PUBLIC HEARINGS OF THE CHAPEL HILL TOWN COUNCIL

MONDAY, MARCH 18, 1996 at 7:00 p.m.

Mayor Waldorf called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.

Council Members in attendance were Julie Andresen, Joyce Brown, Joe Capowski, Mark Chilton, Pat Evans, Richard Franck, Lee Pavão, and Barbara Powell. Staff members in attendance were Acting Town Manager Sonna Loewenthal, Planning Director Roger Waldon, Development Coordinator J.B. Culpepper, Long Range Planning Coordinator Chris Berndt, Parks and Recreation Director Mike Loveman and Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos.

Item 1 Public Forum on Alternative Plans for the Future

Development of the University's Horace Williams &

Mason Farm Tracts

Acting Town Manager Sonna Loewenthal stated that the purpose of this evening's public hearing was to discuss the Town's response to alternative land use plans which consultants for the University had prepared for the Horace Williams and Mason Farm tracts. She stated that the UNC-Chapel Hill Planning Panel had already provided three reports, the first one being its initial thoughts concerning goals and principles of the community, the second report developing more fully the goals and principles that should guide the development of Horace Williams and Mason Farm. She noted that the third report was presented on February 26th and contained draft responses to the University on the three land use plan alternatives which had been proposed. Ms. Loewenthal said this evening's meeting was for the purpose of hearing the public's comments on the draft report, and that the next step in the process was the scheduled meeting on March 21st with the Planning Panel and Johnson, Johnson, & Ray, consultants for the University's land-use plan.

Mayor Waldorf, speaking on behalf of the Planning Panel, stated that the Town had been involved in the University's planning process for the Horace Williams and Mason Farm tracts since October of 1994 and the Town would continue to be involved until this process was concluded, which would likely occur sometime in the fall. Mayor Waldorf said that on March 21st the consultants would receive the community's comments from the Chapel Hill group, the Carrboro group, and any citizen who wished to speak. Mayor Waldorf also said she believed that this meeting was an important opportunity for local citizens to try to exert influence and state their opinions about what had been done thus far and what should happen next. Mayor Waldorf said the University and their consultants had agreed to seriously consider all comments and then come back to the Council in mid-May. She stated that on February 26th the Planning Panel made a detailed report to the Council and the public on the goals and principles they recommended and specific comments on the draft plans that JJ & R brought to the Town on November 30th. Mayor Waldorf said this evening she did not want to cover that same ground again, but wanted to help both the Council and the public review the set of comments that were put forward on February 26. Mayor Waldorf noted several changes the Planning Panel recommended that the Council consider:

Page 3: Clearer definition of what is meant by "old campus". There is a goal for land use in regards to the Horace Williams tract that says that on the land that is developed, not to suggest that all the land should be developed, we suggest a density similar to that of the old campus, including also building height and character. We wanted to make it clear that by old campus, we mean the area between Franklin Street and South Road, not between Franklin Street and Manning Drive.

Another change is a rephrasing of the statement about buildings that are situated not far from the airport: taller buildings should not be located near the airport for safety reasons. Also, we wanted to strengthen the statement that the Town and the University should continue to explore sharing facilities for mutual benefit to save public dollars and achieve more efficient use of land and resources.

Page 6: We wanted to be more explicit in some of our comments regarding transportation comments. One is that we are recommending that Chapel Hill, Carrboro, the University and the regional transit authority mutually explore enhancing and developing mass transit systems. Also, the two transit nodes along the transit corridor north and south of the one proposed on November 30, should avoid sites steeply sloped.

Page 7: With regard to environment and ecology issues, areas that have been identified as protected natural areas should be seen as a whole system that would create larger, higher functioning sustainable natural areas. Along the less sensitive of these areas this approach can incorporate transportation corridors that are destination-oriented and accessible to non-motorized vehicles.

On the Mason Farm tract, we want to stress again that we would like the University to investigate the potential of a fixed guideway corridor being routed along NC 54 to campus. If this is technically feasible, we think this would be better than the other option which would run farther south through the Mason Farm property.

Due to the environmental sensitivity of the Mason Farm tract, internal roads should not serve as through connectors between Durham County and the Bypass. Specifically there should not be a through road from Barbee Chapel Road to Manning Drive.

Mayor Waldorf commented that the Panel has been working under heavy time pressures, and these are the specific changes from what was presented to you on February 26th.

