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

OF CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA, TUESDAY, APRIL 2, 1996 AT 7:00 PM

Mayor Waldorf called the meeting to order. Council Members in attendance were Julie Andresen, Joyce Brown, Joe Capowski, Mark Chilton, Pat Evans, Richard Franck, Lee Pavão and Barbara Powell.

Also in attendance were Town Manager Cal Horton, Assistant Town Managers Sonna Loewenthal and Florentine Miller, Police Chief Ralph Pendergraph, Long Range Planning Coordinator Chris Berndt, Senior Transportation Planner David Bonk and Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos.

Item 1 Ceremonies

Mayor Waldorf requested that Senator Fred Hobbs and DEHNR Secretary Jonathan Howes come forward for a brief ceremony regarding a grant award for the proposed Chapel Hill Museum. Senator Hobbs said that the North Carolina Division of Cultural Resources had awarded the proponents of the Chapel Hill Museum with a grant in the amount of $35,000 for building renovations and related items. Secretary Howes stated that Secretary McCain was unable to attend this evening's ceremony. Secretary Howes noted that it had been his long time dream to adapt the former library building into a community museum. He stated that receipt of the grant would make it possible to move ahead vigorously with this project. Mayor Waldorf thanked Senator Hobbs and Secretary Howes for their efforts in acquiring the grant funds. Dick Matthews, a member of the Museum Study Committee, likewise thanked Senator Hobbs and Secretary Howes.

Mayor Waldorf read the following resolution recognizing the Chapel Hill High School Orchestra:

COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 0.1. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

A RESOLUTION HONORING THE CHAPEL HILL HIGH SCHOOL ORCHESTRA

(96-4-2/R-0.1)

WHEREAS, the Mayors of Vienna, Salzburg, Innsbruck and Graz have invited the Chapel Hill High School Orchestra under the leadership of Ms. Jeanine Zenge to represent the State of North Carolina by performing in June at a celebration of the 1,000th anniversary of the nation of Austria; and

WHEREAS, the Chapel Hill High School Orchestra has received superior ratings for many years in State-wide competitions; and

WHEREAS, the Chapel Hill High School Orchestra members have brought honor upon themselves, the High School, the Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools and the community; and

WHEREAS, members of the Chapel Hill High School Orchestra performed at the Town Council meeting of March 13th, to the delight of citizens including the Mayor and Council, citizens attending the meeting and residents watching the meeting on cable television; and

WHEREAS, the Chapel Hill High School Orchestra is raising funds for the trip to the millennial celebration;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby praises and honors

THE CHAPEL HILL HIGH SCHOOL ORCHESTRA

and encourages citizens to support the Orchestra and to make donations for costs of the trip to Austria.

This the 2nd day of April, 1996.

Item 3 Petitions

Jerry Sharpe of the Westside Neighborhood Association asked that the Council direct Town staff to help residents of his neighborhood address a number of concerns, including: parking, illegal occupancy of residences, traffic safety and sanitation.

Mr. Sharpe presented the Council with a petition signed by residents of the Westside neighborhood. A copy of the petition is on file in the Town Clerk's Office.

COUNCIL MEMBER ANDRESEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN, TO REFER THE MATTER TO STAFF.

Council Member Andresen requested that staff respond to each of the concerns in the citizen's petition. Expressing her concurrence with this request, Council Member Powell said she hoped that these matters would be looked at Townwide, rather than just for this particular neighborhood. Mr. Horton said staff would examine applicable matters on a Townwide basis. He stated that staff could prepare a preliminary report for the Council's April 22nd meeting. Noting that some of the matters were being studied in depth by the Historic District Commission, Council Member Evans said neighborhood residents might need to be a little more patient on these matters. Mr. Sharpe said that neighborhood residents were aware of, and understood, this situation.

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

There were no petitions by the Manager or Attorney.

Council Member Brown noted that a joint public forum on solid waste matters would be held in the Council Chamber on April 18th at 7:30 p.m. She also noted that a public forum on landfill reorganization options would be held on April 25th at 7:30 p.m. in the Carrboro Town Hall. Council Member Brown noted that both forums were being sponsored by the three local government units (Orange County and the Towns of Carrboro and Chapel Hill).

Item 4.1 Consent Agenda

Council Member Evans suggested that an evaluation could be done in the future regarding proposed parking restrictions in the Davie Circle area. Mr. Horton said the matter could be scheduled for review at another time. Mayor Waldorf inquired whether the Council was willing to hear the four citizens who wished to address this matter at this time. There were no objections from Council Members.

James Coe said that the first 300-500 feet of Davie Circle were almost exclusively used for commuter parking. He added that although UNC faculty, students and others favored using Davie Circle for jogging, this was becoming a less safe route as the amount of commuter parking along the roadway increased. Mr. Coe urged the Council to ban commuter parking along the entire length of Davie Circle. He also requested that such restrictions could be removed during severe winter weather conditions.

Rebecca Easton, a resident of Hill Street, stated that a number of children regularly played on Jones Street. Ms. Easton requested that the Council consider issuing only resident parking permits for both sides of Hill and Jones Streets.

Rosemary Williams said that Davie Circle had a total of sixty-five residences, many of which were multiple occupant dwellings. Stating that Davie Circle was heavily travelled, Ms. Williams said she supported imposing some parking restrictions on the entire neighborhood.

William Cowen said he concurred with the remarks of his neighbors relative to parking restrictions. Mr. Cowen expressed concern about the unsafe nature of access to Davie Circle. Mr. Cowen also said he thought that the Manager's recommendation offer good long-term solutions.

Mayor Waldorf inquired whether or not there were any comments or suggestions by Council Members. Council Member Evans suggested that whatever was implemented, staff should provide a follow-up report to the Council within six months.

Council Member Andresen expressed concern about the impact of the proposed parking restrictions on Hill Street. Council Member Chilton said he was inclined to send the matter back to staff.

Council Member Chilton requested removal of item a from the consent agenda. Council Member Capowski requested removal of item c from the consent agenda.

B.B. Olive said he was deeply interested in the subject of converting municipal waste into useful products. Mr. Olive requested that the Council revise the proposed resolution regarding his petition to request that the Landfill Owners Group make a recommendation to the Council regarding the use of plasma technology. He said it was very important for the Council to hear about such alternatives in depth.

Council Member Capowski asked whether or not Mr. Olive was a patent attorney. Mr. Olive said this was correct. Council Member Capowski asked whether Mr. Olive was representing a client in this matter. Mr. Olive said no, noting that he had been an active Orange County resident and volunteer since 1957.

Mayor Waldorf asked whether any Council Members wished to remove the item for discussion at the end of the meeting. Noting that the Town's Landfill Owners Group delegation was in attendance this evening, Council Member Chilton said the Council could pass the resolution as presented in the Council's agenda materials. Council Member Evans noted that she had made a videotape available to Council Members regarding an alternative waste disposal method. She said this and other alternatives could possibly be presented at the next Landfill Owners Group meeting.

Council Member Evans requested removal of item f from the consent agenda.

COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO ADOPT THE CONSENT AGENDA, EXCEPTING ITEMS A, C AND F. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

A RESOLUTION ADOPTING VARIOUS RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES

(96-4-2/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 (excepting item g) in regard to the following:

a. Davie Circle parking restrictions (O-1a and b). Manager recommends O-1a.

b. Purchase of Johnson property (R-2, O-2).

c. Calling joint public forum on landfill siting (R-3).

d. Calling hearing on landfill reorganization options (R-4).

e. Report from committee of citizens regarding the Town's computer networking needs.

(1) Report from Manager regarding development of local area computer network for Town Hall offices and wide area computer network for Town departments.

(2) Awarding contract for local area network at Town Hall (R-5).

(3) Awarding contract for wide area network for various Town facilities (R-6).

f. Referral of petition from Mr. B. B. Olive to the Landfill Owner's Group (R-7).

g. Improvements to Old Fayetteville Road for access to McDougle Middle School (R-8). Mayor Waldorf.

h. Lease agreement for Teen Center use of a portion of the East Franklin Street Post Office building (R-9).

i. March for Parks (R-9.1).

j. Tour DuPont (R-9.2).

This the 2nd day of April, 1996.

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CHAPEL HILL TOWN COUNCIL TO AUTHORIZE THE CHAPEL HILL TOWN MANAGER TO UTILIZE THE LANDFILL RESERVE FUND - RESERVE FOR ACQUISITIONS, TO PURCHASE THE PROPERTY KNOWN AS THE JOHNSON PROPERTY (CHAPEL HILL TOWNSHIP, TAX MAP 7, BLOCK 18, LOT 27D) (96-4-2-/R-2)

WHEREAS, the Landfill Owners Group has been approached by the owners of a 13.8 acre tract of property that adjoins the current landfill on Eubanks Road; and

WHEREAS, Mrs. Shirley B. Johnson, Administratrix of the Estates of Lisbon R. Johnson and his deceased son Simon R. Johnson has expressed her interest in selling this property to the owners of the Orange Regional Landfill; and

WHEREAS, the Landfill Owners Group would have an interest in obtaining this property in order to expand the current buffer area and provide additional space for mulching and recycling operations at the Orange Regional Landfill; and

WHEREAS, it is agreed that the purchase price will be $7,500 per acre, with the total to be determined by a survey prior to closing; and

WHEREAS, the Landfill Owners Group has recommended that the governing boards authorize the purchase of the property, utilizing funds from the Landfill Reserve Fund - Reserve for Acquisitions;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that it authorizes the Chapel Hill Town Manager to use Landfill Reserve Fund to purchase the property known as the Johnson property.

This the 2nd day of April, 1996.

AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND "THE ORDINANCE CONCERNING APPROPRIATIONS AND THE RAISING OF REVENUE FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JULY 1, 1995" (96-4-2/O-2)

BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Budget Ordinance entitled "An Ordinance Concerning Appropriations and the Raising of Revenue for the Fiscal Year Beginning July 1, 1995" as duly adopted on June 5, 1995 be and the same is hereby amended as follows:

ARTICLE I

Current Revised

Budget Increase Decrease Budget

APPROPRIATIONS

LANDFILL FUND 5,423,170 105,000 5,528,700

ARTICLE II

REVENUES

LANDFILL FUND

Fund Balance

Reserves - Land 100,800 105,000 205,800

This the 2nd day of April, 1996.

