SUMMARY MINUTES OF A REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING
OF THE CHAPEL HILL TOWN COUNCIL,
ON MONDAY, DECEMBER 7, 1998 AT
7:00 P.M.
Mayor Rosemary Waldorf called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
Council Members in attendance were Flicka Bateman, Joyce Brown, Joe Capowski, Pat Evans, Kevin Foy, Julie McClintock, and Edith Wiggins. Council Member Lee Pavăo was absent, excused. Also in attendance were Town Manager Cal Horton, Assistant Town Manager Florentine Miller, Planning Director Roger Waldon, Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos, Assistant to the Manager Ruffin Hall, Transportation Planner David Bonk, Engineering Director George Small, Library Director Kathy Thompson, Long Range Planning Coordinator Chris Berndt, Development Coordinator J.B. Culpepper, Solid Waste Administrator Gayle Wilson, Community Development Coordinator Loryn Barnes, Police Chief Ralph Pendergraph, Crime Prevention Officer Jeff Clark, and Interim Town Clerk Joyce Smith.
Item 1 – Presentation of Resolution Commending
the Chapel Hill/Orange County TRIAD and its President, Art Englebardt,
for Outstanding Achievement in Crime Prevention
Mayor Waldorf stated that on October 21, 1998 the Chapel Hill/Orange County TRIAD received an award for Outstanding Achievement in Crime Prevention for the TRIAD Category for 1997-1998. She noted that the award was presented to Mr. Art Englebardt, president of the Chapel Hill/Orange County TRIAD, by Governor Jim Hunt, Secretary of Crime Control and Public Safety Richard Moore, and Director of the Division of Crime Prevention Anthony Queen. Mayor Waldorf discussed the background of TRIAD, which is a joint program of the American Association of Retired Persons, the National Sheriff’s Association, and the National Association of Chiefs of Police. She also said that the Orange County TRIAD program consists of the local AARP chapter, the Orange County Sheriff’s Department, and the Chapel Hill, UNC, Hillsborough, and Carrboro Police Departments. Mayor Waldorf said that a component of the local TRIAD, SALT (Seniors and Law Enforcement Together), formed in May, provided crime prevention education through displays at community education programs and created a speakers bureau. She noted that focus has been to familiarize citizens with the use of 911 and to teach about fraudulent telemarketing and other scams, with future plans to include education about abuse against the elderly.
Mayor Waldorf proposed a resolution to commend the Chapel Hill/Orange County TRIAD and its president, Mr. Art Englebardt.
COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN, TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION COMMENDING ART ENGLEBARDT AND THE CHAPEL HILL/ORANGE COUNTY TRIAD. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
A RESOLUTION COMMENDING ART ENGLEBARDT AND THE CHAPEL HILL/ORANGE
COUNTY TRIAD
WHEREAS, the Chapel Hill/Orange County TRIAD unites senior citizens and Orange County law enforcement agencies; and
WHEREAS, the Chapel Hill/Orange County TRIAD provides valuable crime prevention services to the community; and
WHEREAS, the program was recognized for Outstanding Achievement in Crime Prevention for the TRIAD category by Governor Jim Hunt, Crime Control and Public Safety Secretary Richard Moore, and Director of the Division of Crime Prevention Anthony Queen; and
WHEREAS, the president of the Chapel Hill/Orange County TRIAD since its inception is Mr. Art Englebardt;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council commends the Chapel Hill/Orange County TRIAD and its president Art Englebardt for its excellent crime prevention work and for the recognition it has received by the State of North Carolina.
This the 7th day of December, 1998.
Mr. Englebardt thanked Crime Prevention Officer Jeff Clark for all his help.
for Meadowmont Hilton Garden Inn to Determine Definition of Contiguous Property
Mr. Horton said that the staff recommends that the area of contiguous property for the Meadowmont Hilton be the same as that recommended for the Meadowmont Office Park proposal as a distance of 2,000 feet from the project.
COUNCIL MEMBER BATEMAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER FOY, TO ESTABLISH 2,000 FEET AS THE AREA OF CONTIGUOUS PROPERTY FOR THE MEADOWMONT HILTON GARDEN INN. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN, TO RECESS THE PUBLIC HEARING, TO BE RECONVENED ON JANUARY 11, 1999. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
Item 3 – Public Hearing on Revision to the Town’s Disaster Recovery Initiative Grant Application to Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
Loryn Barnes, Community Development Coordinator, discussed the purpose of the public hearing, which was to receive citizen’s comments on how to revise the Town’s Disaster Recovery Initiative Grant application approved by the Council on January 12, 1998. She said that on August 19, 1997, the Town received a letter from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) stating that the Town had been awarded $349,041 of disaster relief funds under the HUD Disaster Recovery Initiative, for assistance in helping communities recover from the effects of Hurricane Fran, and to help with projects to prevent or reduce damage from future storms. Ms. Barnes also noted that on January 12, 1998 the Council approved a budget for the Disaster Recovery Initiative Grant and on May 18, 1998 the Town’s budget for the Disaster Recovery funds was submitted to HUD. She said that the Town was informed verbally that HUD would not approve two of the activities submitted: (1) the House Repair Program, and (2) the Enhancement of the Emergency Operations Center. Ms. Barnes stated that the Town intends to continue discussions with HUD to pursue funding for improvements to the Emergency Operations Center activities through this grant, but the staff is recommending to the Council that it consider approving new activities for the funds budgeted for home repair. She said that the activities must be relevant to Hurricane Fran and must meet one of the three Community Development Block Grant national objectives. Ms. Barnes noted that there have been several suggestions from the Town staff, in addition to comments and suggestions from other agencies and citizens. She said that a proposal has been received from the Inter Church Council for erosion correction activities at Elliot Woods and Chase Park. Ms. Barnes said that the staff proposes to return to the Council on January 11, 1999 for consideration of a revised plan, which, if authorized by the Council, would be submitted to HUD for approval.
Mayor Waldorf stated that she wished to bring to the attention of the Council a letter she had received from the Inter Church Council Housing Corporation making some suggestions about how the money might be used to benefit their two housing projects. Mayor Waldorf noted that the letter will be entered into the record for referral to the Manager.
Council Member McClintock commented that she was surprised that the Emergency Operations Center had not been approved and urged staff to continue pursing this activity. She also said that she agreed with the suggestion of using the funds to purchase land in the flood-prone areas.
COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BATEMAN, TO REFER CONSIDERATION OF A REVISED PLAN TO THE TOWN MANAGER. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
Rev. Manley petitioned the Council for support with regard to assistance for a Fund Reservation Application to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development for a low income elderly residential development. He said that the Church is exploring the feasibility of developing a 202 Low-Income Housing project for the elderly with a 35-unit complex on a site on Merritt Mill Road. Rev. Manley said that he had met with the Pine Knolls Development Corporation which owns the land, with Congressman David Price, who put him in touch with the HUD office in Greensboro, N.C. and also with Rev. W.B. Lewis, pastor of the First Cosmopolitan Baptist Church in Raleigh. He also said that he talked with Mr. Lane Sarvoe, a housing consultant, with the Board of Deacons of the First Baptist Church, with representatives of the Mayor’s office, the Planning Board, representatives of the United Church of Christ, representatives of the Pine Knolls Association, representatives of CCB, and several senior citizens willing to serve as an Advisory Committee. Rev. Manley noted that there was support for the project from all of the aforementioned. He said that the First Baptist Church endorsed the project, committing some funds for it. Rev. Manley requested support, and the commitment of seed money, from the Council.
Lane Sarvoe, housing consultant, said that there is a real need for housing for the low-income elderly, and that most existing housing projects had waiting lists. He said that he has worked on many 202 projects and projects for the disabled, and looked forward to working with the First Baptist Church project.
Mr. Horton said that the Town would like the opportunity to work with Rev. Manley in developing an outline of the key steps that would need to be taken. He said that the staff would determine the amount of money needed to help the project along and come back to the Council with recommendations.
Council Member Bateman said that she believed that the seed money would be refundable if the HUD grant was awarded.
COUNCIL MEMBER BATEMAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WIGGINS, TO REFER THE PETITION TO THE MANAGER AND TO SUPPORT THE EFFORTS OF THE FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
Gary Dwyer
Mr. Dwyer summarized his letter petitioning the Council regarding the increased cut-through traffic in his neighborhood—from Ephesus Church Road to Eden Lane, to Cypress Road to Spruce Street, to Willow Drive to 15/501—presumably to avoid the traffic light at the intersection of 15/501 and Ephesus Church Road. He said that the largest concern was the pedestrian traffic, including children walking to school. Mr. Dwyer said that many cars drive well above the speed limit and fail to observe stop signs and the afternoon rush hour is the worst. He said that he had spoken to David Brown, Town Traffic Engineer, and they both agreed that speed bumps and additional stop-signs would probably not solve the problem. Mr. Dwyer felt that blocking off the access points to the area, such as creating a dead-end from Eden Road, at the end of Cypress Road, would help the problem. He noted that this would be a minor inconvenience to the neighborhood, but worth it.
Council Member Foy asked where the proposed dead-end would be and Mr. Dwyer said at the end of Cypress Road.
Mayor pro tem Capowski called to the attention of Mr. Dwyer items #5k and 5L on tonight’s agenda. He noted that these items were both the results of similar petitions.
Charles Yarbrough, who lives on Cypress Road, said that he agreed with Mr. Dwyer and said that after Hurricane Fran blew trees down across the road, the area had no traffic for two days, and when the trees were cleared, the increased traffic was very noticeable. He said that many people failed to stop at the traffic stop signs. Mr. Yarbrough said that he would be willing to endure the inconvenience of blocking off the access in order to reclaim the safety of the neighborhood.
Council Member Evans asked Mr. Yarbrough if he had noticed an increase in the traffic since the traffic lights had been installed at the Legion Road/Ephesus Church Road intersection. Mr. Yarbrough said that he could not be sure, but that probably was the case. He said that the increases were noticeable after the local T.V. station started broadcasting alternative routes to avoid traffic congestion. Mr. Yarbrough noted that their neighborhood was not mentioned, but he felt that people started to look at other alternative routes.
Robert Twarog, who has lived on the corner of Cypress Road and Plum Lane since 1965, said that over the years, since many developments have been built, the traffic has increased. He endorsed blocking off the Eden Road/Cypress Road access.
Stephen Lay, who lives on the corner of Willow Drive and Spruce Drive, mentioned that there are no sidewalks on Spruce Drive and Cypress Road, so pedestrians have to walk on the road. He said that everyone he had spoken to in the neighborhood agreed that they would be willing to put up with the inconvenience of blocking off the access at Cypress Road.
