MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA, MONDAY, FEBRUARY 10, 1997 AT 7:00 P.M.

Mayor Waldorf called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. Council Members in attendance were Julie Andresen, Joyce Brown, Joe Capowski, Mark Chilton (arrived at 7:09 p.m.), Pat Evans, Richard Franck, Lee Pavao and Edith Wiggins. Also in attendance were Town Manager Cal Horton, Assistant Town Managers Sonna Loewenthal and Florentine Miller, Planning Director Roger Waldon and Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos.

COUNCIL MEMBERS EVANS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PAVAO, TO REFER A PETITION BY MARGARET SACHS REGARDING TRAFFIC SAFETY TO STAFF. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

David Batten, of the Epsilon chapter of the Phi Beta fraternity, thanked the Town and Council, especially the Town’s Fire Department, for their support of family members effected by the fire of May 12^th. Mr. Batten said his organization requested expedited review of their application for rebuilding a fraternity house on this property. He noted that the fraternity hoped to rebuild the house by the fall of 1998. Mr. Batten said he was requesting that the item be included on the Council’s June 16^th public hearing agenda.

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

Termaine Kyles of EmPOWERment, Inc., thanked the Council for its neighborhood revitalization efforts. Mr. Kyles stated that EmPOWERment, Inc.’s and the Pine Knolls Community Center Board of Directors were working together on a number of neighborhood revitalization projects. Mr. Kyles said he would update the Council on this matter in the near future.

Council Member Andresen noted that the Cane Creek Advisory Committee would be meeting tomorrow evening to discuss the Cane Creek reservoir study. She stated that the committee would be putting forward its recommendations on reservoir protection to the OWASA Board.

Council Member Andresen said it was very important that the Council have a unified position in this matter. Council Member Andresen said that the meeting would begin at 6:30 p.m. on Wednesday. Council Member Chilton arrived at 7:09 p.m.

COUNCIL MEMBER WIGGINS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER CAPOWSKI, TO FORWARD COUNCIL MEMBER ANDRESEN’S PROPOSED COMMENTS TO THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Council Member Andresen suggested that the Council receive an executive summary of the Cane Creek Reservoir report and recommendations. Council Member Evans suggested that the Council have its questions about the reservoir answered after Wednesday’s meeting. Mr. Horton said Town staff could try to get answers to any such questions from OWASA staff.

Noting that about a week ago the Town’s most recent crime statistics had been released, Council Member Capowski extended public thanks to the Police Department for its efforts to reduce crime.

Mayor Waldorf said she was proposing that the Council sponsor a charette regarding the types, intensity and timing of future development on parking lot number five. Noting that the Hudson-McDade house would soon be relocated to parking lot number five, Mayor Waldorf said it was important that the proposed charette take place as soon as possible. She suggested that all interested persons be invited to participate in such a process.

Council Member Andresen asked whether Mayor Waldorf was proposing Council action this evening on the matter. Mayor Waldorf said this was the Council’s choice. Council Member Andresen said going ahead with the matter assumed future development on the site. Council Member Andresen said she liked the idea of having a charette to discuss where to put the Hudson-McDade house on parking lot five.

Council Member Franck said he thought the Council could go ahead and support the charette process tonight without saying anything specific about actual development.

COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PAVAO, TO SUPPORT A CHARETTE PROCESS IN CONCEPT.

Council Member Evans said it was important to go ahead with the proposed process. Council Member Brown said the process needed to be open-ended, with initial focus placed on relocation of the Hudson McDade house. Mayor Waldorf said all viewpoints relative to future development or non-development of parking lot number five were welcome.

Stating that timing was critical in this matter, Council Member Andresen inquired whether the Council would develop the process rather than a larger group.

Council Member Pavao said he favored the Council moving ahead in the matter with some direction. Council Member Brown inquired about the Mayor’s concerns in the matter. Mayor Waldorf said if the Council was interested in only receiving comment on the McDade house location, it should be straightforward about the matter. Council Member Brown said she was suggesting that the focus of the charette be broadened so it was not solely focused on development. Mayor Waldorf inquired whether the motioner and seconder were willing to have the charette process discussion focused on types, intensity and timing of uses, if any. Council Member Evans inquired how the timing of developments other than the McDade house could be known. Council Member Andresen said the focus could be on whether or not parking lot number five would remain a parking lot for the next years or so. Council Member Brown suggested adding “if any” to part three of the proposal.

THE MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Item 4.1 Consent Agenda

Mr. Horton noted that Ordinance 2.1a was recommended relative to item 4.1g.

Council Member Capowski requested removal of item c from the consent agenda. Council Member Brown requested removal of item d. Council Member Franck requested removal of item f. Council Member Andresen requested removal of items a and g.

COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PAVAO, TO ADOPT ITEMS B AND E FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

A RESOLUTION ADOPTING VARIOUS RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES

(97-2-10/R-1)

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

a. Scheduling joint meeting with Chatham County Commissioners (R-2). Mayor Waldorf.

b. Request from EmPOWERment Inc. to reallocate Community Development funds (R-3).

c. Identification of legislative issues for follow-up public forum (R-4).

d. Whitfield property offer (R-5).

e. Annexation of land owned by the Orange Water and Sewer Authority (O-1).

f. Adoption of Council work plan (R-6).

g. Town Center conditional use zoning development ordinance text amendment (O-2).

This the 10th day of February, 1997.

A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A PROCESS TO CONSIDER AN AMENDMENT TO THE 1996 - 97 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM (97-2-10/R-3)

WHEREAS, the Town has an ongoing interest in the promotion of Community Development activities in the Town of Chapel Hill; and

WHEREAS, the Town would use $70,000 of Community Development funds previously budgeted to EmPOWERment, Incorporated;

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council schedules a public hearing for March 3, 1997 at 7:00 in the Council Chamber, Chapel Hill Town Hall, 306 North Columbia Street, to receive citizen comments on a proposed amendment to the 1996 - 97 Community Development Block Grant program to reallocate $70,000 of Community Development funds previously allocated for purchase of Merritt Mill Square.

This the 10^th day of February, 1997.

AN ORDINANCE TO EXTEND THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA (97-2-10/O-1)

WHEREAS, the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill has been petitioned under G.S. 160A-31, as amended, to annex the area described herein; and

WHEREAS, the Town Clerk has certified the sufficiency of said petition and a public hearing on the question of this annexation was held at the Chapel Hill Municipal Building, 306 North Columbia Street, Chapel Hill, N.C., 27516, at 7:00 p.m. on January 21, 1997 after due notice by publication on January 10 and January 19, 1997; and

WHEREAS, the Council does hereby find as a fact that said petition has been signed by all the owners of real property in the area who are required by law to sign and all other requirements of G.S. 160A-31, as amended; and

WHEREAS, the Council further finds that the petition is otherwise valid, and that the public health, safety and welfare of the Town and of the area proposed for annexation will be best served by annexing the area described herein;

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

SECTION I

By virtue of the authority granted by G.S. 160A-31, as amended, the following described territory is hereby annexed and made part of the Town of Chapel Hill as of June 30, 1997:

All that certain tract or parcel of land situated lying and being on the Southwest side of Bolin Creek and on the East side of University Railroad and containing 1.73 acres, more or less, and more particularly described as BEGINNING at a point in the center of Bolin Creek and in the East property line of the University Railroad; running thence South 34°10’ East 16 feet to a stake and thence along the same course 534.55 feet to a point in the Northern right-of-way line of a new roadway Project 6.502098 (also known as Estes Drive); running thence with the said right-of-way line north 34°10’ East 43.8 feet; North 36°55’ East 52.62 feet; North 39°56’ East 52.62 feet; North 43°36’ East 78.94 feet to a stake; running thence the same course 16 feet to the center of Bolin Creek; running thence in a Northwestern direction along the center line of the said Creek as it meanders 536 feet, more or less, to the BEGINNING.

SECTION II

From and after 11:59 p.m. of the 30th day of June, 1997, the effective date of this annexation, the above described territory and its citizens and property shall be subject to all debts, laws, ordinances and regulations in force in the Town of Chapel Hill and shall be entitled to the same privileges and benefits as other parts of the Town of Chapel Hill. Said territory shall be subject to municipal taxes according to G.S. 160A-31.

SECTION III

The Manager of the Town of Chapel Hill shall cause to be recorded in the Office of the Register of Deeds of Orange County and the Orange County Board of Elections, and in the office of the Secretary of State at Raleigh, North Carolina, an accurate map of the annexed territory, described in Section I hereof, together with a duly certified copy of this ordinance.

This the 10th day of February, 1997.

Saying that the State’s major roads in the Town were not currently well-maintained, Council Member Capowski suggested seeking the General Assembly’s assistance in this matter.

Council Member Chilton stated that effective administration of one of the Town’s Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) was partially frustrated by new rules pertaining to Section 8 tenancy in condominiums and apartments. He also noted that the Town’s Housing Board had some significant concerns about this matter.

COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER CAPOWSKI, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 4, INCLUDING THEIR STATED CONCERNS ABOUT PROPOSED LEGISLATION. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Item 4.2 Information Reports

Council Member Brown reminded the Town Council and other interested persons about the transit-related lobbying days on February 17^th and 18^th in Raleigh.

Item 5 Appointments to Boards and Commissions

Mayor Waldorf noted that the Council had not placed a limit on the number of persons who could serve on the Downtown Small Area Plan Work Group.

COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO APPOINT ED CALDWELL, NANCY GABRIEL, ROBERT HUMPHREYS AND BETTY MAULTSBY TO THE DOWNTOWN SMALL AREA PLAN WORK GROUP AND KEEP THE PROCESS OPEN FOR ADDITIONAL APPLICANTS. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

DONNA WILLIAMS WAS APPOINTED TO THE HOUSING ADVISORY BOARD WITH EIGHT VOTES. ANNE FIROR-SCOTT RECEIVED ONE VOTE. ORIGINAL VOTING BALLOTS ARE ON FILE IN THE TOWN CLERK’S OFFICE.

Item 6 Discussion of Development Review Process

Mr. Waldon presented an overview of the matter, noting that voluntary concept review had not yielded many benefits for the Council or staff. Noting that the Council had been holding off on appointments to the Appearance Commission and Design Review Board, Mr. Waldon stated that only three people continued to serve on the Design Review Board and there was also a smaller number of members on the Appearance Commission. Mr. Waldon said that staff was recommending Council adoption of a resolution and ordinance regarding the review process.

Appearance Commission Chairperson Diane Bachmann requested that the Appearance Commission and Design Review Board be given an opportunity to review the staff’s recommendations. Referencing Mr. Waldon’s earlier remarks, Ms. Bachmann noted that all of the remaining terms of office for Appearance Commission and Design Review Board members would expire as of June 30, 1997.

Transportation Board Chairperson Ruby Sinreich said it was very important for the development review process to include as much citizen involvement as possible. Noting that at one time she was a major opponent of the Design Review Board, Ms. Sinreich stated that the Board served a very valuable purpose and did a very effective job of being the Town’s ambassador to developers relative to development regulations and standards. She also expressed concern that there appeared to be no citizen input at the site analysis step of the proposed review process. Ms. Sinreich also said she hoped that the Council would support transit overlay zones later in this evening’s agenda.

Stating that the three main Council objectives relative to improving the process were: 1) having an earlier concept review stage, 2) having an opportunity for continuous review and 3) maintenance or enhancing citizen involvement in the process, Council Member Franck said he did not believe that any of these objectives had been attained in the staff’s proposal. Council Member Franck said he believed that having conceptual plans which would not take up a lot of staff review time was an achievable goal.

Referencing Ms. Bachmann’s earlier remarks regarding the Appearance Commission’s willingness to review the proposal, Council Member Evans suggested that other advisory boards could also contribute ideas regarding the development review process. Suggesting that the Council not request additional staff time on the matter, Council Member Evans requested that the Council refer the matter to the Appearance Commission, Design Review Board and perhaps other boards and commissions.

Council Member Andresen said she sensed a little frustration and sympathized a little with staff regarding possible changes to the development review process. Stating that the Council and staff had devoted a great deal of time and attention to the matter, Council Member Andresen suggested that the Council have a two step process regarding changes to the development review process.

She suggested that the Council work out a carefully worded charge, in consultation with the Appearance Commission, for a new committee on development matters. Council Member Andresen also requested that the Council agree to disband the Design Review Board this evening, have staff develop ideas regarding a charge for the new committee and schedule a future Council work session on the matter.

Stating that the Design Review Board had done some good work on concept plans, Council Member Evans said she did not think that the Board should be disbanded. She reiterated her earlier suggestion that development-related advisory boards provide options about changing the development review process.

Stating that the Council had invited boards and commissions to provide suggestions regarding the review process, Council Member Andresen said that the Appearance Commission appeared to be having a morale problem.

Council Member Pavao suggested that the Council let existing groups think about possible solutions and then decide whether or not to dissolve or keep these entities. He also suggested that the Council might be hampered by its own inadequacy in getting something started.

COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO REFER THE MATTER TO THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD, APPEARANCE COMMISSION AND PLANNING BOARD AND TO ADD THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD TO THE COUNCIL’S FUTURE APPOINTMENTS SCHEDULE.

Council Member Brown said she favored hearing from advisory boards and commissions about possible solutions before the Council acted on any changes to the development review process.

Council Member Franck said the Council needed to make appointments to the Design Review Board and Appearance Commission in order to get the boards up to full strength.

Noting that early concept review was not necessary for development review proposals, Council Member Capowski inquired why the Council should solicit applications for membership on the Design Review Board.

Council Member Chilton suggested adding the Transportation Board to the list of boards reviewing the development review process.

Noting that it was important to hear the opinions of advisory boards and commissions, Council Member Andresen stated that at some point the Council needed to make a decision about possible changes to the development review process. She added that it appeared best to have one, rather than two, boards.

Council Member Wiggins inquired whether or not Council Member Franck would be willing to separate his motion into two parts, one regarding the process and the other regarding appointments. Council Member Wiggins said although she supported the first part, she did not favor the second part. Council Member Franck said he would be willing to have two separate motions.

THE MOTION TO REFER THE MATTER TO THE APPEARANCE COMMISSION, DESIGN REVIEW BOARD, PLANNING BOARD AND TRANSPORTATION BOARD WAS ADOPTED BY A VOTE OF 7-2, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS ANDRESEN AND CAPOWSKI VOTING NO.

COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, FOR THE COUNCIL TO MAKE APPOINTMENTS TO THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD AND APPREARANCE COMMISSION AS PART OF ITS MAY/JUNE OVERALL APPOINTMENT PROCESS/SCHEDULE.

COUNCIL MEMBER CAPOWSKI MOVED A SUBSTITUTE MOTION, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER ANDRESEN, TO ONLY MAKE APPOINTMENTS TO THE APPEARANCE COMMISSION AND NOT THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD. THE MOTION FAILED BY A VOTE OF 2-7, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS ANDRESEN AND CAPOWSKI VOTING AYE.

THE MAIN MOTION, TO SOLICIT APPLICATIONS FOR MEMBERSHIP ON THE APPEAREANCE COMMISSION AND THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD, WAS ADOPTED BY A VOTE OF 7-2, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS ANDRESEN AND BROWN VOTING NO.

Council Member Brown said that site analyses would be helpful in determining impacts on developments in process. Mr. Horton noted that the proposed rules would only apply to new applications.

COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER ANDRESEN, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 7. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED BY A VOTE OF 8-1, WITH COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCK VOTING NO.

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE TOWN MANAGER TO IMPLEMENT A REQUIREMENT FOR SUBMITTAL OF A DETAILED SITE ANALYSIS AS PART OF ALL SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPLICATIONS AND ALL MAJOR SUBDIVISION APPLICATIONS WHICH CREATE MORE THAN 25 LOTS AND DIRECTING THE TOWN MANAGER TO INITIATE THE PROCESS FOR COUNCIL APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS TO THE APPEARANCE COMMISSION (97-2-10/R-7)

WHEREAS, the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill, has considered proposed amendments to the Chapel Hill Development Ordinance adjusting the development review process; and

WHEREAS, the Council as adopted an Ordinance adjusting the development review process by eliminating the Design Review Board and its functions; and

WHEREAS, the Council has elected to simplify the adjustment to the development review process and obtain important site analysis information related to a development proposal as a submittal requirement associated with the formal application for development;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill herewith authorizes the Town Manager to implement a requirement for submittal of a detailed site analysis as part of all Special Use Permit or Special Use Permit Modification applications and all major subdivision applications which create more than 25 lots.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this new submittal requirement shall become effective for applications submitted to the Town on or after March 1, 1997.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council directs the Town Manager to initiate the process for Council appointment of members to the Appearance Commission.

This the 10^th day of February, 1997.

Item 7 Days Inn Request for Special Use Permit

Mr. Waldon presented an overview of the applicant’s proposal, noting that the entire site was located in a regulatory flood plain and the Resource Conservation District. He also stated that no pavement or basins were proposed in the floodway or wetlands areas. Council Member Andresen asked whether or not it was correct that the entire site was in the 100 year flood plain. Mr. Waldon said this was correct. Council Member Andresen inquired about the location of the ten and twenty year flood boundary. Mr. Waldon said that the applicant’s engineer could respond to this question later. Council Member Capowski asked whether the entire site was in the flood plain and Resource Conservation District. Mr. Waldon said this was correct.

Council Member Brown requested a clarification relative to building elevations in the Resource Conservation District. Mr. Waldon said the appropriate elevation was two feet above the one hundred year flood plain elevation. Mayor Waldorf inquired about building height limits in the Resource Conservation District. Mr. Waldon said he believed that the applicable building height limit was thirty-nine feet at the building setback line.

Bruce Ballentine, the applicant’s representative, said the applicant’s main objective was to rebuild a hotel on the site that the entire Town could be proud of. Noting that some people were concerned about the potential erosion of existing resource conservation district regulations, Mr. Ballentine said it was very important for the Council to weigh the proposed project on its own overall merits. Noting that concerns about water quality had been raised, Mr. Ballentine said that the applicant had voluntarily undertaken a stormwater management study and found the net effect on water quality to be negligible. Stating that the projected runoff for a baseline ten year storm from the proposed Days Inn was less than the amount of runoff from the existing Tarheel Motel, Mr. Ballentine said the estimated additional amount of runoff from a one hundred year storm would be one cubic foot per second added to the existing 3,200 cubic feet per second. Mr. Ballentine added that homes on Emory Drive and other areas would continue to flood whether or not the proposed Days Inn project was built or not. Mr. Ballentine also said if the proposed project were not approved, the Town would be passing up: (1) an opportunity to improve the entryway’s appearance, (2) to add about $22,000 in ad valorem taxes and (3) to add about thirteen jobs.

Council Member Capowski inquired what constituted a ten year storm. Mr. Ballentine said a “ten year storm” was a storm which had a ten percent probability of occurrence at any time in a given year.

Noting that she frequently shopped in the Eastgate area, Alice Ingram said she was very interested in the proposed project. Ms. Ingram said she hoped that the appearance of the site could be improved with a new building and possibly a linear park behind the building. She also expressed hope that results of the ongoing study about flooding in this area by the State Division of Environment, Health and Natural Resources would be beneficial to area residents who were experiencing flooding on their properties and in their homes.