Council Member Joyce Brown stated that she and Council Members Andresen and Franck had met on two occasions and developed a list of goals according to the process that was agreed to by the Council in February. She said they had developed a set of goals for zoning purposes, using the Planning Panel's very good work. Council Member Brown said the Council and the public had not had an opportunity to review the document, so her committee requests that the Council put this before the public at the next regular meeting during the time reserved for public comment at the beginning of the meeting. This would give the public a chance to comment on the draft as well as giving the Council a chance to read it and give their comments at that time. Council Member Brown stated she and Council Members Andresen and Franck would like to go over briefly what the committee had developed.

Council Member Brown stated the committee wanted to develop a zone which had the goal of clustering development to preserve sensitive lands and hopefully leaving a larger portion of the site undisturbed, with their goal being 50%. She said they would like to minimize the use of automobiles and maximize the use of other forms of transportation. Council Member Brown stated they wanted to provide incentives for the applicant to enter into performance agreements or other techniques to achieve these goals which could not be achieved through zoning; and, they wanted to ensure that all development proposals receive a thorough public review with approval by the Town Council and that the Council confirm the proposals promote the public health, safety, and general welfare and maintain and enhance the value of contiguous property in conformity with the Comprehensive Plan. Council Member Brown said they wanted to ensure that development of the property minimizes the negative impacts on existing neighborhoods and they wanted goals that provide for the mitigation of the fiscal impacts of development on the Chapel Hill taxpayers.

Council Member Brown stated these were the overall general goals and Council Members Andresen and Franck would address more specific goals.

Council Member Andresen stated she was pleased with the results of the committee's work. Council Member Andresen said the committee recommended land use goals including that the zoning categories should require mixed use as opposed to allowing it; to broadly specify use categories that are allowed and disallowed; to specify minimum and maximum proportions of each use category; to ensure phasing of development results in a balanced build out; and, to require preservation of large areas of the site in an undisturbed state.

Council Member Andresen said the second set of goals deals with scale and density limits. She stated the zoning category should specify a maximum floor area ratio for the portion of the site which is not permanently dedicated to open space; it should specify minimum floor area ratios for areas within one quarter mile of a transit station; and, it should require buildings similar in height and scale to older portions of the UNC campus. Council Member Andresen said they added an idea which they needed Council reaction to, which is that higher densities and heights could be permitted only if community amenities provided by the applicant are sufficient to justify them. She stated that last but quite important was to set an overall limit on development which does not exceed the capacity of the infrastructure to serve the site and surrounding area.

Council Member Andresen said the third category of goals deals with the environment. She said a good job had been done in inventorying environmentally sensitive areas used for waste storage with the Mason Farm tract and a good job should be done with the Horace Williams tract as well. Council Member Andresen continued by saying that no buildings should be permitted on waste storage areas until proven safe; to develop restrictions based on the existing RCD ordinance to protect low lying areas, wetlands and streams; to require the development of a regional stormwater plan and the means for funding it in cooperation with governments in the region; to require that stream channels are preserved in their natural state; to require through the preservation of natural areas, wetlands and buffers that all stormwater management be handled on site; and, require retention ponds to meet containment of stormwater as necessary.

Council Member Richard Franck stated that the last specific set of goals was in the area of buffers. He said they wanted to get at the idea of having flexible buffers based on the types of uses involved both on the site and neighboring sites, so that compatibility was more important than specific length or distance and type of buffer. Council Member Franck said another idea was that the roadway connections between the site and neighboring sites would be allowed only if there were narrow roads and that they would incorporate traffic calming techniques.

Council Member Franck said in the area of transportation, they set goals of requiring a design which demonstrates a high level of access for mass transit as well as bicycle and pedestrian circulation plans. He stated that in the area of parking, they attempted to be creative in not providing more parking than the traffic system could allow, but still making sure that the University had some guarantee that the transit level would be high enough to get people to work on campus without requiring parking. This means flexible parking limits based on the level of service of the surrounding roadways and the amount of transit service being provided by either the Town or another transit entity.

Council Member Franck said that, in the area of utilities, their goals encouraged site design which facilitated the use of renewable energy, making sure than roads were oriented such that buildings could be placed facing renewable energy.

Mary Reeb, speaking for the Planning Board, stated the Planning Board had not had a chance to discuss the latest document, and asked the Council for direction as to what the Council wanted the Planning Board to do.

Mayor Waldorf stated that the report just discussed had not been reviewed by anyone at this point, and the Council would refer it to the Planning Board with direction at the appropriate time.

