corridor study meetings, Council Member Evans said transportation officials felt that it would be too expensive to install a full clover leaf at this intersection. Council Member Evans said she wondered where about the source of funds for the estimated $100 million in improvements to the U.S. 15-501 corridor.

Mayor Broun requested that the staff's follow-up report contain a table outlining differences between resolutions a and b. He also requested that the report contain suggestions to address the concerns of neighborhood residents concerning cut-through traffic from major thoroughfares.

Council Member Brown requested that the staff's follow-up report contain information about how the City of Durham was proceeding in the matter. She also requested that the report contain information about the status of commercial construction projects along the corridor.

Noting that small area plans had proven to be successful planning tools, Council Member Protzman inquired whether this an appropriate approach to planning of the U.S. 15-501 corridor. Council Member Evans noted that several years ago, the Council had discussed the desirability of small area plans for the south and northwest portions of the Town as well as the U.S. 15-501 corridor area.

Council Member Waldorf suggested that a number of short-term actions such as additional speed and traffic enforcement might be undertaken by the Town.

Stating that the Department of Transportation did not appear to favor the use of traffic calming techniques, Council Member Brown said she hoped staff could further explore use of these types of techniques with D.O.T. staff.

Council Member Capowski inquired about the extent to which the Department of Transportation considered U.S. 15-501 as part of a national roadway network. Mayor Broun stated that the Department of Transportation tended to stress traffic movement from one part of the state to another, rather than focusing on the national network or local roadway aspects of planning.

COUNCIL MEMBER PAVÃO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON, TO REFER THE MATTER TO THE MANAGER. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

Item 3 Bolin Creek Greenway, Phase II SUP

Persons wishing to testify in the matter were sworn or affirmed by the Town Clerk.

Parks and Recreation Administrative Analyst Bill Webster presented an overview of the proposal noting that staff recommended that Phase II of the Bolin Creek Greenway follow the "woodland" option presented to the Council in 1993. Mr. Webster stated that this option addressed both privacy and environmental concerns.

Council Member Capowski inquired about the status of property acquisition. Mr. Webster stated that the Town had three signed easement agreements in hand, the paperwork for a fourth completed, and was hoping to complete negotiations with the Village Green Homeowners Association in the near future.

Martin Rody, representing the Planning Board, said the Board had recommended approval of the applicant's request, with conditions. He also stated that the Board felt that it was not appropriate for the Town to provide screening of private recreation areas along the trail.

Joseph Sableski, a resident of Village Green condominiums, said he was opposed to development of the proposed greenway near Village Green. He requested that the proposed trail alignment be deeper into the woods so as to not disturb the privacy of area residents.

Julia Khanova, a Village Green resident, said she had interviewed residents of Village Green and found that 93% of residents opposed the suggested trail alignment. She noted that most of these residents were concerned about their loss of privacy due to the proximity of the trail to their units. Ms. Khanova also stated that residents were concerned about the potential for break-ins and burglaries. She requested that Council Members try to put themselves in the shoes of Village Green residents.

Mayor Broun asked whether the pathway alignment presented to the Council differed from that presented earlier to Village Green residents. Ms. Khoniva said she believed the proposed pathway was closer to Village Green units than shown on the plan. She stated that residents were especially concerned about a proposal to grant a temporary construction easement on the Village Green grounds.

Thomas Beckett, attorney for the Village Green condominium Homeowners Association, said the homeowners had done a great deal to upgrade their physical plant and encourage more homeownership. He noted that the homeowners were especially concerned about the potential loss of privacy arising from the proposed greenway alignment. Mr. Beckett also said the homeowners were concerned about the proposed construction easement which might necessitate access by construction vehicles for up to one year, during construction of the greenway trail.

Leslie Hill, a Village Green resident, said she did not like the woodland option as proposed near Village Green condominiums. She noted that residents were concerned about the potential for trespassers walking along the greenway and illegally accessing the Village Green's pool and basketball court area.

Mark Gigliotti said although the proposed greenway would provide a valuable community resource, it was also important for the Town to protect the interests of Village Green relative to their privacy and safety needs.

David Tilson stated that a number of Village Green residents were especially concerned about their personal safety due to the proximity of the proposed trail to their condominium units. He stated that recent trespassers in the basketball court and swimming pool areas had disturbed the privacy of condominium residents. Mr. Tilson urged the Council to construct a six-foot privacy fence as part of the greenway project. He also expressed concern that the request for a construction easement on the Village Greens property posed a potential danger for accidents on the site.

Debi Draudt presented a written petition outlining her suggestions about proposed conditions of approval for the greenway. A copy of Ms. Draudt's petition is on file in the Town Clerk's Office.

