MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CHAPEL HILL TOWN COUNCIL

MONDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 1995 AT 7:00 P.M.

Mayor Broun called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Council Members in attendance were Joyce Brown, Joe Capowski, Mark Chilton, Pat Evans, Lee Pavão, Barbara Powell, Jim Protzman, and Rosemary Waldorf. Staff members in attendance were Town Manager Cal Horton, Assistant Town Managers Sonna Loewenthal and Florentine Miller, Planning Director Roger Waldon and Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos.

Item 2 Public Hearing on Potential Requests to General Assembly

Roland Giduz urged the Council to seek and actively support enabling or general legislation to permit a modest tax on select big ticket admission events in Chapel Hill for three reasons. Mr. Giduz said this was the fairest kind of tax possible, the Town needed additional revenues, and the majority of citizens supported the tax for these reasons. Mr. Giduz also said although he realized that the Council had to consider a spectrum of proposals, he felt this one was both logical and fair. He stated his belief that this would be a luxury tax that would ease the general tax burden placed on citizens. Mr. Giduz said the tax would apply only to those who voluntarily choose to pay it. He also stated this tax would not have a negative effect on ticket sales since tickets were sold and resold to persons all over the State of North Carolina. Mr. Giduz urged the Council to bring this needed new revenue to the Town's coffers.

Gerald Drake, speaking for the North Carolina Triangle Chapter of Physicians for Social Responsibility, addressed the Council regarding gun control. Mr. Drake suggested that the Town could initiate action toward gun registration by asking for a State referendum allowing cities and towns to have stricter gun control laws than the State. He said positive referendum results could allow the Town to proceed with gun licensing, which would make the owner liable for any injury or death resulting from gun usage. Mr. Drake stated this would help to insure that guns would be locked up and out of the hands of criminals, children and the mentally ill.

James McEnery, speaking as the President of TaxWatch, requested that the Council reinforce the need to seek fire protection funding from the State of North Carolina. Mr. McEnery said this funding needed to be increased since the amount currently received was inadequate to cover actual costs. He expressed concern that Town taxpayers were currently underwriting a $340,000 subsidy for University fire protection.

Robert Gibb said he supported stricter gun control measures within Town limits. Mr. Gibb also emphasized the importance of educating the public about the use of guns.

Collins Kilbourn, speaking as a member of North Carolinians for Gun Control, said the Town had the strictest gun control ordinance in the State. He said that when contrasted with laws in other states, however, state and local gun control laws were very weak. Mr. Kilbourn said existing State statutes had prevented stricter regulation of guns. He also said a recent poll concluded that the majority of State residents favored stricter gun control laws in North Carolina, including provisions for licensing, age limits, sales, and concealment of firearms.

Phil Sullivan, 101 Dundalf Drive, said he was astounded at the number of requests proposed to the General Assembly that would require a tax increase. Mr. Sullivan said he disagreed with the proposal to require developers to include low-income housing in all new developments. Mr. Sullivan also stated that fire protection funds provided by the State needed to be increased. He also urged the Council to support stronger gun control measures.

Susan Johnston requested that the Town help protect the rights of gays and lesbians by restoring deleted sections of the proposed Orange County civil rights ordinance. She stated that all citizens of Orange County should be protected by the Ordinance. Ms. Johnston asked that the Council forward this request to the Orange County Board of Commissioners.

Bob Reda, speaking as the President of the Alliance of Neighborhoods, stated that during recent discussions between the Town Council and School Board, Planning Director Roger Waldon outlined the concept of an adequate public facilities ordinance. Mr. Reda suggested that the Council consider adding this matter to the items to be considered by the State legislature.

Keith Aldridge, Chair of the Orange Community Housing Corporation (OCHC), spoke in support of inclusionary zoning. He suggested that this type of zoning may be a way to plug the gaps in funding for those organizations, such as OCHC, who were attempting to provide low and moderate-income housing developments. Mr. Aldridge stated that the Town currently had little or no land left for these types of development. He said although inclusionary zoning was not the best zoning for many communities, it did offer a good option to the Town, given the higher cost of living in the Town. Mr. Aldridge said the proposed provision would apply to all developers and would provide incentives for low and moderately-priced homes to be located throughout the Town.

James Goldstein spoke in favor of an entertainment tax. He also proposed a resolution, endorsed by TaxWatch, requesting the Town to pursue State legislation giving the Town the authority to impose such a tax.

Lightning Brown, speaking on behalf of the Orange County Lesbian and Gay Association, stated that he had appeared before the Council on March 2, 1994 regarding this same matter. He said that at that time he had shared several difficult stories of pain, discrimination, and violence experienced by gay and lesbian members of the community. He requested the Council's support in asking that the deleted sections of the Orange County Civil Rights Ordinance pertaining to gays and lesbians be reinserted. Mr. Brown also commented that he favored inclusionary zoning for housing and was glad to see this proposal on the Council's agenda. He also expressed his support for an impact tax, rather than an impact fee.

Mayor Broun noted that the Town Council would be meeting with the local legislative delegation on March 3rd, with staff preparing a follow-up report for the Council's March 15th meeting.

Council Member Protzman requested additional staff follow-up information concerning gay and lesbian protections in the Orange County Civil Rights Ordinance and the matter of inclusionary zoning. Mayor Broun said these matters would need to be discussed with the legislative delegation. Mayor Broun said he believed the Council had intended to request reinstatement of the gay and lesbian protections in the Orange County Civil Rights Ordinance.

Council Member Chilton said this was matter was in the County Commissioner's hands. He suggested that the Council send a letter of support to the Board of Commissioners, so that this could be pursued with Orange County's legislative requests. Council Member Brown concurred. Council Member Brown said she wished to go forward with all of the suggestions made this evening and would also like to request more information concerning an adequate public facilities ordinance, so that it could be discussed with the legislative delegation.

Mr. Horton said some previously distributed information could be redistributed prior to the March 3rd meeting with the delegation.

Council Member Powell said she believed that all of the suggestions and recommendations made this evening were worthwhile. Council Member Powell said she particularly wished to pursue the fire protection fee increase from the State. Council Member Powell said that the inclusionary zoning would benefit less fortunate individuals.

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

Item 3 Petitions

Leigh Scott-Prater, representing the Chapel Hill Cloggers asked the Council to consider a request to provide funding assistance for her group to participate in a clogging festival in Ecuador. Ms. Scott-Prater presented a brief overview of the festival and described some of the Cloggers' current community activities. Ms. Scott-Prater requested the Council's favorable consideration of the funding request. Mayor Broun inquired about possible funding sources. Mr. Horton said one option would be to seek an allocation from hotel-motel tax funds. Council Member Protzman suggested that the request be considered as part of the Town's budget process.

COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PAVAO, TO RECEIVE THE PETITION AND REFER IT TO THE MANAGER. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

John Hughes, representing the Orange County Radio Amateurs, Inc. (OCRA), presented a petition for acquisition of an Orange County Emergency radio backup system. Mr. Hughes stated that OCRA served two principal purposes, training and providing emergency services for Orange County and surrounding areas. Mr. Hughes said examples of OCRA's services were emergency radio service during Hillsborough's recent tornado event, the multiple fires experienced in the Town about eighteen months ago, and more recently a full week of emergency service to parts of Orange County when phone service was seriously interrupted. Mr. Hughes said OCRA wished to provide a County-wide radio back-up system. He said UNC Hospitals had donated $8,000 to purchase equipment and WUNC Radio had given his group permission to use part of their radio tower. Mr. Hughes said OCRA was seeking matching funds from the Town. He stated that any help from the Town towards meeting their financial goal would be greatly appreciated.

COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN, TO RECEIVE THE PETITION AND REFER IT TO THE MANAGER. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Cynthia Weiss said she was concerned about the size and impact of the proposed Meadowmont development. Ms. Weiss said the proposed development would impact every aspect of her life and those of her neighbors. She also stated although developers had been working on this development for four years, citizens had only known about the proposal for a little over one year. Ms. Weiss asked the Council not to allow the developers to speed up the review process. She also urged the Council to conduct additional studies concerning anticipated traffic, commercial and retail space impacts on the community.