Council Member Franck stated he believed the process that was adopted by the Council was the Council would agree on its goals and send those along with the consultant to the Planning Board for the development of a zone. He said they felt it was important for the Council to set goals so they didn't end up with a zone the Council didn't agree with.

Council Member Brown stated the process and timetable the Council agreed on states that on April 2nd the Town Council would finalize goals for a zoning workshop with the consultant.

Council Member Pat Evans said she believed it would be worthwhile to refer the document to the Planning Board now to gain their comments and to the University's Planning Panel for their comments before the Council discusses the item again.

Council Member Brown said the process agreed to by the Council said that on March 19th there would be a discussion by the Planning Board of the Planning Panel's draft report and the Council Committee's report. She stated she did not know if it was still on the Planning Board's schedule for their March 19th meeting.

Ruby Seinreich, speaking for the Transportation Board, said the Board had recently reviewed the document. She said she had attended the meeting with JJ & R and the subject of roads was discussed. Ms. Seinreich stated the Board was aware of the need for east-west connections, but it was too soon to discuss roads. She said the Board would like to add to the recommendations that the current Town municipal site leased from the University continue to be leased.

Diane Bloom, speaking as a Citizen for Airport Planning, asked the Council to send the message to the University that the airport not be allowed to expand or grow in any way. She stated that Horace Williams Airport is not in a good location, that the flight patterns pass over four schools. Ms. Bloom stated that it is important to note that the majority of plane crashes occur on takeoff or landing, which places the schools in danger.

Dan Coleman stated that regarding the Planning Panel's report, he believed when "old campus" was referred to, the report should be more detailed. He said that the Council should define the concept of sustainability. Mr. Coleman said he believed the Town should be in regular contact with the University regarding cleaning up waste sites.

Ruby Seinreich, again speaking for the Transportation Board, said the success of any transit plan on that site would depend on connections to the original transit network and the University campus, and pledged the Transportation Board's support.

Council Member Brown read a statement from Jane Sharpe, Energy Task Force Chair, which stated that at their February meeting, they discussed the recommendations of the Chapel Hill Planning Panel regarding energy, and were pleased to see the recommendation that encouraged site planning, landscaping and structure design that maximizes the potential of energy conservation by reducing the demand for artificial heating, cooling, ventilation and lighting and facilitating the use of daylighting techniques, solar, and other renewable energy resources. Council Member Brown read that the Energy Task Force commends and strongly supports such a far sighted recommendation, and hopes that the University will recognize the importance of this recommendation and make it a reality.

Council Member Evans thanked the Panel Planning for the excellent job and stated they had performed a big service not only to the Town but to the University.

Council Member Mark Chilton said that there are a number of tall buildings in the area between Franklin Street and South Road, and asked if the intention was that those buildings be included in the "old campus."

Mayor Waldorf said the Planning Panel would consider these areas.

Council Member Brown stated that the work the committee performed did more narrowly define the old campus. She said that the floor area ratio in the area bounded by Cameron Avenue, Franklin Street, Columbia Street and Raleigh Road is actually much less than the central campus which includes those areas, and the building heights are also much lower. She said this might serve as the model to work with.

Mayor Waldorf asked the Council to consider referring the report to the Planning Panel for presentation of these comments to the University at a public meeting scheduled for March 21st, as well as a transcript of this meeting so that all the comments made tonight could be represented in full. Mayor Waldorf also asked that referral be made to the Council Committee for their further consideration and that we refer these comments and questions to the Manager for a follow-up report on April 2nd. Mayor Waldorf stated that Council Member Evans had suggested that they be referred to the Planning Board and the Planning Panel as stated in the Council's schedule.

Council Member Franck stated he believed that the Council's Committee would cease to exist once the goals were developed and presented to the Council. He said he felt their charge had been met, which was merely to develop goals for zoning and they view the zoning issue as somewhat separate from the work of the Planning Panel. Council Member Franck said he did believe their report should be referred to the Planning Board but not the Planning Panel, who was concerned with broader issues.

Mayor Waldorf said what is being suggested is that the Planning Panel's report by ratified and sent to the Planning Panel so the Planning Panel could take it back to the University's consultant. She said she did not realize the committee would cease after tonight's presentation. Mayor Waldorf said she is suggesting that the Planning Panel's report be sent back to the Mayor's Committee as well.

COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PAVÃO, THAT THE PLANNING PANEL'S REPORT, ALONG WITH A VIDEOTAPE AND TRANSCRIPT OF TONIGHT'S DISCUSSION, BE REFERRED TO THE MANAGER FOR INCLUSION IN THE MEETING SCHEDULED FOR MARCH 21ST. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY.

COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PAVÃO, TO REFER COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS FROM TONIGHT'S DISCUSSION INCLUDING THE COMMITTEE'S REPORT, TO THE MANAGER FOR A FOLLOW-UP REPORT BY APRIL 2ND. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY.

COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PAVÃO, TO REFER THE MAYOR'S COMMITTEE REPORT TO THE PLANNING BOARD FOR THEIR REVIEW. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY.

COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED TO REFER THE COUNCIL'S COMMITTEE REPORT TO THE MANAGER FOR INCLUSION ON THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING OF THE COUNCIL FOR PUBLIC AND COUNCIL COMMENT.

Council Member Chilton asked Council Member Brown if she was suggesting the Council hold a brief public forum at the beginning of the next regular meeting to give the public an opportunity to comment. Council Member Brown responded yes.

Council Member Evans asked if the Council would take action at that time. Mayor Waldorf responded no. Council Member Evans said she believed it was important that the Council remember we are hiring a consultant, and what has been suggested is new zoning categories that are different from anything we have experienced. Council Member Evans stated she believed it would be valuable to the Council to hear what the consultant has to say before the Council takes action.

Council Member Franck said the purpose of the Committee's report was to give some direction to the consultant.

Council Member Brown stated that April 2nd would be when the Council finalized the goals to send to the consultant, so it was important to receive any public comment and include it in the report before it was discussed on April 2nd.

Mayor Waldorf said that the items already scheduled for the March 25th meeting are many, including the items deferred from the previous business meeting; so many are going to have to be postponed. She said this adds another item to an already very long agenda.

THE MOTION WAS SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY.

Item 2 Public Hearing on Proposed Preliminary Plat

for Windsor Park Subdivision

Persons wishing to testify in the matter were sworn. Long Range Planner J.B. Culpepper presented a brief overview of the item before the Council. She stated this is a cluster subdivision with 69 lots proposed on 27 acres of land in the Residential 2 zoning district. Ms. Culpepper said the property is located on the east side of Airport Road (NC 86) 250 feet north of Stateside Drive and 800 feet south of Westminster Drive. She said the proposal includes a single point of access on NC 86 and proposes a stub out to the northwest corner of the property to the Maddry property. Ms. Culpepper said there are two primary issue that came to light during review of this subdivision, both related to roadways. She said the first concerns NC 86 frontage and the second relates to roadway connections. Ms. Culpepper stated the property does have frontage on NC 86 with a single point of access and we are recommending improvements to NC 86 and have included a stipulation in Resolution A before you tonight that would call for this development to improve NC 86 for one half of those ultimate improvements that NCDOT is moving ahead with, which is the four lane divided highway. She stated the stipulation was adding calling for these improvements along the property's frontage or that the developer may wait until NCDOT has completed those improvements. Ms. Culpepper said the second issue involves roadway connections. She indicated the applicant had proposed a single stubout to the northwest, but the Manager's recommendation calls for a second stubout in the northeast corner of the property that would provide an ultimate connection to Westminster Drive. Ms. Culpepper said this future connection could promote the movement of vehicles, including emergency vehicles and sanitation trucks. She stated the recommendation is for approval of Resolution A.

Phil Szostak, speaking as the applicant, said one of their goals was to meet the goals of the Design Guidelines, such as enhancing small lots with open space, using natural drainage areas and vegetation, maximizing open space and the view of this open space from the road entering the project. He stated they attempted to minimize the number of houses on the entry road into the development. Ms. Szostak said they had a plan in place that would save every tree measured at 20 inches or larger, and increased the amount of pedestrian circulation throughout the project.

Mr. Szostak said another concern was stormwater runoff, but nearly all of the stormwater runoff caused by this project would be contained in the pond located on the site, because of the natural topography of the land, which slopes toward the pond. He said the issue of improvements to NC 86 is a concern to him. Mr. Szostak said the resolution before the Council says no homes can be occupied until the improvements to NC 86 are completed, which may not be until 1999. He said if he is asked to postpone the completion of this project for two years while NCDOT completes the improvements, he would not be able to agree. Mr. Szostak said he is locked into NCDOT's schedule, and has no control it.

Mayor Waldorf asked which stipulation was Mr. Szostak referring to. Mr. Szostak said stipulation number 1.a in both Resolution A and B.