Council Member McClintock wondered if there was a need for a traffic study, and if this should be requested now.
Council Member Evans felt that it should be referred to the Manager.
Council Member McClintock asked if a request for a traffic study could be included in the referral.
COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER FOY, TO REFER THE PETITION, INCLUDING THE QUESTION OF WHETHER OR NOT A TRAFFIC STUDY WAS NECESSARY, TO THE MANAGER. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
Council Member Wiggins commented that there were traffic problem spots all over Town and felt that reducing the speed limit all over the Town would be a good idea. She felt that electronic speed monitoring, used in many cities in the country, would make a big difference in enforcement of the speed limit.
Mr. Horton said that he agreed with the matter of installing electronic speed monitoring devices and said that the staff would be glad to bring back a proposal to the Council. He noted that the Town would need legislative authorization to use the devices.
Mayor Waldorf supported the idea of investigating the use of the devices.
(1) Mayor pro tem Capowski
Mayor pro tem Capowski asked the staff to present the Council with a visual picture of how each proposed project would look and function in its realistic, three-dimensional environment, during the day and the night, during rush hours and light traffic hours. He said that the only one he could remember was the OWASA proposal for the Hilltop water tank, which was a very realistic portrayal of how the project would actually look. Mayor pro tem Capowski said that there were technical capabilities for presenting these pictures, such as videos to indicate the traffic movement at any given time, and other models to indicate a three-dimensional portrayal of projects such as water towers and high buildings, which would be very helpful to the Council in making decisions.
Council Member Evans commented that she would not like to see this raise the costs of proposed projects. She also pointed out that individuals visualize in different ways and felt that the Community Design Commission was well versed in these matters.
Council Member McClintock felt that the visualization would be very helpful to the Council.
Mayor Waldorf said that she remembered some discussion during last year’s budget sessions, when the staff suggested the possibility of introducing models to help the Council visualize projects. She asked that this possibility be brought back for further discussion. Mayor Waldorf also said that she wondered how visualization of the evidence would be taken into account in the evidence as the projects were reviewed.
MAYOR PRO TEM CAPOWSKI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MCCLINTOCK, TO REFER THE PETITION FOR VISUALIZATION OF PROPOSED PROJECTS IN THEIR THREE-DIMENSIONAL ENVIRONMENT TO THE MANAGER. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
Council Member McClintock
Council Member McClintock said that the Committee on the Water and Sewer Boundary Agreement was very close to an agreement and that the last meeting probably would be their meeting in January. She said that at their previous meeting the participants had agreed to take the latest draft back to their local attorneys to review and report on the legal implications for the Town.
COUNCIL MEMBER MCCLINTOCK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER FOY, TO PETITION THAT THE COUNCIL REQUEST THE TOWN ATTORNEY TO REVIEW THE LATEST DRAFT OF THE WATER AND SEWER BOUNDARY AGREEMENT AND REPORT ON THE LEGAL IMPLICATIONS FOR THE TOWN. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
Council Member McClintock
Council Member McClintock said that she would ask the Committee to study the buffers in various areas of the Town. She said that she was concerned about the 35-foot buffer in The Estates.
COUNCIL MEMBER MCCLINTOCK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER FOY, TO PETITION THE STAFF TO REPORT ON THE ADHERENCE BY THE DEVELOPER TO THE 35-FOOT BUFFER IN THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT CONDITION FOR THE ESTATES. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
Mayor Waldorf
Mayor Waldorf petitioned to call the attention of the Council to the University’s expansion plans and the need for the Town to get involved in a dialogue with the University regarding these plans, particularly in the areas of housing and transportation. She asked that the Council set aside some time at its Retreat to discuss this matter. The Council agreed by consensus.
Mayor pro tem Capowski suggested inviting a representative of the University’s Planning Staff to the Retreat.
Council Member Brown suggested that the representative be invited early on in the agenda, so that he/she would not have to stay for the remaining agenda.
Council Member Foy said that he and Council Member Pavăo had been discussing the renovation of University Mall and felt that the Council should get involved in the discussions early on in the process and talk to the representatives of the various groups to be affected by this project.
COUNCIL MEMBER FOY MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MCCLINTOCK, THAT THE COUNCIL ASK MAYOR WALDORF TO APPOINT A MAYOR’S COMMITTEE TO DISCUSS THE REDEVELOPMENT OF UNIVERSITY MALL. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
The Council deferred item a and b until January 11, 1999.
Council Member Bateman removed item n.
Council Member McClintock removed items d and e.
Robert Foley, President of the Oaks Homeowners Association, in a letter read by Madeline Jefferson, asked the Council to remove item L and to delay the action to install traffic diverters on Rogerson and Oakwood Drives until the neighborhood residents of Cleland Drive and Pinehurst Drive could have time to review the resolution and speak to the Council about the significant increase in traffic which would ensue on both those drives.
Madeline Jefferson, a resident of Cleland Drive, speaking on her own behalf, requested a delay in adoption of the resolution. She stated that most of the larger, progressive cities do not use one-way streets to control traffic, and she thought that Council Member Wiggins’ suggestion of electronic speed monitoring devices was a good one.
Council Member Bateman asked if the proposed one-year trial for the one-way streets was not acceptable. Ms. Jefferson said that they would be worth a trial after the Meadowmont Development was built.
Council Member Evans removed Item L.
Kristina Ahlen, representing the Timberlyne Neighborhood Association and the residents of Kingston Drive, stated that these neighborhoods, in a strong consensus, spoke on behalf of item m and she had submitted a petition of an endorsement for the Town Engineer’s sidewalk proposal. She urged the Council to move Item m forward on the Agenda so it could be discussed as early in the meeting as possible.
COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS MOVED, SECONDED BY MAYOR PRO TEM CAPOWSKI, TO ADOPT THE CONSENT AGENDA WITH ITEMS A, B, D, E, L, AND N REMOVED. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING VARIOUS RESOLUTIONS
AND ORDINANCES
(98-12-7/R-1)
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby adopts the following minutes, resolutions and ordinances as submitted by the Town Manager in regard to the following:
|
c. |
Response to request for expedited review of Special Use Permit Application by Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools for new middle school on Seawell School Road. (R-2). |
|
f. |
Response to request from EmPOWERment, Inc. regarding use of Community Development Neighborhood Revitalization funds for project at 128 Johnson Street. (R-5). |
|
g. |
Resolution authorizing the acceptance of two Library Service and Technology Act grant applications and adoption of Library Equipment Replacement Policy. (R-6). |
|
h. |
Resolution authorizing the Manager to negotiate and execute a lease agreement for a Park/Ride lot in Carrboro. (R-7). |
|
i. |
Resolution releasing economic development funds to the Triangle J Council of Governments. (R-8). |
|
j. |
Resolution referring draft 2000-2006 N.C. State Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) to advisory boards and calling a public hearing for January 20, 1999. (R-9) |
|
k. |
Resolution directing the Manager to install signs and pavement markings on Hillsborough Street to improve traffic control. (R-10). |
|
m. |
Resolution authorizing the construction of sidewalks along Kingston Drive and Weaver Dairy Road. (R-12a). |
This the 7th day of December, 1998.
A RESOLUTION DIRECTING EXPEDITED PROCESSING IN THE REVIEW OF THE CHAPEL
HILL-CARRBORO CITY SCHOOLS’ SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION FOR CONSTRUCTION OF
A NEW MIDDLE SCHOOL ON SEAWELL SCHOOL ROAD (98-12-7/R-2)
WHEREAS, the Town Council has received a petition from the Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools for expedited review of its application for a Special Use Permit for construction of a new middle school on Seawell School Road; and
WHEREAS, the application is for a public project; and
WHEREAS, the Chapel Hill community is in need of an additional middle school;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Town Manager is directed to expedite processing of the Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools’ application for a Special Use Permit for construction of a new middle school on Seawell School Road, in a manner that will speed review without sacrificing breadth or depth of analysis.
This the 7th day of December, 1998.
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING USE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT NEIGHBORHOOD
REVITALIZATION FUNDS FOR A $110,000 DEFERRED LOAN TO EMPOWERMENT INCORPORATED
TO PURCHASE A BUILDING LOCATED AT 128 JOHNSON STREET (98-12-7/R-5)
WHEREAS, the Town has an ongoing interest in community development activities in Chapel Hill; and
WHEREAS, on November 23,1998, the Council received a request for Community Development funding from EmPOWERment Incorporated;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill authorizes use of Community Development Neighborhood Revitalization funds for a $110,000 deferred loan to EmPOWERment Incorporated to purchase a building located at 128 Johnson Street.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill authorizes use of $6,000 of Community Development Neighborhood Revitalization funds for relocation expenses for the three households currently living in the building, if necessary.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council authorizes the Manager to execute a Performance Agreement, Promissory Note and Deed of Trust with EmPOWERment contingent upon:
1. Submittal of a formal resolution from the EmPOWERment Board of Directors authorizing acquisition and renovation of the property; and
2. Submittal of documentation that that the time limit in the contract to purchase
the property has been extended.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Performance Agreement will include the following stipulations:
· The apartment building will be completely renovated and occupied by December 31,1999;
· Units will be occupied by households earning less than 70% of the area median income;
· Rents will not exceed the Section 8 rents by bedroom size;
· EmPOWERment will accept Section 8 rental vouchers, and will maintain a policy of referring tenants to the Section 8 program wherever possible;
· EmPOWERment will follow all applicable local, state and federal guidelines and assume responsibility for meeting the acquisition and relocation guidelines of the Uniform Relocation Act;
· EmPOWERment will provide the Town with an annual report on the project by June 30 of each year.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Promissory Note and Deed of Trust will provide that if the terms of the Town’s Performance Agreement with EmPOWERment are not fulfilled, EmPOWERment would be required to repay the Town’s investment according to the following schedule:
1) Until renovation of the building is complete, if the terms of the Performance Agreement were not met, the full amount would be due and payable to the Town.
2) Upon opening and for the next three years of operation, if the terms of the Performance Agreement were not met, the full amount would be due to the Town.
3) For each year following the third year the apartment building is operational and is used for purposes agreed to by the Council, the loan will be reduced on a pro rata basis for the remaining years of the term of the loan which would be fifteen (15) years from the day of the agreement.
This the 7th day of December, 1998.