A RESOLUTION CALLING A PUBLIC FORUM TO RECEIVE PUBLIC COMMENT ON AN OUTLINE OF GENERAL PRINCIPLES AND A SCHEDULE FOR CREATION OF A NEW JOINT SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT AGENCY FOR ORANGE COUNTY (96-4-2/R-4)

WHEREAS, the Landfill Reorganization Work Group was charged by the landfill owning governments to evaluate options for ownership, financing and administration of the next landfill and/or other solid waste management facilities and activities; and

WHEREAS, the Landfill Reorganization Work Group was charged to report back to the governing bodies on recommendations for ownership, financing and administration and a process for public debate and consideration of the associated issues; and

WHEREAS, a mission and goals statement was adopted by the governments of Orange County as an initial step in the reorganization of the solid waste management activities in Orange county; and

WHEREAS, the Landfill Reorganization Work Group has formulated and asked the governing boards to consider an "Outline of the General Principles and Arrangements for a Joint Solid Waste Agency to be created by the governing boards of Carrboro, Chapel Hill, Hillsborough, and Orange County to serve the Citizens, Businesses, and Institutions of the County"; and

WHEREAS, the Landfill Reorganization Work Group has proposed a schedule for public discussion, consideration and creation of a Joint Solid Waste Management Agency which would result in creation of a new solid waste management agency by January 1, 1997 that could begin operations on July 1, 1997;

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

1. That the Council will consider the attached "Outline of the General Principles and Arrangements for a Joint solid Waste Agency to be Created by the Governing Boards of Carrboro, Chapel Hill, Hillsborough, and Orange County to Serve the Citizens, Businesses, and Institutions of the County".

2. That the Council will consider the proposed schedule and the creation of a Joint Solid Waste Management Agency.

3. That the Council will jointly host a public forum on reorganization of solid waste management services on April 25, 1996 at 7:30 p.m. at Carrboro Town Hall.

This the 2nd day of April, 1996.

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF THE TOWN HALL LOCAL AREA NETWORK (96-4-2/R-5)

WHEREAS, the Town of Chapel Hill has solicited formal bids by legal notice in The Chapel Hill News on December 24, 1995 in accordance with General Statute 143-129 for the purchase of Town Hall Local Area Network; and

WHEREAS, the following bid was received and opened on January 2, 1996 as follows:

VENDOR BID

Information Decisions, Inc. $68,866.00

WHEREAS, the bid by Information Decisions, Inc. is responsive to the Town's specifications and within expenditure amount recommended for this purchase;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Town accepts the bid of Information Decisions, Inc. for Town Hall Local Area Network in the amount of $68,866.00.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council authorizes the Town Manager to enter into a contract with First Union Bank on behalf of the Town for the lease-purchase of this equipment at a fixed interest rate of 4.35% annually.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the aforementioned contract by and between the Town of Chapel Hill and Information Decisions, Inc. together with the amounts to be paid thereunder, be and the same are hereby designated as a qualified tax-exempt obligation of the Town of Chapel hill for purposes of Section 265 (b) (3) of the internal Revenue Code of 1986.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Town Council does not reasonably expect that the Town of Chapel Hill (and any subordinate entities) will issue more than $10,000,000 in qualified tax-exempt obligations during the current calendar year and the Town Council will not designate more than $10,000,000 of qualified tax-exempt obligations pursuant to such Section 265 (b)J (3) (B) (ii) during the current calendar year.

This the 2nd day of April, 1996.

A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE BID FOR WIDE AREA NETWORK (96-4-2/R-6)

WHEREAS, the Town of Chapel Hill has solicited formal bids by legal notice in The Chapel Hill News on January 28, 1996 in accordance with General Statute 143-129 for wide area network: and

WHEREAS, the following bids were received and opened on February 8, 1996:

VENDOR BID

Dilan Communications Technology, Inc. $48,943.25

Information Decisions, Inc. $34,935.00

Racal Datacom $56,416.00

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the bid of Information Decision, Inc. in the amount of $34,935.00 be accepted.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council authorizes the Town Manager to enter into a contract with First Union Bank on behalf of the Town for the lease-purchase of the network equipment and additional network equipment and computers ($37,852) at a fixed interest rate of 4.35% annually.

This the 2nd day of April, 1996.

A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE NEED TO KEEP PROJECT U-3100 ON ITS PRESENT ACCELERATED SCHEDULE IN THE NORTH CAROLINA TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM (96-4-2/R-8)

WHEREAS, the North Carolina Transportation Improvement Program for 1996-2003 includes project U-3100 (improvements to Hillsborough Street, Old Fayetteville Road and Lorraine Street) for construction in mid-1998; and

WHEREAS, this project is critical for access to the McDougle Middle School; and

WHEREAS, State staff has estimated that the cost of this project will be about double the previous estimate and therefore has identified options for proceeding with the project in phases; and

WHEREAS, the Mayor of the Town of Carrboro has invited the Town of Chapel Hill to comment on the need to keep this project on schedule;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby expresses its support for keeping project U-3100 (improvements to Hillsborough Street, Old Fayetteville Road and Lorraine Street) on its current accelerated schedule, with the understanding that the Council does not hereby intend to change its previously adopted set of priorities for transportation improvements in Chapel Hill and the Town's planning jurisdiction.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council supports cooperation between the State and the Town of Carrboro and the Board of Education to achieve a design and construction plan which meet both State and local objectives.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council reaffirms its support for keeping improvements to Weaver Dairy Road as a high priority in the Transportation Improvements Program, in part because of the need for safe and adequate access to East Chapel Hill High School.

This the 2nd day of April, 1996.

A RESOLUTION RENEWING A LEASE FOR A PORTION OF THE POST OFFICE/COURT BUILDING FOR USE AS A TEEN CENTER (96-4-2/R-9)

WHEREAS, the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill, on May 22, 1995, pursuant to G.S. 160A-272, authorized the Manager to enter into a lease for a portion of the Post Office/Court Building for a Teen Center; and

WHEREAS, the term of said lease was for one year, beginning on June 1, 1995, and ending on May 31, 1996; and

WHEREAS, Franklin Street Teen Center, Inc. entered into a lease with the Town for approximately 2,400 square feet of space in the basement of the Post Office/Court Building on June 1, 1995, and has requested that the lease be renewed;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council approves of, and authorizes the Town Manager to enter into on behalf of the Town, a renewal agreement for the lease to the Franklin Street Teen Center, Inc. of approximately 2,400 square feet in the basement of the Post Office/Court Building, at 179 East Franklin Street, for the operation of a Teen Center, for a term of one year commencing on June 1, 1996, said agreement to contain language substantially the same as contained in the lease agreement presented to the Town Council at its meeting of April 2, 1996.

This the 2nd day of April, 1996.

A RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA STUDENT RECREATION SOCIETY FOR ORGANIZING A COMMUNITY EVENT TO SUPPORT IMPROVEMENTS TO CHAPEL HILL PARKS (96-4-2/R-9.1)

WHEREAS, representatives of the University of North Carolina Student Recreation Society have made a presentation to the Town Council announcing the upcoming "March for Parks"; and,

WHEREAS, all pledges earned by participants in this event have been designated to support the planned playground improvements at the Community Center Park; and,

WHEREAS, the members of the Student Recreation Society have provided the leadership and initiative in organizing this event.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby expresses its appreciation to the Members of the University of North Carolina Student Recreation Society for their efforts to support park improvements in Chapel Hill.

This the 2nd day of April, 1996.

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING TOWN STAFF TO PROVIDE ASSISTANCE TO THE TOUR DUPONT BICYCLE RACE ON MAY 4, 1996 (96-4-2/R-9.2)

WHEREAS, the 1996 Tour DuPont is an international Bicycle Race which will be held from May 1 to May 12, 1996; and

WHEREAS, the 1996 Tour DuPont route is from Wilmington, Delaware to Atlanta, Georgia; and

WHEREAS, the 1996 Tour DuPont will come through Chapel Hill on May 4, 1996; and

WHEREAS, the North Carolina Highway Patrol has requested assistance from the Town of Chapel Hill on the portion of the course in Chapel Hill; and

WHEREAS, the Tour DuPont will provide the Town with a certificate of insurance on their $5,000,000 liability policy; and

WHEREAS, the Tour DuPont will provide citizens a unique opportunity to see an international bicycle race.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council supports the Tour DuPont in Chapel Hill on May 4, 1996.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor will sign a letter which will authorize the Tour DuPont to name the Town as an additional insured party on the Tour DuPont liability insurance.

This the 2nd day of April, 1996.

The information reports were accepted as presented.

Item 5 Horace Williams and Mason Farm Tracts

Noting that this was a Council policy decision, Mr. Horton said staff welcomed the Council's guidance in this matter.

Diane Bloom said the matter involved a difficult task with a tight timetable. She stated that the Council's decision to create the Council Committee on zoning goals was a unanimous one. Ms. Bloom said that the Council had a good set of goals before them this evening for discussion at the June public hearing.

Ed King, a resident of Mount Bolus Road and a member of the Orange County Greens, said that the University and Town had enjoyed strong collaboration in their joint planning efforts. Mr. King said the Council had a fundamental responsibility to protect the interests of the Town's residents using zoning. He also stated that successful collaboration necessitated both parties having respect for the other party's responsibilities.

Orange County Green representative Dan Coleman briefly outlined differences between the Council Committee's and staff's recommended goals, stating the importance of the Council adopting explicit goals. Mr. Coleman urged the Council to discuss each of the Council Committee's goals.

Planning Board Chair Mary Reeb said that the Planning Board proposed coordinating a half-day charette with consultant Dwight Merriam on Saturday, April 27th at a place to be determined, possibly the Friday Center. She stated that members of the public would be encouraged to attend this meeting. Ms. Reeb also said that the Board hoped to draft a zoning proposal by May 29th and a draft ordinance by the June 17th public hearing. She stated that the proposed charette would provide a good opportunity for give and take. Ms. Reeb said that Resolution B offered some good suggestions relative to the development of zoning for large tracts.

Planning Board and Planning Panel member Scott Radway said the Council and Planning Board had had an informative meeting with Dwight Merriam last Friday. Mr. Radway thanked the Manager and Town staff for putting together a very good, comparative working document. Mr. Radway also said he supported the proposal to have a workshop with Mr. Merriam on April 27th. Mr. Radway said in his role as a Planning Board member and planning consultant, he would rather work with Resolution B, rather than Resolution A. He urged the Council to focus on goals, rather than numbers.

Noting that he supported the goals in Resolution A, Kevin Foy said he believed that these goals would help move the process forward. Stating that the University had been very cooperative in the matter, Mr. Foy said that the Council had a responsibility to the community to ensure that this continued. Mr. Foy said that Resolution A's best attribute was that it set forth specific goals for negotiating points, rather than being a final document. Stating that Resolution A set forth minimum and maximum uses by zoning categories, Mr. Foy encouraged the Council to adopt this resolution.