Mayor Broun asked whether any other citizens wished to speak on the matter. No other citizens expressed a desire to speak.

Mr. Horton requested that written materials pertaining to the item be entered into the record of the hearing. Mayor Broun concurred with the request.

COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PAVÃO, TO REFER THE MATTER TO STAFF. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY

(8-0).

Item 4 Franklin Park Rezoning Request

Mr. Horton requested that the materials relating to the request be entered into the record of the hearing. Mayor Broun concurred.

Development Coordinator Jennie Bob Culpepper reviewed the proposal for rezoning of a 5.2 acre parcel from R-5 to OI-2 conditional zoning. She stated that the staff's preliminary recommendation was adoption of Ordinance A.

Martin Rody said the Planning Board had reviewed the request at its October meeting. He noted that the rezoning recommendation was in keeping with the Franklin Street corridor study.

Council Member Evans inquired whether it would be logical to consider changing the zoning of other nearby commercial establishments which currently had R-5 zoning. Ms. Culpepper said it was not absolutely necessary to rezone these properties. Council Member Evans requested that staff look into the possibility of rezoning the Howell Building and the Better Homes and Gardens Building. Mr. Horton noted that the building owners would need to request the rezonings.

COUNCIL MEMBER PROTZMAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO REFER THE MATTER TO STAFF. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY

(8-0).

Item 5 Franklin Park SUP Request

Ms. Culpepper said the request involved three parcels totalling 5.2 acres. She noted that the applicant was proposing a total of 61,800 square feet in the three buildings. She stated that the two key issues were the number and placement of driveways on the site. Ms. Culpepper stated that the Planning Board recommended only one point of access in order to reduce the number of potential turning movement conflicts. She stated that the staff's preliminary recommendation was the adoption of Resolution A.

Council Member inquired about the proposed driveway orientation if only one access point were provided. Ms. Culpepper showed the proposed driveway locations and alignments. Council Member Capowski inquired about proposed development to the east. Ms. Culpepper said a second office building was proposed. Council Member Capowski inquired about the possibility of connecting the Howell and Franklin Park parking lots. Ms. Culpepper said this would be possible if Mr. Howell chose to request that the Council modify his existing special use permit.

Gregg Sandreuter, representing East-West Partners, said he thought the proposed project with office uses was a good one. He stated that Johnny Morris, Michael Hining and himself were available to answer questions.

Martin Rody stated that the Planning Board stated that although the Board wished to minimize the number of curb cuts on Franklin Street, it discussed whether to preserve specimen trees on the site or act in the interests of public safety. Mr. Rody said the Board had discussed the possibility of prohibiting left turns from the site onto Franklin Street and the applicant providing an automatic fire sprinkler system. Mr. Horton noted that staff did not recommend such a system.

Council Member Capowski inquired about the possibility of using one driveway for buildings A & B and the Howell Building driveway for Building C. Mr. Horton said it would be necessary for Mr. Howell to agree to this arrangement. Council Member Capowski asked whether this possibility had been discussed. Mr. Sandreuter said yes, although no agreement had been reached.

Council Member Waldorf inquired about the location of proposed dumpsters on the site. Mr. Sandreuter showed the location of the proposed pads, noting that the applicant proposed to provide a solid screening wall of sufficient height. Council Member Waldorf inquired how dumpster odors would be addressed. Mr. Sandreuter stated that refuse would be of the general office variety, producing few if any odors. Council Member Waldorf inquired about alternate dumpster locations. Mr. Sandreuter said staff had worked with the applicant to determine the best dumpster sites.

Council Member Protzman inquired about the proposed number of total parking spaces on the site. Mr. Sandreuter said approximately one hundred and eighty. Council Member Protzman inquired about the possibility of locating a driveway next to one of the buildings without crossing the ravine. Mr. Sandreuter said a large oak tree in the area precluded this option.

Noting that she had worked on the Franklin Street corridor study, Council Member Evans said she preferred a single entrance. She inquired whether the applicant had spoken to the owners of the Sunstone Apartments about possible access options on Conner Drive.

Mr. Sandreuter said no.

Noting the impracticality of having no left turns out of the site, Council Member Evans reiterated her preference for a single access onto Franklin Street. Council Member Evans said she also encouraged the applicant to talk to the owners of Sunstone Apartments about the possibility of alternate access.

Mayor Broun said he believed that limiting drivers to right turns only on to Franklin Street would prove problematic.

COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO REFER THE MATTER TO STAFF AND RECESS THE HEARING TO NOVEMBER 14TH. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

The hearing concluded at 10:34 p.m.