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING AN EQUIPMENT
REPLACEMENT POLICY AND AUTHORIZING THE TOWN MANAGER TO ACCEPT TWO LIBRARY
SERVICE AND TECHNOLOGY ACT (LSCA) GRANT APPLICATIONS FOR LIBRARY MATERIALS AND
FOR EQUIPMENT AND SERVICES (98-12-7/R-6)
WHEREAS, interim State Library guidelines
recommend that a library serving a population the size of Chapel Hill provide
nine public Internet stations; and
WHEREAS, the library currently provides five
public Internet stations; and
WHEREAS, the State Library has approved the
Town’s application for two Library Service and Technology Act grants totaling $26,647
to purchase equipment to meet current State Library guidelines; and
WHEREAS, funds available in the current library
budget are sufficient to meet the 25% match required by the Enhanced
Connectivity grant and first year operating costs; and
WHEREAS, grant acceptance requires that an
equipment replacement policy be in place prior to awarding a grant;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of
the Town of Chapel Hill that the Town Manager be authorized to accept the
Library Service and Technology Act Basic Equipment grant and the Library
Service and Technology Act Enhanced Connectivity grant as awarded by the State
Library of North Carolina and to contract for services to install and network
equipment.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council of the
Town of Chapel Hill adopts the attached Library Equipment Replacement Policy.
This the 7th day of December, 1998.
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE TOWN MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE A
LEASE AGREEMENT WITH Carrboro-Belman
Shopping Center, LP. FOR THE
PROVISION OF A PARK/RIDE LOT IN THE NC 54 WEST CORRIDOR OF CARRBORO
(98-12-7/R-7)
WHEREAS, it is the policy of the Town of Chapel Hill to maintain a balanced transportation system for the citizens of the service area; and
WHEREAS, the Town of Chapel Hill has operated park/ride transit service to commuters in the NC 54 West corridor under contract to the Town of Carrboro and the owner of the Carrboro Plaza Commercial area since 1985; and
WHEREAS, the Town of Chapel Hill has been notified by Carrboro-Belman Shopping Center, LP., the owner the Carrboro Plaza Shopping Center, that the lot will no longer be available for park/ride transit service to commuters; and
WHEREAS, the Town of Chapel Hill has been notified by Carrboro-Belman Shopping Center, LP. that an alternate site on its property is available for lease to the Town for the development of approximately 145 park/ride spaces to serve commuters;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council authorizes the Town Manager to negotiate and execute a lease agreement for the development of a park/ride lot in the NC 54 East corridor of Carrboro with terms generally as follows:
NOW, THEREFORE, know ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that
the Lessor, in consideration of the sum of ONE DOLLAR ($1.00) in hand paid, the
receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, and of the agreements on the part of
the Lessee to be performed as hereinafter set forth, hereby leases, subject to
the conditions herein contained, to Lessee, and Lessee leases, as tenant of
Lessor, the real property located in Chapel Hill Township, Orange County, North
Carolina, more particularly described on Exhibit A attached hereto and
incorporated herein by reference (“Premises”).
BEING all that tract of land containing 2.025 acres, more or less, within the Carrboro Plaza Shopping Center, which is located in Chapel Hill Township, Orange County, North Carolina; as shown on Attachment A – Site Plan for Park/Ride Spaces in the Carrboro Plaza Shopping Center. This tract should be suitable for the construction of approximately 145 park/ride spaces and access driveways to those spaces.
1.
Term. This Lease
Agreement shall commence on the _______ day of _____________, 19___, and unless
sooner terminated as herein provided shall exist and continue for a term of
(20) years thereafter (“Original Term”).
Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, in the event
that the grant from the Federal Transit Administration and the North Carolina
Department of Transportation, under which this park/ride lot construction
contemplated herein is proposed, not be approved, or the projected costs of the
development exceed available funding as determined by the Lessee, this Lease
Agreement for the Park and Ride lot shall terminate.
2. Option to Extend Term. Provided Lessee is not in default hereunder, Lessee shall have the option to extend the Original Term of this Lease for two (2) additional periods of ten (10) years each (each additional period being referred to as a “Renewal Term”) upon the same terms and conditions as are provided for in the Original term hereof. To exercise a Renewal Term, Lessee shall provide Lessor with written notice of its intent to renew at least one (1) year prior to the end of the applicable rent term.
3. Fees.
a) Upon receipt of a building permit for construction of the Park and Ride Lot, Lessee shall make a one-time payment to Lessor in the amount of $34,747 as reimbursement for certain pre-development expenses associated with the Park and Ride Lot. Said expenses are itemized on Attachment B, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
b) Lessor shall also pay to Lessor a lease management fee of Two-Hundred Dollars ($200.00) per month for the use of this property. The first of said fee shall be paid to Lessor upon Lessee’s receipt of a building permit for construction of the Park and Ride Lot. Lessee agrees to deliver a copy of said permit to Lessor within ten (10) days of Lessee’s receipt of said permit. Subsequent payments shall be made on the first day of each following month.
4. Acceptance and Use of Premises. Lessee agrees to accept the Premises, upon the first day of the commencement of construction by the Lessee, as they now exist with no obligation on the part of the Lessor, to make any improvements thereto, and agrees during the term of this Lease Agreement not to make any unlawful use of the Premises, and to use same only for the purpose of providing a Park and Ride Lot as described in the Lessee’s grant application to the Federal Transit Administration and the North Carolina Department of Transportation, dated October 26, 1998.
5. Taxes. Lessee agrees and covenants to reimburse the Lessor for any taxes, assessments, or public charges attributable to the Premises, and on any other improvements constructed by the Lessee on said real property. Said reimbursement shall only be those assessments or public charges assessed and due, if any, from the Lessor for the period of time after the Lessee’s receipt of a building permit for construction of the Park and Ride Lot. Said reimbursement shall be made within ten (10) business days after Lessor presents Lessee a copy of the paid bills or suitable documentation of the assessment.
6. Operation. The Premises shall be operated by the Lessee as a Park and Ride Lot for the term and purpose specified herein, subject to the conditions herein contained. The relationship herein created is strictly the relationship of Lessee and lessor, it being understood that the parties are not principal and agent.
The Lessee acknowledges and agrees that the Lessor, tenants of Lessor and all customers of the Carrboro Plaza Shopping Center shall have the right at all times to use any access roads or driveways which are part of the Premises for ingress, egress and regress to and from the shopping center. Lessee agrees to keep the any such access roads or driveways clean, free of litter and debris and abandoned vehicles. Lessee further agrees not to obstruct such ingress, egress and regress contemplated herein.
The design and construction of the Park and Ride Lot and required access road(s) and required transit loading area will be the responsibility of the Lessee and its designated staff. Development plans and final drawings of the Park and Ride Lot, any associated structures including landscaping plans, must however, be submitted to and approved in writing by the Lessor, prior to the initiation of any work. The Lessee agrees to monitor the work of the construction contractor so that the work is completed in a reasonable amount of time, adjusting for any unforeseeable weather delays. Construction is expected to be completed within three (3) to six (6) months after the notice to proceed is issued by the Lessee.
The Lessee agrees to maintain and repair the Park and Ride Lot during the term of this Lease. Said maintenance work shall include, but not be limited to, repaving, repatching and restriping the Park and Ride Lot as necessary.
The Lessee agrees to provide signage, lighting, monitoring and/or patrols for the parking lot. In addition, the Lessee will provide a video security system in the Park and Ride Lot. This system will be connected to the Lessee’s existing video security system used in the Lessee’s other Park and Ride Lots, which is monitored twenty-four (24) hours per day by either the Chapel Hill Transit or Chapel Hill Police Department staff.
Lessee will monitor the use of spaces in the lot, by using both the video system and staffed patrols, in order to limit the Park and Ride Lot to use only by individuals who are patrons of the public transit system so that there is no unauthorized use of the park/ride spaces. Lessee will also monitor use of the Premises to limit transit patrons from using other parking spaces in the shopping center unless they are so designated by the Lessor.
7. Insurance. Lessee shall maintain throughout the term of this Lease a policy for the premises of commercial general liability insurance (including contractual liability coverage) with combined single limit coverage of not less than TWO MILLION DOLLARS ($2,000,000) per occurrence. Lessee shall cause the insurer to name Lessor and mortgagee(s) of Lessor as additional insureds.
8. Hazardous Substances. Lessee to the extent allowed by law, shall hold Lessor harmless from and indemnify Lessor against any damage, loss, expense, response costs or liability, including consulting fees and attorneys’ fees, resulting from hazardous substances generated stored, disposed of or transported to, on or under the Premises as a result of the Lessee’s use of the Premises. The indemnities set forth in this paragraph shall survive expiration or termination of this Agreement. For purposes of this Agreement, “hazardous substances” shall mean (i) any substance which contains gasoline, diesel fuel or other petroleum hydrocarbons, (ii) any substance which is flammable, radioactive, corrosive or carcinogenic, (iii) any substance the presence of which causes or threatens to cause a nuisance or health hazard affecting human health, the environment, the premises or Premises adjacent thereto, or (iv) any substance the presence of which requires investigation or remediation under any hazardous substance law, as the same may hereafter be amended. “Hazardous Substance Law” means the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, 42 U.S.C. &9601 et seq.; the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, 42 U.S.C. &6901 et seq.; Hazardous Materials Transportation Act, 49 U.S.C. &1801 et seq.; the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. &1251 et seq.; the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. &7401 et seq.; the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, 7 U.S.C. &136 et seq.; the Toxic Substances Control Act, 15 U.S.C. &2601 et seq.; the Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Air Act, (SARA Title III) 42 U.S.C. &11001 et seq.; and any other applicable federal, state or local law, rule or regulation.
9. Subordination. At Lessor’s option, this Lease Agreement shall be subordinate to any deed of trust, deed to secure debt or mortgage (collectively “encumbrance”) by Lessor which now or hereafter may encumber the Premises, provided, that no such subordination shall be effective unless the holder of every such encumbrance shall, either in the encumbrance or in a separate agreement with the Lessee, agree that in the event of a foreclosure, or conveyance in lieu of foreclosure, of Lessor’s interest in the Premises, such holder shall recognize and confirm the validity and existence of this Lease Agreement and the rights of Lessee hereunder, and this Lease Agreement shall continue in full force and Lessee shall have the right to continue its use and occupancy of the Premises in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement as long as Lessee is not in default of this Lease Agreement beyond applicable notice and cure periods. Lessee shall execute in a timely manner whatever instruments may reasonably be required to evidence the provisions of this paragraph.
10. Nuisances. The Lessee agrees not to commit or permit any nuisance on the Premises. The Lessee further agrees, throughout the term of this Lease Agreement, at its own expense, to promptly comply with the requirements of every applicable statute, law, ordinance, regulation, or order by any federal, state, municipal or other public body, department, commission, bureau, or officer with respect to the use and occupancy of said Premises; provided, however, the Lessee may at its own expense contest the validity of any statute, law, ordinance, regulation or order and any non-compliance by the Lessee during such contest, provided such contest shall be diligently pursued, shall not be deemed a default under this Lease Agreement.