Jan Halle supported Ms. Weiss' comments. Dr. Halle said she opposed expedited review of the Meadowmont development proposal. She also said it was very important for the East Entranceway Group to gather much more information prior to issuing a meaningful report to the Council.

Glenn Parks, a Rogerson Drive resident, said he was gravely concerned about the potential traffic impact from the proposed Meadowmont development. Mr. Parks said the large scale of the development surprised him and the impact on NC 54 would be greatly impacted. He emphasized the importance of carefully considering such impacts.

Mayor Broun inquired whether an application was pending. Mr. Horton said yes. Mayor Broun asked whether this matter was on the Council's schedule. Mr Horton said it was scheduled for the public hearing date in May.

Charlotte Adams, 313 Patterson Place, stated that she and her husband had purchased four lots in 1938 on McCauley Street and Patterson Place. Ms. Adams said she had been parking on McCauley Street at the end of the privacy hedge on her property for many years, but had recently received a Town parking ticket. She requested that the parking restrictions be amended so that she would be able to continue to park where she had always done so.

COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON, TO REFER THIS PETITION TO THE MANAGER. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Council Member Brown stated that she had some concerns about duplexes on Hillsborough Street. She requested that the Manager examine Town ordinances to possibly address the concerns of area residents. Council Member Powell requested a follow-up report concerning unrelated persons residing in duplexes.

COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER POWELL, TO REFER THE MATTERS TO THE MANAGER.

Council Member Capowski said he believed the Town's rooming house ordinance would cover this issue, and asked the Manager to look into this. Mayor Broun asked when staff could bring back the report. Mr. Horton said he would attempt to report back within a month.

THE MOTION TO REFER WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Council Member Brown said when the project at 208 W. Franklin Street was reviewed she was under the impression that a member of the Transportation Board was present, but the minutes of the Design Review Board indicated that there was not. She said that the Transportation Board wished to review the project at its next regular meeting.

Council Member Evans said the applicant had delineated parking spaces for carpools of three or more people, had proposed bicycle racks and shower facilities, as well as providing bus passes to employees. She said she was concerned about the amount of time the staff would have to spend to prepare a report for the Transportation Board. Mr. Horton replied that Town staff would ordinarily prepare one memo to be used for all boards, and said staff might be able to use this memo for the Transportation Board also.

Council Member Waldorf inquired whether the proposal had gone before the Design Review Board on more than one occasion. Mr. Horton said he did not believe so. Council Member Waldorf said that if there had been a glitch in the Town's review process, this was not the applicant's liability.

Council Member Pavão asked that if the Council acted on this matter and in the future a board commented that they did not review a specific proposal, would the Council then have to go back and allow that board to review the proposal. Council Member Brown said the purpose of the Design Review Board was to allow a representative of each Board to review these types of proposals and if a representative of a particular board was not present, it was not feasible to wait until such time as a member could be present. Council Member Brown said it was important for the Transportation Board to review the proposal.

COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER POWELL, TO

REFER THE MATTER TO THE TRANSPORTATION BOARD FOR COMMENT AT ITS NEXT REGULAR MEETING.

Mayor Broun said although he believed it was appropriate for the Transportation Board to examine the proposal, he also believed the Board should only make informal comments on the proposal.

Council Member Evans said it was important for alternates to be designated in the event a board or commission was unable to attend

a Design Review Board meeting on behalf of a specific board or commission.

THE MOTION TO REFER WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Council Member Waldorf stated that she was the new Council liaison to the Appearance Commission. Noting her new role, Council Member

Waldorf suggested adding some landscaping to enhance the four entranceway markers into the Town. She suggested that private donations and volunteers be used to accomplish this project.

Town Manager Horton requested that the Council add an item to the Consent Agenda as item 4.2(g) regarding the Buy Back the Hill Gun Purchase Program. Mayor Broun concurred with the request.

COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PAVAO, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION R-4.2. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING COOPERATION WITH AND ASSISTANCE TO THE BUY-BACK THE HILL TASK FORCE FOR A PROPOSED GUN BUY-BACK PROGRAM (95-2-27/R-4.2)

WHEREAS, gun-buy backs sponsored by the Buy Back the Hill task force in 1994, were successful in removing guns from our community; and

WHEREAS, the Police Department could provide assistance on a date(s) agreed upon by the Buy Back the Hill task force and the Chief of Police; and

WHEREAS, a person who turns in a gun under the buy-back program would not be cited for having a weapon on Town property;

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

1. The Council supports and appreciates the efforts of the Buy Back the Hill task force.

2. The Council authorizes the release of Buy Back the Hill funds on deposit with the Town to the Buy Back the Hill task force.

3. The Council authorizes the Police Department to receive guns, issue documents showing receipt of guns, and to dispose of such weapons.

This the 27th day of February, 1995.

Item 4.1 Consent Agenda

COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WALDORF, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION R-1. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY

(9-0).

A RESOLUTION ADOPTING VARIOUS RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES

(95-2-27/R-1)

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

a. Minutes of January 17th, 23rd, 30th and February 5th.

b. Transportation grant project ordinance (O-1).

c. Scheduling meeting with legislative delegation at 7:30 a.m. on March 3rd at Siena Hotel.

d. Extending the review period for consideration of proposed increases in basic television rates (R-3).

e. Authorizing response to request from Orange Water and Sewer Authority for comments on proposed changes in sewer use regulations (R-4).

f. Local amendment to 1994-1995 Community Development program (R-4.1).

This the 27th day of February, 1995.

AN ORDINANCE TO ADOPT GRANT PROJECT ORDINANCES FOR TRANSIT PROJECTS (95‑2‑27/O-1)

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 adopted:

SECTION I

The Section 9 and Section 3 projects authorized are from 1995 federal funds from agreements with the Federal Transit Administration and the N.C. Department of Transportation.

SECTION II

The Manager of the Town of Chapel Hill is hereby directed to proceed with the implementation of the project within the terms of the grant agreements executed with the Federal Transit Administration and the N.C. Department of Transportation within the funds appropriated herein.

SECTION III

The following revenue is anticipated to be available to the Town to complete activities as outlined in the project application.

Section 9

Federal Transit Administration (FTA) $290,312

N.C. Department of Transportation (NCDOT) 36,289

Town of Chapel Hill (local match) 36,289

──────────

TOTAL $362,890

══════════

Section 3

Federal Transit Administration (FTA) $1,687,868

N.C. Department of Transportation (NCDOT) 210,894

Town of Chapel Hill (local match) 210,893

──────────

$2,109,835

══════════

SECTION IV

The following amounts are appropriated for the project:

Section 9 Planning Funds

Salaries ‑ FT/Fringe Costs $76,290

Miscellaneous Contracted Services 6,400

──────────

$82,690

══════════

Section 9 Capital Funds

Capital Equipment $164,200

M & R Vehicles 50,000

Building Improvements 66,000

──────────

$280,200

══════════

Section 3 Capital Funds

Capital Equipment $1,954,360

Building Improvements 147,075

Maintenance & Repair Vehicles 8,400

──────────

$2,109,835

══════════

SECTION V

The Manager is directed to report annually on the financial status of the project in an informational section to be included in the Annual Report. He shall also keep the Council informed of any unusual occurrences.

SECTION VI

Copies of this project ordinance shall be entered into the minutes of the Council and copies shall be filed within 5 days of adoption with the Manager, Finance Director and Town Clerk.

This the 27th day of February, 1995.

A RESOLUTION SCHEDULING A MEETING WITH THE LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION (95-2-27/R-2)

BE IT RESOLVED by the Town Council of Chapel Hill that the Council will meet with the legislative delegation from 7:30 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. on Friday, March 3 in the Terrace Room at the Siena Hotel, 1505 East Franklin Street, Chapel Hill.

