MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA, MONDAY, FEBRUARY 24, 1997 AT 7:00 P

MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA, MONDAY, FEBRUARY 24, 1997 AT 7:00 P.M.

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 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.

Mayor Waldorf called forward retiring Fire Marshal Joe Robertson for recognition upon the occasion of his retirement from Town service. Mayor Waldorf noted that Mr. Robertson had recently accepted the position of Fire Chief with the City of Florence, South Carolina. Mayor Waldorf and the Council presented Mr. Robertson with a plaque of appreciation for his twenty-seven years of excellent service to the Town.

Mayor Waldorf read a proposed resolution regarding recognition of the efforts of the Orange County Disability Awareness Council.

COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 1. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

A RESOLUTION HONORING THE ORANGE COUNTYDISABILITY AWARENESS COUNCIL (97-2-24/R-1)

WHEREAS, the Orange County Disability Awareness Council is a non-profit, volunteer citizens’ action group dedicated to improving the quality of life for persons with disabilities in Orange County; and

WHEREAS , the Orange County Disability Awareness Council seeks to promote opportunities for disabled citizens to work and live in an environment free of barriers imposed by architecture, attitude, and/or lack of opportunity; and

WHEREAS, the Orange County Disability Awareness Council conducts annual recognition ceremonies to recognize individuals, organizations, or groups who actively include in their services and programs people with disabilities; and

WHEREAS, the Orange County Disability Awareness Council guides and educates the community about the Americans with Disabilities Act, which was signed into law on July 26, 1990 and which bans discrimination based on physical or mental disability, provides individuals with disabilities civil rights protection, and guarantees equal opportunity in employment, public accommodations, transportation, government services and telecommunication; and

WHEREAS, the Orange County Disability Awareness Council is a member of the National Organization on Disability and serves as the Town of Chapel Hill’s Mayor’s Committee on Persons with Disabilities; and

WHEREAS, the Orange County Disability Awareness Council received the 1996 Governor’s trophy as the most outstanding Mayor’s Committee in North Carolina by the Governor’s Advocacy Council on Persons with Disabilities; and

WHEREAS, the Orange County Disability Awareness Council won second place in the category of counties under 100,000 population in the National Organization on Disability’s annual awards competition among 4,500 participants in the United States, which carries a cash award of $2,500; and

WHEREAS, this is only the second time in the 26 year history of the National Organization on Disability that a North Carolina entity has been recognized;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council recognizes and congratulates the

ORANGE COUNTY DISABILITY AWARENESS COUNCIL

for its recognition as the State of North Carolina’s most outstanding Mayor’s Committee on Persons with Disabilities, for winning a second place award from the National Organization on Disability, and for its continuing efforts to improve the lives of disabled citizens.

This the 24^th day of February, 1997.

Tim Miles expressed the appreciation of the entire Orange County Disability Awareness Council for the Council’s recognition of their efforts. Mr. Miles especially thanked Deputy Town Clerk/ADA Coordinator Joyce Smith, Town Manager Cal Horton and Mayor Rosemary Waldorf for their efforts to assist disability-challenged community residents. He also invited interested persons to attend the Disability Awareness Council’s meetings on the third Tuesday of each month.

Item 2 Public Forum on Legislative Requests

Noting that the Council would be holding a meeting on Friday morning, February 28^th with the local legislative delegation, Mr. Horton presented a brief introduction to this evening’s forum.

Roland Giduz requested the Council’s support for an entertainment tax. Mr. Giduz said that this proposal would produce the most potential revenue of the thirteen revenue-generating options on the Council’s options listing. Noting that discretionary spending was involved, Mr. Giduz said that the State had been imposing an entertainment tax in a negligible manner for almost sixty years. Referencing the Council’s efforts relative to the Transit 2001 Commission’s recommendations, Mr. Giduz suggested that the Council appoint a joint citizens/Council task force to further pursue this goal.

Jim Carter, representing the Chapel Hill-Carrboro Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors, said that many of the proposals in the draft legislative packet would be beneficial to the community, including increased funding for State parks and transit systems and maintenance of existing annexation laws. He also stated that a couple of issues including the prepared meals tax and entertainment tax had been controversial as discussed in the community. Pledging the Chamber’s willingness to assist in facilitating a dialogue on the meals tax and other matters, Mr. Carter requested that the Council reconsider its proposal regarding impact taxes.

Arthur Finn, a member of the Founder’s Board of North Carolinians Against Gun Violence, requested that the Council oppose the North Carolina preemption law, which rendered null and void all present and future local gun control laws which were stronger than those provided by State statutes. Mr. Finn expressed concern that this legislation was passed in an outrageous manner, with no significant advertisement of opportunities for citizen comment on the proposed legislation. A copy of Mr. Finn’s remarks are on file in the Town Clerk’s Office.

Joe Herzenberg said he hoped that the Council would continue to support the Orange County Commissioner’s efforts to ensure protection of citizen from their rights being restricted based on sexual orientation.

Sarah Froeberg, marketing director of a small theater operation for children, said her organization operated on a shoestring budget at a huge loss. She requested that the Council not authorize enactment of an entertainment tax, due to its adverse impact on smaller entertainment operations.

Blair Pollock, representing the North Carolina Recycling Association, requested the Council’s support of an extension of the “white goods” appliance fee. He noted that this disposal tax was schedule to be sunsetted in the near future.

Council Member Evans suggested that the Council bring to the legislature’s attention the Council’s recent discussions regarding funding the cost of a gymnasium/multi-purpose facility in the proposed new Southern Village Elementary School.

Council Member Chilton expressed his support for proposal number eighteen regarding assurances that individual condominium unit owners would have the right to lease their units to citizens participating in assisted housing programs of public or private entities.

Referencing proposal number five, Council Member Franck said he thought that the Town already had the authority to require transportation management plans through the development review process. Mr. Horton said this was correct and the applicable corrections would be made.

Council Member Andresen encouraged Council Members to think which legislative proposals were most important to them prior to Friday’s meeting with the legislative delegation. Mayor Waldorf said this was a good idea.

Council Member Franck suggested that the Council separate its local bill requests from broader legislative requests.

COUNCIL MEMBER CAPOWSKI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO REFER COMMENTS TO THE MANAGER AND ATTORNEY. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

Item 3 Petitions

Louise Cole requested that the Council grant expedited review to a request regarding the opening of a one hundred and fifty student charter school. Council Member Franck inquired whether or not there was any reason that the Council could not approve an expedited review this evening. Mr. Horton said the staff could prepare a follow-up report to the Council for their March 3^rd meeting.

COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER ANDRESEN, TO REFER THE MATTER TO THE MANAGER.

Council Member Capowski requested that the staff’s follow-up report contain information about the estimated amount of development fees and whether these would cover the Town’s total costs for review. He also requested that the report include information about whether or not similar fee waivers were granted for East Chapel Hill High School and other schools. Council Member Capowski inquired whether or not it was correct that charter schools received $6,000 per student. Ms. Cole said charter schools received about $6,000 to $6,100 per student, which was about $750 less per student than received by Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools. Council Member Evans inquired who the proposed school would report to. Mr. Horton said staff could report back to the Council on this matter.

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

COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON, TO REFER A PETITION FROM RESIDENTS OF VILLAGE GREEN CONDOMINIUMS REGARDING ON-STREET PARKING TO THE MANAGER. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Mayor Waldorf noted that a number of citizens had signed up to address the Council this evening regarding the Horace Williams Airport facility.

Fred Black, a resident of North Haven at Ironwoods, expressed concern about the safety of the airport and its proximity to schools and neighborhoods. Mr. Black also said that the University’s recent decision to allow jets to use Horace Williams airport appeared to be the product of unilateral and secret decision making. He also expressed deep concern that the University had changed its written agreement with the Council without the Council’s knowledge. Mr. Black stated that homes in his neighborhood shook when jets were taking off from Horace Williams airport.

Mr. Black requested that the Council act to protect the interest of local residents by: (1) establishing a delegation of Council Members to meet with Chancellor Hooker about the matter, (2) requesting that the University reverse its policy regarding jet usage of the airport facility, (3) asking that the University document their analysis of stated need and analysis for jet usage as opposed to prop planes and (4) asking the Council to take steps to evaluate what tools were available and the Council’s willingness to use them to act on the matter. Mr. Black said given the seriousness of the situation, it would be strongly preferable for the Council to act on the items this evening, rather than referring the matter to staff.

Mayor Waldorf inquired about the Council’s pleasure relative to possible action this evening. Council Member Capowski suggested that the Council decide what, if any, action to take after the Council had heard from all of the petitioners.

Noting that he had owned three different homes in the Town, all impacted by the airport to varying degrees, Planning Board and Planning Panel Member Scott Radway said he wished to add his voice to the growing number of persons who felt that the University’s policy regarding jet flights needed to be reversed as soon as possible. Mr. Radway said it was very important that the Council express in the strongest terms possible that the University’s process for unilateral decision making needed to change.

David Strevel of the Chapel Hill Flying Club said he wished to address the Council about development on the Town’s north side and the problems of airport encroachment brought about by prior Council actions. He noted that at a recent open house at Horace Williams Airport, a photograph from about sixty years ago showed that the airport at that time was about two miles north of Town, in the middle of a forest-like setting. Mr. Strevel said that sixty years later, Orange County had a population of about 100,000 and an increasing need for a general aviation airport.

Mr. Strevel said that as pilots, members of the Chapel Hill Flying Club were dismayed by the number of residential developments, such as Shadowoods and Ironwoods North, which the Council had approved near the Horace Williams airport. He stated that former Councils could have chosen to surround the Horace Williams airport with non-residential buffer areas to minimize possible conflicts. Mr. Strevel also said that there was a lamentable lack of cooperation and understanding between the Council and University which had persisted for many years. Mr. Strevel concluded his remarks by requesting that the Council acknowledge its role in creating land-use conflict on the Town’s north side, and to work with the University to develop a more mature and cooperative relationship.

William Sawyer, Vice President of the Chapel Hill Flying Club, said he was a faculty member at the University. Mr. Sawyer stated that AHEC operations were not the reason for the Horace Williams airport being located in the Town. Mr. Sawyer said that Horace Williams was a general aviation, rather than commercial, facility which was established more than fifty-eight years ago.

He noted that the airport was used by many local pilots, Medical Air Operations, Children’s Flight of Hope and various others. Mr. Sawyer said that jets which had recently flown into Horace Williams airport were Cessna Citations, rather than Lear jets, which were much quieter than many propeller planes which had used Horace Williams for many years. He also stated that the airport facility did not pose a safety threat to surrounding neighborhoods, nearby schools or the community. Stating that airplane crashes almost always only involved death or injury to airplane occupants, Mr. Sawyer said that more of the Town’s school children were killed each year in auto accidents than were killed or injured in aviation-related accidents at Horace Williams. Mr. Williams said that no children had ever been hurt or injured in aviation-related accidents at Horace Williams airport.

Chris Hudson said although he lived in Charlotte, he was a Town taxpayer. Mr. Hudson also said that prior Council decisions regarding land use patterns had led to the current conflict regarding jet usage at Horace Williams airport. Mr. Hudson urged the Council to carefully weigh the benefits of the airport before potentially threatening the future use of this facility.

Mark Royster, Chairman of the Chapel Hill-Carrboro School Board, said that the Board was on record in opposition to the use of jets at Horace Williams airport. Mr. Royster stated that the Board objected to the airport being so close to schools and was also opposed to any possible expansion of the Horace Williams airport. Mr. Royster said the School Board hoped that the Council would take whatever action was necessary to have the University’s jet use policy reversed and the entire matter resolved as quickly as possible.

David Tauber, a resident of Ironwoods subdivision for five years, said the idea of allowing jets to fly into Horace Williams airport left him a bit speechless. Mr. Tauber suggested that persons wishing to use jets fly them to Raleigh-Durham (RDU) Airport and then drive in a car to the University. Mr. Tauber said that the airport without jets was a good neighbor to the Ironwoods neighborhood.

COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, FOR THE COUNCIL TO HAVE A FOLLOW-UP DISCUSSION ON THE AIRPORT AT THE COUNCIL’S MARCH 3^RD MEETING.

Council Member Andresen suggested that the Council establish a committee or task force to further discuss the matters.

THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0)

COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO BRING THE MATTER BACK ON THE COUNCIL’S MARCH 3^RD AGENDA FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION.

Council Member Andresen suggested formation of a committee or task force to discuss airport-related matters further.

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

Climmon Jefferson asked the Council to expand the scope of the proposed Piney Mountain Road sidewalk project. Mr. Jefferson said he would be pleased to engage in a conversation with applicable Town staff about linking existing sidewalks to other neighborhoods along Piney Mountain Road.

Noting that she could remember the time when Piney Mountain Road was an unpaved dirt road, Dianne Pledger said she was very disturbed by the fact that the present sidewalk project for Piney Mountain Road did not extend all the way down this roadway. Ms. Pledger requested that the Council find the necessary funds to extend a sidewalk all the way down Piney Mountain Road.