UNC-Chapel Hill Planning Panel member Bob Woodruff said that the current zoning on the Horace Williams tract had been in place for many years. Stating that the University had extended a hand of cooperation in the matter, Mr. Woodruff urged the Council to postpone action on zoning until the joint planning process was completed.

Council Member Capowski said this item was a prime example that matters coming before the Council were not rehearsed beforehand. Referencing the activities of the UNC-Chapel Hill Planning Panel, Council Member Capowski said the fifteen members of the Town's Planning Panel had worked hard over an eighteen month period. He added that the Council had voted to forward the Planning Panel's recommendations on the Mason Farm and Horace Williams properties to the University's land use planning consultants, JJ&R Associates.

Council Member Capowski said that the Council had the options of adopting an interim zoning category or waiting for a bonafide land-use plan prior to zoning. Stating that the overall process was proceeding very well, Council Member Capowski said continuing to work on an interim plan would violate the existing collaborative spirit between the University and the Town. Noting that two bodies, the North Carolina General Assembly and the Town Council, were responsible for zoning, Council Member Capowski said that the Council had forwarded opinions to JJ&R Associates and had asked the Planning Board to start work on the development of a new zoning category. Council Member Capowski said it would be confusing and stupid to give different direction to JJ&R and the Planning Board. Stating that he did not want to cut off the Council's discourse, Council Member Capowski suggested that the Council table the matter.

Council Member Andresen said the Council had agreed at earlier meetings to move ahead on this matter. She also said it was very important that the Council discuss process format questions such as whether or not a charette would be held as proposed by the Planning Board. Mayor Waldorf inquired whether the Council wished to discuss the goals or charette matter first.

Council Member Chilton asked whether or not the Planning Board's suggestion made it unnecessary for the Council to discuss goals this evening. Mayor Waldorf said she thought the matters were separate from one another.

Noting that two members of the Planning Board had indicated their preference for working with Resolution B, rather than Resolution A, Council Member Evans suggested that the Council Committee's report could be forwarded to the Planning Board for their views and comments. She also suggested that the Council could possibly endorse the recommendation from the Planning Board to proceed with the charette.

COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PAVÃO, TO

ENDORSE THE SCHEDULE OF EVENTS PROPOSED BY THE PLANNING BOARD, PUT THE PLANNING BOARD IN CHARGE OF THE PROPOSED CHARETTE AND FORWARD THE PLANNING BOARD REPORTS FROM THE UNC-CHAPEL HILL PLANNING PANEL RELATIVE TO THE HORACE WILLIAMS AND MASON FARM PROPERTIES.

Council Member Brown said that on February 26th the Council had unanimously adopted a process and timetable regarding the properties. Noting the ambitious nature of the proposed timetable, Council Member Brown said it might be necessary to make some changes in this timetable. Stating that the objective of the Council was to present ideas to Town residents for the June 17th public hearing, Council Member Brown expressed concern that the activities of the Council Committee had been mischaracterized. She also said that the Committee had stayed within the bounds of the charge approved by the Council on February 26th. Stating that the Council had previously worked out a very good process, Council Member Brown said she would not support Council Member Evans proposed motion.

Council Member Andresen said she was not sure whether it would be useful to have a charette discussion with Mr. Merriam unless the discussion topics were carefully defined. Ms. Reeb said that the Planning Board was suggesting that two or three major topics be the focus of the charette session.

Council Member Andresen said she wondered if a meeting with University officials was needed at this point to explore the options for a new or interim zone for these properties. Council Member Capowski said that a series of meetings had been held with University officials and other interested persons for the past eighteen months. Council Member Andresen said there were really two separate processes in motion: the development of broad goals and related matters by the Planning Panel and the development of a zone for the property by the Planning Board and Town Council.

Noting that the Town and University had been working together on the matter for about eighteen months, Council Member Pavão said that the process was still developing and that Town and University officials were waiting to receive JJ&R's report. Council Member Pavão suggested that the process be allowed to continue to develop, with the Planning Board taking all of the information it had to work on the development of a zoning category.

Council Member Chilton said it appeared that Council Member Pavão was suggesting moving ahead with the charette process while Council Member Capowski was suggesting not moving forward in this manner. Noting that the Planning Board was moving ahead with the development of a new zoning category, Council Member Capowski said he was very concerned about the potential for confusion if the Planning Board were given a different set of goals from those given to the University and its planning consultants.

Council Member Chilton inquired whether the suggestion was to abandon the original process in favor of the proposed charette.

Council Member Franck said although he very much favored the process adopted by the Council a few weeks ago, he could support Council Member Evans motion if she were willing to amend her motion to include the Council Committee's goals. Council Member Evans said she could not support this amendment, stating that the Council Committee had been asked to clarify the goal statements of the Planning Panel. Council Member Evans said she felt that other items were included in Resolution A which went beyond the scope of this charge. She suggested that the Planning Board be given an opportunity to coordinate the proposed charette process.

Council Member Franck said the Council Committee had exactly followed the charge adopted by the Council, namely taking the Planning Panel's report and making them into broader goals for zoning purposes.

COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON, TO REFER THE NEW SET OF ZONING GOALS TO THE PLANNING BOARD FOR DISCUSSION AT THE PROPOSED CHARETTE SESSION.

Stating that he did not care whether or not the Council Committee had overstepped its bounds, Council Member Chilton suggested that the Council focus on the matter before them this evening. Council Member Chilton also said he thought that Council Members needed to be less territorial about the whole issue and tone down the tenor of the debate. He suggested that the Council focus its energies on development of a high quality zoning district to replace the existing one. Council Member Chilton also stated that he was willing to go along with either of the proposed processes. Mayor Waldorf noted that the substitute motion was on the floor.

Council Member Powell expressed her concurrence that Council Members had become too territorial. She also expressed concern that it appeared that some members of the Council were turning their backs on the Council Committee, which had been asked to rework the Planning Panel's goals. Mayor Waldorf stated that the Committee had done the work requested by the Council in its charge to the Committee. Council Member Franck noted that his motion would include a set of yet to be established goals for follow-up by the Planning Board.

Council Member Brown said that although the process had reached a difficult point, the Council would be the ultimate decision maker in the matter. She also said that regardless of whether the charette or original process were followed, the Council would have to stand behind the particular process. Council Member Brown stated that if the charette process were followed, the Council and Planning Board should decide how this would be handled.

Noting that it would be a good forum for concerns to be heard, Council Member Franck said that the Planning Board should have a key role in the planning of the charette.

Expressing concern about the possibility of micromanagement by the Council, Council Member Capowski suggested that the Planning Board coordinate the charette.

Mayor Waldorf said the motion on the floor was an amendment to Council Member Evans' motion.

Council Member Andresen called the question. Mayor Waldorf said she had a few comments prior to a vote on the matter. Mayor Waldorf also said she thought that it was reasonable to support the process suggested by the Planning Board and to refer all documents to the Planning Board, including the Council Committee's report and the Planning Panel's comments and reports. She stated that the main goal of the process needed to be to maintain and preserve a good relationship with the University.

Council Member Brown said that the Council needed to stop floundering, move on and take a stand. Council Member Andresen expressed her concurrence, stating that it was important to get to specifics and pass the matter on to the Planning Board.

Mayor Waldorf said the main motion was for the Planning Board to plan the charette and direct it with the Council as active participants, with the Planning Panel's reports to be forwarded. She added that the proposed amendment was to include the as yet to be adopted statement of goals by the Council relative to the two properties.

THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT WAS ADOPTED BY A VOTE OF 8-1, WITH COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS VOTING NO. THE MAIN MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Mayor Waldorf inquired whether or not the Council wished to discuss goals this evening.

COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION A.

COUNCIL MEMBER CAPOWSKI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO SUBSTITUTE RESOLUTION B.

Council Member Chilton inquired why Council Member Capowski favored voting for Resolution B. Council Member Capowski said Resolution B more closely approximated the wishes of the Council and the Planning Panel than did Resolution A. Council Member Chilton said he was willing to extend the laurel of peace and vote for the substitute motion in the spirit of compromise.

Council Member Evans also said she was willing to compromise. She stated that it was important to move forward and leave some fixed positions behind. Council Member Evans also stated that Resolution B incorporated some input from the University, as recommended by the Town's zoning consultant. She also said that Resolution B did not tie the Planning Board's hands.

Council Member Andresen suggested that the Council discuss and attempt to reach consensus point by point, rather than attempting to adopt Resolution A or Resolution B in their entirety.

Council Member Brown said the purpose of this effort was to give Dwight Merriam some idea of the Council's direction relative to the two properties. She stated that Resolution B would not protect the interests of neighbors.

THE MOTION TO SUBSTITUTE RESOLUTION B AS THE MAIN MOTION WAS ADOPTED BY A VOTE OF 5-4, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS ANDRESEN, BROWN, FRANCK AND POWELL VOTING NO.

Mayor Waldorf said Resolution B was the main motion on the floor for discussion.

Council Member Brown inquired about the possibility of including Resolution A with Resolution B. Council Member Chilton suggested that although going point by point through Resolution A or B would be a time-consuming process, there was room for compromise between the two resolutions.

Council Member Franck said that there were a good number of points of agreement between the two resolutions. Council Member Andresen suggested that the Council hear Council Member Franck's main concerns about Resolution B.

Stating that the overall goals in the two resolutions were quite similar, Council Member Franck said he was willing to give up the fifty percent undisturbed land figure referenced in Resolution A.

Council Member Evans noted that the Planning Panel's recommendation was to leave more than fifty percent of the land area undisturbed. Council Member Franck said the two resolutions were synchronized on this item.

Council Member Franck said that requiring mixed use and minimum floor area ratios could be done using a development agreement. Stating that conditions could change unexpectedly in the future, Council Member Evans suggested encouraging, rather than requiring, mixed use. Council Member Andresen said that a zoning category or development agreement could provide complete flexibility in this matter. Mayor Waldorf said she would vote against changing the language to "require".

Expressing concern about voting quickly on the matter, Council Member Brown suggested that Mr. Merriam advise the Council on the matters.

Council Member Capowski noted that if the two tracts were combined, they would constitute approximately one-fifth of property in the Town.

Council Member Powell noted that the Council was formulating goals for future discussion, rather than actually requiring mixed use.

Council Member Brown noted that the goal statements adopted by the Council this evening would be forwarded to Mr. Merriam for his comments and critique.

Council Member Evans said it would help a lot if the items were called suggestions, rather than goals.