11. Assignability. The Lessee shall not assign, sublet, or license the leased premises without the prior written consent of the Lessor, which shall not be unreasonably withheld. In no event shall the Lessee assign, sublease, or license the leased premises to a commercial or for profit entity.
12.
Improvements. Lessee
shall have the right and option to construct or cause to be constructed on said
Premises a ground parking lot only and such other structures or other
improvements as are necessary for the operation of a Park and Ride Lot. Any such improvements (except for the
roadway and the parking lot provided for herein) shall be and remain the
property of Lessee. During the term of
this Lease Agreement, Lessee shall have the right to clear (except as expressly
prohibited), grade or fill any part of the Premises necessary to render said
area more usable for a Park and Ride Lot so long Lessee obtains prior written
approval.
13.
At the expiration or
termination of this lease or any renewals thereof, the Lessor, may require the
Lessee to remove, at the Lessee’s expense and within a reasonable time, any
improvements, except the roadway and the parking lot constructed on the
Premises. Upon termination of this
Lease Agreement, the constructed by the Lessee in accordance with this Lease
Agreement shall become a part of the freehold and the sole and absolute
property of the Lessor, in fee simple absolute. Any improvements not removed within 30-days after the request of
the Lessor, shall become the property of and owned by the Lessor. The Lessee further agrees it will, at the
expiration or termination of this lease or any renewals thereof, surrender the
Premises in as good condition as at the beginning of the term, reasonable wear
and tear excepted. This covenant
specifically includes cleaning up the Premises of any debris, trash, building
scraps, etc., in addition to any other restorations, repairs or work necessary.
14. Event Parking. Lessee shall have a license to use the area outlined on Attachment A and labeled (“Event Parking Area”) as overflow parking for use in conjunction with single-day special events sponsored by the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill or the Towns of Chapel Hill or Carrboro (“University/Town Events”). The “Event Parking Area” will be used as overflow parking from the park/ride lot only at times, which do not disrupt the commercial activities of the Carrboro Plaza Shopping Center. Use of the Event Parking Area for any multiple-day events must be approved in writing by the Lessor, which shall be in Lessor’s sole discretion. Said license shall permit Lessee to use the Event Parking Area as part of its Park and Ride Lot in connection with University/Town Events. The terms and provisions of Paragraph 6 herein shall apply at all times to Lessee’s use of the Event Parking Area.
15. Breach of Agreement. In the event the Lessee should breach any of the covenants or conditions set forth herein, then and in that event the Lessor may give notice to the Lessee specifying the breach. Upon such notice, the Lessee shall have 30 days to remedy said breach. If said breach is not remedied with 30-day period, the Lessor may terminate and pursue any other remedies it may have at law or in equity.
16. Notices. All notices herein provided to be given or which may be given by either party to the other shall be deemed to have been fulfilled when made in writing and deposited in the United States mail, certified and postage prepaid and addressed as follows:
Lessor:
C/0 Mr. Goodman Segar GVA
6320 Quadrangle Drive, Suite 360
Chapel Hill, N. C. 27514
Attn: Property Manager
With a copy to:
Alfred G. Adams, Esq.
Kilpatrick Stockton LLP
1001 West Fourth Street
Winston-Salem, NC 27101-2400
Lessee:
Town Manager
Town of Chapel Hill
Municipal Building
306 North Columbia Street
Chapel Hill, NC 27516
Nothing herein shall preclude the giving of such
written notice by personal service. The
address to which notices shall be mailed as aforesaid by either party may be
changed by written notice given to such other party by the other as herein
provided.
17. Strict Performance. The failure of either party to insist in any instance upon strict performance of any of the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth shall not be constructed as a waiver of the right to insist upon strict performance in any other instance. No modification of any provision hereof and no cancellation surrender hereof shall be valid unless in writing and signed by both parties.
18. Indemnity. Lessee shall, to the extent allowed by law, indemnify and hold harmless Lessor from any violation of any applicable statues, law, ordinance, regulation or order, and any and all liabilities, claims, suits, demands, penalties, fines, forfeitures, or rebates which may be asserted or assessed against Lessor, or any of their employees or agents arising out of or due to the Lessee’s constructions, use, operation and maintenance of the Premises.
This the 7th day of December, 1998.
A RESOLUTION
REQUESTING THE RELEASE OF STATE FUNDS FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TO THE TRIANGLE
J COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS (98-12-7/R-8)
WHEREAS, in North Carolina the Lead Regional Organizations, as voluntary organizations serving municipal and county governments, have established productive working relationships with the cities and counties across the State; and
WHEREAS, the General Assembly continued to recognize this need through the appropriation of $864,270 to help the Lead Regional Organizations assist local governments with grant applications, economic development, community development, and to support local industrial development activities and other activities as deemed appropriate by their local governments; and
WHEREAS, these funds are not intended to be used for payment of members’ dues or assessments to Lead Regional Organization or to supplant funds appropriated by the member governments; and
WHEREAS, in the event that a request is not made by a unit of government for release of these funds to our Regional Council, the available funds will revert to the State’s General Funds; and
WHEREAS, in Region J funds in the amount of $48,015 will be used to carry out the economic development plan approved by the Council of Governments Board of Delegates and especially to improve the economy of the counties and towns of the Region by strengthening ties to, and consequently, the benefits of the Research Triangle Park;
NOW,
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that Chapel
Hill requests the release of its $2,821.84 share of these funds to the Triangle
J Council of Governments at the earliest possible time in accordance with the
provisions of Section 16.5 of Senate Bill 352, the 1998 ratified budget
bill.
This the 7th day of December, 1998.
A RESOLUTION REFERRING THE DRAFT 2000-2006 STATE TRANSPORTATION
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AND CALLING A PUBLIC FORUM TO RECEIVE PUBLIC COMMENT
(98-12-7/R-9)
WHEREAS, the Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Transportation Advisory Committee has requested public comment on the draft 2000-2006 State Transportation Improvement Program;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council requests that Planning Board, Transportation Board, Greenways Commission and Parks and Recreation Commission provide comments to the Town Council on the 2000-2006 State Transportation Improvement Program.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council calls a public forum for January 20, 1999 to receive public comment at 7:00 PM in the Council Chamber, Town Hall, 306 North Columbia Street.
This the 7th day of December, 1998.
A RESOLUTION
DIRECTING THE TOWN MANAGER TO HAVE SPECIAL SIGNS AND PAVEMENT MARKINGS
INSTALLED AT SELECTED LOCATIONS ALONG HILLSBOROUGH STREET TO IMPROVE THE
CONTROL OF TRAFFIC
(98-12-7/R-10)
WHEREAS, the Chapel Hill Town Council has received a petition requesting that the Town do something to make Hillsborough Street a safe place to live, walk, and drive; and
WHEREAS, Town staff has reviewed the request and has identified that speeding is a significant problem on Hillsborough Street; and
WHEREAS, the volume of traffic in addition to the physical characteristics of Hillsborough Street limit the traffic management alternatives which would be appropriate;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council herewith directs the Manager to have Police enforcement efforts increased on Hillsborough Street to the maximum extent possible with available resources and to have special signs and pavement markings installed to improve traffic control.
This the 7th day of December, 1998.
A RESOLUTION DIRECTING THAT TOWN FUNDS BE USED TO CONSTRUCT SIDEWALK ALONG KINGSTON DRIVE (98-12-7/R-12a)
WHEREAS, the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill has reviewed preliminary design and cost estimates for Weaver Dairy road and Kingston Drive;
NOW,
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that
remaining 1998-99 Capital Improvements Program funds, reappropriated funds from
the 1997-98 Capital Improvements Program and the remaining funds from the first
allocation of the 1996 Bond funds be used to construct the following pedestrian
sidewalk projects:
· Kingston Drive from Cedar Lane to Kingston Court;
And to construct the following sidewalk as time permits after completion of the above projects:
· Weaver Dairy sidewalk between Sunrise and Kingston Drive.
This the 7th day of December, 1998.
The Information Reports were accepted by consensus.
Item 7 – Nominations and Appointments (none)
Item 8 – Proposal for Zoning Atlas Amendment for Properties in the Vicinity of U.S. Highway 15/501, Interstate-40 and Old Durham Road
J.B. Culpepper, Development Coordinator, reviewed the Manager’s recommendation that, based on the information in the record to date, the Council could make the findings required to approve the rezoning, and recommended that the Council adopt an ordinance which would rezone the area under consideration to Residential-1. She said that the zoning designation could be supported by changing conditions in the area, and also by the argument that it helps to achieve the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan.
John Hawkins, Chair of the Planning Board, discussed the summary of the Planning Board action regarding the Interstate Interchange Rezoning Proposal. He said that the Planning Board, taking a second look, voted 7-1 against the proposal, citing that from a strict planning perspective, they could not support the proposal to rezone the property in question to a Residential-1 classification. Mr. Hawkins also said that the Planning Board recommended that consideration of the rezoning proposal be incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan revision. He said that there may have been some facts that the Planning Board had not been made aware of. Mr. Hawkins explained that the Planning Board, as a Citizen’s Advisory Board, felt uncomfortable in making a recommendation in favor of a down-zoning proposal which had a clearly stated goal of inducing a specific, significant corporate entity to stay in Town. He said that there were also other unrelated reasons for a change. Mr. Hawkins said that the other concern was that a Residential-1 classification might not be appropriate for this area, that some other classification might be justified. He said that the Planning Board also asked why rezoning was considered crucial to the expansion plans of Blue Cross-Blue Shield’s Special Use Permit, which could be modified to meet all of their goals with the existing zoning.
David Haggart, of Childress Klien Properties which controls options on most of the properties under consideration, told the Council that the company has filed a concept plan for approximately 44 acres of the site, which will be reviewed by the Community Design Commission on December 16, 1998. He said that he wished to point out a few issues for the Council to consider before it voted: (1) Blue Cross Blue Shield expansion on this property would create a logistical issue to use of their existing Special Use Permit because it is not contemplated that the ownership of their existing headquarters facility would be the same as the ownership of the site that has the proposed concept plan on it; (2) the existing zoning does accommodate the facilities needs of Blue Cross Blue Shield; (3) the plan filed does not have a large retail component which would generate high traffic. The retail component planned is small, compatible with the Blue Cross Blue Shield potential office facility and would not have a heavy impact at peak traffic hours on the adjacent roads; (4) if the site plan did not work for Blue Cross Blue Shield, the Council would have the opportunity to review the zoning for the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Haggart asked the Council to vote against the proposed rezoning and focus their energies on reviewing the plan that has been submitted.