This the 27th day of February, 1995.

A RESOLUTION EXTENDING THE PERIOD FOR REVIEW OF BASIC CABLE TELEVISION RATES UNDER FEDERAL REGULATIONS (95-2-27/R-3)

WHEREAS, the Council has taken steps necessary to enforce federal regulations for basic cable service and associated equipment; and

WHEREAS, under federal rules, the cable television company must submit information on its rates to the Town this summer;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the 30-day period for rate review is extended by an additional 90 days for consideration of the filings by Cablevision of Chapel Hill and Cablevision of Durham dated February 2, 1995.

This the 27th day of February, 1995.

A RESOLUTION REGARDING PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE ORANGE WATER AND SEWER AUTHORITY'S PROPOSAL TO AMEND THE AUTHORITY SEWER USE ORDINANCE (95-2-27/R-4)

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council authorizes the Mayor on behalf of the Town to convey to the Orange Water and Sewer Authority that the Town has no comment on the proposed changes in the Authority's sewer use ordinance as submitted to the Town with a letter from the Authority dated January 26, 1995.

This the 27th day of February, 1995.

A RESOLUTION APPROVING A LOCAL AMENDMENT TO THE 1994-95 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM (95-2-27/R-4.1)

WHEREAS, the Town of Chapel Hill is a member of the Orange County HOME Consortium and is committed to rehabilitating low- and moderate income homes in Orange County; and

WHEREAS, the Town of Chapel Hill has committed and obligated $88,500 of Community Development funds for the rehabilitation of owner-occupied homes in Chapel Hill;

WHEREAS, additional funds are needed to complete the program;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill approves a local amendment to the 1994-95 Community Development Program to use $8,300 of unspent Community Development Block Grant funds for the Housing Rehabilitation activity, and authorizes the Manager to submit this change to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

This the 27th day of February, 1995.

Item 4.2 Information Reports

Council Member Brown requested that item 4.2(b) be referred to the Transportation Board for comments.

Council Member Capowski said his memory was that the first time the Council looked at this matter was when the Top of the Hill came before the Council. He said he would like to know how many bus passes were purchased by employers for their employees. Council Member Capowski said that providing parking spaces was a much more expensive undertaking and suggested encouraging the purchase of bus passes to reduce the use of single-occupant vehicles.

Item 5 Village Center Rezoning and Special Use Permit

Planning Director Waldon said the applicant's initial request was to rezone ten acres of land to Community Commercial (CC). Mr. Waldon also said that if approved, the development would only take place pursuant to the Council's approval of the Special Use Permit to be considered this evening. Mr. Waldon stated that staff felt the proposed rezoning would achieve the purposes of the Town's Comprehensive Plan.

Tom Gunn said he was puzzled by the applicant's rezoning request. He stated that a change of zoning would allow the developers to pack the area with buildings as well as asphalt. Mr. Gunn asked the Council to deny the request because he did not believe the rezoning would satisfy the requirements of the Comprehensive Plan.

Bob Rabil, an employee of Lowe's, stated that a lot of information had been offered regarding the proposed rezoning. He said both sides of the issue had presented very convincing arguments to support their beliefs. Mr. Rabil said he believed approving the request was a win-win situation. He said it would ease the Town's tax burden and would create jobs. Mr. Rabil said he strongly recommended that the Council approve the rezoning request.

Bob Reda stated the issue this evening was not Lowe's, but whether or not the Council was prepared to make a decision on this development without a solution to U.S. 15-501 congestion concerns.

Mr. Reda said the applicant's request should be examined carefully, with additional discussion taking place at the March 23rd work session on the U.S. 15-501 corridor study. He urged the Council to delay action on the matter until after the work session.

Ed Harrison, representing the Cross-County Community Association, requested that the Council keep in mind matters including economic development, the element of regional cooperation such as with the Department of Transportation, Durham City and County and long-term traffic and transportation impacts in its decision-making processes. Mr. Harrison said he believed that each development on the U.S. 15-501 corridor had to be carefully studied. He expressed concurrence with Mr. Reda's recommendation to delay a decision on the matter until after the March 23rd 15-501 Corridor Study work session.

Council Member Capowski inquired whether the Council was being asked to rezone ten acres of a twelve-acre site. Mr. Waldon said yes. Council Member Capowski noted that the parking lot carried over into two acres which the Council was not being asked to rezone. Mr. Waldon stated that a planned development with a minimum area such as parking could go in any zone, so rezoning was not necessary for this two-acre tract.

Council Member Chilton displayed a map of the general area under consideration. Council Member Chilton said he did not believe the Council could proceed with rezoning of the property without examining the zoning of all properties along the Town portion of the corridor. He suggested that the Council look at the entire corridor and see what really made sense as to where commercial zoning should be permitted. Council Member Chilton suggested the Council not rush in and change the zoning just because someone was willing to build a commercial structure. Council Member Chilton asked the Council to wait until after the March 23rd work session before making a decision on the applicant's rezoning request.

Council Member Chilton also said he could also make the argument that this development was not compatible to the surrounding area, since most of the existing area was residential, rather than commercial. Council Member Chilton stated that it was possible to build a shopping center on this site without the need for rezoning.

He suggested that this possibility be explored.

Council Member Brown thanked Council Member Chilton for his comments and said he had made a very good case. Council Member Brown said she felt it was unfortunate that this matter had been put into a pro- and anti-Lowe's context, rather than tied to planning along the U.S. 15-501 corridor. Council Member Brown said she believed the corridor plan should be looked at closely before the rezoning was approved and suggested that the Council wait until after the March 23rd work session before making a rezoning decision.

Council Member Capowski inquired whether the rezoning was linked to the Special Use Permit and what would happen if the rezoning was approved but the Special Use Permit was not. Mr. Karpinos stated that the developer would have one year to obtain special use permit approval.

Council Member Protzman said although he appreciated Council Member Chilton's remarks, he did not agree with him. Council Member Protzman stated that transportation planning matters were the most critical. Council Member Protzman said he had studied the proposal over the last few weeks and felt that the Council was fairly unanimous in what they wanted concerning future development along the U.S. 15-501 corridor. He stated that it would be necessary to widen U.S. 15-501 if cloverleafs and off-ramps were not constructed. Council Member Protzman stated that allowing the rezoning would be in line with this reasoning. Council Member Protzman noted that he supported the proposed rezoning. Council Member Chilton said his main point was that good transportation planning along the corridor needed to take place prior to possible rezoning.

Council Member Brown stated that since the corridor study heavily emphasized transportation and land use matters, the Council should more closely examine the area and encourage more citizen comments. She said it should be looked at from the comprehensive planning angle, rather than just transportation matters.

Council Member Evans stated that the Council had in the past opted not to do a small area plan in this area, choosing instead to study other parts of the Town. Council Member Evans said she agreed with Council Member Protzman that the requested rezoning was appropriate for this parcel.

Council Member Waldorf said she was not optimistic that the Council could do a lot with this corridor expect for commercial development. Council Member Waldorf also said she believed the nature of the corridor was fixed and should be commercially focused.

Council Member Chilton said he felt it was a defeatist attitude to assume that just because nearby commercial properties were not pedestrian-oriented did not mean the Council should continue along the same course.

Council Member Pavão said after listening to the pros and cons of this issue, he would vote in favor of the proposed rezoning.

Council Member Brown pointed out that saying the area was not pedestrian-oriented actually would argue for not approving the requested rezoning.

COUNCIL MEMBER PROTZMAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 2. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED BY A VOTE OF 7-2,

WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS BROWN AND CHILTON VOTING NAY.