Council Member Pavão suggested the possibility of forwarding resolutions a and b to the consultant for his review and comments. Council Member Andresen said it was important for the consultant to have a sense of the Council's overall goals, rather than receiving comments from nine individuals. Council Member Pavão said he believed that the nine individual Council Members had had a good meeting with the consultant on March 29th.

Council Member Chilton said he had been told that all development on North Carolina State University's Centennial Campus went before the Raleigh City Council for review.

Council Member Evans expressed concern about potentially tying the consultant's hands relative to goals for the properties.

COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER ANDRESEN, TO "REQUIRE" RATHER THAN "ENCOURAGE" MIXED USE. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED BY A VOTE OF 6-3, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS ANDRESEN, BROWN, CAPOWSKI, CHILTON, FRANCK AND POWELL VOTING YES AND COUNCIL MEMBERS EVANS AND PAVÃO AND MAYOR WALDORF VOTING NO.

Council Member Evans requested that the Town Attorney comment on proposed goal number 2b, regarding clustering of development. Noting that he had some concerns about the extent to which goals such as this could be achieved within the context of existing laws, Mr. Karpinos said he looked forward to seeing the consultant's opinion on these matters.

Council Member Chilton noted that the proposal was saying "or other mechanisms".

THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED BY A VOTE OF 8-1, WITH COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS VOTING NO.

COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON, TO INSERT THE LANGUAGE IN ITEM 2D OF RESOLUTION A INTO RESOLUTION B.

Council Member Evans inquired whether this would include "and surrounding area" as specified in Resolution A. Council Member Brown suggested substituting the entire sentence. Council Member Evans inquired how the applicant could be responsible for development in the surrounding area. Mayor Waldorf said she would vote against this change, since the standard could not be fairly quantified as proposed. Council Member Brown expressed her willingness to delete the words "and surrounding area". The seconder concurred. Mayor Waldorf noted that it would still be difficult to quantify.

THE MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS ADOPTED BY A VOTE OF 8-1, WITH MAYOR WALDORF VOTING NO.

Expressing concern that the language in Resolution B on item 3e was not strong enough, Council Member Andresen suggested using the language in Resolution A for item e. There was unanimous consent by the Council to do so.

COUNCIL MEMBER CAPOWSKI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCK, TO ADD AN ITEM F, SPECIFYING THAT "HOUSING SHOULD BE CONSTRUCTED EARLY IN THE PROCESS". THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED BY A VOTE OF 8-1, WITH COUNCIL MEMBER ANDRESEN VOTING NO.

COUNCIL MEMBER CAPOWSKI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER ANDRESEN, TO REQUIRE THAT SEWER LINES, ROADS AND INFRASTRUCTURE BE CONSTRUCTED SO AS TO NOT DISTURB SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS, REPLACING ITEM 1D.

Council Member said she preferred having this as a separate item. Council Member Chilton said he did not know enough about the proposal to support it. Council Member Andresen said she supported the proposed goal. Noting that the property was to be built out over a long period time, Council Member Brown said she would vote against the suggested goal. Stating that a huge property was involved, Council Member Evans said the proposed goal was not reasonable.

THE MOTION FAILED BY A VOTE OF 4-5, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS BROWN, CHILTON, EVANS, FRANCK AND PAVÃO VOTING NO.

COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PAVÃO, TO REMOVE THE TERM "ETC." FROM GOALS 4A AND B. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Council Member Capowski said the Planning Panel in its second interim report had concluded that it was not desirable for adjoining neighborhoods, such as Glen Heights, to be connected to the Horace Williams property by anything other than bikeways and pedestrian connections. Noting that he had visited Council Member Brown's home on Ransom Street on some occasions, Council Member Franck said the narrower streets in this area tended to slow traffic. Council Member Capowski said as a bicyclist in the area, he felt that traffic in this area was sometimes dangerous and not very slow.

COUNCIL MEMBER ANDRESEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCK, TO STIPULATE IN CONDITION 5D THAT INTERIOR ROADS EMPLOY TRAFFIC CALMING METHODS. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

COUNCIL MEMBER CAPOWSKI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON, TO STIPULATE IN OVERALL GOAL NUMBER SEVEN THAT "TRANSIT CORRIDORS SHOULD BE IDENTIFIED AND DEDICATED". THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Council Member Franck said the language in Resolution A for goal number 6d was much stronger. Council Member Brown expressed her concurrence, noting that it was important strive for a goal which would not encourage the use of single-occupant vehicles.

Council Member Evans said she wondered how many people would accept jobs wherein parking convenient to workplace was difficult. Council Member Franck said it was important to provide good transportation alternatives whenever possible.

Council Member Chilton suggested that the Council substitute the language in Resolution A for item 6d.

COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN, TO SUBSTITUTE THE LANGUAGE IN RESOLUTION A FOR ITEM 6D. THE MOTION TO

SUBSTITUTE THE LANGUAGE WAS PASSED BY A VOTE OF 6-3, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS ANDRESEN, BROWN, CAPOWSKI, CHILTON, FRANCK AND PAVÃO VOTING YES AND COUNCIL MEMBERS EVANS, POWELL AND MAYOR WALDORF VOTING NO.

COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS SUGGESTED THAT AN ITEM 7C BE ADDED TO ENCOURAGE THE USE OF RECLAIMED WATER. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Council Member Capowski suggested that a provision be included discouraging large regional facilities such as large auditoriums or other similar facilities. Council Member Evans inquired whether or not this was meant to apply to both parcels. Council Member Capowski said yes, adding that a clone of the Ambulatory Care facility was not desirable.

COUNCIL MEMBER CAPOWSKI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON, TO ADD THE FOLLOWING PROVISION AS GOAL #1g: "Discourage regional facilities, such as large auditoriums or medical facilities, which would draw regional visitors who could not be called upon to use mass transit". THE MOTION PASSED BY A VOTE OF 6-3, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS ANDRESEN, EVANS AND FRANCK VOTING NO.

Noting that the upstream portion of Bolin Creek ran through the Horace Williams tract, Council Member Capowski suggested the possibility of requiring flood control measures. Council Member Andresen said the best language might be condition 3d in Resolution A. Stating that the Council could not force the applicant to provide such measures, Council Member Evans said she felt this amendment was out of place. Noting that cooperative flood control efforts were underway, Mayor Waldorf said she thought this was a good idea.

Council Member Andresen suggested requiring the development of a regional stormwater plan. Council Member Chilton said he did not think that such an undertaking was the University's responsibility. Council Member Capowski noted that item 3g stated "pending the results of a regional stormwater management plan, require the applicant to implement flood control measures."

COUNCIL MEMBER CAPOWSKI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCK, TO ADOPT THE FOLLOWING AS GOAL 3g: "PENDING RESULTS OF A REGIONAL STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN, TAKE STEPS TO PREVENT DOWNSTREAM FLOODING ON BOLIN CREEK AND REQUIRE APPLICANTS TO IMPLEMENT APPROPRIATE FLOOD CONTROL MEASURES. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Mayor Waldorf inquired whether or not the Council was willing to add the word "suggested" goals to the title of the amended resolution. Council Member Andresen said there was nothing to suggest that one hundred percent of every goal would be attained.

Stating that the Council had moved ahead with the draft goals rather quickly this evening, Council Member Chilton said this proposal was a good idea.

COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCK, TO ADD THE WORD "SUGGESTED" TO THE RESOLUTION'S TITLE. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED BY A VOTE OF 8-1, WITH COUNCIL MEMBER ANDRESEN VOTING NO.

THE MAIN MOTION, RESOLUTION B AS AMENDED, WAS PLACED ON THE FLOOR AND ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF SUGGESTED GOALS TO BE DISCUSSED IN DEVELOPING NEW ZONING REGULATIONS (96-4-2/R-9.3b)

WHEREAS, the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill seeks to establish a new zoning district that may be applied to large, undeveloped tracts of land; and

WHEREAS, the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill has asked the Planning Board to draft language for this new district, using the assistance of a planning consultant; and

WHEREAS, the Council wishes to prepare a statement of goals to be achieved by these new regulations, which can be used by the Planning Board and the consultant as a guide in preparing this new district;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill adopts the following set of goals, to be used in the design of new zoning regulations that may be applied to large, undeveloped tracts of land:

Overall Goals

1. Development on the property should be clustered, and should be confined to the areas that are the least environmentally sensitive, preserving a large portion of the site in an undisturbed state.

2. Minimize use of automobiles and maximize use of alternative methods of transportation, including mass transit, bikeways, and sidewalks; continue partnerships with the University to develop alternative modes of transportation.

3. Provide incentives for the applicant to enter into performance agreements or other techniques to achieve those goals which cannot ordinarily be achieved through zoning.

4. Ensure that all development proposals receive a thorough public review with approval by the Town Council, and meet the appropriate findings (promoting public health, safety and general welfare; maintaining or enhancing the value of contiguous property; conforming with the Comprehensive Plan) found in the Special Use Permit ordinance.

5. Ensure that all development proposals receive a thorough public review.

6. Ensure that development of the property minimizes the negative impacts on existing neighborhoods.

7. Transit corridors be identified and dedicated.

Specific Goals

1. Land Use: Use zoning categories or other mechanisms to:

a. require mixed use;

b. broadly specify use categories which are allowed and disallowed;

c. encourage collaborative planning;

d. ensure that the phasing of development results in a balanced buildout;

e. protect and, to the greatest extent possible, preserve environmentally sensitive land;

f. housing should be constructed early in the process;

g. discourage regional facilities, such as large auditoriums or medical facilities, which would draw regional visitors who could not be called upon to use mass transit.

2. Scale and Density Limits: Use zoning categories or other mechanisms to:

a. specify a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) for the portion of the site which is not permanently dedicated as open space;

b. specify a minimum floor area ratio (FAR) for areas within 1/4 mile of a transit station;

c. encourage and provide incentives for clustering development around transit nodes;

d. set an overall limit on development that does not exceed the capacity of the infrastructure to serve the site.

3. Environment: Use the zoning category or other mechanisms to:

a. require an inventory of environmentally sensitive areas of the site, and areas used for waste storage;

b. require that no buildings be permitted on waste storage areas until proven safe;

c. develop restrictions based on the existing RCD ordinance to protect low-lying areas, wetlands, and streams;

d. clearly state objectives regarding stormwater management and specify what needs to be addressed in the preparation of stormwater management plans;

e. protect stream channels;

f. clearly state objectives regarding stormwater management. Require retention ponds to meet containment of stormwater on site if necessary;

g. pending results of regional stormwater management plan, take steps to prevent downstream flooding on Bolin Creek and require applicants to implement appropriate flood control measures.