Kevin Weeks expressed concern that the practical effect of the Council’s sidewalk policy was to make islands separated by walls. Noting the importance of being able to walk safely from part of the Town to another, Mr. Weeks requested that the Council approve sidewalk projects on Estes Drive and Piney Mountain Road as soon as possible.

COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO RECEIVE AND REFER THE PETITION REGARDING PINEY MOUNTAIN ROAD SIDEWALKS TO THE MANAGER.

Council Member Franck asked whether or not any portion of the proposed sidewalk cost was being paid for by developers. Mr. Horton said there was a very limited amount of funds to pay for the Piney Mountain Road sidewalk project. He stated that the Council could authorize additional funds to build additional sidewalks along Piney Mountain Road. Mr. Horton requested that the staff’s follow-up report on the matter come back on March 24^th, rather than March 3^rd.

Council Member Wiggins asked whether or not it was correct that there was no capital money left for sidewalk projects. Mr. Horton said although funds were available, it was not possible to add to the present contract. He added that staff could present a report on sidewalk funding options to the Council on March 24. Mayor Waldorf inquired how long it would take to design a sidewalk. Mr. Horton said it would take several months to complete design work, receive bids and start work on the project.

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

Steve Wallace requested that the Council discontinue funding of the DARE program. He said that the local program was a dismal failure and a recent feature on a national television program had refuted the program’s overall effectiveness. A copy of Mr. Wallace’s remarks are on file in the Town Clerk’s Office.

COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PAVAO, TO RECEIVE AND REFER MR. WALLACE’S PETITION TO THE MANAGER. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Trish Hussey, Executive Director of Freedom House, requested that the Council provide expedited review for an application regarding a proposed addition to the existing Freedom House

facility on Airport Road.

Chris Moran, Executive Director of the Interfaith Council, said that the Interfaith Council supported Freedom House’s petition as a means of providing additional transitional housing opportunities in the local community.

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

COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCK, THAT TWO ITEMS, ONE REGARDING FUNDING OF THE TRANSIT 2001 PROGRAM AND THE OTHER REGARDING POSSIBLE CHANGES TO EXISTING ANNEXATION LAWS, BE ADDED TO THIS EVENING’S CONSENT AGENDA. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Council Member Capowski requested that staff prepare a report on the possibility of providing a minor skateboarding facility on Eubanks Road or elsewhere in the community. Council Member Wiggins requested that possible involvement with the University be investigated. Mr. Horton said staff would report back to the Council on both items.

Council Member Andresen inquired about the status of the report on University planning matters. Council Member Capowski said that this report would be completed in the near future.

Item 4.1a Consent Agenda

Council Member Franck requested removal of item d from the consent agenda.

Noting that the first meeting of the Downtown Small Area Plan Work Group was scheduled for March 25^th, Council Member Evans suggested that the Council conclude its appointments to the Work Group this evening.

COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCK, TO ADOPT THE CONSENT AGENDA, EXCEPTING ITEM D. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

A RESOLUTION ADOPTING VARIOUS RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES

(97-2-24/R-2)

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

a. Minutes of January 18, 21 and 29.

b. Changing secretarial position in the Solid Waste Department from part-time to full-time (from 30 hours to 37.5 hours) (O-1).

c. Authorizing contract for Lincoln gymnasium restroom project (R-3, O-2).

d. Corrected resolution regarding submittal of detailed site analyses for certain new developments (R-4).

e. Setting dates for a joint meeting with the Planning Board and a follow-up planning session (R-5).

f. Appointments to Downtown Small Area Plan Work Group.

g. A resolution regarding the Transit 2001 Commission’s Recommendations (R-5.1).

h. Proposed changes he annexation laws (R-5.2).

This the 24th day of February, 1997.

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE POSITION CLASSIFICATION AND PAY PLAN dated October 1, 1996 (96-2-24/O-1)

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

Section I

That the Council hereby amends the "Ordinance Establishing a Position Classification and Pay Plan and Longevity Plan for Employees of the Town of Chapel Hill and Bonds of Officials beginning October 1, 1996 (96-6-10/0-6)" as follows:

In Section IV, part C, in the Solid Waste Management (Operations) Department DELETE the line

Full-time Part-time Grade No.

# hrs. # hrs.

Secretary I - - 1 30 13

and ADD the line

Secretary I 1 37.5 - - 13

This the 24th day of February, 1997.

A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING THE CONTRACTS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF LINCOLN GYMNASIUM RESTROOMS PROJECT

(97-2-24/R-3a)

WHEREAS, the Town of Chapel Hill has solicited formal bids by legal notices in The Chapel Hill News on January 3, 1997 and the Challenger News on January 2, 1997 in accordance with General Statute 143-128 for construction of Lincoln Gym Restrooms; and

WHEREAS, the following bids were received and opened on February 4, 1997:

VENDOR BID

Capital Building Company $126,000

Raleigh, N. C.

Force Construction Company $129,402

Durham, N. C.

Harrod & Associates, Constructors, Inc. $157,500

Raleigh, N. C.

Keck Company, Inc. $129,000

Burlington, N. C.

Patriot Building company $149,500

Hillsborough, N. C.

Trout & Riggs Construction Company $130,000

Durham, N. C.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council accepts the bid and awards a contract to Capital Building Company in the amount of $126,000, for the construction of the Lincoln Gymnasium restrooms.

This the 24th day of February, 1997.

AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CAPITAL PROJECTS ORDINANCE FOR PARKS AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES (97-2-24/O-2)

BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that, pursuant to Section 13.2 of Chapter 159 of the General Statutes of North Carolina, that the capital projects ordinance established for Parks and Recreational Facilities in 1986 and amended in 1989 is hereby amended as follows:

SECTION I

The capital project, as authorized by bond referenda approved in November 1986 and November 1989, includes the capital costs of providing parks and recreational facilities within and without the corporate limits of the Town, including the acquisition and development of land for community and neighborhood parks, entranceways, greenways, and open spaces.

SECTION II

The Manager of the Town of Chapel Hill is hereby directed to proceed with the implementation of the project within the terms of the bond authorization, and within the funds appropriated herein.

SECTION III

Revenues anticipated to be available to the Town to complete the project are amended as follows:

Current Budget Revised Budget

Bond Proceeds $7,500,000 $7,500,000

State Grant 240,000 240,000

Interest on Bond Proceeds 169,000 235,000

Transfer from General Fund 106,000 106,000

Total $8,015,000 $8,081,000

SECTION IV

Amounts appropriated for the project are amended as follows:

Current Budget Revised Budget

Parks and Recreational $8,015,000 $8,081,000

Facilities (including

open space)

SECTION V

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

SECTION VI

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

This the 24^th day of February, 1997.