Catherine Newberry said she was concerned about the process for this item coming forward. Ms. Newberry stated that if the applicant had sought a variance from the Town’s Board of Adjustment, the Board would likely have denied such a request. Ms. Newberry stated that

denial of Mr. Amin’s development application would not deny Mr. Amin the use of his property.

She also said that the most important issue before the Council was remedying flooding problems using the Town’s existing Resource Conservation District regulations. Ms. Newberry stated that

granting Mr. Amin’s request would undermine these regulations. Requesting that a letter from a resident of the Ridgefield area be entered into the record of this evening’s hearing, Ms. Newberry

urged the Council to vote against Resolution A.

Mr. Nettie said he had lived in an area located in the flood plain for about twenty-six years. He asked the Council to examine the erosion of existing Resource Conservation District regulations, including illegal filling on Willow Drive to accommodate building of duplexes. Stating that his home had flooded eight times in the past year, Mr. Nettie requested that the Council enforce the Town’s Resource Conservation District regulations.

Art Werner said although Mr. Ballentine was a good engineer, he was making calculations based on data which was collected twenty years ago, including FEMA maps from the 1970’s. Mr. Werner said he projected that floodway would be located somewhere in the middle of the proposed hotel. He also stated that the proposed detention pond would be built to protect immediate downstream neighbors of the proposed hotel. Mr. Werner stated that the likelihood of the Board of Adjustment waiving existing resource conservation district regulations relative to this proposal was negligible. Noting that it would be difficult for the Council to deny similar requests in the Resource Conservation District in the future, he encouraged the Council not to approve the applicant’s development proposal.

Noting that the decision before the Council was a tough one, Richard “Stick” Williams urged the Council to ignore any intimidation by activist groups opposed to the proposal.. Stating that the project was going to be a good one, Mr. Williams encouraged the Council to vote in favor of the proposed project.

Jonathan Wahl, 915 Emory Drive, said he resided on the edge of the flood plain. Mr. Wahl also stated that when he wished to remodel his home, he had to be granted a variance from Resource Conservation District standards by the Town’s Board of Adjustment.

Mayor Waldorf inquired whether or not the applicant accepted the proposed conditions of approval. Mr. Ballentine said the applicant supported the proposed conditions of approval as presented.

Correcting his earlier reference to permissible building height, Mr. Waldon said the building height limitation was thirty-four feet up to sixty feet away from the building setback line.

Council Member Brown inquired about standards for the resource conservation district relative to

one hundred year flood elevation standards. Mr. Waldon presented a brief overview of RCD standards relative to flood and finished floor elevations.

Noting that some portions of the site were wooded or grassed, Council Member Andresen stated that the wooded area was fairly wet on a recent tour of the site. Stating that the proposed retention pond was not in a wetland area, Council Member Andresen suggested that the Council needed to look at the overall mass of the proposed project.

Council Member Brown inquired about the mechanism for granting variances relative to Resource Conservation District (RCD) standards. Mr. Karpinos stated that before an applicant came in with a final plan, they needed to granted applicable variances from RCD standards by the Board of Adjustment, dependent upon facts involved in the individual case.

Mayor Waldorf noted that the Division of Environment, Health and Natural Resources would be working on a $200,000 drainage study of Bolin and Booker creeks, including watershed computer models. She stated that some of the study’s objectives were better water runoff control, better regional and on-site detention and putting measures into place to help with flooding concerns. She noted that the study would only help to solve some future flooding and drainage problems.

Council Member Chilton said he would like the opportunity to have the applicant make still further changes to the proposal. Council Member Chilton stated that livability space, rather than the maximum floor area limit, was of greatest concern to him. Council Member Chilton also said that it was likely that the applicant could meet livability space standards if they proposed a total amount of impervious surface which was much closer to the amount currently on the site.

Council Member Andresen requested a clarification of impervious surface requirements. Mr. Waldon said that Resource Conservation District regulations stipulated a maximum impervious surface level of thirty percent.

Council Member Chilton suggested that the hearing be recessed and the matter referred to Town staff and the applicant, with the applicant being asked to find a way to have the amount of proposed impervious surface similar to the amount of impervious surface currently on the site.

Council Member Andresen said that the table on page two of the November 18^th memorandum on this matter was misleading in that it assumed that the Council had already granted the requested variance. Council Member Chilton said that the impervious surface requirement was not an appropriate basis for turning down the application. Mayor Waldorf requested clarification regarding the course of action being suggested by Council Member Chilton. Council Member Chilton said he was suggesting reducing the impervious surface area, with like decreases in other areas such as floor area. Noting that the proposed amount of impervious surface area was most troubling to her, Mayor Waldorf said she favored this approach. She also expressed concern about how far the proposed building extended back into the wetlands area.

COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WIGGINS, TO RECESS THE HEARING AND REFER THE APPLICATION BACK TO THE APPLICANT AND STAFF TO DEVELOP AN APPLICATION WHICH MUCH MORE CLOSELY REFLECTED THE AMOUNT OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AREA ON THE SITE.

Council Member Brown urged the Council to keep in mind that the principal focus of the matter were the standards of the Town’s Resource Conservation District (RCD) ordinance.

Council Member Andresen said she would have problems supporting the proposed motion since she thought that any significant changes/improvements in the project would require going through the process again.

Mr. Horton said the matter could come back on March 3^rd or 24^th if the Council wished to proceed with the proposed motion. Council Member Chilton suggested that the matter come back on March 3^rd.

THE MOTION PASSED BY A VOTE OF 7-2, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS ANDRESEN AND BROWN VOTING NO.

Item 8 Public Housing Matters

Assistant Town Manager Florentine Miller presented a brief overview of the staff’s memorandum and recommendations, including a proposed communications plan and the establishment of a community resources team to coordinate a variety of housing services. Ms. Miller said that staff recommended the adoption of Resolutions A, B and C. Council Member Wiggins urged the inclusion of young people in communications programs and activities in public housing communities. Ms. Miller said that this was a good idea.

Stating that the Town’s front line maintenance staff had been working hard, Mayor Waldorf noted that since December, 1993, 87% of the Town’s 336 public housing units had been refurbished.

Council Member Wiggins said she was very impressed about how involved the members of the Housing Advisory Board were involved with housing-related matters.

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

A RESOLUTION APPROVING A NEW ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING (97-2-10/R-9A)

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby approves the revised organizational structure for the Department of Housing as submitted by the Manager on January 27, 1997, and authorizes the Manager to prepare changes to the employee classification ordinance if and as needed consistent with the revised organizational structure.

This the 10th day of February, 1997.

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

A RESOLUTION APPROVING A PUBLIC HOUSING COMMUNICATIONS PLAN

(97-2-10/R-9B)

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby approves the public housing communications plan as submitted by the Town Manager on January 27, 1997.

This the 10th day of February, 1997.

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

A RESOLUTION REFERRING A PROPOSED LIST OF PRIORITIES FOR ADDRESSING ADDITIONAL NEEDS AND ISSUES REGARDING SERVICE TO PUBLIC HOUSING FAMILIES (97-2-10/R-9C)

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby refers to the Housing and Community Development Advisory Board and the Residents’ Council for their comments the proposed list of priorities submitted by the Manager on January 27, 1997, for addressing various public housing needs and issues in the future.

This the 10th day of February, 1997.

Council Member Andresen requested that the status of the new organization be reviewed in one year. Mr. Horton said staff could provide an update to the Council in one year.

Item 9 Transit Corridor Overlay Zoning District

Stating that the proposed overlay zone would not change the density of existing underlying zones, Council Member Franck said the Council should look at this matter as long-term proposal. He also stated that the proposed overlay zone would positively contribute to the appearance of corridors into the Town. Council Member Franck said that the district would be one means to swing the tide in favor of public transit.

COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PAVAO. TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 10.

Stating that no one was opposed to a transit-friendly town, Council Member Brown said she thought that there was going to be much more discussion before this matter came to a vote before the Council. Council Member Brown said she had a lot of questions about the concept of a transit corridor overlay zoning district. She also stated that the Council had not heard from the public about this matter.

Council Member Evans said she was also concerned that there had been very limited discussion on this matter to date. She suggested that the Council have more discussions about safety-related concerns relative to proposed building setbacks along transit corridors. She also suggested that the Planning Board have an opportunity to review the proposal.

Thanking Council Member Franck for putting the proposals before the Council, Council Member Andresen said she thought that some of the specifics were quite good, while others bothered her.

She suggested that the Council could possibly reach agreement about which proposals were good ones.

Noting that he supported many of Council Member Franck’s ideas, Council Member Capowski said some of the ideas such as limiting traffic on West Franklin Street were too utopian. He stated that if such limitations were put in place, people would drive and park their cars elsewhere, as close as possible to West Franklin Street. Council Member Capowski suggested removing the first “Be it Resolved” clause from the proposed resolution and adding a number seven clause, stipulating that “surrounding neighborhoods not be penalized”.

Stating that concrete language was needed relative to proposed goals, Council Member Franck said he did not accept Council Member Capowski’s second proposed change as a friendly amendment. Council Member Pavao expressed his concurrence with Council Member Franck’s observation.

Mayor Waldorf suggested that staff be asked to do some preliminary research and the come back with these findings for the Council to discuss, rather than the Council asking staff to write a possible ordinance.

Council Member Andresen said it was important for the Council to hear from advisory boards and for the Council to agree on proposed goals before moving forward on the matter.

Stating that there had been a number of procedural delays relative to this matter, Council Member Chilton said that there appeared to be a general propensity not to deal with the topic. He also stated that the impact on surrounding neighborhoods relative to West Franklin Street was extremely important.