Mary Reeb, speaking for the Planning Board, stated the Board voted 6 to 1 to recommend the project. She stated the Planning Board had added a stipulation which stated that every street within the development would have sidewalks on both sides of the street. Ms. Reeb said the Board discussed the timing of improvements to Airport Road, but came to no conclusion. She said another concern was an easement to a sewer line shown on the map, which they hope will not have to be connected through the back lots of some of the properties, but in fact there will be another easement coming down to another sewer connection eventually so that those lots could at some time be larger.

Diane Bachman, speaking for the Appearance Commission/Design Review Board, said the Boards recognized that access to the development was weak from Weaver Dairy Road to Stateside Drive. She said their recommendation was to extend Westminster Drive through The Estates of Chapel Hill to connect out to NC 86, giving a second access for Windsor Park and The Estates of Chapel Hill to NC 86. She said another suggestion was to relocate the apartments so that that type of housing was in closer proximity to the single-family lots. Ms. Bachman said the third recommendation was shifting the median cut from Stateside Drive to the Windsor Park entry and/or keeping the Stateside curb cut and putting a second curb cut at Westminster Drive. She asked that the Council work with NCDOT to see how this could be done. Ms. Bachman said the combined Boards felt that the traffic patterns from Weaver Diary Road to Stateside Drive need to be studied to produce an overall traffic plan to benefit these developments.

Ruby Senreich, speaking for the Transportation Board, said the most important thing about this project is The Estates development to the north because of the complications with NC 86. She said it was important that the development connect to Westminster Drive. Ms. Senreich said extending Westminster could begin to correct the traffic patterns in place now.

Flicka Bateman said that last week Jack Smyre had commented that there was no evidence that there was a safety issue involved. Ms. Bateman said that in February she had shared police reports on the number of accidents on this stretch of road, which proved it was unsafe.

Council Member Franck asked Ms. Bateman to enter the accident reports into the record so the Council could take a look at them.

Pat Cabarga said she lives in the Timberlyne area, and it is very dangerous to turn left onto NC 86. She said between 3 and 7 p.m., as well as the morning rush hour, it is almost impossible to turn left from Stateside Drive. She encouraged the Council to require a traffic light at this intersection. Ms. Cabarga also asked the Council to reconsider the density allowed in this area, so that traffic would not increase to even more dangerous levels. She also asked if the pond would be completed before the project was started, so that runoff would not encroach onto her property.

Pearl Woo has lived in this area for two years and is very concerned about the time it takes to make a left turn safely onto NC 86, which can take anywhere from two to five minutes. She asked that NC 86 be widened before construction begins.

Dave Handfinger, a resident of Timberlyne, stated that when looking at the Windsor Park development, you have to also consider The Estates development. He said he was against the two stubouts to the north, and that he was very much in favor of cul-de-sacs in neighborhoods.

Norm Rosen, President of the Timberlyne Neighborhood Association, said that much construction was taking place in this area of Town, with the Timberlyne neighborhood being in the middle. He said no matter what is done to NC 86, traffic will still come through their neighborhood. Mr. Rosen said it is impossible to walk through his neighborhood because of the traffic, and asked the Council to please listen carefully to the residents' concerns.

Eleanor Howe, a resident of Stateside Drive, agreed with the comments made earlier concerning traffic and the difficulty of turning left onto NC 86. She asked the Council to try and solve these problems as soon as possible.

Jesse Eversole stated he believed traffic could be reduced if density was reduced in The Estates development. He stated that there is a dense forest with large old trees which are in danger from The Estates development. Mr. Eversole asked that the Council rethink allowing the 244 apartments proposed for The Estates.

James Manning said his biggest concern was the safety issues related to the amount of traffic in this area. He said the increase in traffic on Kingston Drive would be significant and would have an adverse impact on that neighborhood. Mr. Manning asked the Council to look carefully at the traffic impacts before making a decision.

Council Member Joe Capowski asked if this project is built as proposed, and if a house fire were to occur, how would a fire truck get to it. Ms. Culpepper said there is a single point of access proposed on NC 86. Council Member Capowski asked Ms. Culpepper to trace a route a fire truck would take. She responded that a fire truck leaving the Weaver Dairy Road/Airport Road fire station would have to come down NC 86 to Stateside Drive, then make a U-turn to come back to the development, unless Parkside development were completed to allow the truck to come down Longbrook.

Mayor Waldorf asked what if a tree were blocking the road? She asked how our ordinances would address the need for dual access?

Council Member Capowski asked if there was truly room for a fire truck to make a U-turn at this point. Ms. Culpepper stated there was some concern with the turning radius, but did not know how fire officials would respond to this question.