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CHAPEL HILL ZONING ATLAS (95-2-27/O-2)

WHEREAS, the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill has considered the application of Tri-City/Pinehurst National to amend the Zoning Atlas to rezone property identified as Chapel Hill Township Tax Map 27, Block B, Lots 1 and 1A from Residential-4 to Community Commercial Conditional, and finds that the amendment achieves the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan; and

WHEREAS, the Council finds that any approved special use under the Community Commercial Conditional Use District Zoning would be suitable for the property proposed for rezoning under the conditions attached to the approved Special Use Permit;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Chapel Hill Zoning Atlas be amended as follows:

SECTION I

That the northern two lots of the Village Center 20-acre site, identified as Chapel Hill Township Tax Map 27, Block B, Lots 1 and 1A, located on the east side of Sage Road, north of Dobbins Drive and U.S. Highway 15-501, within the Residential-4 zoning district, plus one-half of the adjoining right-of-way of Sage Road, be rezoned from Residential-4 to Community Commercial Conditional zoning. The legal description of the property is as follows:

Beginning at an existing axle, at the north corner of Amanda Burch Property, Deed Book 143, Page 254. Point also beginning near the southeast R/W corner of Coleridge Drive. Running thence in a northerly direction N 04 degrees 09' 38" I 241.29 feet to a point; running thence south 85 degrees 28; 47" east 956.00 feet to a point in the centerline of the creek branch. Running thence along branch south 32 degrees 58' 33" west 15.26 feet to a point. Running thence along a creek branch south 28 degrees 01' 58" west 78.25 feet to a point. Running thence along creek branch south 17 degrees 31' 42" west 79.45 feet to a point. Running thence along creek branch south 61 degrees 51' 20" west 26.97 feet to a point. Running thence along creek branch south 34 degrees 36' 56" west 61.28 feet to a point. Running thence along creek branch south 12 degrees 53' 53" west 54.83 feet to a point. Running thence along creek branch south 31 degrees 22' 41" west 63.72 feet to a point. Running thence along creek branch south 11 degrees 23' 09" west 37.86 feet to a point. Running thence along creek branch south 34 degrees 38' 53" west 90.45 feet to a point. running thence along creek branch south 60 degrees 33' 43" west 48.65 feet to a point. Running thence along creek branch south 41 degrees 13' 07" west 17.76 feet to a point at the southwest corner of V.A.C. limited partnership, Deed Book 1205, Page 126. Running thence north 79 degrees 26' 17" west 7.83 feet to an iron stake. Running thence north 85 degrees 32' 36" west 639.20 feet to an iron stake. Running thence north 85 degrees 32' 36" west 29.51 feet to a point at the west side of Sage Road. Running thence north 85 degrees 32' 36" west 20.90 feet to an iron stake in the right of way of Sage Road. Running thence along Sage Road north 23 degrees 45' 25" west 17.08 feet to an iron stake. Running thence north 04 degrees 09'38" east 8.12 feet to a point. Running thence north 04 degrees 09' 38" east 234.00 feet to the point and place of beginning.

SECTION II

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

This the 27th day of February, 1995.

Mr. Waldon presented an overview of the proposed planned development shopping center at the corner of Sage Road and U.S. 15-501. He said the applicant proposed to reroute Dobbins Drive, which currently ran through the site and came out on Sage Road. Mr. Waldon said staff was concerned about this because of its proximity to the U.S. 15-501 corridor. He said the proposal would move Dobbins Drive further away from U.S. 15-501, which would create a sliver of landscaping between Sage Road and Dobbins Drive. Mr. Waldon stated that staff recommended that the entire road between Sage Road and Dobbins Drive be dedicated as open space. He said because of the proposed landscaped aisle between Sage Road and Dobbins Drive it would be appropriate to reduce the buffer requirements for this area from thirty feet to twenty feet. Mr. Waldon also said that staff had concluded that the application would meet development requirements and would be an appropriate use of the site. He noted that staff recommended adoption of Resolution A.

Woody Davis of Pinehurst Development, the applicant's representative, stated that approximately seventy changes had been requested and the applicant had complied with all of them. He said the applicant had agreed to provide a thirty-foot buffer and had been asked to reroute Dobbins Drive. Mr. Davis said this involved a total of about one acre of land. He also stated that the applicant preferred that the matter of buffering be left open for negotiation with the Town staff.

Bob Anderson said it was inappropriate for a special use permit decision to be delayed until a firm corridor plan in place. Mr. Anderson also said he hoped the Council what was fair for both the applicant and Town residents.

Karen Raleigh said she believed approval of the proposed Village Center was in the best interest of the Town and should be approved. She urged the Council not to delay approval of the special use permit.

Linda Convissor said she was surprised the matter was before the Council since a work session on the U.S. 15-501 corridor study would not take place until March 23rd. Ms. Convissor said she did not feel sufficient time had been allowed for citizen input and asked that the questions submitted by the Cross-County Community Association be answered by Kimley-Horn, the applicant's traffic engineer, before the Council acted on the special use permit. She also requested that the Council postpone action on the matter until after the March 23rd work session.

Tom Gunn requested that materials he submitted this evening be entered into the record of the hearing. Mr. Gunn stated that there were many problems with the transportation-related information presented by Kimley-Horn in association with the application. He also stated that a number of staff memorandums prepared last fall were not included in the materials before the Council this evening.

Ed Harrison stated that studies had found that about 80% of the vehicles travelling along the U.S. 15-501 corridor exceeded the posted speed limit. He also said that traffic was doubling every decade along this corridor. Mr. Harrison stated that it was important that whatever was adopted did the most good possible for the boulevard area. He said there was a serious need to fix the geometrics of Scarlette Drive and felt there was no option but to widen the boulevard. Mr. Harrison stated that the goal of the site plan should be that the development contribute as much good as possible to the boulevard. He also expressed concurrence with Mr. Gunn that a number of important documents had been omitted from the staff's follow-up report.

Bob Reda said he had a clear idea of what the Council did not want, but had no idea what the Council did want. Mr. Reda also said he only knew that the Council did not want a freeway. He requested that no decision be made on the development proposal until after the March 23rd work session concerning the U.S. 15-501 corridor study. Mr. Reda said he understood there was no plan for a right-turn lane on the southbound side of U.S. 15-501, on to Sage Road. He implored the Council to look at the big picture now, not after the fact. Mr. Reda said the Council should also bear in mind the limited amount of land available in the Town for affordable housing.

Richard "Stick" Williams, Chair of the Chapel Hill-Carrboro Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors, said he supported the special use permit because it was a good economic development project. He said the jobs created would be beneficial for the entire community. Mr. Williams encouraged the Council to represent the entire community by supporting the applicant's request.

Council Member Protzman said he had some concerns, one being the right-turn lane referenced by Mr. Reda. He said this matter was related to the applicant's comments about the proposed buffer. Council Member Protzman said he supported full buffering and felt that the Council should plan for every eventuality. He also said it seemed that more lanes would be needed along U.S. 15-501 and should be planned for now.

Council Member Protzman stated that a right-turn approach to this development was essential and that the Council should not reduce the buffer on the right side of Dobbins Drive since it might not be possible to retain it as a right-of-way if U.S. 15-501 was widened in the future.

Council Member Waldorf asked if it was being suggested that a right-turn lane be included on the U.S. 15-501 South and if so she would support one.

Council Member Brown asked how the stormwater would be retained in the parking lot. Mr. Anderson remarked that there were a number of methods to provide storage, one being to have a pipe size and slope that would fill the pipe but let it out slowly. He said another approach would be to grade the parking lot to provide runoff at a slower rate. Mr. Anderson also stated that the applicant had taken the retention basins out of the Resource Conservation District area and opted instead for landscaping options.

Mr. Horton stated that any proposed drainage plan would need to be approved by the Town Engineer.

Council Member Brown asked whether the proposed buffer would screen parking lots from view along U.S. 15-501. Mr. Anderson said it would be possible to see buildings, but not parking lots, over the proposed berms.

Council Member Evans asked whether parking had been added in the Resource Conservation District when the drainage plan was revised. Mr. Anderson said no, noting that all of the parking lots had always been located entirely outside of the RCD.