Council Member Brown said she supported the Mayor’s suggestion of getting more information and options for the council to review and discuss. She also suggested that the Attorney be asked to look at legal constraints prior to a Council discussion of the matter.

COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WIGGINS, FOR THE STAFF GET MORE INFORMATION AND OPTIONS AND FOR THE ATTORNEY TO REVIEW LEGAL CONSTRAINTS PRIOR TO COUNCIL DISCUSSION OF THE MATTER.

Council Member Brown inquired whether or not four weeks was a reasonable timeframe to complete this project. Mr. Horton said it would be necessary to employ someone, possibly a graduate student, to complete this project, which could take an estimated five hundred hours.

Suggesting that the substitute motion be withdrawn, Council Member Chilton said it might be better if Council Members drafted various versions of Resolution 10 for the February 24^th meeting. Council Member Brown said that more time and thought on this matter was needed. Noting that he was having difficulty deciding which process to proceed with, Council Member Chilton said he would prefer to have the options written down, discussed and voted on at a future meeting. Mayor Waldorf noted that no Council Member appeared willing to undertake such an activity.

Council Member Evans said it was very important to seek strategic input from community residents and to look at the safety of people who did not drive vehicles or cars.

Council Member Chilton suggested that the Council vote the matter down if it was not interested in proceeding with the matter.

Council Member Brown said she hoped that the Council could take up the matter at its upcoming retreat follow-up session.

COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN WITHDREW HER SUBSTITUTE MOTION.

Council Member Franck said he could send out copies of supplementary information to interested Council Members.

Council Member Andresen said it was important to reflect all of the Council Member’s goals and priorities. Stating that he had taken into account a lot of comments received from Council Members, Council Member Franck said he was frustrated that some Council Members were saying that they had not had a chance to think the matter over.

Council Member Franck said he was willing to withdraw his motion if discussion could be continued at the Council’s follow-up retreat meeting. Council Member Brown said that transit overlay and other options could be discussed at this meeting. Council Member Pavao said he applauded Council Member Franck’s initiative in this matter.

Item 10 Security Camera System Bid Award

Noting that there had been an increased incidence in vandalism at Town parking lots, with most break-ins taking place in cars stored at park and ride lots, Transportation Director Bob Godding

said that staff was proposing the purchase and installation of security cameras in a number of park and ride lots. Mr. Godding also noted that the use of video cameras had been reviewed and recommended by the Transportation Board.

Council Member Capowski inquired whether or not the grant funds in question could be used for other purposes. Mr. Godding said yes, noting that the funds could be used for replacement buses. He stated that the amount of money involved was not sufficient to buy one bus. Noting that he was very much in favor of spending money to help with problem resolutions, Council Member Capowski inquired whether or not the proposal was the best solution. Noting that reserve funds were available to pay the Town’s share of cost relative to the purchase of additional buses, Mr. Horton said that the cameras were the best means to try to ensure that the parking lots would be secure. Council Member Capowski asked whether this approach was better than hiring more staff. Mr. Horton said it was a better solution.

COUNCIL MEMBER WIGGINS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 11. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

A RESOLUTION AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR THE INSTALLATION OF A SECURITY CAMERA SYSTEM FOR TWO TOWN PARK AND RIDE LOTS AND THE POLICE DEPARTMENT ( 97-2-10/R-11)

WHEREAS, the Town Council of the Town of Chapel Hill has solicited formal bids by legal notice on November 6, 1996 in accordance with G.S. 143-129 for the purchase and installation of a Security Camera System; and

WHEREAS, the following bids were received and opened on November 18, 1996:

Pro-Net Image and Audio $229,937.84

SFI Electronics $231,430.00

Facility Robotics $304,492.00

WHEREAS, all bids exceeded available funds, the two lowest bidders were asked to amend their cost proposal to eliminate the Eubanks Road park and ride lot and provide video camera and motion detection equipment for the NC 54 East and Southern Village park and ride lots; monitoring, recording, and camera equipment for the Police Department; and monitoring equipment for the Transportation Department offices; and

WHEREAS, the following amended bids were received:

Pro-Net Image and Audio $158,914.15

SFI Electronics $183,600.00

WHEREAS, the lowest responsive bid was submitted by Pro-Net Image and Audio; and

WHEREAS, Pro-Net Image and Audio has adequate experience and expertise to provide the required services in a timely manner;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the contract for the installation of a Security Camera System be awarded to Pro-Net Image & Audio in the amount of $158,914.15

This the 10^th day of February, 1997.

Item 11 Controlling Parking in Front Yards

Mr. Waldon said that staff was recommending that the Council adopt a policy regarding front-yard parking similar to the one adopted by the City of Greenville, North Carolina.

Historic District Commission member Betsy Pringle urged the Council to consider the needs of neighborhood residents in their decisionmaking process.