Council Member Capowski said that the difficulty a fire truck would have to access a house in this development shows we have a real concern. He asked Town Attorney Karpinos how the Council could delay this project while traffic studies were undertaken. Mr. Karpinos said the Development Ordinance states that the development must meet the Town's plans, and if it does the application is required to be considered. Mr. Karpinos said we must look at the Town's plans in place now and judge the project on those merits.

Council Member Andresen said that a rational approach needs to be taken here, and asked if it could be referred back to the staff to make sure that the neighborhood streets work well with the rest of the area. Mr. Karpinos said subdivisions must conform to the Town's plans for streets, and if we want this subdivision to connect to other developments, the staff could be asked to relook at this issue to see if other alternatives are available. Mr. Karpinos said it was not possible to delay one development while another development was studied, that the proposal must be judged on its own merits. Council Member Andresen said she believes the Council should take a regional approach to this by not just looking at one subdivision at a time, but at the entire area as a whole. She said we need to study the traffic patterns in the entire area. Council Member Andresen said the vehicle trips per day projected for this area should be addressed comprehensively by studying the entire area, not just each development individually. Council Member Andresen asked what it would take to solve this problem, and what road connections should be considered. She said she believed it was the Council's responsibility to look at other alternatives.

Council Member Evans said one thing the Council could do was assure the residents that the Council would approach NCDOT regarding a traffic life at Stateside Drive, maybe before construction occurs. She said this would considerably increase the safety on NC 86 in this area. Council Member Evans said she very much favors the two stub outs proposed to allow traffic to move within the collector roads.

Council Member Pavão stated the Appearance Commission had suggested that the Council do an NC 86 corridor study which may begin to clarify some of the problems we are facing with the developments coming before us, and suggested the Council consider doing that.

Council Member Powell stated that she is concerned about the question raised regarding the completion of the pond before construction begins. She requested that the citizen be given an answer to her question.

Mayor Waldorf said she was concerned how to approach the problem of the traffic light and had a suggestion. She stated that when this item came back before the Council a companion resolution available that has the Council asking NCDOT for a traffic light at Stateside Drive, with the resolution having a trigger clause that would send this resolution to NCDOT if the preliminary plat was approved, then a trigger clause than would sent it forward if the final plat were approved, and so on.

Council Member Franck asked Mr. Szostak where the water drains after it leaves the detention pond. Mr. Szostak said from the pond there is a creek that runs along property lines down Dixie Lane to the southern boundary of the park property. Council Member Franck asked Ms. Szostak to present evidence that he could not make improvements to NC 86 because of the scope of those improvements. Mr. Szostak said he could only offer the design drawings already done by NCDOT that define the right of way that is being acquired for this expansion. Council Member Franck requested that the information be provided either by Mr. Szostak or the staff and made a part of this public record. Mr. Szostak said he had that information with him and would provide it. He also said it all comes down to how you route traffic down one side of the two lane versus the other side while doing construction.

Council Member Franck asked the length of the uninterrupted median between Weaver Dairy Road and Stateside Drive will be. Mr. Szostak said he estimates it to be about 3/4 of a mile.

Council Member Evans asked Mr. Szostak to answer a concern expressed by a citizen regarding the staging pond.

Mr. Szostak said the pond was proposed to be completed during the earlier stages of construction. He stated he could not say if this was an interim pond, since a lot of grading will have to be done and the dam rebuilt, but there is a possibility of a temporary retention basin within the pond itself prior to any other construction.

Council Member Powell asked it that meant there would be no danger to surrounding property. Mr. Szostak said absolutely no danger would be present.

Council Member Franck asked before we forget the idea of connecting this property to Stateside Drive, was it considered since this would make getting into Town a lot easier for these residents.

Ms. Culpepper said that was something that was looked at and what we found is that each of the lots that abuts this property along the Stateside frontage are developed, so there is no undeveloped property and this developer doesn't own any of those lots.

Council Member Franck said that answered the question for this use, but not for the larger issue of could the Town take some action. He said he agreed with Ms. Bateman that this was probably not a good idea and was willing to state emphatically that his belief that Stateside Drive should not be connected.

Council Member Brown said she believed it was very good to have a public statement from the developer concerning his intentions regarding the pond, but she would like to have it in writing that the adjoining property owners would be protected from storm damage from this development.

Council Member Brown asked about the possibility of a second sewer connection. Mr. Szostak said some consideration had been given to a second sewer easement near the Timberlyne Shopping Center.