Judith DuVal, who has owned property on White Oak Road for 33 years, spoke against the rezoning. She said that she felt that Residential-1 would be dangerous to the location because of the changes that have taken place since the original zoning of MUR-1. Ms. DuVal said that the Council should consider the votes of the Planning Board and the Transportation Board, which voted against it. She said that proponents of the downzoning have never advocated that it was the best use of the property and the Chapel Hill/Carrboro Chamber of Commerce stated that office/institutional use of the property was appropriate. Ms. DuVal said that Council Member Foy had stated at a Transportation Board meeting on December 1, 1998 that the purpose of zoning R-1 was to prevent development in the MUR-1 fashion and that Council Members felt that it was appropriate that Blue Cross Blue Shield build 750,000 square-feet of office buildings on the property. She stated that no single-family home had been built on the property in 24 years. Ms. DuVal asked the Council to deny the R-1 zoning, because there is no justification to change the zoning: no manifest error has ever been indicated in the rezoning; it is not justified because of changed or changing conditions, which were contemplated in 1987 and expected with the MUR-1 zoning; and that downzoning does not achieve the purpose of the Comprehensive Plan, which calls for a mixed-use design of properties.
Terri Benforado spoke for her grandmother, Josephine Riley, who owns four acres on Old Durham Road, and has lived there for over 50 years. She said that Mrs. Riley felt that her property’s value would be severely depreciated and is strongly opposed to the recommendation to rezone.
Council Member Evans asked what the status of the Childress Klien application was. Ms. Culpepper responded that a concept plan had been submitted to be heard by the Community Design Commission on December 16, 1998. She noted that it is not a formal Special Use Permit application.
Council Member Wiggins asked if the concept plan appears to include office space for Blue Cross Blue Shield. Ms. Culpepper responded that the plan does include 750,000 square feet for office space.
Council Member McClintock asked Council Members Foy and Bateman if their recommendations included consideration of the traffic on 15/501. Council Member Foy responded that one of the primary concerns was the traffic increases on 15/501 without any near-future plan to mitigate it, and the traffic now spilling over into the neighboring streets.
Mayor Waldorf felt that Residential-1 would give the Council more discretion as to what should go on the properties. She said that it would give more latitude than MUR-1.
Council Member Foy said that they anticipated seeing something that uses the land to a very high value, such as 750,000 square-foot office buildings. He said that MUR-1 would dump 20,000 cars a day on the community, which is what they were trying to defend against.
MAYOR PRO TEM CAPOWSKI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER FOY, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
Council Member Evans asked Council Member Foy that, since a concept plan had been filed, how that would play out. Council Member Foy said that any kind of an application could be filed from a R-1 on upward, but that a Special Use Permit would have to address the clear concerns of the Council.
COUNCIL MEMBER FOY MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 1. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CHAPEL HILL
ZONING ATLAS (98-12-7/O-1)
WHEREAS, the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill has considered the proposal to amend the Zoning Atlas to rezone property described below from Mixed Use-Residential-1 (MU-R-1) to Residential-1 (R-1), and finds that the amendment is warranted because of changed or changing conditions in this particular area and in the jurisdiction generally, and/or to achieve the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Chapel Hill Zoning Atlas be amended as follows:
Section I
That the property identified as now or formerly Chapel Hill Township Tax Map 27B, Block A, Lots 1, 1A, 2, Block B, Lots 1, 1A, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8; Block E, Lots 1, 1A, 2, 2A, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8; and Durham County (Triangle Township) Tax Map 477, Block 4, Lot 1A; Tax Map 478, Block 1, Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 5A, 6; Block 2, Lots 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 31A, 31B, 32, 33, 34, 35, and 36, generally located in the southwest quadrant of the intersection of US Hwy. 15-501 and Interstate-40, within the Mixed Use-Residential-1 zoning district, be rezoned from Mixed Use-Residential-1 to Residential-1 as designated on the attached map.
Section II
That all ordinances and portions of ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.
This the 7th day of December, 1998.
for Special Use Permit Modification
Development Coordinator J.B. Culpepper gave a brief background for the application for a Special Use Permit Modification. She noted that at a Public Hearing on November 23, 1998, the Village Charter School proposed to expand into a residential building located on property encumbered by the Carol Woods Special Use Permit adjacent to Cedar Falls Courtyard, the current location of the school. Ms. Culpepper said that the Manager continues to recommend adoption of Resolution 16a, with a stipulation requiring compliance with the minimum landscape requirements of the Development Ordinance along that portion of the Carol Woods property. She also noted that the applicant had requested that that requirement be eliminated because of the cost of additional plantings.
Chairman of the Planning Board John Hawkins said that the Planning Board supported the applicant’s wish to strike Stipulation #8, requiring additional landscaping.
Council Member Bateman said that she agreed with the Planning Board, that the house did not need the required buffering.
Council Member Brown wondered why the landscaping stipulation was included in the resolution. Ms. Culpepper said that it was taking into consideration the houses across the street. She distributed a handout to the Council in which the language of the stipulation was modified.
Mayor Waldorf said that the language basically said that the landscaping could be left as is.
Council Member Evans asked if the applicant had a preference regarding the landscaping requirement. Sadie Jordan, speaking for the applicant, said that if they had to have a buffer they would prefer a Type A buffer, but their strongest preference would be to leave the landscaping as it was.
COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BATEMAN TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
COUNCIL MEMBER WIGGINS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 16a APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT MODIFICATION FOR THE VILLAGE CHARTER SCHOOL AT CAROL WOODS RETIREMENT COMMUNITY, WITH THE REMOVAL OF STIPULATION #8, AND THE INSERTION OF NEW LANGUAGE AFTER THE FIRST “BE IT RESOLVED.” THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT MODIFICATION FOR THE VILLAGE CHARTER SCHOOL AT CAROL WOODS RETIREMENT COMMUNITY (File No. 17..16) (98-12-7/R-16a)
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that it finds that the Special Use Permit Modification application, proposed by Chapel Hill Residential Retirement Center, Inc., on property identified as Chapel Hill Township Tax Map 17, Lot 16 if developed according to the site plan dated November, 1998 and the conditions listed below:
1. Would be located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or promote the public health, safety, and general welfare;
2. Would comply with all required regulations and standards of the Development Ordinance, including all applicable provisions of Articles 12, 13, 14, and with all other applicable regulations;
3. Would be located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property, and
4. Would conform with the general plans for the physical development of the Town as embodied in the Development Ordinance and in the Comprehensive Plan.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that it finds, in this particular case, that the following modifications satisfy public purposes to an equivalent or greater degree:
1. Modification of Subsection 14.12 of the Development Ordinance to allow the existing vegetation along the Weaver Dairy Road frontage of the 1.14 acre portion of the Carol Woods property (at 650 Weaver Dairy Road) to remain without the provision of additional plantings rather than satisfying the Type “D” landscape bufferyard requirement for school use.
Said public purposes being:
1. Retention of single-family appearance of the existing structure; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Town Council hereby approves the application for the Special Use Permit Modification for the Village Charter School at Carol Woods in accordance with the plans listed above and with conditions listed below:
Stipulations Specific to the Development
1. That construction begin by December 7, 2000 (two years from the date of Council approval) and be completed by December 7, 2001 (three years from the date of Council approval).
2. Relationship to 1990 Special Use Permit Modification: That this approval authorizes the use of approximately 1.14 acres including the structure at 650 Weaver Dairy Road as either a single-family dwelling unit or a elementary or secondary school. This authorization is intended to be in addition to the terms of the Town Council, July 9, 1990 Special Use Permit Modification document recorded in deed book 876, page 339 of the Orange County Register of Deeds.
3. Driveway/Parking
Restrictions: That the driveway to 650 Weaver Dairy Road shall be
restricted to staff and faculty. A sign
shall be placed at the driveway entrance noting the restricted access.
4. Pathway
to Cedar Falls Courtyard: That a mulch, pedestrian walkway be provided from
the house to Cedar Falls Courtyard.
5. State Approvals: That any required State permits or encroachment agreements be approved and copies of the approved permits and agreements be submitted to the Town prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
6. Landscape Plan Approval: That a detailed Landscape Plan and Landscape Maintenance Plan and shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
7. Landscape Protection Plan: That a detailed Landscape Protection Plan shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
Stipulations Related to Utilities
8. Fire Flow: That a fire flow report prepared by a registered professional engineer, showing that flows meet the minimum requirements of the Design Manual, be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
9. Refuse Management: The Town shall not be responsible for refuse collection at 650 Weaver Dairy Road unless the structure returns to a single-family dwelling unit use. The school shall continue to use the refuse collection and recycling facilities associated with the main portion of the school facility located at Cedar Falls Courtyard.
10. Construction Sign Required: That the applicant post a construction sign that lists the property owner’s representative, with a telephone number; the contractor’s representative, with a telephone number; and a telephone number for regulatory information at the time of issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
11. Continued Validity: That continued validity and effectiveness of this approval is expressly conditioned on the continued compliance with the plans and conditions listed above.
12. Non-severability: That if any of the above conditions is held to be invalid, approval in its entirety shall be void.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Town Council hereby approves the application for a Special Use Permit Modification for the Village Charter School at Carol Woods Retirement Community in accordance with the plans and conditions listed above.
This the 7th
day of December, 1998.
to Negotiate the Final Details of an Interlocal Agreement
Regarding the Management of Solid Waste by Orange County
Mayor Waldorf introduced a proposal in response to the proposal from the Orange County Commissioners concerning the governance of solid waste operations in Orange County. She said that she felt that until the governance issue of solid waste disposal is settled, there will be no movement on siting decisions. Mayor Waldorf said that the proposal accepts most of the terms of the County’s proposal emphasizing that the system would be operated by the County as of October 1, 1999, requiring that the Greene Tract not be used for C&D burial, and requesting that the transfer station and MRF be located near the municipalities.
Council Member McClintock said that she would like to change the language in the resolution to state that there will be no C&D landfill on the Greene Tract.
COUNCIL MEMBER FOY MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MCCLINTOCK, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 17 WITH AN AMENDMENT “AND THAT SUCH AREA WILL NOT BE USED AS A CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION LANDFILL FACILITY.”