Thanking the Council for their leadership in the matter, Baird Grimson stated that a new balance needed to be struck between parking needs and the beauty of neighborhoods. He requested that the Council instruct the staff to examine the possibility of using the Town’s police power in addition to its zoning enforcement powers. A copy of Mr. Grimson’s remarks are on file in the Town Clerk’s Office.

Pauline Grimson urged the Council to more vigorously control parking in neighborhoods adjoining the University.

Ricky Malik, a junior at the University residing off-campus, said that the Town had an anti-student policy relative to parking. He stated that most students were forced to park in front yards for lack of available parking. Stating that students were not going to continue to allow themselves to be treated poorly, Mr. Malik urged the Council to reevaluate its parking-related policies.

Kimberly Kyser, representing the Franklin Street Neighborhood Association, expressed concern that there were still several houses on Franklin Street which abused existing policies prohibiting parking in front yards. She stated that this practice was unattractive and unsafe. Ms. Kyser also suggested that the Council have an open public discussion before its September public hearing on the matter.

Mayor Waldorf said that Mr. William Lindsay had asked her to convey to the Council that the fourth article to the United States Constitution protected the citizen’s right to park in front yards.

Council Member Brown inquired about the possibility of having a public hearing on the matter before September 15^th. Stating that the proposed regular public hearing was quite full, Mr. Horton said one possibility would be to have a hearing at a regular business meeting in May or June. Council Member Chilton stated that a problem with this was that some impacted parties would not be in Town during May or June. Council Member Brown inquired about the possibility of having a hearing in April. Mr. Horton said one possibility would be to have a hearing on April 28^th, with possible Council action on May 12^th. Mayor Waldorf asked whether or not this would mean bumping any important items. Mr. Horton said although it would not be necessary to bump any items, it would necessitate a fair amount of staff time to prepare the Council agenda items.

Council Member Capowski suggested that the item come back in August or September.

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

Council Member Andresen said she did not think that anyone was being helped by waiting until September to have the public hearing on the matter.

Noting that she favored having a hearing in April, Council Member Brown said she did not see sufficient Council support for such a hearing. She requested that the Council consider all comments received this evening in addition to the letter from residents of the Ephesus Church Road area regarding front yard parking. Council Member Chilton said it was important to come up with a solution which was not an arbitrary designation. He requested that the staff include maps of the Town’s historic districts and the Northside neighborhood protection district in their follow-up report to the Council.

COUNCIL MEMBER CAPOWSKI MADE A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT THAT THE TRANSPORTATION BOARD BE ADDED TO THE LIST OF REFERRAL BOARDS. THE MOTIONER AND SECONDER CONCURRED.

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

A RESOLUTION CALLING A PUBLIC HEARING ON FRONT YARD PARKING REGULATIONS (97-2-10/R-12)

WHEREAS, the Chapel Hill Town Council has received comments and concerns about the negative impacts that result from front yards being used for the parking of automobiles in Chapel Hill;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council calls a Public Hearing to consider possible amendments to the Chapel Hill Development Ordinance, to establish restrictions on the use of front yards for parking. The hearing shall be held on September 15, 1997, at 7:00 p.m. at the Chapel hill Town Hall Council Chambers, 306 North Columbia Street.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Town Manager is directed to draft ordinance language for consideration at the September 15 Public Hearing, and to submit this draft to the Planning Board, Transportation Board and Historic District Commission for review and comment prior to the public hearing.

This the 10th day of February, 1997.

Item 12 Draft Letter to UNC President Spangler

Mayor Waldorf noted that she was proposing to write a letter to UNC President Spangler regarding the University’s recent change in policy regarding jets utilizing Horace Williams Airport. Council Member Andresen stated that this new policy violated a long standing policy prohibiting the use of jets at the facility. She also noted that the Chapel Hill-Carrboro School Board was on record asking that the existing airport facility be moved. Council Member Andresen also noted that Chancellor Hardin had made an assurance at a public hearing that no jets would be permitted to use the airport facility.

COUNCIL MEMBER CAPOWSKI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON, THAT MAYOR WALDORF FORWARD A LETTER TO UNC PRESIDENT SPANGLER, INCORPORATING COUNCIL MEMBER ANDRESEN’S PROPOSED ADDITIONS.

Noting that there was a difference between UNC Chapel Hill and the University’s General Administration, Council Member Evans said she did not think that the proposed letter would be detrimental to the Town’s relationship with the University. Council Member Andresen noted that the letter was requesting General Administration’s assistance in addressing the Town’s concerns.

Council Member Evans said the current situation was evidence that the Council needed to work on cooperation with the University’s General Administration. She also noted that the matter of jet use could possibly be an issue in other University communities.

Stating that the Council needed to revisit the matter in the future, Council Member Andresen said she believed that sending the letter to President Spangler was the right thing to do.

THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PAVAO, TO MOVE INTO CLOSED SESSION TO DISCUSS PENDING LITIGATION. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

The meeting concluded at 10:38 p.m.