A RESOLUTION SETTING DATES FOR A JOINT MEETING WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND A FOLLOW-UP PLANNING SESSION (97-2-24/R-5)

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council will meet jointly with the Planning Board from 5:30 to 7 p.m. on March 4^th in the Council Chamber, and will meet on March 14^th from 2 to 5 p.m. in the Library Meeting Room as a follow-up to the January 18^th planning session.

This the 24^th day of February, 1997.

A RESOLUTION REGARDING THE TRANSIT 2001 COMMISSION’S RECOMMENDATIONS (97-2-24/R-5.1)

BE IT RESOLVED that the Chapel Hill Town Council supports the recommendations of Governor Hunt’s Transit 2001 Commission regarding State funding for mass transportation.

The Chapel Hill Town Council further supports the Transit 2001 Commission’s recommendation that a menu of options be granted for local government transit funding approaches including: rental vehicle gross receipts tax, vehicle registration surcharge, parking tax, local option sales tax and land transfer fees to allow flexibility to local governments in choosing options.

This the 24th day of February, 1997.

A RESOLUTION REGARDING PROPOSED CHANGES TO ANNEXATION LAWS (97-2-24/R-5.2)

WHEREAS, current annexation laws provide for fair and just treatment of areas that have become urban and need the urban services offered by cities and towns; and

WHEREAS, annexation of urban areas is fair and just because the areas outside of a city or town benefit directly or indirectly from town services; and

WHEREAS, people who live just outside a city’s limits benefit from the street maintenance, police protection, fire protection, sanitation and other city services when they work and shop in the city; and

WHEREAS, the presence of a city and its services tends to increase the value of land immediately outside the city; and

WHEREAS, if future annexation is prevented or discouraged, the result will be situations where two citizens are in essentially identical circumstances on opposite sides of a street but one will be in the city and will pay taxes for services while the other citizen will be outside the city and not pay taxes for city services that provide direct and indirect benefits; and

WHEREAS, this inequity will occur because current annexation law encourages use of streets as annexation boundaries;

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Council requests that the legislative delegation oppose several bills as discussed below that would effectively prevent annexation or make it inequitable to current city residents.

House Bill 124, which would require approval of annexation in a referendum of voters in the annexation area.

House Bill 92, which would require unconditional extension of water and sewer lines to annexation areas at the cost of taxpayers in the overall city although Chapel Hill and many other cities have provided limited subsidy of very few residential sewer lines in current city limits, and no subsidy to the vast majority of subdivisions. Current law fairly allows a city to serve annexation areas on the same basis as the rest of the city.

House Bill 94, which would in part limit annexations across county lines. This bill would appear to undermine annexation boundary agreements such as the one between Chapel Hill and the City of Durham which 10 years ago defined an annexation boundary allowing some limited and logical annexations by Chapel Hill in Durham County.

This the 24^th day of February, 1997.

Council Member Franck said he would vote against item d (Resolution 4) on the consent agenda.

COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER ANDRESEN, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 4. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED BY A VOTE OF 8-1, WITH COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCK VOTING NO.

A RESOLUTION CORRECTING 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 (97-2-24/R-4)

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 has 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 by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council 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 24^th day of February, 1997.

Item 4.2 Information Reports

Council Member Andresen requested removal of items 4.2d and e for discussion.

Mayor Waldorf suggested that item f be referred to the Public Access Advisory Committee. There was Council concurrence on this point.

Pine Knolls Program

George Tate, Jr. said that at one time the Johnson and Creel Street area was a very undesirable area to live in. He stated that citizens, including Ted Parrish, had worked together to improve the neighborhood’s quality of life. Mr. Tate said he stood firmly behind the efforts of the Pine Knolls Neighborhood Association.

Ted Parrish thanked the Council for providing the fiscal and staff resources necessary to assist with cleaning up a formerly troubled neighborhood. He requested the Council’s continued support of the program. A copy of Mr. Parrish’s remarks are on file in the Town Clerk’s Office.

Kevin Cook expressed appreciation to staff in the Planning Department for their many hours of assistance relative to the Pine Knolls Community Housing Program. Mr. Cook requested the Council’s continued support of efforts to provide affordable housing in the Knolls community.

Harvey Reid said he believed that the program audit had contributed positive aspects to the Knolls program. Mr. Reid also said it was very important to make stronger efforts to qualify eligible homebuyers for refurbished homes in the Knolls community. He stated that the program was a good one which might require support staff in the future and might possibly be used as an example of a successful program model in other parts of the country.

Stating that she lived in one of the homes refurbished by the Knolls Development Association, Constance Adu requested that the Council continue to withhold Town funding for the program.

Stating that her home had a hole in the roof and insufficient insulation, Ms. Adu said she had attempted to resolve these concerns with Mr. Parrish and Mr. Horton. Ms. Adu stated that an attorney she had spoken to about this matter suggested that she address the Council this evening about her concerns. Ms. Adu said that she was asking to be treated fairly in this matter.

Margaret Cheek expressed a number of concerns about the Knolls Development Association, including the absence of a fully functioning board, missing documents, the suppression of information, unauthorized evictions and audit details worked out by a few members of the association, rather than a participatory process. Ms. Cheek requested the Council’s assistance in securing fair and equitable treatment for all residents of the Knolls community.

Expressing her support of the remarks of the two previous speakers, Marian Brooks suggested that a special audit of the Knolls program be done as soon as practical. Ms. Brooks said she hoped that the Council could handle this matter in the near future.

Item 5 Proposed Joint Meeting with Chatham County Commissioners

Council Member Andresen said in addition to transportation concerns, she thought it would be interesting to get the County Commissioners thoughts about water and sewer service issues relative to proposed developments in Chatham County.

Council Member Capowski asked whether or not the County Commissioners would receive a copy of the proposed agenda prior to the meeting. Mayor Waldorf said this was correct. Council Member Capowski said he wanted to hear the desires and needs of the Chatham County Commissioners relative to water and sewer and other development-related matters. Mayor Waldorf said she would be glad to convey this to the Commissioners via their Board Chairperson.

Council Member Evans said she would have to have the strongest confrontational issue on the first joint meeting agenda with the Chatham County Commissioners. She also expressed hope that the Council could listen to the issues which the County Commissioners wished to convey.

COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PAVAO, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 6. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

A RESOLUTION SCHEDULING A JOINT MEETING (97-2-24/R-6)

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council will meet with the Board of Commissioners of Chatham County at 6 p.m. on March 13, 1997, in the Chapel Hill Public Library, 100 Library Drive.

This the 24^th day of February, 1997.

Item 4.2d Curtis Road Traffic Count

Margaret Sachs said that fifteen percent of 3,500 vehicles recently monitored on Curtis and Lakeshore Drives were speeding. Ms. Sachs stated that traffic patrol units were unable to keep up with speeding vehicles on these roadways. She requested that the Council reduce speeding in this area by installing stop signs in the area.

COUNCIL MEMBER ANDRESEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN, TO REFER THE MATTER BACK TO STAFF FOR DEVELOPMENT OF ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC CALMING OPTIONS.

Council Member Andresen noted that traffic calming options had recently been approved by the Council for a section of North Lakeshore Drive. Council Member Franck said this was a significant distance from this area. Council Member Andresen said this area was about a quarter of a mile away. Stating that the Engineering Department had looked into traffic calming measures in this area, Mr. Horton said staff did not recommend such measures due to the area’s topography. He stated that the best resolution might be to install stop signs. Council Member Brown suggested that staff could bring a resolution recommending installation of stop signs at the next business meeting. Mr. Horton said the Council could vote on stop signs this evening if they wished to do so.

Council Member Andresen withdrew her motion. Council Member Andresen said she would like staff to bring back ideas about traffic calming options in the future. Council Member Brown requested that the staff’s follow-up options package include stop signs as one possibility. Council Member Franck said he would more comfortable acting on this matter at another meeting.

Council Member Brown inquired why staff was recommending that the Whitfield property matter be referred to advisory boards and commissions. Noting that a petition had been received from Henry Whitfield, Mr. Horton said staff felt that advisory boards might wish to discuss the matter.

COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCK, TO REFER THE MATTER TO STAFF. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Item 8 Town Center Development Ordinance Text Amendment

COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PAVAO, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 4A. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

TOWN CENTER DOTA RF, LP (O-4A) (9-0).

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CHAPEL HILL DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE REGARDING CONDITIONAL USE ZONING DISTRICTS (97-2-24/O-4a)

WHEREAS, the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill has considered the proposed amendment to the Chapel Hill Development Ordinance adjusting the conditional use district provisions, and finds that the amendments are appropriate due to changed or changing conditions in a particular area or in the jurisdiction generally and achieve the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED as follows:

SECTION I

AMEND Subsection 3.1.11 of the Chapel Hill Development Ordinance to read as follows:

3.1.11 Conditional Use Districts

For the TC-2, TC-1, CC, NC, OI-2, OI-1, I, R-6, ~~and~~ R-5, R-4, R-3, R-2, R-2A, R-1, R-1A, R-LD1, and R-LD5 districts herein above described, there are hereby established parallel conditional use districts designated TC-2-C, TC-1-C, CC-C, NC-C, OI-2-C, OI-1-C, I-C, R-6-C, ~~and~~ R-5-C, R-4-C, R-3-C, R-2-C, R-2A-C, R-1-C, R-1A-C, R-LD1-C, and R-LD5-C pursuant to North Carolina General Statutes Section 160A-382. Under each conditional use district, all uses allowed as a permitted use or special use by Section 12.3 of this ordinance, Schedule of Use Regulations, for the parallel general use district are permitted only upon issuance of a Special Use Permit by the Council pursuant to Article 18 of this Ordinance.

SECTION II

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

SECTION III

That these amendments shall become effective upon adoption.

This the 10th day of February, 1997.

Council Member Franck suggested deferring the work plan matter until after the Council’s retreat follow-up meeting on March 14^th.

Council Member Andresen noted that she would be bringing an agenda item regarding the Resource Conservation District at the March 3^rd meeting.

Council Member Evans requested that her memorandum of January 23^rd regarding improvements to the Town’s appearance be included in materials relative to the proposed Council work plan.

Mayor Waldorf noted that there was Council concurrence to wait for adoption of the work plan.

Item 9 Triangle Transit Authority Status Report

Mayor Waldorf noted that the Council’s Triangle Transit Authority representative, Dr. Rachel Willis, had recently received the William Friday award for Inspirational Teaching.

Ms. Willis presented an overview of the services currently being offered by the Triangle Transit Authority, including regional bus service, buspooling and vanpooling. She also noted that the Authority was doing a tremendous amount of regional planning, especially relative to a light rail system sometime in the future. Ms. Willis noted that the State Division of Environment, Health and Natural Resources had recently awarded a grant to the Authority for the extension of its vanpooling program.

Triangle Transit Authority Executive Director Jim Ritchey said the authority had recently issued a brochure regarding its plans for a regional transit system, linking together the communities in the Research Triangle area. He noted that work was underway on a major investment study regarding the proposed regional plan. Mr. Ritchey also stated that a preliminary engineering study about railroad service had also been completed. Mr. Ritchey said that of the approximately $60 million in federal transit taxes collected each year in the Triangle, only about $6 million of these funds were returned to the Triangle for transit projects. Mr. Ritchey said he hoped that the Triangle would fare substantially better in the upcoming round of “ISTEA” hearings relative to funding of local transit projects.

Congratulating the Triangle Transit Authority on their success to date with programs, Council Member Capowski noted that the Council’s number one priority in terms of transit was Chapel Hill Transit. He requested the Authority’s assistance in securing as much funding as possible for the continued operation of the Chapel Hill Transit System. Ms. Willis said she thought of Triangle Transit Authority operations as a complement to Chapel Hill Transit service in getting citizens in and out of the Town. She stated that the Town was getting a really good return of service from the Triangle Transit Authority relative to the amount of funding contributed by the Town. Noting his agreement that the Triangle Transit Authority’s service complemented the Town’s service, Council Member Capowski said he was concerned that the TTA represented competition with Chapel Hill Transit for scarce dollars. Stating that all local transit systems were in the same boat, Ms. Willis urged the local entities work cooperatively in securing funding for their operations. Council Member Franck suggested that Durham, Chapel Hill and the Triangle Transit Authority ask the legislature to provide a bigger pie relative to transit funding. He also complimented Mr. Ritchey and the Triangle Transit Authority for putting more buses on the road to and from the Research Triangle Park on a daily basis. Mr. Ritchey noted that the Triangle Transit Authority had made a lot of progress in this regard.

Item 10 Status Report of the Orange County Economic Development Commission

Orange County Economic Development Director Ted Abernathy noted that the unemployment rate in Orange County was very low. He presented a brief overview of the Commission’s programs including loans for small businesses, the Businesswomen’s Roundtable, the Orange County Arts Commission and the Shop Orange First program. Mayor Waldorf applauded the Commission for having a very ambitious agenda.