4. Buffers: The zoning category should:

a. provide buffers which would protect neighborhoods from noise, lighting, traffic, etc.;

b. allow for flexibility of buffers to protect neighborhoods from noise, lighting, traffic, etc., taking into account the differing uses on the surrounding properties;

c. connect by pedestrian and bicycle paths only and that automobile access be discouraged;

d. require sidewalks, bicycle paths, jogging paths, where appropriate to surrounding areas.

5. Transportation: The zone or other tools should:

a. require bicycle and pedestrian circulation plans;

b. require dedicated travel areas for bicycles and pedestrians;

c. require a design which demonstrates a high level of access for mass transit to all parts of the site;

d. encourage use of traffic calming measures on interior roads.

6. Parking: The zone or other tools should:

a. limit parking to provide an incentive for mass transit;

b. tie changes in parking limits to the amount of transit service provided. If the Town or other transit agency fails to provide transit services as planned, the applicant would be allowed to exceed previously set goals.

c. tie parking to the level of service (LOS) for the surrounding roadway system, seeking to keep all roads at LOS D, or LOS E for peak hour only;

d. have a goal of providing parking for no more than 25% of employees.

7. Utilities: The zone or other tools should:

a. require underground utilities;

b. encourage road placements and site design to facilitate the use of renewable energy;

c. encourage use of reclaimed water.

This the 2nd day of April, 1996.

Item 6 Historic District Commission Recommendations

Historic District Commission Member Lee Corum was making a total of six recommendations regarding the regulation of historic districts. He noted that the Commission was requesting that the Council refer these comments to the Manager for follow-up by Town staff.

Mayor Waldorf expressed appreciation to the Commission for its efforts.

Council Member Evans inquired about next steps in the process. Mr. Corum said that the Commission would work with Town staff on the Commission's recommendations. Council Member Pavão thanked the Commission for bringing the matters to the Council's attention.

COUNCIL MEMBER PAVÃO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO REFER THE COMMISSION'S COMMENTS TO THE TOWN MANAGER.

Council Member Capowski said the most important Commission recommendation appeared to be the one regarding the issuance of business licenses for renting housing units for businesses or dormitories. Council Member Capowski said he encouraged staff to learn more about the City of Newark, Delaware's regulations regarding this and other matters relative to historic districts. Council Member Evans inquired whether or not the Commission had discussed whether or not bed and breakfast establishments should be permitted in parts of the Town's historic districts. Mr. Corum said the Commission believed that existing special use regulations could be used to address such situations.

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

Item 7 Presentation by UNC Students Regarding Downtown Planning

Danielle Rinsler said that the student's report would consist of two parts, with the second part being presented to the Council on May 13th. Ms. Rinsler presented a summary of the issues identified by a survey of forty-six stakeholders in the downtown area, including businesses, social service providers and others.

She stated that the three primary areas of concern were safety and crime, appearance and streetscape, and pedestrian/bicycle use and safety. Ms. Rinsler said other areas of concern included panhandling, vagrancy, the homeless shelter and mobility issues.

Noting that she was impressed by the depth of the questions in the survey, Council Member Andresen asked whether or not the Council would receive specific recommendations at the end of the study. Ms. Rinsler said that the group had been asked to perform an assessment, rather than make specific recommendations. Noting that many reports tended to sit on shelves unimplemented, Council Member Andresen inquired whether the students could make suggestions on next steps in the process. Ms. Rinsler said the students would be pleased to do so. Council Member Evans commended the students for facilitating free-flowing dialogue and for producing an excellent report. Council Member Brown thanked the group for a good report.

Item 8 Alcohol-Related Matters

Mr. Horton said staff was suggesting that the Council take advantage of existing State laws to offer comments on applications for initial permits for the sale of alcoholic beverages and to adopt standards for the consideration of new permits. He stated that a total of approximately two dozen alcoholic beverage sales permits were sought by establishments within the Town each year. Mr. Horton added that the second item before the Council was to put in place a process for the Council to review the annual business license renewals of establishments selling alcoholic beverages.

Kevin Clyde, owner of the Henderson Street Bar, said he was opposed to both proposals. He stated that there were existing State regulations in place to revoke the business licenses of establishments which broke State laws relative to alcoholic beverage sales. Mr. Clyde expressed concern that the proposed Town regulations would discriminate against businesses in the Town selling alcohol.

Stating that Mr. Clyde's argument had strong appeal, Council Member Franck asked whether or not the standards in Section 10-18A could be applied to all types of businesses. Mr. Karpinos said that although the Town Code contained a general provision about the revocation of business licenses, it had not been used in recent times. He stated that the ordinance before the Council this evening would give the Council additional powers regarding establishments selling alcoholic beverages. Council Member Franck inquired what other processes needed to be put in place, other than the existing language which was not utilized. Mr. Horton said the Town's Police, Fire and Public Works Departments could collaborate to notify the Council of flagrant or continuing violations of existing regulations.

COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER ANDRESEN, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 3.

Mayor Waldorf noted that she had requested that Mr. Karpinos draft a final paragraph in Section 3, providing that the ordinance would not be applied retroactively.

Council Member Capowski requested a clarification concerning enforcement of the provisions to limit the sale of alcohol by businesses violating existing regulations. Mr. Horton said staff would not recommend non-renewal of a license for a single violation and would work on good faith efforts with business owners to correct violations and problems. Council Member Capowski asked whether it was correct that the ordinance was not limited to the downtown area. Mr. Horton said this was correct.

Council Member Capowski inquired how provisions related to non-service to intoxicated persons were enforced and who enforced these regulations. Mr. Horton said these provisions were principally enforced by Alcohol Law Enforcement (ALE) staff.

Council Member Chilton requested a clarification of what the proposed ordinance would cover. Mr. Karpinos said the ordinance dealt with violations of existing Alcohol Beverage Commission (ABC) laws. Council Member Chilton asked whether or not it was correct that any license revocation could be based on one act.

Mr. Karpinos said this was correct, adding that violators had the right to appeal in Superior Court. Noting the absence of specific guidelines, Council Member Chilton expressed concern that future Councils might be overzealous in the application of the proposed ordinance. Council Member Capowski noted that five Council votes were needed to reject a license renewal request. Mayor Waldorf said there was a lot of discretion in the legislative process.

Noting that he was somewhat edgy about the proposal, Council Member Chilton said he would probably vote against the matter for now.

Council Member Andresen inquired how staff would interpret provisions of the proposed ordinance. Mayor Waldorf said the proposed ordinance contained considerable due process provisions. She added that staff would need to develop specific guidelines relative to enforcement of the ordinance's provisions.

Council Member Chilton said although this would make him feel better about the whole situation, he intended to vote against the proposed ordinance.

Council Member Capowski said it was important to publicize the proposed new regulations. Council Member Chilton said it was difficult to run a bar and to never receive a ticket relative to its operation.

Mr. Horton said staff would bring draft guidelines to the Council, to ensure consistent application of the ordinance.

THE ORDINANCE WAS ADOPTED BY A VOTE OF 8-1, WITH COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON VOTING NO.

AN ORDINANCE REVISING THE TOWN CODE TO PROVIDE PROCEDURES FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE COUNCIL OF APPLICATIONS FOR LICENSES TO SELL ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES AND TO MAKE OTHER TECHNICAL CHANGES (96-4-2/O-3)

BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL as follows:

Section 1. Sec. 3-1 of the Town Code is hereby rewritten as follows:

~~Sec. 3-1. Licenses for retail sale of beer and wine.~~

The town manager is hereby authorized on behalf of the council to issue municipal licenses for retail sales of beer and wine, pursuant to Section 18-77, General Statutes of North Carolina, to legally qualified applicants without first submitting such applications to the board of aldermen for approval.

Sec. 3-1. Findings and purposes.

The Town Council does hereby find that:

(1) North Carolina General Statutes Chapter 18B and Section 105-113.71 authorize municipalities to exercise limited regulatory authority over the licensing and permitting of places selling alcoholic beverages and over the possession and consumption of alcoholic beverages.

(2) the exercise of that authority by the Town of Chapel Hill is for the benefit of the public health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Chapel Hill and the greater Chapel Hill community.

(3) The provisions of this Chapter Three and Chapter 10, Sections 10-18 and 10-18A of the Town Code are intended to implement the authority of the Town to regulate a) the licensing and permitting of establishments selling alcoholic beverages to the extent authorized by Chapter 18B and Section 105-113.71 of the General Statutes; and, b) the possession and consumption of alcoholic beverages to the extent authorized by Chapter 18B of the General Statutes.

Section 2. Article I, Chapter 10 of the Town Code is hereby revised to read as follows:

"ARTICLE I. IN GENERAL

Sec. 10-1. Definitions.

Wherever in this chapter, the words defined or construed in this section are used, they shall, unless the context requires otherwise, be deemed to have the following meanings:

Agent. The person having the agency for the manufacturer, producer or distributor.

Business. Any business, trade, occupation, profession, avocation or calling of any kind, subject, by provisions of this chapter to a license tax.

Engaged in the business. Engaged in the business as owner or operator.

Fiscal year. The period beginning with the first day of July and ending with thirtieth day of June next following.

Person. Any person, firm, partnership, company or corporation.

Quarter. Any three (3) consecutive months.

Sec. 10-2. Exemptions from chapter -- Generally.

The license taxes levied by this chapter shall not apply to any business operated by any strictly religious or charitable organization when the gross income or proceeds of such business are for the exclusive benefit of such organization.

Except as herein provided or as provided by state law or in the schedule of license taxes hereinafter set forth, there shall be no exemption of any person from the payment of the license taxes levied by this chapter.

Sec. 10-3. Same - Exempted persons must secure license.

Every person engaging in any business upon which there is levied a license tax by this chapter, but which person is, by some provisions of this chapter exempt from the payment of such license tax, shall, nevertheless, secure from the town ~~tax~~ revenue collector a license to engage in such business, which license shall show upon its face that the licensee is exempt from the payment of the license tax and shall cite the section of this chapter which is the authority therefor.

Sec. 10-4. Effect of chapter on authority of council.

Nothing contained in this chapter shall be construed to prevent the mayor and council from imposing from time to time, as they see fit, such license taxes as are not specifically herein defined, or from increasing or decreasing the amount of any special license tax, or from prohibiting or regulating the business or acts licensed, and all licenses are granted subject to the provisions of existing ordinances and those hereafter enacted.

The adoption of the schedule of license taxes shall not limit the power of the mayor and council to increase or decrease any of such license taxes, to levy a license tax upon any business not included therein, nor to make any other changes with respect to such license taxes.