Council Member Brown said that she had objections and would not vote for the resolution. She stated that she has indicated all along that she did not think that it mattered who managed solid waste operations but that she did not think that all the governing bodies should be taken out of the policy decisions about solid waste matters, particularly waste reduction. Council Member Brown said that she had objections other than the one just stated. She indicated that the towns and County had agreed that significant decisions would be made jointly before restructuring takes place, and quoted from a letter from Attorney Jessup mentioning that the agreement would not go into full effect until there was agreement on solid waste management sites, funding for the benefits, and agreement on the solid waste management plan. She was concerned because the decision had not yet been made on the implementation of the solid waste management plan. Council Member Brown said that she felt that the restructuring began as a regional, cooperative effort and it was no longer that, and by passing the resolution the Council would be taking Chapel Hill out of the serious decision making, which Chapel Hill was to be a part of, making it no longer a regional effort as it had begun. She said that an Orange County Commissioner had stated that Orange County was going to make the decisions, which will take Chapel Hill out of any kind of decision about solid waste including those previously agreed to.
Mayor pro tem Capowski thanked Mayor Waldorf for her efforts. He had a question about the effective date of the take-over and asked Mr. Horton about the logistics of the date. Mr. Horton said that the date, the beginning of the fiscal year, could be cumbersome and more expensive, but it was workable. Mr. Horton said that the key was to have an understanding between the staffs on how to proceed and to have a mid-year audit.
Council Member Evans asked if this proposal would preclude Orange County from sharing a waste facility with Durham County. Mayor Waldorf felt that this was not a condition.
Council Member Evans said that she felt it should be stated that this was a compromise on several issues. She said she would support it.
Council Member McClintock said that she wished to thank Council Member Brown for all of her service, and felt that the waste reduction goals would not have been reached without her efforts.
Council Member Bateman also thanked Council Members Brown and Foy for all their efforts serving on the Landfill Owners’ Group, especially Council Member Brown for her long years on the committee. She said she would support the proposal.
THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED 7-1, WITH MAYOR WALDORF, AND COUNCIL MEMBERS BATEMAN, CAPOWSKI, EVANS, FOY, MCCLINTOCK, AND WIGGINS VOTING AYE, AND COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN VOTING NAY.
A RESOUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND THE TOWN MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE FINAL DETAILS OF AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT REGARDING THE MANAGEMENT OF SOLID WASTE BY ORANGE COUNTY (98-12-7/R-17)
WHEREAS, in 1972 the governments of Carrboro, Orange County and Chapel Hill together bought a 202-acre site on both sides of Eubanks Road to serve as a landfill for solid waste from Orange County; and
WHEREAS, the governments of Carrboro, Orange County and Chapel Hill agreed by contract in 1972 that Chapel Hill would operate the landfill; and
WHEREAS, since 1972 the management of solid waste has developed into a much more complex and expensive operation, including federally regulated lined landfills, waste reduction and recycling programs, and the need for a variety of facilities beyond a landfill; and
WHEREAS, the Landfill Owners’ Group has recommended that the owners of the landfill and the Town of Hillsborough work together to develop another form of governance of the management of solid waste within Orange County; and
WHEREAS, representatives of these four governments have been working since the Landfill Reorganization Work Group began meeting in April 1995, on various approaches; and
WHEREAS, at the request of the November 1996 Assembly of Governments, another group of representatives from each of the four governments began meeting with an attorney to prepare a draft interlocal agreement; and
WHEREAS, the eighth draft of the Interlocal Agreement was presented to the local governing bodies in the summer of 1997, proposing that one government own and operate the solid waste management system with the advice of representatives of the four local governments; and
WHEREAS, in June 1997, all four governing bodies adopted and submitted to the State the outline of an integrated solid waste management plan which included waste reduction and recycling programs; and
WHEREAS, sites have been identified for a materials recovery facility and a transfer station on the current landfill site, and more than one potentially viable site for a construction and demolition waste facility have also been identified; and
WHEREAS, the Landfill Owners’ Group has concluded that the present system of tipping fees will not generate enough revenue to fund the implementation of the Solid Waste Management Plan and appointed an Alternative Finance Committee to explore other means of financing; and
WHEREAS, the Committee has identified an availability fee and use of the General Fund as potential complements to the tipping fees, both of which would be most efficiently and effectively handled by the County;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council recommends that the Orange County Commissioners, with the advice of a Solid Waste Advisory Commission, set policy, raise revenue and implement the Solid Waste Management Plan throughout Orange County.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council requests the partners set up a work group composed of the Mayors and Chair or other single representatives chosen by the governing bodies, and the Managers to negotiate the revision of the eighth draft of the Interlocal Agreement to reflect the organization described above, intended to implement the Solid Waste Management Plan adopted by the governing bodies and submitted to the State of North Carolina in July 1997.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council urges that this work group begin no later than February, report to the governing bodies in March and be ready for final governmental action in April.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a condition of the Interlocal Agreement achieve the following: that no more than 60 acres of the Greene Tract be set aside for use by the County in solid waste management activities, or as an asset of the Landfill Fund, and that such area will not be used as a construction and demolition landfill facility.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council believes a construction and demolition (C & D) facility is very important for services to citizens and to generate revenue, with net revenue projected for 1998-99 being approximately $1,000,000.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council:
· urges the County to locate a transfer station near the municipalities in southern Orange County to avoid having the public pay very high hauling costs,
· endorses a site on or near the landfill for a transfer station and a materials recovery facility,
· urges that the properties of Mrs. Julia Blackwood and Mrs. Gertrude Nunn not be purchased for solid waste management purposes.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council recommends that the transfer of the solid waste operations be accomplished by October 1, 1999, with the transfer to the County of all Town of Chapel Hill Solid Waste Department employees and assets of the Landfill Fund.
This the 7th day of December, 1998.
Item 11 – Resolution Recommending Approval of U.S. 15/501 Major Investment Study with Conditions, Phase I Final Report and Recommendations for Phase II.
Transportation Planner David Bonk briefly reviewed the Phase I report which included changes requested by the Council: to remove consideration of freeway construction between Franklin Street and I-40, and include busway technology as fixed guideway alternative. He said that the report also included additions recommended by the staff. Mr. Bonk also said that the Policy Committee modified the report to include the two recommendations made by the Council. He noted that the Manager recommended that the Council recommend to the Transportation Advisory Committee the approval of the Phase I report and that the items listed in the Resolution be incorporated into Phase II.
Council Member McClintock said that she did not understand the fifth item under the additional recommendations. Mr. Bonk said that in Phase I more services were added to the 15/501 corridor, but now it is felt that the service area should be expanded as well.
Mayor pro tem Capowski asked why, since there are no bicyclists and pedestrians on 15/501, item #3 to “Improve the modeling process to better reflect bicycle and walk activity under future land use patterns,” is being recommended. Mr. Bonk said that was to encourage areas for bicyclists and pedestrians in future land-use development.
Mayor pro tem Capowski said that he felt that the plan should keep bicyclists and pedestrians off 15/501, which is a very hostile area. He felt that the realities of rail transit should be looked at. Mayor pro tem Capowski noted that the consultant had said that any new development would increase the cars, as well as rail use. He felt that, looking at the charts projecting rail riders, there would not be enough to justify the projected high costs, and would result in very little reduction in traffic congestion.
Mr. Bonk said that 9,000 riders per day on a fixed guideway corridor is viewed as a basis for a successful system. He said that although congestion is not going to stop in the corridor, if there is no guideway system, traffic would increase with growth.
Council Member Brown felt that it was a step forward that the Town was looking at a bus system as well as a rail system.
Mayor Waldorf said that it was a busway and diesel-powered light rail. Mr. Bonk said that the busway was not that much less expensive than the rail alternative.
Mayor pro tem Capowski asked what was the local cost share for the rail line. Mr. Bonk said that it would depend on which federal funding was tapped into. Mr. Bonk said that the local cost share would be a combination of State and local taxes.
Council Member Brown wanted to be sure that the roads being considered for bikeways and pedestrian walkways were the circulator roads rather than 15/501.
Council Member Evans noted that the proposed bikeways and pedestrian walkways were for all of the general area, rather than a particular place.
Council Member McClintock wanted to reword or eliminate Items 3 and 4 of the recommendations. She had a problem with the consultants recommendations and did not see any changes in the land use patterns coming. Mr. Bonk said that the bikeway concern was that the modeling structure used by State and urban areas was one-dimensional, predicting automobiles, but not reflecting bikeways or railways.
Council Member McClintock wanted to change Items 3 and 4 and substitute the word “Include” for the words “Improve” and “Enhance.” She felt that the logic used by the consultants was faulty. Mr. Bonk said that the model used did not include bicycle and walk trips, only auto and transit trips.
Mayor Waldorf said that the consultants were bound by federal DOT models, and felt that the suggestions were reasonable.
Council Member McClintock said that she was interested in getting realistic figures.
Council Member Bateman felt that the word “includes” was a neutral verb and that Council Member McClintock’s suggestion was acceptable.
COUNCIL MEMBER MCCLINTOCK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BATEMAN, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 18 APPROVING COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE DRAFT U.S. 15/501 MAJOR INVESTMENT STUDY PHASE I REPORT FOR SUBMISSION TO THE POLICY OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE, WITH AN AMENDMENT TO ITEMS 3, AND 4 TO SUBSTITUTE THE WORD “INCLUDES” FOR THE WORDS “IMPROVE” AND “ENHANCE.” THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
A RESOLUTION APPROVING COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE US 15-501
MAJOR INVESTMENT STUDY PHASE I REPORT FOR SUBMISSION TO THE DURHAM-CHAPEL
HILL-CARRBORO TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE (98-12-7/R-18)
WHEREAS, the US 15-501 Major Investment Study Phase I Report has been prepared; and
WHEREAS, the Phase I Report includes an analysis of various alternative transportation improvements to the US 15-501 Boulevard corridor; and
WHEREAS, the Town of Chapel Hill has reviewed the analysis and recommendations of the Phase I Report; and
WHEREAS, the Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Transportation Advisory Committee has requested public comment on the Phase I Report;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council endorses the recommendations of the US 15-501 Major Investment Study Phase I Report.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that that the Phase II Report incorporate the following items:
· Identify and evaluate the Meadowmont (A) and Fordham Boulevard (B) fixed guideway corridors in the UNC central campus area from UNC Hospital to Fordham Boulevard.
· Incorporate capacity improvements related to transportation system management enhancements along US 15-501 into the analysis.
· Include in the modeling process bicycle and walk activity under future land use patterns.
· Include in the modeling process changes in travel behavior for households located in fixed guideway station areas.
· Improve the projected expansion of future local transit service to broaden the population served by transit.