Council Member Wiggins inquired about the response from the business community about assisting people in getting off welfare programs. Mr. Abernathy said that the Commission was in the process of asking various social service agencies what they wanted in the way of pledges relative to jobs. Mr. Abernathy also said he thought that the business community would come through very strongly in this regard.

Noting that she had attended the Economic Development Commission’s annual breakfast in November, Council Member Wiggins said she was committed to finding comparable prices and shopping in Orange County. Mr. Abernathy stated that a lot of stores in Orange County would appreciate having people shop locally, rather than in other counties.

Item 11 Proposed Estates Development

COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Planning Director Roger Waldon presented a brief overview of the applicant’s proposal and a brief review of the resolutions before the Council this evening.

Lee Ann Neese, the applicant’s representative, expressed the applicant’s objection to the reopening of the public hearing this evening, stating that there was no additional evidence presented in the staff’s memorandum to the Council. She also expressed the applicant’s objection to the repetition of some items in the staff’s memorandum to the Council.

Applicant’s representative Jack Smyre said that the applicant was willing to either enlarge the proposed recreation area or make a payment in lieu for recreation space.

Mayor Waldorf inquired whether or not the Council had any questions for Mr. Smyre. There were no Council questions for Mr. Smyre.

Mindy Gellin, a resident of Butternut Drive, said she opposed the applicant’s statement that only residents of Silver Cedar Lane were opposed to the proposed Estates development. Ms. Gellin expressed particular concern about traffic safety concerns at the Montessori School on Weaver Dairy Road. She stated that there were near collisions just about daily on or near this site. Ms. Gellin said the Council was entrusted to keeping this site safe.

Noting that he preferred Resolution A-2 over Resolution A-1, James Manning requested the Council’s adoption of Resolution B, denying the applicant’s proposal.

Bob Ward encouraged the Council to think of the needs of neighborhood residents when making their decision on the applicant’s development application.

Jesse Eversol requested that the Council postpone its decision on the Estates’ application, pending receipt of information regarding stormwater impacts and traffic mitigation strategies.

Sue Sweezy stated that Ms. Neese’s letter to the Council had not been confined to changes in the applicant’s proposal. Ms. Sweezy said she feared that the apartments proposed by the applicant would lower property values in the existing Timberlyne neighborhood. Stating that homes in the Coker Woods development near new apartments sold for an average of $23,000 less than comparable homes, Ms. Sweezy said this magnified the concerns of neighborhood residents. Ms. Sweezy also said that Mr. Heffner’s letter to Ms. Neese regarding property values minimized the negative potential of apartments on adjoining property values.

Don Sweezy said that Town residents did not need to expect the value of their homes to fall when the conditions of a special use permit were met. He stated that the special use permit process was in place to protect property owners in the Town. Mr. Sweezy also said that approving the proposed development would weaken the Town’s ability to manage growth. He stated that the Council was charged with ensuring that proposed projects met existing development standards.

Pat Cabarga expressed concern that a breech in a dam at the Windsor Park site had recently been deepened. Ms. Cabarga said that Orange County erosion control staff had indicated that silt fencing should have been put into place prior to clearcutting of the site. Ms. Cabarga also expressed concern about the potential for mud from the proposed Estates development to encroach on to her property in the future.

Norm Rosen, President of the Timberlyne Neighborhood Association Board of Directors, clarified that the Council had received two separate letters, one from area residents and one from the Neighborhood Association Board, at their places this evening.

Referencing Ms. Neese’s letter of February 14^th, Council Member Franck requested a clarification of the standing of the Town’s design manual standards. Noting that the Council had authorized Town staff to update the Design Manual, Planning Director Roger Waldon said there were two different drafts of the Design Manual which contained the same language.

Council Member Evans inquired when it would be appropriate to inquire about the applicant’s willingness to provide additional recreation amenities such as a secured tot lot and a concrete basketball court. Mr. Karpinos said if Council Member Evans were inquiring about the applicant’s willingness to provide such amenities, it was appropriate to bring these questions up during the public hearing. Council Member Evans inquired whether or not the Council was interested in asking the applicant to provide a picnic and play area, possibly including a paved basketball court and a secured children’s play area. Mayor Waldorf noted that there did not appear to be any other Council Members who supported this proposal.

Jack Smyre said it was incorrect that there had been a shift in density into the R-5 portion of the proposed project. He stated that the only shift in density had involved shifting the proposed location of the multi-family portion of the project on land zoned R-3.

COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER ANDRESEN, TO ADJOURN THE PUBLIC HEARING. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

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

Council Member Franck expressed concern about whether or not there was competent evidence regarding property values relative to the proposed development. Council Member Chilton said this was a critical issue with a great deal of evidence being offered on both sides of the issue. Council Member Chilton said he believed that the language offered in this regard was fine. Stating that the Council had heard opinions on both sides of the matter, Council Member Andresen said it was necessary to get a reflection of the entire Council on the matter.

Council Member Capowski inquired whether Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos had reviewed the proposed Resolution B. Mr. Karpinos said he had reviewed the proposed resolution. Council Member Capowski said he would support Resolution B as presented.

Council Member Andresen said potential effects on property values and the safety of neighborhood children were both legitimate concerns. Council Member Andresen said she did not feel that the applicant had sufficiently addressed the matters of increased traffic volume and related safety concerns. Stating that the proposed development would involve moving a lot of earth, Council Member Andresen said she also had significant concerns about stormwater on the proposed site.

Council Member Capowski said he was not convinced by Mr. Heffner’s arguments about property values. Council Member Capowski also said that he shared Council Member Andresen’s and Ms. Cabarga’s concerns about possible erosion control problems on the Windsor Park development site. He requested that if there were problems with the Windsor Park erosion controls, something needed to be done to correct these problems as soon as possible. Also expressing concern about the safety of children along Kingston Drive, Council Member Capowski said he would support the adoption of Resolution B.

Expressing disappointment that the developer and neighborhood residents were unable to come closer together to address their concerns, Council Member Wiggins said she would support the adoption of Resolution B.

Stating that he had reviewed expert testimony on both sides of the matter of property values,

Council Member Chilton said he had concluded that the proposed project would not maintain or enhance the values of contiguous properties. He said that the proposed development failed to meet existing Town standards regarding the safety of pedestrians on Kingston Drive. Council Member Chilton also said that neither the proposed internal or external circulation pattern for the proposed project met Town development regulations. Council Member Chilton said he would support the adoption of Resolution B.