Sec. 10-5. License tax levied.

In addition to the tax on property ~~and polls,~~ as otherwise provided for, and under the power and authority conferred in the laws of North Carolina, there shall be levied and collected annually, or oftener, where provided for, a privilege license tax on trades, professions, agencies, business operations, exhibitions, circuses and all subjects authorized to be licensed. Such tax shall be levied by ordinance adopted by the ~~board of aldermen~~ Town Council from year to year, and nothing in this Code or the ordinance adopting this Code shall be deemed to affect the validity of any such ordinance, and all such ordinances are hereby recognized as continuing to force to the same extent as if set out at length herein.

Sec. 10-6. License prerequisite to conduct of business.

It shall be unlawful for any person or his agent or servant to engage in or carry on a business in the town for which there is required a license, without first having paid the license tax and obtained the license. For the purpose of this section, the opening of a place of business, or offering to sell, followed by a single sale or the doing of any act or thing in furtherance of the business shall be construed to be engaging in or carrying on such business.

Sec. 10-7. Separate license required for each business.

The payment of any particular tax imposed by this chapter shall not relieve the person paying the same from payment of any other tax imposed by this chapter for any other business he may carry on, unless so provided by the section imposing such tax, it being the intent of this chapter that license taxes prescribed by various sections or subsections of this chapter applicable to any business shall be cumulative except where otherwise specifically provided.

Sec. 10-8. License required for every place of business.

A license issued for the privilege of conducting a business is only valid for the business conducted at the place and by the licensee named therein. Every person doing business in more than one factory, mill, warehouse, store, stall or stand, or other place of business, shall secure a separate license for each such places of business, unless such place of business are contiguous to each other, communicate directly with and open into each other, and are operated as a unit. If the business is moved or if the licensee sells to another, then a new license is necessary, unless a special permit to continue business under the original license is obtained from the ~~board of aldermen~~ Town Council.

Sec. 10-9. License application.

Every application for a license required by this chapter shall be made in writing to the town ~~tax~~ revenue collector upon a form or forms to be provided by the tax collector. Such application shall be signed either by the applicant or by his agent.

Sec. 10-10. Information required of license applicant.

Every applicant for a license required by this chapter shall furnish to the town ~~tax~~ revenue collector the following information:

(a) Complete and exact name under which the business is proposed an to be operated.

(b) If the business is proposed to be operated by an individual under any assumed name, the name of such individual and his address.

(d) If the business is a corporation, the name and address of the president and of the secretary of the corporation, and the location of the principal office.

(e) Nature of the business for which license is desired.

(f) Proposed location.

and, in addition to the foregoing, the applicant shall furnish to the town ~~tax~~ revenue collector such other information as may be required by the town ~~tax~~ revenue collector in order to enable him to determine the proper classification of the applicant and the appropriate license tax.

Sec. 10-11. Compliance with conditions precedent required for license issuance.

The town ~~tax~~ revenue collector shall not issue any license when the application therefor is disapproved by the ~~board of aldermen~~ Town Council or by any town official in any case where the approval of the board or official is required precedent to the issuance of such license; nor shall the town ~~tax~~ revenue collector issue any license until the applicant therefor has performed or complied with any and every condition precedent prescribed by any provision or provisions of this chapter, including the execution and delivery of any bond required.

Sec. 10-12. License term, expiration; proration of fee.

All taxes provided for in this chapter shall be for twelve (12) months, unless otherwise specified, and shall so remain for each year hereafter until changed by the ~~board of aldermen~~ Town Council. All the licenses provided for shall date from the 1st day of July of each and every year and shall expire on the 30th day of June of each year; provided, that where the license is issued after January 1st, then the licensee shall be required to pay one-half (1/2) of the tax prescribed, except where otherwise specifically provided for.

Sec. 10-13. Display of License.

Every license must be kept prominently displayed at the place of business of the licensee named in the license, or, if the licensee has no fixed place of business, such licensee must keep the same wherever such business is being operated and where it can be inspected at any time by the proper official.

Every vehicle required to be licensed shall display on such vehicle the license tag issued by the town.

Sec. 10-14. Transferability of License.

All licenses granted under this chapter shall be a personal privilege and shall not be transferable.

Sec. 10-15. Abatement of tax.

No license tax shall be abated nor shall any refund of any part thereof be made, in any case where the licensee discontinues his business before the end of the period for which such license was issued.

Sec. 10-16. Replacement of lost or destroyed license or license tag.

Upon satisfactory evidence that any licensee has lost any license or license tag issued to him, or that the same has been destroyed, the town ~~tax~~ revenue collector may issue to him a duplicate thereof upon payment of a fee of one dollar ($1.00).

Sec. 10-17. New license required when business is changed so as to subject it to payment of additional license tax.

Where the amount of license tax is determined by certain factors existent at the time such license tax is due, or issued, and, after the issuance of such license, the licensee proposes to change such factors so that his business will be subject, under the provisions of this chapter, to a greater license tax, he shall, before making such change, deliver his license to the town tax collector together with a written and signed statement as to the nature of such proposed change, and shall pay to the town ~~tax~~ revenue collector the proper additional license tax. The town ~~tax~~ revenue collector shall thereupon cancel the old license and shall issue to the licensee a new and appropriate license.

Sec. 10-18. Revocation of licenses by ~~aldermen~~ Council.

Any license issued by the ~~tax~~ revenue collector may be revoked by the ~~board of aldermen~~ Town Council upon the finding by the ~~board~~ Council that the licensee has wilfully or persistently violated any ordinance of the town, or any laws of the state, or that such licensee is conducting his business in a fraudulent or unlawful manner or is abusing his license. If it shall be made to appear to the ~~board of aldermen~~ Town Council that any business licensed with the approval of the ~~board~~ Council, as hereinbefore provided, has become, because of its location, the character of its management, or the nature or method of operation, or for any such reason, is about to become dangerous to the morals, health or general welfare of the town, or a nuisance of any kind, the ~~board of aldermen~~ Town Council shall cause a written notice to be served upon the proprietor, manager, or any person who may be in charge of the operation of such business, that a public hearing will be held by the ~~board~~ Council to determine whether or not the license issued therefor shall be revoked, and such notice shall state the time and place fixed for such hearing. At the time and place so fixed or at such subsequent time as may be then fixed by the ~~board~~ Council shall proceed to hear the charges made against the licensee and his defense against the same and if the ~~board~~ Council shall find that such business has become or is about to become dangerous to the morals, health, or general welfare of the town, or a nuisance of any kind, it shall forthwith revoke the license therefor.

Sec. 10-18A. Special provisions relating to licenses for establishments holding ABC permits.

A. Authority to deny ABC permit. Pursuant to N.C.G.S. Sec. 105-113.71, the Town Council may refuse to issue an annual local license, or renewal thereof, for the operation of an establishment required to receive an alcohol beverage privilege license from the Town if the Council finds that the applicant committed any act or permitted any activity in the preceding year that would be grounds for suspension or revocation of the applicant's permit under the provisions of North Carolina General Statute 18B-104.

B. Applications to be considered by Town Manager. Initial applications for a Town-issued alcohol beverage privilege license shall be submitted to the Town revenue collector for evaluation by the Town Manager and the Manager's designee(s). Specifically, but without limitation, the revenue collector shall refer all such applications and all annual license renewals to the Police, Fire, and Inspections Departments.

1. If none of the three departments recommends the license be denied and no other information is received by Town Manager indicating grounds for the Manager to consider denial, the revenue collector shall issue the license upon payment of the annual license fee.

2. If any one of the three departments recommends that denial of said application be considered, the matter shall be referred to the Town Manager, who shall review the recommendations of the three departments and any other relevant information received by the Manager.

a. If the Manager determines that there is not sufficient reason to consider denial or non-renewal of an application, he shall issue his determination and direct that the license be issued.

b. If the Manager determines that there is sufficient reason to consider denial or non-renewal of an application on grounds provided for in paragraph A above, the Manager shall refer the application to the Town Council for its consideration at the next regular meeting of the Council.

C. Consideration by Town Council. Upon receiving a recommendation from the Town Manager that an application for an alcohol beverage privilege license or renewal be denied, before considering whether to deny the license, the Council shall give the applicant an opportunity to appear at a hearing before the Council and to offer evidence.

Any hearing held under the provisions of this section shall be upon at least 10 days notice to the applicant. All persons who present evidence at such a hearing shall be sworn and parties shall have the right to cross-examine witnesses.

D. Process following Council hearing. At the conclusion of the hearing the Council shall make written findings of fact based on the evidence presented at the hearing. If the Council finds that the application should be issued, it shall direct the Manager to issue the requested license. If the Council finds that the license should be denied, it shall enter its decision.

E. Appeal to Superior Court. The applicant may appeal the denial of a license to the Orange County Superior Court, by an action in the nature of certiorari, if notice of appeal is given within 10 days of the denial.

F. Manager to establish administrative policies. The Town Manager shall establish any administrative policies and application forms necessary to implement this section.

Sec. 10-19. Procedure on license revocation; refund.

Whenever any license is revoked by the ~~board of aldermen~~ Town Council under the provisions of sections 10-18 or 10-18A, the town ~~treasurer~~ finance director shall, upon application of the person whose license has been revoked, and without further authority from the ~~board of aldermen~~ Council, refund to such person the pro rata part of the license tax paid by such person, the amount thereof to be determined, however, on the basis of the number of complete quarters of the fiscal year remaining.

Sec. 10-20. Payment of additional tax where license tax increased.

In any case where any license tax is increased, any licensee affected by such increase shall, within thirty (30) days after such increase becomes effective, deliver to the town ~~tax~~ revenue collector his license together with the additional tax required, whereupon the town ~~tax~~ revenue collector shall issue a new and appropriate license to such licensee. Upon the failure of such licensee to pay such additional license tax within said thirty (30) day period, the town ~~tax~~ revenue collector shall immediately, and without further authority from the ~~board of aldermen~~ Council, revoke the license of theretofore issued to such licensee, and shall immediately mail to the licensee written notice of such revocation.

Sec. 10-21. ~~Penalty for late payment.~~ Operating without a franchise or license unlawful.

a. Operating without a license. Operating a business without a valid, current license required under this Chapter, or operating a business after a license issued under this Chapter has been revoked is unlawful.

b. Late Payment. Each license tax provided for by this chapter, shall be increased five per cent (5%) for each month or fraction thereof during which such license tax remains unpaid after it becomes due and payable.

Sec. 10-22. ~~Reserve~~ Enforcement.