· Provide a detailed comparison of the operating and capital requirements of rail and busway technologies and an evaluation of the possible differences of the technologies ability to impact ridership and land use decisions.
This the 7th day of December, 1998.
Mr. Horton reported on the possible acquisition by the Town of non-University owned properties on the south side of Highway 54 between Barbee Chapel Road and Finley Golf Course Road. He said that the staff had met with the owners of the several tracts involved and, based on the figures received from the owners, the total cost to the Town to purchase the land would be an estimated $10 million dollars. Mr. Horton said that this could be financed by General Obligation Bonds, installment purchase contract, Certificates of Participation, or some other financial considerations. He also reminded the Council that it continues to have a responsibility to proceed with consideration of the pending special use permit applications in its quasi-judicial role even as it considers possible acquisition.
Council Member McClintock said that the Council could have bought the land for a lot less money before it was zoned, but it was too expensive now. She also told Mayor pro tem Capowski that she thought that the idea had been a good one.
Mayor pro tem Capowski thanked Mr. Horton for the investigation and stated that the Merritt pasture, purchased as greenspace, continued to be a wonderful asset. He also said that he felt that the Town should do something similar for the east side.
Council Member Foy said that if the Council was serious about acquiring greenspace on the east side of Town, the Lloyd Farm was the only property available, about 170 acres, and the Council might look into that property.
Mayor Waldorf said that the Greenways Commission would be reporting to the Council in January and she would be interested in what they recommended. She said that she also was interested in the Legion property.
Council Member Brown said that she thought the mass transit line went through the Lloyd Farm.
in the Highway 54 Entryway Corridor
Mr. Karpinos reported on information provided to the Council in response to a citizen petition proposing consideration of enacting a moratorium on the development in the NC 54 entryway corridor. He said that no action was recommended by the staff. Mr. Karpinos summarized the key points regarding a moratorium: (1) the reasons for a moratorium should be clearly stated in the ordinance calling the moratorium, expressed in terms of a problem(s) that are of a nature such that ongoing development without some intervening action would result in public harm; (2) the moratorium ordinance should state a geographic area to be covered by the moratorium, along with a specific time frame for the moratorium; (3) the moratorium ordinance should state the actions to be taken during the moratorium that would address the stated problem(s); (4) a moratorium would generally not affect vested rights. Under the Town’s Development Ordinance, a special use permit constitutes a “site specific development plan;” (5) a moratorium ordinance should identify what, if any, pending or proposed development, would be allowed during the period of the moratorium; and (6) issues related to effective date and pending applications would need to be considered if a moratorium were to be established.
Council Member McClintock asked if the Council would be willing to consider, at a later time after study, a moratorium of three or four months for special use permits along the area of Highway 54 under consideration, until a solution for the pedestrian use problem could be found. She felt that would give the Town some clout with the Department of Transportation (DOT).
Council Member Evans said that she felt that the pedestrian access was reviewed in depth by all Boards and the Council and that Council had required an underground passageway at the Meadowmont site. She said that several other ideas for improving pedestrian access had been raised with the developers.
Council Member McClintock said that there are ways of making pedestrian crossing safe, and she felt that the Council owed it to the people living in this area to get things worked out before approving projects. She felt that her request would be a legitimate way to use a moratorium.
Mayor pro tem Capowski questioned how many people would use a 150-foot tunnel. He said that there would be a notion of the question of safety.
COUNCIL MEMBER MCCLINTOCK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER FOY, THAT THE COUNCIL ASK THE STAFF TO DRAFT A MORATORIUM RESOLUTION WITH THE NECESSARY COMPONENTS IN IT AND WITH SOME OPTIONS AND SUGGESTIONS, FOR THE AREA TO BE COVERED, THE TIME, AND SUCH, TO APPLY TO HIGHWAY 54 AND TO BRING IT BACK TO THE COUNCIL FOR DISCUSSION AT THEIR FIRST MEETING IN JANUARY, THE PURPOSE BEING TO SECURE SAFE PASSAGE ACROSS 54 AT HAMILTON ROAD AND AT THE FRIDAY CENTER.
Council Member Wiggins pointed out the staff’s workload and asked the staff what impact the request would have on other projects and proposals already under consideration. She asked if they would have to be put off.
Council Member Brown asked Council Member McClintock what could be accomplished in three or four months. She noted that the Council would be meeting with the DOT in the first part of the year. Council Member McClintock responded that it would give the Town time to get concessions with the DOT. Council Member McClintock said that she felt that if the Council was united they could get some real pedestrian improvements.
Mayor Waldorf said that she did not think a moratorium was the way to accomplish this goal. She felt that the Town should work with the DOT and the developer. Mayor Waldorf said that she saw a moratorium as being very complicated.
Council Member Brown said that they had to consider what the possible solutions are, and what the cost implication would be, before setting up the process.
Mr. Horton said that several factors would make it very difficult to meet a January schedule. He noted that the Council had set up a process to have a group of citizens work with the Transportation Board to consider solutions to pedestrian crossing, particularly at Hamilton Road. Mr. Horton said that the Town would have to advertise for applicants, make the appointments in January, and then it would be several months before a report came back. He also said that the negotiation process with the DOT is out of the Town’s hands. Mr. Horton said that, with a hearing already scheduled for January, he felt that a resolution from the staff would probably be possible in the spring.
Council Member Evans said that the pedestrian crossing problem already exists, before the future development in the area. She felt it would be more constructive to enlist the developer’s help.
Council Member McClintock said that she didn’t sense support from the Council for her motion, so she would withdraw it, but she still felt that it would be a good idea.
COUNCIL MEMBER MCCLINTOCK WITHDREW THE MOTION.
Council Member Brown asked if this moratorium could be done at a later time, and how it would affect the projects already before the Council. Mr. Horton said that it would depend on what happened at the special use permits hearing. He said that he felt it could be done in February or March.
Council Member Wiggins said, in response to a remark by Mayor pro tem Capowski that Highway 54 was going to turn into another Glenwood Avenue, that she felt that there was no comparison between the two. She said that the congestion of wall-to-wall office buildings, malls, and the like on Glenwood Avenue would never happen on Highway 54 in Chapel Hill, where the Town of Chapel Hill had control of development.
Mayor pro tem Capowski said that he was referring to cars, which create the danger.
Council Member Wiggins said that she felt that somebody’s numbers concerning traffic were incorrect.
Item 14 – Consideration of Ethics Guidelines for Town Advisory Boards and Commissions
Assistant to the Manager Ruffin Hall presented the staff’s report to the Council highlighting four components: 1) a proposed set of ethical guidelines to serve as a policy for the Town’s boards and commissions; 2) a suggested addition to the boards and commissions application of a check box indicating a promise to comply with the Council’s guidelines; 3) an additional pledge under the boards and commissions oath of office that states that one agrees to comply with the guidelines; and 4) examples of ethical guidelines from other communities. Mr. Hall said that the Manager recommended that the Council refer this material to the advisory boards and commissions to get comments from them and then to consider that information at the Council’s February 22, 1999 meeting.
Council Member McClintock asked the Town Attorney how the Council could easily set the same standards for the Council as they set for the advisory boards and commissions. She also noted that the Council does have something like the ethical guidelines proposed for the boards and commissions but that it only concerns financial disclosure and not some of the other categories covered by the guidelines for the boards and commissions. Council Member McClintock said that she thinks that the Council should have the same standards as the boards and commissions.
Council Member McClintock suggested adding to Part II, reporting requirements, a statement such as “that the board member can ask to be disqualified at the time of the meeting” in order to give clear guidelines to the boards and commissions. She said that if the Council refers this to the boards and commissions the addition of this statement will help them to understand what they are doing by pinpointing the timing of when a conflict of interest may occur and when they can respond to a possible conflict of interest. Council Member McClintock offered an example to show how a conflict may arise in the future that may not be anticipated when the applicant applies to be on a board or commission.
Council Member Evans said that
asking for so much information from the boards and commissions applicants
“exhibits a total lack of trust” to the community. She suggests that the Council also refer Greensboro’s statement
concerning ethical guidelines as an option to the boards and commissions. Council Member Evans noted that Greensboro
uses a simple, one paragraph statement.
She said that she thinks the Council wants to encourage a greater
diversity of people to serve on the boards, not less. Council Member Evans said that she is not sure what the Manager’s
proposal is focused on. She said that
she was afraid that the disclosure of position and employment interests will
discourage citizens from applying.
Council Member Evans noted that, in the past, she has seen members of
the boards ask the Town Attorney if they have a conflict of interest. She said that sometimes they voluntarily
remove themselves and sometimes the Attorney advises them in one way and they
may take another direction. Council
Member
Evans noted that the boards and commissions members are honorable people and
that they only have one vote and, therefore, will not influence a
decision. She said that she is
concerned about what this says to our citizens, who we want to voluntarily
serve and advise the Council.
Council Member Bateman said that she thought the tenor of the Council’s last discussion of the ethical guidelines indicated an interest in making things broader rather than more specific. She also said that she had expected a report presenting a range of options from ones that are quite specific to ones that are very broad. Council Member Bateman said she is inclined to support guidelines which are clear and broad and which do not require an applicant to bring in a job description and the extensive disclosure that is in the Manager’s recommendation. She said that she does not think that what the Council has before them are really guidelines. Council Member Bateman said that they are more prescriptive than what she would support for ethical guidelines. She said that she appreciates the spirit of the Council to reiterate to the boards and commissions the Council’s expectations for them. Council Member Bateman asked if the Council should adopt the resolution to refer the Manager’s recommendation to the boards and commissions knowing that some of the Council Members are not entirely comfortable with it and then having the boards and commissions spend time on the guidelines when the Council will later pick it apart or if the Council should discuss the recommendation in detail before referring it to the boards and commissions.
COUNCIL MEMBER FOY MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 20.
Mayor Waldorf asked if the motion included amendments. Council Member Foy said it did not, adding that he thought it was fine to send it to the boards and commissions and then to discuss it when it comes back to the Council.
Council Member Evans asked if referring the guidelines to the boards and commissions now says to them that the Council supports them as written. She said that she would vote against the resolution. Council Member Evans said that she would support sending the boards and commissions several options but is uncomfortable in sending the recommendation of the Manager and Attorney as the recommendation of the Council.
Council Member Foy said that it is not a Council recommendation but that the resolution states that the Council “requests comments from advisory boards and commissions.” He said that, although the guidelines are several pages long, they are just asking what property the applicant owns, what businesses do they have interest in that are doing business with the Town, and who their employer is. Council Member Foy said that he does not think that this is too burdensome. He said that he thinks that the Council should see what the boards and commissions say about it. Council Member Foy noted that the Council Members would have an opinion about it when it comes back anyway.