Referencing the reasons for disapproval put forth by staff in Resolution B, Council Member

Brown said she would support this resolution.

Council Member Evans said she would vote against Resolution B. She stated that the applicant had made many accommodations for the Timberlyne neighborhood, including the provision of emergency access, extra recreation space, sidewalks, reducing traffic on Kingston Drive and arranging for a median cut at NC 86 and Westminster Drive. Stating that it was appropriate for higher density development to be located near service areas, Council Member Evans said it was very difficult to meet everyone’s needs. Council Member Evans said she would vote against the proposed resolution.

Stating that his Council colleagues had made some very good points, Council Member Pavao said he felt that the developer had done quite a bit to compromise in a currently undeveloped area. Noting that the developer had attempted to meet most stipulations put forth by the Council and area residents, Council Member Pavao said he would not support Resolution B.

Stating that this area would be developed someday, possibly multifamily housing, Council Member Andresen said she did not want to be painted into a corner. She stated that the proposed Estates development did not meet findings necessary to approve a special use permit.

Council Member Franck said it was not a matter of whether the applicant had tried to do this or that, but the fact that the proposed development did not meet standards in the Development Ordinance.

Mayor Waldorf said she would support Resolution B as well. She also stated that master plans were better than trying to do things at the tail end of a process.

RESOLUTION B WAS ADOPTED BY A VOTE OF 7-2, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS EVANS AND PAVAO VOTING NO.

A RESOLUTION DENYING APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR THE ESTATES PLANNED DEVELOPMENT - HOUSING (SUP 24-25C) (97-2-24/R-9b)

WHEREAS, an application has been submitted for approval of a Special Use Permit for the Estates Planned Development; and

WHEREAS, according to Sec. 18.4.6 of the Chapel Hill Development Ordinance, ‘The applicant shall bear the burden of presenting evidence sufficient to establish persuasively that the proposed development will comply with the determinations required in Sec. 18.3;”

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that it finds that the Special Use Permit application proposed by Mr. Kelly Dunbar, on property identified as Chapel Hill Township Tax Map 24, Lot 25C and Tax Map 24M, Lots 1-142, if developed according to the site plan dated August 8, 1995 (revised May 2, 1996), would not:

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

2. Comply with all required regulations and standards of the Development Ordinance, including all applicable provisions of Articles 12, 13, 14 and 18, and with all other applicable regulations;

3. Be located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property, or be a use or development that is a public necessity; and

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

The reasons are as follows:

1. There is competent, material, and substantial evidence indicating that the proposed development would negatively affect nearby property values, therefore the Town Council fails to find that the proposed development is located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property (Sec. 18.3 of Development Ordinance).

2. There is competent, material, and substantial evidence that the proposed development would not conform with the general plans for the physical development of the Town as embodied in the Development Ordinance and in the Comprehensive Plan (Sec. 18.3 of Development Ordinance). Specifically:

· External Circulation: The proposal is not “designed to encourage smooth traffic flow with minimum hazards to pedestrian, bicycle, and other vehicle traffic. The proposal is not “arranged as to facilitate the future utilization or accommodation of public transportation.” The proposal does not include “accommodations for safe intersections of bicycle and/or pedestrian routes with adjacent vehicular routes.” (Sec. 14.5.1 of Development Ordinance).

· Internal Circulation: The proposal is not “designed so as to facilitate the movement of persons, goods, services, and waste products in a safe and efficient manner, with maximum pedestrian orientation and a minimum of impermeable surface.” (Sec. 14.5.2 of Development Ordinance).

· Stormwater Management: There is insufficient competent, material, and substantial evidence to allow a determination that the proposed development would be “designed, constructed, and maintained so as to 1) provide for natural infiltration of storm water; 2) control velocity of run-off flows; 3) extend the time of concentration of storm water run-off; and 4) to collect and transmit excess storm water flows into either the Town drainage system or into a natural drainage system (Section 14.7 of Development Ordinance).

· General Standards: The proposal is not designed such that roadways, bikeways, and pedestrian ways shall connect where necessary to permit the convenient and safe movement of traffic (1982 Design Manual, Section 3B; 1993 Design Manual, Section 2B).

· Roadways: The proposed development would be inconsistent with the following policy statement, included in Chapel Hill’s Comprehensive Plan: “In newly developing residential and commercial areas, the Town shall encourage a local roads network that promotes a sense of Town-wide community, mobility within and between neighborhoods and provides at least two points of access to all new neighborhoods. The local street systems should maintain multiple routes for tripmaking, and avoid the construction of long cul-de-sacs.” (1989 “Goals, Objectives, and Policies,” p. 16).

· Roadways: When new development is adjacent to existing residential areas, the Town shall allow connections of local streets if there will be no significant increase in traffic on the local streets.” (1989 “Goals, Objectives, and Policies,” p. 16).

3. There is competent, material, and substantial evidence that the proposed development would pose risks to the public health, safety, and general welfare in the following ways:

· Traffic: Evidence was presented indicating increased levels of traffic congestion that would be caused by this proposed development.

· Pedestrian Safety: Evidence was presented indicating unsafe conditions for pedestrians along Kingston Drive, which would be exacerbated by this proposed development.

· Stormwater Runoff: Evidence was presented indicating potential problems associated with increased stormwater runoff that would result from this proposed development, with no accompanying detailed information about how the potential problem could be mitigated.

Therefore the Council fails to find that the proposed development is located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or promote the public health, safety, and general welfare (Sec. 18.3 of Development Ordinance).

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby denies the application for a Special Use Permit for The Estates Planned Development - Housing.

This the 24th day of February, 1997.

Noting that the OWASA Board and staff were continuing discussions regarding Cane Creek, Council Member Andresen suggested that the Council could discuss this matter at a Council meeting sometime in the future.

Item 15 Bids for Hargraves Gymnasium Project

Stating that the proposed facility was greatly needed in the community, Mr. Horton said he was recommending that the Council allocate additional funding for this project.

R.D. Smith expressed concern that speeding motorists were apparent throughout the Town and that security at the Eubanks Road park and ride lot was inadequate. Mr. Smith urged the Council to adopt Resolution A. He also said he hoped it would not be necessary to use any of the project contingency fund of $130,000.

Ed Caldwell urged the Council to adopt the Manager’s recommendation of Resolution A.

Elaine Norwood urged the Council to adopt Resolution A, rather than cutting back on the proposed project by taking out air conditioning, restrooms and conference rooms. Ms. Norwood said it was very important to provide recreational opportunities for the community’s children.