Council Member Chilton inquired about the assumptions made concerning traffic volume growth rates along the U.S. 15-501 corridor. Mr. Davis stated that his firm had projected future traffic volumes based on the historic growth rate. He noted that the North Carolina Department of Transportation and Town transportation planning staff used the same methodology.

Council Member Chilton inquired about the amount of existing reserved right-of-way along the Town's portion of the U.S. 15-501 corridor. Council Member Chilton said he understood that a minimum of two hundred and sixty feet would be needed for future roadway widening.

Council Member Brown said some serious questions, including transit-related concerns, had been raised by citizens this evening. She requested that these questions be answered before the Council acted on the matter.

Council Member Protzman requested clarification of the first "Be it Resolved" in Resolution R-6a concerning the proposed number of parking spaces. Mr. Waldon explained that staff had worked with the applicant to reduce the number of required parking spaces as much as possible, with 702 being the suggested number of spaces.

Mayor Broun said he realized it was sometimes quite difficult to determine reliable traffic volumes. Mayor Broun stated that there were a number of different ways to project potential traffic impacts. Mayor Broun expressed his belief that the Council had the best available information on which to make its decision.

Council Member Brown emphasized the importance of getting responses to citizen's questions and concerns raised at this evening's meeting prior to acting on the matter.

Council Member Protzman said although he thought that improvements were needed in the Scarlette Road area, these improvements were not a problem connected to the Village Center site.

Responding to Council Member Chilton's earlier query, Mr. Horton stated that the existing right-of-way along U.S. 15-501 was two hundred and sixty feet. Council Member Chilton noted that the Triangle Transit Authority had stated that at least 260 feet of right-of-way would be needed to provide light rail service.

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

Council Member Capowski said he agreed with Mr. Williams' comments, and said the big picture did indeed need to be examined. He stated this project should create approximately two hundred and fifty jobs, but because of the low unemployment rate in Orange County, most of the jobs would probably go to non-Town residents. Council Member Capowski stated that the proposed development was on a smaller site and was approximately one-third larger than the recently completed Home Depot store in Durham, along the U.S. 15-501 corridor. He expressed concern about whether the proposed configuration and density were appropriate for the site.

COUNCIL MEMBER CAPOWSKI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON, TO REFER THE APPLICATION BACK TO THE APPLICANT FOR FURTHER MODIFICATIONS, INCLUDING A REDUCTION IN DENSITY.

Council Member Evans inquired whether Council Member Capowski's concerns could be addressed this evening.

Mr. Waldon first commented on how trucks would enter and exit the area. He stated that the trucks would have adequate maneuvering room on the site. Council Member Evans asked whether delivery trucks would exit via a different route. Mr. Waldon said there were several ways which trucks could enter and exit the site.

Council Member Evans said the main drive should be the drive which carried the most traffic. She noted that a stop sign was proposed along the main entry drive to the site.

Council Member Brown inquired whether the Town could require the developer to lower the project's density if all other ordinance requirements were being met. Mr. Horton stated that if the applicant were asked to lessen the density, it would be up to the applicant to determine whether or not this was satisfactory. Council Member Protzman requested the applicant's comment concerning a possible reduction in site density. Mr. Anderson stated that the applicant's desire was to meet Town development requirements and their own needs as well. He commented that a total site development of 172,000 square feet would be presented on the final site plan, because the proposed Brendle's store had been reduced from 45,000 to 40,000 square feet, which was still well below the maximum density permitted for the site.

Mayor Broun noted the late hour and acknowledged this was not an easy decision to make. Mayor Broun said he believed the development proposal was well-balanced and would have long-term community benefits. Mayor Broun stated his belief that the Council should move forward with approval of the special use permit this evening.

Council Member Chilton said he believed that speakers this evening had raised some very important questions, particularly regarding apparent errors in the Traffic Impact Statement. Council Member Chilton said he believed this would require the Council to take another look at this development. Council Member Chilton said he believed it would be a mistake to move forward on the matter this evening, since there were more points which need to be addressed.

THE MOTION TO REFER THE MATTER BACK TO THE STAFF AND APPLICANT FAILED BY A VOTE OF 3-6, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS BROWN, CAPOWSKI AND CHILTON VOTING AYE.

Council Member Protzman suggested adoption of Resolution 6 with amendments. He proposed that the language on page 15 of the resolution regarding the Type C buffer be omitted, that the reference to Type C buffer on page 19 be changed to Type D, and that language be added that would include the requirement for a right-turn lane. Mr. Horton offered the following language to be added to Stipulation 3(f) after the semi-colon: and that a right turn lane be added to US Highway 15-501 for southwest bound traffic turning right (north) on to Sage Road."

COUNCIL MEMBER PROTZMAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WALDORF, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 6A, AS AMENDED.

Council Member Brown stated she would vote against the proposal because of the many unresolved questions presented this evening.

THE MOTION TO ADOPT RESOLUTION R-6A, AS AMENDED, WAS ADOPTED BY A VOTE OF 6-3, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS BROWN, CAPOWSKI, AND CHILTON VOTING NAY.

A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR VILLAGE CENTER PLANNED DEVELOPMENT - SHOPPING CENTER (SUP 27-B-1) (95-2-27/R-6a)

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that it finds that the Special Use Permit application, proposed by Pinehurst National/Tri-City, Inc., on property identified as Chapel Hill Township Tax Map 27, Block B, Lots 1, 1A, and 2, if developed according to the site development plan dated November 21, 1994, and the conditions listed below:

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

2. Would 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, except for the modification being requested below;

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

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

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council finds, in this particular case, that the following modifications to the regulations satisfy public purposes to an equivalent or greater degree:

1. Modification to Subsection 14.6 to allow an exception to the parking regulations to allow a reduction in the number of parking spaces to 702 or fewer.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Town Council hereby approves the application for Special Use Permit for the Village Center Planned Development - Shopping Center in accordance with the plans listed above and with conditions listed below:

Stipulations Specific to the Development

1. Construction Deadlines: That construction begin by February 27, 1997 (two years from the date of Council approval) and be completed by February 27, 1998 (three years from the date of Council approval).

2. Recombination Plat: That a recombination plat, combining the three lots into a single zoning lot, be prepared and recorded prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

3. Required Improvements:

a. That Dobbins Drive be realigned as shown on the plans, and that it be built to local street standards with a 27-foot back-to-back cross-section, with curb and gutter on both sides, and sidewalk on the north and east sides; and that it be built to withstand future transit traffic. If the street is to become a State road, the street must also be built to minimum NCDOT standards.

b. For the site entrance across from Coleridge Drive, lanes at least 12 feet in width shall be provided. The portion of the entrance which crosses public right-of-way shall be constructed to the Town's local street standards with curb and gutter.

c. That right-of-way be dedicated for the realigned Dobbins Drive extending to Sage Road and U.S. Hwy 15-501. The new Dobbins Drive shall be continuous (no "islands" of private property shall be created between the new Dobbins Drive and Sage Road/U.S. Hwy 15-501).

d. That the intersection of Dobbins Drive and Sage Road be relocated to a point about 320 feet north of its present location, as shown on the plans.

e. That an additional left-turn lane for southbound traffic turning northeast onto the highway be provided on Sage Road.

f. That an additional left-turn lane be added to U.S. Hwy 15-501 for northeastbound traffic turning left (north) onto Sage Road; and that a right turn lane be added to U.S. Highway 15-501 for southwest bound traffic turning right (north) onto Sage Road.

g. That the signals at the Sage/Highway intersection be upgraded to accommodate new left turn lanes.

h. That the applicant be required to contribute a payment-in-lieu of $7,000 for the necessary traffic counts to be done as part of the traffic signal timing plan for Zone 4, which includes this section of the highway. (After the work is completed, any excess funds would be returned to the developer.)

i. That Sage Road be improved to an 83-foot cross-section from the highway to a point about 150 feet north of the highway. This would include six traffic lanes and a traffic island at least 7 feet in width. This would include an additional left-turn lane for southbound traffic turning northeast onto the highway and dedication of right-of-way to include the new improvements and the newly aligned Dobbins Road, including dedication of right-of-way, for the unpaved land between Dobbins and Sage Roads.