Council Member Brown said she is concerned about the traffic patterns in this entire area. She said it is important for the Council to look at the Subdivision Ordinance, which has a statement which says that these plans must be in conformity not with just the Town's plans but with the Comprehensive Plan as well. Council Member Brown said she felt it was important to note that the Article's intent according to Section 17.1 of the Subdivision Ordinance is to ensure that subdivided lots or parcels can be used safely to build on without danger to the health, safety or general welfare of both the prospective and future owners and of the Chapel Hill community. Council Member Brown said it was important to remember this as they talk about a corridor study and she would like to see how the staff would address this issue regarding the whole area and how the Subdivision Ordinance would be carried out to ensure the safety, health, and general welfare of existing and future residents.

Council Member Evans asked if the Council could also see what is proposed for bicycle and pedestrian paths for the entire area.

Council Member Andresen asked if there was a proposed median cut at Westminster Drive. Ms. Culpepper said no. Council Member Andresen said regarding the pond, a stipulation should be added to ensure that the pond is maintained in an appropriate manner.

Council Member Brown asked what the statement on page 10 of the staff report meant when it said the intersection of Weaver Diary Road and NC 86 would not operate at a satisfactory level by the year 2015 without additional improvements above what is now proposed. She asked that the staff answer this question.

Mr. Szostak, referred to statements made by the representative of the Appearance Commission/Design Review Board, tonight is the first time he has heard about a corridor study. He said the comments provided in the material from those Boards do not mention a corridor study, but does mention coordinating the two stub outs to the north with the property owners. Mr. Szostak that if the Council was emphatic about not connecting Stateside Drive as one Council Member stated, and not connecting Butternut Drive which he agrees with, then there are only three other pieces of property on the east side of Airport Road that can be considered, and they are Windsor Park, The Estates project, and the Maddry property. Mr. Szostak said by coordinating the two stub outs to the north, we have stub outs already ordinate for both subdivisions. He said there is nothing else that can be done except connect with Stateside Drive and Butternut. Mr. Szostak said this is not part of the plan. He said that regarding emergency access to the development, use turf stone in the median just as it is all over the United States, which grass with cover, then two or three ton trucks can pass over it instantly without turning signals, turn lanes, and any other kind of vehicle access requirements. Mr. Szostak said if the was something else he needed to do, the Council needs to tell him, but he believes there is nothing more he can do. He said he believes this is a wonderful project and looks forward to a unanimous vote when it is considered.

COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PAVÃO, TO RECESS THE HEARING TO APRIL 22ND. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY.

Item 3 Public Hearing on Proposed Hargraves Gymnasium Facility

on North Roberson Street

Lakisha Kinney, representing the Youth In Action club, stated the YIA Youth In Action club was formed in January and is an active group of 25 members. She asked the Council how the gym would be used and would it be open to the community on a daily basis.

Antoine Burnett, also representing the Youth In Action club, stated that he wanted to make sure that the gym would have a multi purpose room so that the young people in his neighborhood would have someplace to go after school and during the summer.

Acting Manager Loewenthal stated that the Town was again acting as the regulator and the owner. She said Ms. Culpepper would present the statement as the regulator.

Ms. Culpepper stated the proposal before the Council tonight was to modify the existing SUP to include a new gymnasium, two new parking lots, one to access off Mitchell Lane, and another off North Roberson in the area of the current basketball court. She said the key issue is the design of the gymnasium, which the Design Review Board felt should be more consistent with the current Hargraves structure. Ms. Culpepper said the staff recommendation is for approval of Resolution A.

Parks and Recreation Director Mike Loveman, speaking as the applicant, stated that key issue sin the planning process included the design of the gymnasium, providing more parking, restroom and storage facilities, a public reception area. Mr. Loveman said the proposal would provide an additional 34 parking spaces, that one of the two basketball courts would be preserved, and that the ball field was preserved by moving the fences around the perimeter. He said that they proposed to include the multipurpose center in the first phase.

Mary Reeb, speaking for the Planning Board, stated the Board voted 5 to 2 to adopt the resolution. She said the two persons who voted no were concerned about loosing one of the two basketball courts. She said the design was also an issue, but no solution was offered.

R. D. Smith stated some concern had been expressed about the design of the gymnasium. Mr. Smith said since there were no buildings near the proposed gym except the Center itself, he did not believe the design should draw such negative comments. Mr. Smith said even though one basketball court would be lost, even more would be gained inside. Mr. Smith asked why couldn't the fire lane be extended to Mitchell Lane, and why did we need a 20 foot fire lane beside the proposed gymnasium?