The provisions of this Article may be enforced by injunctive remedy and/or the imposition of a civil penalty of $50.00. as provided by law. Violation of this Article shall constitute a misdemeanor. Each day of operation in violation of this Article shall constitute a separate civil and/or criminal offense.

Sec. 10-23. Slaughterhouses prohibited; killing beef, sheep, etc. for sale in town prohibited.

No person shall keep or establish a butcher pen or slaughterhouse within the corporate limits of the town or shall kill or have killed therein, for sale within the corporate limits any beef, sheep, goats, hogs or other such animals.

Sec. 10-24. Shooting galleries prohibited.

No shooting galleries shall be allowed in the town.

Sec. 10-25. Operation of certain enterprises prohibited without obtaining a franchise; continuance in operation after expiration of franchise.

From and after the effective date of this section (December 18, 1972), no person shall operate an enterprise as designated by General Statutes, Section 160A-311, or operate a telephone system within the town without first obtaining a franchise from the town, nor shall any person continue to operate such enterprise after the expiration of such franchise, except as provided by law."

Section 3. This Ordinance shall be effective upon adoption. In evaluating applications for initial licenses and license renewals under the provisions of Sec. 10-18A, acts committed or permitted by any applicant before the effective date of this ordinance shall not be considered by the Town staff or Town Council.

This the 2nd day of April, 1996.

Mayor Waldorf said the proposed guidelines would follow existing General Statutes. Council Member Franck said he had an intuitive feeling that the Council should not be involved in this matter. He stated that the matter was a prescriptive, rather than a political, decision. Council Member Franck said he preferred the staff handle these matters.

Council Member Capowski asked what the Council could do that the staff could not do. Mr. Horton said the Council had far more weight with the Alcohol Beverage Commission (ABC) than staff. Noting that the ABC Board was composed of political appointees, Mayor Waldorf said the Council might get the Commission's attention more quickly than staff.

COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PAVÃO, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 11.

Council Member Franck proposed the exclusion of the fourth "whereas" clause and a related change in the resolution. Council Member Capowski inquired whether the Council was merely acknowledging that there were existing State laws in these matters. Council Member Franck said no.

COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON, TO AMEND THE MAIN MOTION.

Noting that he had spoken with Council Member Franck earlier this afternoon about how to achieve his goal, Mr. Karpinos said the Manager would forward facts on individual cases to the Alcoholic Beverage Commission. Council Member Brown asked whether or not it was the case that staff recommendations in past instances were not particularly effective. Mr. Horton said this was correct. He noted that staff felt that the Council directly taking on this role might be more effective than current practice.

THE MOTION TO AMEND THE MAIN MOTION WAS APPROVED BY A VOTE OF 6-3, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS BROWN, CHILTON, EVANS, FRANCK, PAVÃO AND POWELL SUPPORTING THE MOTION.

Council Member Brown said the effectiveness of the change could be reviewed in the future. Mr. Horton said that staff could forward copies of each report to the Alcoholic Beverage Commission and related results to the Council.

Mayor Waldorf expressed concern that the amendment was a mistake.

RESOLUTION 11, AS AMENDED, WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING COUNCIL GUIDELINES FOR CONSIDERATION OF PERMIT APPLICATIONS TO THE NORTH CAROLINA ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL COMMISSION (96-4-2/R-11)

WHEREAS, the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill is interested in the Town making appropriate comments to the State ABC Commission on applications for retail ABC permits within the Town of Chapel Hill and its environs; and,

WHEREAS, such comments are invited by the terms of North Carolina General Statute Sec. 18B-901 and are required to be considered by the ABC Commission; and,

WHEREAS, the Council believes such comments from the local government in the community where the proposed ABC outlet desires to locate are important to the ABC Commission's consideration of the applications; and,

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council adopts the following general policies and guidelines with respect to applications for State ABC permits for establishments seeking to locate within Chapel Hill, based on the factors the ABC Commission is required to consider under N.C.G.S. Sec. 18B-901(c) (numbers correspond to factors listed in Sec. 18B-901(c)):

1. The Council believes that the ABC Commission should deny a permit to any applicant who has a criminal record that includes a conviction for any violation of the ABC laws in North Carolina or any other state or a conviction of any felony involving injury to another person.

2. The Council believes that the ABC Commission should seriously consider denying a permit to any applicant seeking to operate an establishment for the on-premises consumption of alcoholic beverages if there are already adequate numbers of permits issued and in use in a neighborhood. The Council believes that excessive numbers of such establishments increase competition, resulting in a greater incentive on the part of establishments to "bend the rules" or try special promotions in competition for customers, thereby encouraging the over-consumption of alcoholic beverages and consumption of alcoholic beverages by persons under age.

3. The Council believes that the ABC Commission should seriously consider denying an application for an ABC permit where there is a substantial insufficiency in parking in the surrounding area. The Council notes that it is not its intent by making such a statement to encourage parking and subsequent driving by persons who have consumed alcoholic beverages. The Council further believes that the ABC Commission should consider denying an application for an ABC permit where nearby street and traffic patterns indicate that the establishment would result in significant increased traffic in a residential neighborhood.

4. The Council believes that the ABC Commission should seriously consider denying a permit where the establishment would be inappropriate due to the nature of nearby businesses. Among the businesses that the Council believes should be considered in this category are businesses that generally attract and cater to persons less than 21 years of age and, especially, persons less than 18 years of age, including, for example, video game parlors.

5. The Council takes no position on whether the ABC Commission should deny a permit to an establishment proposed to be located within 50 feet of a public or private school or within 50 feet of a place of worship.

6. The Council believes that the ABC Commission should deny a permit where the establishment does not fully comply with the zoning regulations of the Town as contained in the Development Ordinance.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council directs the Town Manager to review any ABC permit application submitted to the Town in accordance with said guidelines and report, on behalf of the Town, facts relevant to that application to the ABC Commission for its consideration along with a copy of this resolution.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council designates (in accordance with N.C.G.S. Sec. 18B-904(f)) the Town Manager, or such other person as the Town Manager shall designate, to forward the Town's recommendations to the State ABC Commission concerning the suitability of a person or of a location for an ABC permit and directs that the State ABC Commission be notified of that official designation.

This the 2nd day of April, 1996.

Item 9 Locating Skateboarding Facility

Mr. Horton said that staff believed that the Northern Community Park was the most appropriate site for a skateboarding facility.

COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCK, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 12.

Council Member Andresen expressed concern about voting for the Northern Community Park site this evening when residents of Rainbow Heights might come back in the future with concerns about noise and lighting. Parks and Recreation Director Mike Loveman said that staff had attempted to locate the proposed facility as far as possible away from existing developments. Council Member Andresen inquired how citizens had been notified of the proposed skateboarding facility's location. Mr. Loveman said a notification of the proposed site location had been sent to all residents living within one thousand feet of the proposed skateboarding facility site.

Council Member Evans inquired whether or not it was essential to put in a long driveway from Homestead Road plus a parking lot. Mr. Horton said the Council would ultimately make this decision.

Stating that it would be at least two years before a skateboarding facility could be located at Northern Community Park, Council Member Pavão suggested looking at other sites for locating such a facility in the interim. Council Member Pavão added that he would not support the proposed resolution.

Council Member Powell asked whether adoption of the proposed resolution would preclude looking for another site. Mayor Waldorf said the Council could adopt the resolution and continue to look for another site.

RESOLUTION 12 WAS ADOPTED BY A VOTE OF 8-1, WITH COUNCIL MEMBER PAVÃO VOTING NO.

A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE NORTHERN COMMUNITY PARK AS THE LOCATION FOR A SKATEBOARD FACILITY (96-4-2/R-12)

WHEREAS, the Town Council has requested the Town Manager to review several options for the location of a skateboard facility; and

WHEREAS, the Town Manager has recommended the Northern Community Park as the most cost effective location for this facility.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby approves the Northern Community Park as the location for a skateboard facility and authorizes the Town Manager to include this facility in the first phase of development of the park project.

This the 2nd day of April, 1996.

COUNCIL MEMBER PAVÃO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO REQUEST THAT STAFF LOOK FOR AN IMMEDIATE ALTERNATE SKATEBOARDING FACILITY LOCATION FOR TEMPORARY USE, WITH RELOCATION OF THE FACILITY TO THE NORTHERN COMMUNITY PARK IN THE FUTURE.

Noting that staff had already devoted a good deal of time to locating a skateboarding facility, Council Member Andresen said she was not sure that staff should devote more time to this project.

Mayor Waldorf said the Council could ask staff to be alert to opportunities for alternate sites.

THE MOTION FAILED BY A VOTE OF 4-5, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS EVANS, PAVÃO AND POWELL AND MAYOR WALDORF VOTING YES.

Council Member Franck said he did not think that there was a pressing, immediate need for an alternate skateboarding facility site.

Item 10 Cameron Avenue Bicycle Lanes

Engineering Director George Small said that staff offered four alternatives for the Council's consideration this evening. He presented a brief overview of each alternative, noting that good urban street design was a series of well thought-out compromises.

Transportation Board Member Michelle Minstrell said that she frequently walked, drove and bicycled in the Cameron Avenue area. Ms. Minstrell urged the Council to move forward with the examination of bicycle lane options, including Resolution A, an option to restripe pavement along portions of Cameron Avenue and Pittsboro Street.

Noting that she resided in the neighborhood being discussed, Council Member Brown stated that on-street parking spaces in this area were filled all day long when the University was in session. Council Member Brown said although her initial preference was for Resolution A, she would like to hear from people who might be inconvenienced by this course of action.

COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED THE ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION A, FOR SIGNAGE ONLY.

Noting that she had travelled on Cameron Avenue every weekday morning for about four years, Council Member Evans said she had observed a reasonable amount of bicycle traffic using this roadway each morning. Council Member Evans said she favored the Manager's recommendation to take no action on the matter unless there was an appreciable increase in the number of bicycle riders in the area.

COUNCIL MEMBER ANDRESEN SECONDED THE MOTION.

Council Member Andresen said it would be beneficial to implement the proposal on a trial basis.

Council Member Capowski inquired whether or not staff had examined safety statistics in the area. Mr. Small said staff had reviewed accident rates, with the ramifications of the various changes having been discussed briefly in terms of safety aspects.

Council Member Capowski asked if staff felt that it was not worthwhile to "fine tune" the existing situation. Mr. Small said this was correct.

Council Member Franck said he disagreed with the staff on this point. Stating that a bicyclist had been killed on Cameron Avenue last year, Council Member Franck said he did not believe that having a center turning lane was the best use of asphalt. He also said he did not believe that it would cost approximately $25,000 to restripe a six block area. Council Member Franck suggested that the Council put both options, restriping and eliminating daytime parking, on the docket for discussion at a future public hearing.