j. That Sage Road be improved to half of a 5-lane cross-section with curb and gutter, bikelanes, and sidewalk along the remaining frontage. (This would be consistent with the Sage Road cross-section of the adjacent (north) section of Sage Road.) Given the proposed site plan, this would likely entail construction of a retaining wall on the east side of Sage Road. In addition, sufficient right-of-way shall be dedicated to complete a 90-foot total right-of-way width across this section of Sage Road.

k. That the developer make a payment-in-lieu for a traffic signal at the main Sage Road entrance to the site. If the warrants for the signal are not met within 5 years, the payment shall be returned to the developer.

l. That transit stops (shelter, bench, and pad) be provided near the main Sage Road entrance to the site, and near the main Dobbins Drive entrance on the north side of Dobbins Drive near Building #2.

m. That sidewalks be provided in the following locations:

- both sides of the main Sage Road entrance

- north side of the minor Sage Road entrance

- east side of the main Dobbins Drive entrance near Building #2

- north side of Dobbins Drive/Highway, along the property frontage

- east side of Sage Road, along the property frontage

- along the fronts of both buildings and between the buildings

- from Sage Road to the western entrance to Building #1

- along the southern side of the main vehicular entrance into the site from Sage Road.

n. That textured or colored pavement shall be provided in the following areas of concentrated pedestrian traffic:

- at the building fronts;

- between the buildings and front parking areas;

- and at the two primary vehicular entrances, one each on Sage Road and Dobbins Drive

o. That pedestrian crosswalks from the parking lots to the building entrances shall be slightly raised above the surrounding pavement.

p. That the S-curve pedestrian walks proposed in the individual landscaped islands in the parking lots shall be removed to allow more room for tree root growth.

q. That bike racks be provided near the main entrances to the buildings.

r. That adequate horizontal and vertical sight distances be reserved at all proposed entrances.

s. That all road widening must include appropriate transitional and deceleration tapers.

t. That all street and driveway entrances onto State roadways must be controlled with appropriate signage and pavement markings approved by NCDOT.

u. That drainage facilities, curb cuts, and curb ramps and all encroachment into State right-of-way shall be reviewed for approval by NCDOT.

v. That any roadway proposed to be added to the State's roadway system shall be designed and constructed to NCDOT standards.

w. That all parking lots and drive aisles shall be built to meet or exceed minimum Town standards for pavement design and dimensions.

x. That the parking lot islands near the northwest corner of Building #2 be reconfigured to better guide traffic and protect motorists backing out of parking spaces.

y. That some of the drive aisle entrances be narrowed to better control and direct traffic, and that drive aisle realignment may be required where drive aisles cross. The internal circulation plan shall be reviewed for approval by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

5. Transportation Management Plan: That a Transportation Management Plan be developed, and that the Town Manager review and approve this plan prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. The Transportation Management Plan shall include:

a. provision for designation of a Transportation Coordinator for the building.

b. provision for submittal of an annual Transportation Survey and Annual Report to the Town Manager.

c. quantifiable traffic reduction goals and objectives.

d. provisions for disseminating transit and ridesharing information

The Transportation Management Plan shall be reviewed on an annual basis by the Town Manager. Upon reviewing the annual report, the Town Manager may suggest changes to the existing programs or may suggest additional programs. The Plan may also be amended to reflect the results of the Town's ongoing study of alternative transportation programs.

Stipulations Related to the Resource Conservation District

6. Boundaries: That the boundaries of the Resource Conservation District be shown on the final plat and final plans with a note indicating that "Development shall be restricted within the Resource Conservation District in accordance with the Development Ordinance."

7. Variances: That all variances necessary for development within the Resource Conservation District be obtained before application for final plat or final plan approval.

Stipulations Related to State and Federal Government Approvals

8. State or Federal Approval(s): That plans for improvements to state-maintained roads or within NCDOT rights-of-ways be approved by NCDOT prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

Stipulations Related to Landscape Elements

9. Landscape Plan Approval: That a detailed landscape plan (including the buffer plantings), landscape maintenance plan, and lighting plan be approved by the Appearance Commission prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. The Landscape Plan shall include:

a. Detailed planting plans for the following buffers:

- Type D buffer of minimum width 50 feet along the Dobbins/Highway frontage. The plans shall indicate a berm of 50 feet in width to help screen the parking areas from the highway.

- Type D Buffer, at least 30 feet in width, between Dobbins Road and the development, parallel to Sage Road.

- Type D buffer at least 30 feet in width along Sage Road (north of the Dobbins intersection), outside the power easement and outside the public right-of-way.

- Type B buffer at least 10 feet wide along the remaining length of the western property line.

- Type C buffer of minimum width 30 feet along the northern property line.

- existing vegetation along the eastern boundary of the northern half of the property, with supplemental plantings if necessary to fulfill the Type C buffer requirements.

b. A landscape strip at least 5 feet wide between the buildings and the parking lots and drive aisles.

c. Provisions for shading of at least 35% of the pavement.

d. A screen wall shall be constructed to screen the residentially zoned adjacent property from the back of the building's loading dock, and service areas.

e. All planting islands shall be at least 10 feet in width from back of curb to back of curb. All planters intended to accommodate trees shall be at least 100 square feet in interior area.

f. Planting islands shall be a minimum of 12 feet in width if they include pedestrian paths.

g. Street tree plantings along the U.S. Highway 15-501 frontage in accordance with the Town's Entranceway Master Landscape Plan for this section of the highway.

h. Screening of the proposed garden shop from the road view with solid fencing or walls.

i. Plantings areas shall be no steeper than 4:1. Exceptions can be made by the Town Manager for 3:1 slopes for special situations.

j. Screening between the north and west sides of newly aligned Dobbins Drive and the proposed parking areas.

k. Plantings to be installed in the unpaved area between the newly aligned Dobbins Drive and Sage Road where the two streets are parallel. The plantings shall be designed to help screen the parking areas from Sage Road. After installation, the applicant shall be responsible for maintenance of live plants and removal of dead plants in this area. A Landscape Maintenance Agreement, committing the applicant to a maintenance schedule, shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

l. Existing vegetation and/or fencing may be used, partially or wholly, to fulfill the buffer planting requirements, where deemed sufficient by the Town Manager.

10. Landscape Protection Plan: That a tree survey, identifying the significant trees to be preserved along the northern and eastern property lines, and a detailed Landscape Protection plan for these trees, be submitted for review and approval by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

The Landscape Protection Plan shall include standard landscape protection notes and a detail of the proposed tree protection fencing. The clearing limit lines should account for the locations of utilities and stormwater management improvements.

Stipulation Related to Building Elevations

11. Building Elevation and Signage Approval: That all four sides of each building be given comparable architectural treatment so that the rear service sides of the buildings facing residentially zoned property will be as attractive as possible. All service areas and equipment, including rooftop equipment, shall be screened from view.

The detailed building elevations and signage shall be reviewed for approval by the Appearance Commission prior to issuance of the Zoning Compliance Permit.

Stipulations Related to Water, Sewer and Other Utilities

12. Water/Sewer: That separate service lines for the two buildings be provided, and a revised sewer service plan be reviewed for approval by OWASA. Any necessary water and sewer easements must be dedicated via recordation of a final plat prior issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

13. Fire Hydrants: That three new fire hydrants shall be installed within the site on 8-inch water lines, and an existing hydrant shall be relocated within the site. The fire hydrant locations shall be reviewed for approval by the Town Manager.

14. Fire Flow: That a detailed fire flow report shall be 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.

15. Stormwater Management Plan: That a detailed stormwater management plan, based on the Hydros computer model, be submitted for review and approval by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

The stormwater management plan shall be revised to eliminate encroachment of stormwater detention facilities into the Resource Conservation District.