Mary Norwood Jones said she resided across the street from the site of the proposed gymnasium. Ms. Norwood Jones stated that the facility would enhance the entire community. She expressed hope that the project could be completed as soon as possible.

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

Council Member Andresen inquired whether or not the November, 1996 bond issue had specified that a portion of parks and recreation bond funds might be expended on this project. Mr. Horton said this was correct. He noted that the second possible use of funds would be for the Northern Community Park project. Council Member Brown asked whether or not contingency funds were necessary. Mr. Horton said it was a good idea to have these funds available for any unanticipated problems which might arise during the construction of the project.

Council Member Capowski asked whether or not the Town was obliged to accept the lowest bid for this and other projects. Mr. Horton said the Town was required to go with the lowest responsive bidder. Mr. Karpinos noted that contractor references were checked. Noting that he was recommending that funds be earmarked for attorney’s fees and construction management of several projects, Mr. Horton said he believed that these two things would make a substantial difference relative to the Hargraves Gymnasium and other proposed Town construction projects.

Noting that he was a student at North Carolina Central University, Council Member Chilton said the quality of buildings on that campus were not nearly as good as the quality of buildings on the University of North Carolina’s campus. He expressed hope that the completed Hargraves Gymnasium facility would have a positive impact on its surrounding community.

Council Member Pavao said although it pained him to take $500,000 or so away from the Northern Community Park project, it was very important to use these funds to make sure that it was possible to construct a high quality Hargraves Gymnasium facility. Council Member Evans expressed her concurrence with Council Member Pavao’s remarks.

RESOLUTION 10A WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING THE CONTRACTS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF HARGRAVES GYMNASIUM (97-2-24/R-10a)

WHEREAS, the Town of Chapel Hill has solicited formal bids by advertisement in The Chapel Hill News on November 22, 1996 and December 20, 1996, and the Challenger Newspaper on November 28, 1997 and in accordance with G.S. 143-128 for the construction work; and

WHEREAS, the following bids were received and opened on January 7, 1997:

SINGLE PRIME CONTRACT FOR ENTIRE PROJECT

CONTRACTOR BID AMOUNT

Patriot Building, Inc. $1,319,500

MULTIPLE PRIME CONTRACTS

GENERAL CONTRACTORS BID AMOUNT

J. C. Edwards $1,296,909

Engineered Construction Co. $1,059,889

Patriot Building, Inc. $1,084,500

ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS

Electrical Maintenance & Service Co. $99,520

Mark Henderson, Inc. $86,600

Watson Electrical Construction Co. $99,500

HVAC CONTRACTORS

Comfort Engineers, Inc. $74,048

Cooper Oil Company, Inc. $80,000

Southern Piping Company, Inc. $65,578

Southeastern Mechanical $60,000

PLUMBING CONTRACTORS

Acme Plumbing & Heating $109,320

Brown Brothers Plumbing & Heating $105,199

Cam-Ful Industries, Inc. $134,348

Eakins Plumbing Co. $89,983

Southeastern Mechanical $118,753

Sparrow & Sons $101,935

WHEREAS, Eakins Plumbing Co., the initial low bidder for the plumbing contract declined to extend their bid price beyond the February 7, 1997 deadline;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Town accepts the bids and awards contracts to Engineered Construction Company, General Contract ($1,059,889); Mark Henderson, Inc., Electrical Contract ($86,600); Southeastern Mechanical, HVAC Contract ($60,000); and Sparrow & Sons, Plumbing Contract ($101,935) for a total amount of $1,308,424, for the construction of the Hargraves Gymnasium.

This the 24^th day of February, 1997.

COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER CAPOWSKI, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 5. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CAPITAL PROJECTS ORDINANCE FOR PARKS AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES (97-2-24/O-5)

BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Chapel hill that, pursuant to Section 13.2 of Chapter 159 of the General Statutes of North Carolina, that the capital projects ordinance established for Parks and Recreational Facilities in 1986 and amended in 1989 is hereby amended as follows:

SECTION I

SECTION II

The Manager of the Town of Chapel Hill is hereby directed to proceed with the implementation of the project within the terms of the bond authorization, and within the funds appropriated herein.

SECTION III

Revenues anticipated to be available to the Town to complete the project are amended as follows:

Current Budget Revised Budget

Bond Proceeds $7,500,000 $7,500,000

Orange County Grant 0 100,000

State Grant 240,000 240,000

Interest on Bond Proceeds 235,000 295,000

Transfer from General Fund 106,000 106,000

Total $8,081,000 $8,241,000

SECTION IV

Amounts appropriated for the project are amended as follows:

Current Budget Revised Budget

Parks and Recreational $8,081,000 $8,241,000

Facilities (including

open space)

SECTION V

SECTION VI

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

This the 24^th day of February, 1997.

COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 6. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

AN ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH A CAPITAL PROJECTS ORDINANCE FOR PARKS AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES FOR 1996 PARKS AND RECREATION BOND PROJECTS (97-2-24/O-6)

BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Chapel hill that, pursuant to Section 13.2 of Chapter 159 of the General Statutes of North Carolina, that the capital projects ordinance is hereby established for Parks and Recreational Facilities to be constructed from Parks bonds approved by the voters in November, 1996:

SECTION I

The capital project, as authorized by bond referenda approved in November 1996, includes the capital costs of providing parks and recreational facilities within and without the corporate limits of the Town, including the acquisition and development of land for community and neighborhood parks and park facilities, entranceways and greenways.

SECTION II

The Manager of the Town of Chapel Hill is hereby directed to proceed with the implementation of the project within the terms of the bond authorization, and within the funds appropriated herein.

SECTION III

Revenues anticipated to be available to the Town to complete the project are as follows:

Bond Proceeds $5,000,000

SECTION IV

Amounts appropriated for the project is established as follows:

Parks and Recreational Facilities $5,000,000

SECTION V

SECTION VI

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

This the 24^th day of February, 1997.

COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 11.

Stating that Town residents paid approximately forty-six percent of Orange County’s total taxes, Council Member Capowski urged the Council to carefully consider their request to the County Commissioners requesting allocation of $750,000 for a gymnasium facility in the Southern Village area.

Requesting additional background information from staff, Council Member Brown said she would rather not vote on the matter this evening. Council Member Franck said as a County taxpayer he was not that he wanted to go along with the proposal.

COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON WITHDREW HIS MOTION AS BEING OUT OF ORDER.

COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. THE MOTION PASSED BY A VOTE OF 8-1, WITH COUNCIL MEMBER ANDRESEN VOTING NO.

The meeting stood adjourned at 10:53 p.m.