Council Member Brown said she did not that Resolution B was a good idea, given heavy bicycle usage in the area. Council Member Brown added that she did not oppose having this option included as a topic for the proposed public hearing.

THE MOTIONER AND SECONDER CONCURRED WITH THE PROPOSAL FOR THE POSSIBLE HEARING TO BE HELD ON THE OPTIONS OUTLINED IN RESOLUTIONS A AND B.

Council Member Chilton said Cameron Avenue was heavily used by bicyclists, especially during non-peak times.

Council Member Capowski said since the situation was not broken, no action was needed.

Mayor Waldorf inquired whether staff had taken safety considerations into account in its recommendation. Mr. Small said staff concurred with Council Member Capowski's observation that the current situation was working well. He added that one of the options before the Council could be implemented on an experimental basis if the Council wished to do so. Mayor Waldorf said she would vote against the motion on the floor.

THE MOTION WAS PLACED ON THE FLOOR AND FAILED BY A VOTE OF 4-5, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS ANDRESEN, BROWN, CHILTON AND FRANCK VOTING YES.

Item 11 Request by Paramount Pictures

Mr. Horton said staff recommended denial of Paramount Pictures request for street closures and related matters, relative to filming of a motion picture in the Town. Mr. Horton said he believed that the Council had a good policy in place of reserving streets for public, rather than private usage.

Vick Griffin, Location Manager for Paramount Pictures, said his organization was in no way requesting permission for the closure of Franklin Street. He added that Paramount was not requesting rerouting of public transportation or blocking of public sidewalks. Mr. Griffin said he would work with appropriate law enforcement officials to coordinate traffic control. He added that in November, 1994, Savoy Pictures had filmed a motion picture at the Investors' Title building. Mr. Griffin also said that the State of North Carolina realized a total of $391 million in film revenues in 1995.

Council Member Capowski inquired how much equipment Paramount Pictures would be using for filming at a private residence on Coolidge Street. Mr. Griffin said this film sequence would require the use of several vans. He noted that Paramount Pictures was investigating the possibility of using a private lot located off U.S. 15-501 for equipment and van storage. Mr. Griffin said that the balance of equipment and vans would be parked in accordance with existing Town parking regulations.

Mayor Waldorf noted that the Town had received correspondence from a church on East Franklin Street including a daily schedule of events for the month of April. She noted that church officials were very concerned about access-related problems relative to possible filming on East Franklin Street. Mr. Griffin said Paramount was not suggesting that it would be necessary to block any access on East Franklin Street or any other street in the downtown area.

Council Member Chilton said it was possible that the Council did not have sufficient information to make a decision in this matter. He stated that if the film were more generically based, such as the "Michael Jordan Story", the Council might be more favorably disposed to such a proposal. Noting that the request was quite similar to a parade permit request, Council Member Chilton also said leaving aside the question of what the movie was about, the Council could not deny the request without knowing more about Paramount's proposal. He suggested referring the matter back to staff for them to work with Paramount Pictures representatives, with the objective of preparing a report for the next Council meeting.

COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON MOVED TO REFER THE MATTER BACK TO STAFF WITH INSTRUCTIONS TO NEGOTIATE WITH PARAMOUNT PICTURES.

Mr. Griffin requested that the Council evaluate the request without regard to the film's subject matter. He added that there had been a tremendous amount of undeserved negative press about

Paramount's proposal from persons who had not read the film's script.

COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCK SECONDED THE MOTION.

Noting that he had read the book "Kiss the Girls" and found it to be totally offensive, Council Member Capowski said he did not want the Town to be associated with the proposed film.

COUNCIL MEMBER CAPOWSKI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PAVÃO, TO SUBSTITUTE RESOLUTION 14A FOR THE MAIN MOTION, INCLUDING A PROVISION THAT PARAMOUNT WOULD NOT RECEIVE SPECIAL PARKING PRIVILEGES.

Mr. Karpinos said he would need to examine the specifics of this proposed amendment. Council Member Capowski said he was willing to withdraw his proposed amended motion.

Council Member Franck said he favored consideration of the main motion. Council Member Andresen said she could not support the substitute motion. Council Member Brown inquired whether the standards being applied to this request were similar to other filming related requests in the Town. Mr. Horton said he had not been aware of other filming in the Town until after the fact. Mr. Horton said he believed that the Town had a good policy of not permitting public streets to be used for private purposes. He added that it was not a good idea to evaluate the content of the proposed film.

Council Member Chilton said all motion pictures should be treated alike, regardless of their content.

COUNCIL MEMBER CAPOWSKI'S MOTION TO SUBSTITUTE PASSED BY A VOTE OF 5-4, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS ANDRESEN, CHILTON, EVANS AND FRANCK VOTING NO.

RESOLUTION 14A, TO DENY PARAMOUNT PICTURES REQUEST, WAS APPROVED BY A VOTE OF 6-3, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS ANDRESEN, CHILTON AND EVANS VOTING NO.

A RESOLUTION DENYING A REQUEST FOR TRAFFIC AND PARKING RESTRICTIONS (96-4-2/R-14a)

BE IT RESOLVED by the Town Council of Chapel Hill that the Council denies the request by Paramount Pictures for traffic and parking restrictions as set forth in letters dated March 22 and 27, 1996 to the Town Manager.

This the 2nd day of April, 1996.

Item 12 Discussion of Consent Agenda Items

Petition from Mr. B. B. Olive

Council Member Andresen noted that at a recent solid waste conference in New Jersey, she had spoken to an expert (Herbert Hollander) on the plasma technology suggested by Mr. Olive, and Mr. Hollander had indicated that this technology had problems related to maintaining the integrity of the vessel in which waste products were superheated to temperatures of up to 5000 degrees. Council Member Andresen said Mr. Hollander believed that the community did not want to have this type of liability. Council Member Andresen said she had problems going ahead with the resolution suggested by Mr. Olive.

COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 7.

Council Member Evans inquired about the possibility of adding referral of the Vedco videotape and materials to the Landfill Owners Group. Council Member Franck said he would not accept these as friendly amendments.

RESOLUTION 7 WAS ADOPTED BY A VOTE OF 8-1, WITH COUNCIL MEMBER PAVÃO VOTING NO.

A RESOLUTION REFERRING A PROPOSAL FROM MR. B.B. OLIVE TO THE LANDFILL OWNERS' GROUP (96-4-2/R-7)

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council refers to the Landfill Owners' Group the letter from Mr. B.B. Olive dated March 12, 1996 regarding plasma technology.

This the 2nd day of April, 1996.

Council Member Evans inquired about the possibility of bringing the VEDCO matter forward as a petition this evening. Noting that it took a unanimous vote of the Council to place an item on the agenda on the same evening, Council Member Franck suggested that Council Member Evans place this petition on a future Council agenda.

Davie Circle

Council Member Chilton suggested the possibility of referring the parking restrictions for Jones Street back to staff. Engineering Director George Small stated that based on this evening's comments, it appeared that area residents were satisfied with the staff's recommendation.

COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCK, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 1A, AS AMENDED. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 21 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES

(96-4-2/O-1a)

BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill:

SECTION I

That Section 21-27 of the Town code of Ordinances, "No parking as to particular streets." is amended by inserting the following therein, in appropriate alphabetical order:

STREET

SIDE

FROM

Davie Circle

South

A point 376 feet east of the centerline of Franklin Street

Jones Street

East

Davie Circle

Hill Street

North

Jones Street

End

SECTION II

That Section 21-27.8 of the Town Code of Ordinances, "No parking anytime except by residential permit." is amended by inserting the following therein, in appropriate alphabetical order:

STREET

SIDE

FROM

Davie Circle

South

A point 106 feet east of the centerline of Franklin Street

A point 376 feet east of the centerline of Franklin Street

Davie Circle

Outer Radius

Jones Circle

A point 436 feet east of the centerline of Franklin Street

Jones Street

West

Davie Circle

Hill Street

South

Jones Street

End

SECTION III

These ordinances shall become effective on May 1, 1996.

SECTION IV

All ordinances or portions of ordinances in conflict herein are hereby repealed.

This the 2nd day of April, 1996.

Landfill Siting

Council Member Capowski inquired why another hearing regarding the landfill siting process was being proposed. Mayor Waldorf said the Council had earlier agreed to this hearing in concert with Orange County and the Town of Carrboro. Council Member Brown stated that the agenda would include items other in addition to landfill siting.

Council Member Evans said she believed that the Council and Landfill Owners Group had a responsibility to investigate alternative technologies for waste disposal. Council Member Evans said the proposed agenda would include a segment to discuss alternative technologies. Council Member Evans asked who was in charge of the meeting's agenda. Council Member Brown said that the meeting was an Assembly of Governments forum. Mr. Karpinos noted that the matter of a vote on the landfill site would occur in the future.

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

ADOPT RESOLUTION 3. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

A RESOLUTION CALLING A JOINT PUBLIC FORUM TO RECEIVE PUBLIC COMMENT AND TO HAVE A PUBLIC DIALOGUE ON ISSUES RELATED TO THE SITING OF THE NEXT SANITARY LANDFILL IN ORANGE COUNTY (96-4-2/R-3)

WHEREAS, there is a need for a new landfill once the current facility reaches capacity and that the landfill be developed as part of an integrated solid waste management plan; and

WHEREAS, a landfill site search was initiated in 1990, by the governing bodies of Carrboro, Chapel Hill, and Orange County; and

WHEREAS, the six-year landfill siting process has concluded with the Landfill Search Committee and the Landfill Owners Group both recommending site OC-17 as the preferred site; and

WHEREAS, it is the intention of the Council to insure that all citizens and property owners be given ample opportunity to comment on the final recommendations; and

WHEREAS, the Council is committed to early adoption and implementation of an integrated solid waste management plan and a goal of a minimum 50% reduction of solid waste requiring disposal; and

WHEREAS, the Council is committed to insuring surrounding neighbors receive fair and just compensation for any losses; and

WHEREAS, the Council has concluded that OC-17 is the most suitable site for the next landfill for managing Orange County's waste; and

WHEREAS, the Landfill Owners Group has requested that the Council join in sponsoring a joint public forum.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council authorizes a joint public forum to be scheduled on April 18, 1996, at 7:30 p.m., in the Chapel Hill Town Council Chambers, to discuss solid waste issues related to landfill siting and waste management.

This the 2nd day of April, 1996.

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

The meeting concluded at 11:35 p.m.