16. Utility/Lighting Plan Approval: That the final detailed utility/lighting plan be approved by Orange Water and Sewer Authority, Duke Power, Southern Bell or GTE, Public Service Company, Cablevision, and the Town Manager, before issuance of Zoning Compliance Permit. The property owner shall be responsible for assuring these utilities are extended to serve both buildings.

The lighting plan, to be approved by the Appearance Commission and Town Manager, shall be designed to achieve adequate lighting for nighttime security and to minimize visual impact on the roadways and adjacent properties through the use of lower light poles; fixtures directed away from the property lines; and a lower intensity, even lighting pattern thorough the lighted areas.

Miscellaneous Stipulations

17. 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 the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

The number, location, orientation, and size of the dumpsters, dumpster pads, and recycling containers shall be approved by the Town Manager.

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

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

20. Sight Triangle Easements: That sight triangle easements be provided for all entrances on the final plat.

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

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

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

24. Non-severability: If any of the above conditions is held to be invalid, approval in its entirety shall be void.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby approves the application for Special Use Permit for the Village Center Planned Development - Shopping Center in accordance with the plans and conditions listed above.

This the 27th day of February, 1995.

Item 6 Floodway & Floodplain Reconstruction DOTA

Mr. Waldon noted that the amendment, if adopted, would allow the rehabilitation and reconstruction of properties in the Resource Conservation District which experienced catastrophic damage. He said the Town would allow reconstruction of properties, but not expansion, in conjunction with Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) regulations. Mr. Waldon noted that a number of communities, including the Town, had recently requested FEMA flood studies. He also stated that staff recommended adoption of Ordinance A.

Miles Fletcher said he was disturbed by the proposed change to the Resource Conservation District regulations. Mr. Fletcher said he realized the current difficulties that would be experienced if properties were damaged or destroyed, but believed this amendment would weaken overall RCD regulations. Mr. Fletcher said he also believed that when another FEMA flood study was done, the designated flood area would have expanded. He stated he did not believe it was fair for one part of the Town to suffer because of developments elsewhere in the Town. Mr. Fletcher said it was preferable to strengthen our safeguards, rather than weaken them.

Johnny Mariakasis said he would have to get a Town variance to rebuild if his business were destroyed or damaged. He said it would be very challenging to maintain his employees and customers if such a catastrophic event took place. Mr. Mariakakis asked that the Council seriously consider the needs of business persons in their decision-making process. Mr. Mariakakis requested the Council's support of Ordinance 3.

Catherine Newberry asked the Council to reject the proposed amendment to the RCD ordinance. Ms. Newberry said she felt that rebuilding in the flood plain should be considered on an individual case basis. Ms. Newberry said that existing regulations allowed for rebuilding using certain procedures and these should be kept in place rather than changing the ordinance. She said changing the ordinance might result people assuming it was appropriate to build in floodplains. Ms. Newberry said it was not fair to weaken the existing ordinance. She asked the Council to vote against the proposed ordinance amendment.

Council Member Chilton said he had taken some photographs about two weeks ago just after a significant rainstorm and passed the photographs to Council Members for their viewing. He stated that Article 5 addressed more than just flooding situations. Council Member Chilton said the primary issue was not whether or not a property could be rebuilt upon, but whether or not a process was necessary for approval of rebuilding activities. Council Member Chilton said he believed such a process should be required for rebuilding projects in the Resource Conservation District.

Council Member Brown said she was also concerned about these matters. Council Member Brown also although said she sympathized with Mr. Mariakasis, there was a process in place to address rebuilding of damaged or destroyed properties in the RCD. Council Member Brown said she did not feel the Council should adopt the proposed text amendment.

Council Member Pavão said he intended to support the staff's recommendation to approve the text amendment. Council Member Pavão said he felt local businesses were only asking for the right to rebuild under FEMA's guidelines.

Mayor Broun said he strongly agreed with Council Member Pavão. He said the issue was a question of fairness to existing property owners. Mayor Broun said that since the value of these properties would be affected, the Town should enforce the floodway and floodplain strictly and uphold the RCD, but should not use it as an opportunity to force some property owners out.

Council Member Waldorf said she also supported the proposed text amendment.

Council Member Capowski inquired whether it was correct that the proposed amendment pertained to reconstruction in both the flood plain and floodway. Mr. Waldon said this was correct.

Council Member Capowski inquired whether the Pizza Hut on Estes Drive was located in the RCD. Mr. Horton said a formal land survey would have to be conducted to make such a determination. Council Member Capowski inquired about the number of businesses in floodways around the Town. Mr. Horton said it would be necessary to conduct a survey of properties to determine this information.

Using Bolin Creek as an example, Council Member Capowski asked why the floodway, relative to the creek, was one foot higher. Mr. Waldon said he had insufficient information to adequately address this specific question. He noted that the lay of the land, such as the slope of the bank, would effect this calculation.

Council Member Protzman said he certainly did not want to weaken the Town's RCD regulations and he did not believe this proposal would do so. He stated that it would probably be some time before the RCD, floodway and floodplain were redefined, potentially impacting more businesses and residences. Council Member Protzman said out of sense of fairness, the Council should support the proposed change.

Council Member Chilton stated that under existing RCD regulations,

a property owner could go through a process to receive a variance to rebuild in the event of significant property damage. Council Member Chilton said he could not imagine the Council denying permission to rebuild a same size structure in the RCD if a building were to be destroyed by fire or other catastrophe.

He also emphasized that FEMA regulations were not environmental regulations. Council Member Chilton said if changes were adopted, he would strongly urge that rebuilding only be permitted in the floodplain, not in the floodway.

COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PAVAO, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 3.

Council Member Capowski proposed an amendment, to say that the Manager would report back annually to the Council the number of actions taken under this text amendment.

Council Member Chilton proposed another amendment, which would delete the reference to Section 5.4.5. The motion was seconded by Council Member Brown.

Council Member Evans noted that if FEMA conducted a study in the future, the limits of floodways and floodplains could change.

Mr. Karpinos said he did not believe that Section 5.4.5 could be deleted at this time as proposed by Council Member Chilton without significantly changing the language of the proposed ordinance.

Council Member Powell inquired why Council Member Chilton was suggesting this modification to the proposed ordinance. Council Member Chilton stated that the proposed language would permit rebuilding in the floodplain but not the floodway. He noted that the floodplain entailed a much larger area than the floodway.

THE MOTION TO DELETE REFERENCE TO SECTION 5.4.5 FROM ORDINANCE 3 WAS DEFEATED BY A VOTE OF 3-6, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS BROWN, CHILTON, AND PROTZMAN VOTING AYE.

THE MOTION TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 3 WAS ADOPTED BY A VOTE OF 7-2, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS BROWN AND CHILTON VOTING NAY.

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CHAPEL HILL DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE RESOURCE CONSERVATION DISTRICT REGULATIONS (95-2-27/O-3)

WHEREAS, the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill has considered the proposed amendment to the Chapel Hill Development Ordinance adjusting the Resource Conservation District provisions, 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 Subsections 5.4.4 and 5.4.5 of the Chapel Hill Development Ordinance to read as follows:

5.4.4 Application of the Resource Conservation District to the Expansion, Reconstruction, Rehabilitation or Renovation of Development Existing Within the Regulatory Floodplain

Within the part of the RCD within the regulatory floodplain, any alteration, repair, reconstruction, or improvements to a structure, and/or a development shall meet the requirements of Section 5.6 of this Article.

a) Within the regulatory floodplain, the expansion of a development existing, or for which construction had substantially begun, on or before March 19, 1984, is prohibited unless:

1) the expansion is permitted by Section 5.5 and meets the design standards of Section 5.6; or

2) the expansion is permitted by a variance authorized by this Article and approved by the Board of Adjustment.

b) Within the regulatory floodplain, the reconstruction, rehabilitation, or renovation of a development existing, or for which construction had substantially begun, on or before March 19, 1984, is prohibited unless:

1) the reconstruction, rehabilitation, or renovation complies with the requirements of the Federal Emergency Management Agency in place at the time of reconstruction, rehabilitation, or renovation.