Ed Caldwell said he the community sees this building as something to look forward to, and a group of senior citizens had already expressed their desire to use the building. Mr. Caldwell said this brought up the issue of air conditioning the building. He said they deserved to have the kind of building the public needs. Mr. Caldwell said many groups had already expressed interest in using the gymnasium for meetings. He asked the Council to please do this building right, including air conditioning, which would truly make it multipurpose. Mr. Caldwell said that when taking into consideration the history of the Hargraves Center, he felt the community felt strongly that every effort should be made to make it as multipurpose as possible, which meant air conditioning the building.

Elaine Norwood said she was anxious to see the project started. She said she was excited about it, and the community was excited about it. Ms. Norwood said she had waited a long time to see a gymnasium built at Hargraves, and the kids were looking forward to it. She said in this day and age it was inconceivable to build a structure without air conditioning, and if the Town could spend money on soccer fields at the Northern Community park, they could provide air conditioning for the new gymnasium. Ms. Norwood said better lighting should be provided.

Mary Norwood Jones stated she hoped the new center would enhance the life of the neighborhood children, and air conditioning the building would bring children in off the streets to use the facility. She said the gym could be used for community activities, and if you were going to build a gym, you should build it so that even more activities could take place there.

Mike Loveman stated that the building design scope included a chiller system which would allow the temperature to be adjusted based on the use of the building, which could be set at a higher level for athletic uses.

Council Member Evans asked does that mean the gym would be air conditioned.

Mr. Smart stated that the system proposed acted the same as an air conditioning system. He said additional insulation had been proposed for the roof, with lights on the side of the building rather than the ceiling. Mr. Smart said the windows were also placed so that sun would never shine into the gym.

Council Member Capowski asked if twelve parking spaces could be removed so that the second basketball court could be saved. Mr. Loveman said the need for parking was so great that it was decided to add the twelve spaces in front of the building and remove the second basketball court.

Council Member Powell asked if additional land for parking could be found across the street so that the second basketball court could be saved. Mr. Loveman said it could be explored, and a report made to the Council.

Council Member Evans if the Town had addressed the idea of more on street parking during the hours the Center is opened. She said she is also concerned that adequate lighting be provided. Council Member Evans agreed with Mr. Caldwell, that the facility should be built right.

Council Member Pavão suggested that the County Commissioners be approached and requested they help provide funds for this facility.

Mayor Waldorf agreed that this was an excellent idea. She also commented that parking was in great demand.

Council Member Andresen asked if it was possible to provide a two level deck. Mr. Loewenthal said there was no money available for that type of project.

Council Member Brown said her understanding is that the building will be air conditioned as well as energy efficient, and asked if her understanding was correct. Mr. Loveman responded yes.

Council Member Andresen asked if it was possible to use University parking lots on Rosemary Street after business hours for additional parking. She asked the staff to respond.

Council Member Evans also asked that the concerns regarding the indoor lighting be addressed to make sure adequate lighting is provided on overcast days.

Mr. Caldwell commented he believed the Council was sincere and thanked them for their help.

Mr. Smart said the window in question was on the west side in the community room, and the gym windows are on the north side. He said he believes the large windows will be adequate to light the room. He said every attempt was made to make the new design as compatible as possible with the existing building.

Council Member Powell complimented Mr. Smart on his accommodating attitude and how well he had worked on this project.

Ms. Loewenthal said that regarding the 20 foot fire lane next to the building, it was important that fire trucks have access as close to the building as possible. Ms. Loewenthal, responding to a question from Ms. Norwood, said it would go out for bids in the fall, and it would probably be the spring of 1998 (see tape) before construction was stated.

COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO RECESS THE HEARING TO APRIL 22ND. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY.

Mayor Waldorf asked Council Member Pavão if he wished to move that the Council request financial assistance from the County Commissioners.

Council Member Capowski stated there were many items the Council needed to discuss with the Commissioners, and we need to prioritized them before we approach them.

COUNCIL MEMBER PAVÃO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER ANDRESEN, THAT THE MAYOR WRITE A LETTER TO THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ASKING FOR ASSISTANCE IN FUNDING THIS PROJECT. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED 7 2, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS CAPOWSKI AND FRANCK VOTED NAY.

COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO RECESS THE HEARINGS. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY.

The meeting was adjourned at 9:48 p.m.