5.4.5 Development Within Floodway Portion of the Regulatory Floodplain.

Within the part of the RCD within a floodway, no development, maintenance, or land disturbance shall be permitted without certification (with supporting technical data) from a registered professional engineer that base flood heights will not be increased.

a) Within the floodway portion of the regulatory floodplain, the expansion of a development existing, or for which construction had substantially begun, on or before March 19, 1984, is prohibited unless:

1) the expansion is permitted by Section 5.5 and meets the design standards of Section 5.6; or

2) the expansion is permitted by a variance authorized by this Article and approved by the Board of Adjustment.

b) Within the floodway portion of the regulatory floodplain, the reconstruction, rehabilitation, or renovation of a development existing, or for which construction had substantially begun, on or before March 19, 1984, is prohibited unless:

1) the reconstruction, rehabilitation, or renovation complies with the requirements of the Federal Emergency Management Agency in place at the time of reconstruction, rehabilitation, or renovation.

SECTION II

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

This the 27th day of February, 1995.

Council Member Capowski moved that the Manager report back to the Council annually on the number of actions taken under this text amendment, if any.

COUNCIL MEMBER CAPOWSKI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WALDORF, FOR THE STAFF TO PREPARE AN ANNUAL REPORT ON THE NUMBER OF ACTIONS TAKEN REGARDING THE TEXT AMENDMENT, IF ANY. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED BY A VOTE OF 8-1, WITH MAYOR BROUN VOTING NAY.

Item 7 Colony Lake Development

Mr. Horton stated that area homeowners had requested changes concerning refuse collection and street maintenance. He said although this would require a special use permit modification, the Development Ordinance also permitted minor changes without the need for such a modification. Mayor Broun asked if a special use permit modification would be needed if the proposed resolutions were not adopted by the Council. Mr. Horton said this was correct.

Council Member Capowski asked whether the Town would be fiscally responsible for paving streets in Colony Lake. Mr. Horton said no, noting that property owners would bear this expense.

Ken Hough stated that he had been informed that converting to Town refuse collection in Colony Lake would only entail rerouting, rather than additional expenses to the Town. He said the residents of Colony Lake were requesting the removal of dumpsters from their single-family residence neighborhood. Mr. Hough asked the Council to please adopt Resolution 9 and instruct the Manager to provide Town refuse collection to the Colony Lake subdivision.

Dr. Jim Jacobs said he supported Council adoption of Resolution 8, concerning street maintenance.

COUNCIL MEMBER CAPOWSKI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 8. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY.

A RESOLUTION INSTRUCTING THE TOWN MANAGER TO VIEW PROPOSED CHANGES REGARDING PUBLIC MAINTENANCE OF EXISTING PRIVATE STREETS AT COLONY LAKE DEVELOPMENT AS A MINOR CHANGE TO THE DEVELOPMENT RATHER THAN A SPECIAL USE PERMIT MODIFICATION (95-2-27/R-8)

WHEREAS, the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill approved a Special Use Permit for the Colony Lake Development on February 27, 1984; and

WHEREAS, the Council approved plans and conditions that identified private ownership and maintenance of particular streets;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council instructs the Town Manager to consider changes proposed to the development by the Homeowner's Association regarding public maintenance of particular private streets and dedication of said private streets as public streets to be a minor change to the Special Use Permit rather than a Modification of the Special Use Permit as defined by the Development Ordinance for purposes of processing an application for the changes.

This the 27th day of February, 1995.

COUNCIL MEMBER CAPOWSKI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WALDORF, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 9. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY.

A RESOLUTION INSTRUCTING THE TOWN MANAGER TO VIEW PROPOSED CHANGES REGARDING THE PRIMARY FORM OF REFUSE COLLECTION AT COLONY LAKE DEVELOPMENT AS A MINOR CHANGE TO THE DEVELOPMENT RATHER THAN A SPECIAL USE PERMIT MODIFICATION (95-2-27/R-9)

WHEREAS, the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill approved a Special Use Permit for the Colony Lake Development on February 27, 1984; and

WHEREAS, the Council approved plans and conditions that identified bulk refuse collection as the primary form of refuse collection;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council instructs the Town Manager to consider changes proposed to the development by residents to allow curbside refuse collection in particular areas of the development to be a minor change to the Special Use Permit rather than a Modification of the Special Use Permit as defined by the Development Ordinance for purposes of processing an application for the changes.

This the 27th day of February, 1995.

Item 8 Dining on Downtown Sidewalks

Mr. Horton stated that two principal areas of concern had been identified, one being that the proposal might not be permissible under existing State Statutes and secondly, how the serving of alcoholic beverages on sidewalks might be contained. Mr. Horton said he recommended that the Council adopt Resolution 10a, calling a public hearing on the matter. Council Member Capowski inquired whether the proposal pertained only to West Franklin Street. Mr. Horton said such requests could be received from any part of the Town.

COUNCIL MEMBER WALDORF MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PAVAO, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 10A. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY.

A RESOLUTION CALLING A PUBLIC HEARING TO BE HELD ON MARCH 27, 1995 FOR THE PURPOSE OF HEARING CITIZEN COMMENT ON PERMITTING DINING ON THE SIDEWALKS IN THE TOWN CENTER-1 AND -2 ZONING DISTRICTS AND INSTRUCTING THE TOWN MANAGER TO WORK WITH THE ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL COMMISSION AND THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO DETERMINE WHETHER AND HOW SIDEWALK DINING AND DRINKING OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES CAN BE PERMITTED (95-2-27/R-10a)

WHEREAS, the Council has received a petition requesting that the Town permit dining on the sidewalks in the downtown area; and

WHEREAS, the Council desires to hear public comment on whether and how dining on the sidewalks should be permitted;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council calls a Public Hearing to be held at 7:00 p.m. on March 27, 1995 in the Council Chamber of the Town Hall, for the purpose of receiving comment on an ordinance which:

* would permit property owners who operate businesses in the Town Center-1 and -2 zoning districts to apply to the Town for a permit to use the sidewalks for dining; and

* would permit only customers of the restaurant to use the tables and chairs placed by the restauranteurs.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill instructs the Town Manager to work with the Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission and the State Department of Transportation to determine whether and how sidewalk dining and drinking of alcoholic beverages may be permitted.

This the 27th day of February, 1995.

Item 10 Downtown Plan Committee

Josh Gurlitz thanked the other members of the committee who had worked very hard on this report. Mr. Gurlitz presented a brief overview of the information previously distributed to the Council. He said the Committee's top priority was the creation of a central village association, which would be an inclusive organization represented by the University, Town, and interested citizens. Mr. Gurlitz said the proposed association would study issues of common concern, such as traffic, zoning and land use, and public safety.

Mr. Gurlitz stated that the Committee also asked the Council to consider the development of a small area plan for the downtown area. He said this mechanism would enable the target community to have some control over its own future development. Mr. Gurlitz also said this would also allow the Council to better plan the TC-1 and TC-2 zoning districts.

Mayor Broun thanked the committee members for their hard work and contributions to the community.

COUNCIL MEMBER PAVAO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO REFER THE SUGGESTIONS MADE IN THE REPORT TO THE MANAGER FOR A REPORT BACK TO THE COUNCIL.

Council Member Brown inquired about the proposed public forum process. Mr. Horton stated that as a part of the follow-up report a process could be suggested. Council Member Brown expressed her concurrence.

Council Member Waldorf asked whether changes would be needed in zoning if the suggestions made in the report were implemented. Mr. Gurlitz said yes, noting that some changes would be necessary if all of the suggestions were adopted.

Council Member Protzman also thanked the committee and said he thought the idea of a small area plan was an excellent one.

THE MOTION TO REFER THE REPORT WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

There was no need for a Closed Session.

The meeting stood adjourned at 11:17 p.m.