Council Member Evans asked if they could send the Code of Ordinances that Greensboro has as an Option B.
Council Member Foy said he would be happy to send the whole packet of material to the boards and commissions.
Mr. Cal Horton suggested that the Council could send a transcript of the Council’s discussions, if the Council wished.
Council Member Bateman noted that the boards and commissions have shown that they can think independently of the Council. She said that she is not concerned that they will just “rubber stamp” the recommendation.
Mayor pro tem Capowski noted that the Council is just asking the opinion of the boards and commissions about something which relates to them before the Council makes a decision about it.
COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN SECONDED THE MOTION.
Council Member McClintock said that she does not believe that the ethical guidelines will discourage participation in government because, for example, things which are harder, such as college applications to the best schools, do not necessarily discourage people from applying. She said that she thinks that what the Council is doing is good and that it engenders confidence and trust in Town government which the citizens will appreciate.
Council Member Wiggins said that she would vote to refer it but, given the lack of diversity on the boards and commissions, she is not sure if the Council will get feedback from the diversity that is represented in the community. She noted that there are some citizens who feel that there is a preoccupation by many people with who one is employed by, one’s title and position. Council Member Wiggins said that there are members of the Afro-American community in Chapel Hill who feel like white Chapel Hill residents first want to know these things. She said that the request for job descriptions in the ethical guidelines is another reinforcement of the perception that in Chapel Hill you are not someone unless you have the right employer or are employed by a certain institution at the right level. Council Member Wiggins noted that the Council would probably not get this sort of feedback from the boards and commissions because of the minimal minority presence on them. She said that she decided to express this opinion now because there was a suggestion to send a transcript of this discussion to the boards and commissions along with the packet of information. Council Member Wiggins said that she would support the resolution if the transcript is included. She stressed the need to be sensitive to issues such as these.
Mayor Waldorf said that she thinks this packet of ethical guidelines is excessive. She said that she agreed with Council Member Bateman that it is quite prescriptive. Mayor Waldorf said that Council Member Foy gave a nice summary of what is asked for, but noted that for the average person it is not easy to read. She requested that when it is passed on to the boards and commissions that there is a clear cover memorandum that summarizes what it is asking for and that clearly indicates that this matter is under discussion. Mayor Waldorf asked if it was okay to say that the Council passes it without any prejudice and that the Council would like their feedback. The Council agreed. Mayor Waldorf said that she does not want the boards and commissions to assume that the Council wants them to agree with it or else just resign if they don’t like it.
Council Member McClintock suggested that, to help the boards and commissions understand what the Council is talking about, the staff outline examples and “what if” scenarios to be included in the memorandum.
THE COUNCIL ADOPTED RESOLUTION 20 UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
A RESOLUTION REFERRING ETHICS GUIDELINES FOR TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL
ADVISORY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS (98-12-7/R-20)
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council refers the proposed Ethics Guidelines for Advisory Boards and Commissions to all advisory boards and commissions.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill requests comments from advisory boards and commissions in time for consideration at the February 22, 1999 meeting of the Council.
This the 7th day of December, 1998.
Mr. Karpinos asked if the staff could bring back their report on how the ethical guidelines for the boards and commissions could be set as standards for the Council as well on February 22, 1999, at the time when the boards and commissions would come back with their recommendations. The Council agreed by consensus.
Council Member McClintock asked a question regarding the memorandum concerning a public hearing for amending the Development Ordinance to create a new district. She wondered, with the proposed standards set forth in the Development Standards Table by the Orange Community Housing Corporation, if there would be a way to guarantee affordability. Mr. Horton said that one modification would be to require that a component of the development plans being approved under the new set of standards be mechanisms to ensure affordability. He said that a “conditional use” zone could not be put in place unless specifically authorized by the Council.
Council Member McClintock suggested that a policy be developed to go along with creating a new zoning area, that this Council be on record as using the zoning with the intent that it be affordable housing.
Mayor pro tem Capowski asked the Town Attorney if “conditional” meant that the new zoning could not take effect until a special use permit was granted. Mr. Karpinos answered that it would require a special use permit.
Council Member Foy said that there was language in the ordinance for the zoning to ensure affordability.
Council Member Evans said that the resolution called for a Public Hearing.
Mr. Horton said that a proposal was always made to the Council to take under consideration at a Public Hearing. He said that a special conditional use zone would only be applied by Council action.
COUNCIL MEMBER FOY MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 3. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
A RESOLUTION
CALLING A PUBLIC HEARING ON A PROPOSAL TO CREATE A NEW ZONING DISTRICT
(98-12-7/R-3)
WHEREAS, the Chapel Hill Town Council seeks to encourage development of affordable housing opportunities in Chapel Hill; and
WHEREAS, the Orange Community Housing Corporation has prepared a proposal suggesting how a new set of development standards might help promote development of such housing; and
WHEREAS, no current zoning district in the Town’s Development Ordinance contains standards that would permit the development of housing as proposed by the Orange Community Housing Corporation;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council calls a Public Hearing on March 15, 1999, to consider amending the Development Ordinance to create a new zoning district with characteristics generally as described in a Manager’s Memorandum to the Council dated December 7, 1998.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this proposal is referred to the Town Manager and the Planning Board for comment and recommendation to the Council.
This the 7th day of December, 1998.
Council Member McClintock asked if the Town intended to deliver municipal services to area 5 in the annexation report, and also to the Northwoods area. Mr. Horton said that each year the staff brings to the Council all the areas under consideration for annexation, so if the area does meet standards, the Council can annex the area if it so chooses. He said that some of the areas may have water or sewer services, some may not.
Council Member McClintock asked what if the area does not have the services. Mr. Horton said then it would not be annexed.
COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 4. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
A RESOLUTION IDENTIFYING THE AREAS
DESCRIBED WITHIN AS BEING UNDER CONSIDERATION FOR ANNEXATION (98-12-07/R-4)
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill:
SECTION 1
That pursuant to G.S. 160A-49(i), the following described areas are identified as being under consideration for annexation by the Town of Chapel Hill, under provisions of Part 3, Article 4A of Chapter 160A of the General Statutes of North Carolina:
Generally, the unincorporated areas between Chapel Hill’s existing corporate limits and the Town’s Urban Services Boundary as identified on the 1986 Land Use Plan that was adopted by the Council on July 14, 1986.
The above-referenced areas are specifically shaded on the attached map (“Areas Under Consideration for Future Annexation – December 7, 1998”), which shall be incorporated into this resolution by reference, in accordance with N.C. General Statute 160A-49(i)
SECTION 2
That pursuant to G.S. 160A-49(i), persons subject to annexation by this Resolution of Consideration are hereby notified of their rights under North Carolina General Statute Subsections 160A-49(f1) and 160A-49(f2).
Subsections 160A-49(f1) and (f2) provide as follows:
f1) Property Subject to Present-Use Value Appraisal. -- If an area described in an annexation ordinance includes agricultural land, horticultural land, or forestland that on the effective date of annexation is:
(1) Land that is being taxed at present-use value pursuant to G.S. 105-277.4; or
(2) Land that:
a. Was on the date of the resolution of intent for annexation being used for actual production and is eligible for present-use value taxation under G.S. 105-277.4, but the land has not been in use for actual production for the required time under G.S. 105-277.3; and
b. The assessor for the county where the land subject to annexation is located has certified to the city that the land meets the requirements of this subdivision
the annexation becomes effective as to that property pursuant to subsection (f2) of this section.
(f2) Effective Date of Annexation for Certain Property. -- Annexation of property subject to annexation under subsection (f1) of this section shall become effective:
(1) Upon the effective date of the annexation ordinance, the property is considered part of the city only (i) for the purpose of establishing city boundaries for additional annexations pursuant to this Article and (ii) for the exercise of city authority pursuant to Article 19 of this Chapter.
(2) For all other purposes, the annexation becomes effective as to each tract of such property or part thereof on the last day of the month in which that tract or part thereof becomes ineligible for classification pursuant to G.S. 105-227.4 or no longer meets the requirements of subdivision (f1)(2) of this section. Until annexation of a tract or a part of a tract becomes effective pursuant to this subdivision, the tract or part of a tract is not subject to taxation by the city under Article 12 of Chapter 105 of the General Statutes nor is the tract or part of a tract entitled to services provided by the city.
SECTION 3
That a copy of this resolution shall be filed with the Town Clerk.
This the 7th day of December, 1998.
Item 5L
Mr. Horton said that the Town had collected data for the installation of traffic diverters on Rogerson and Oakwood Drives and is asking that the installation of these diverters be made an experiment for one year.
Mark Broadwell, resident of Rogerson Drive, spoke to the Council in favor of the traffic diverters. He noted that there were 120 signatures on the petition for the traffic diverters. Mr. Broadwell said that one of the findings of the staff was that there would be no significant traffic increases on the surrounding roads. He felt that a trial basis would be a fair compromise. Mr. Broadwell said that the diverters will be a great safety benefit.
Beth Kell, resident of Rogerson Drive, spoke to the Council in favor of the traffic diverters. She said that the two roads in question were short streets, making cut-throughs easy and fast, more so than the other surrounding roads, which were winding and already had stop signs on them. Ms. Kell said that she would like to see the traffic remain on the main arteries, not go into the surrounding roads. She pointed out that if, after a one-year trial, it is found that more traffic is going onto Cleland Road and Burning Tree Drive, then the problem could be evaluated again. Ms. Kell added that the two roads, Rogerson and Oakwood Drives, were not being made one-way streets, only having diverters installed.
Council Member Evans said that one neighbor had already reported that the stop signs had made a difference. She said that she would hope that the Council would not succumb to preventing parking on these streets, and hopes that there would be an evaluation in one year, of any additional traffic on the surrounding roads.
Mr. Karpinos stated that there would be no tickets issued for turning into the roads with the diverters, because the Town had not passed an ordinance to issue tickets.
Mr. Bonk said that the Town could pass the ordinance if it wishes after the one-year trial basis.
COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BATEMAN, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 11. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
A RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE TOWN MANAGER TO INSTALL TRAFFIC DIVERTERS ON ROGERSON DRIVE AND OAKWOOD DRIVE ON A ONE-YEAR TRIAL BASIS (98-12-7/R-11)
WHEREAS,
the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill has received requests to better manage
and control traffic in the Little Creek neighborhood area; and
WHEREAS,
Town staff has completed an area traffic study and compiled the resultant data;
and
WHEREAS,
the Council has had stop signs installed at several intersections to help
control traffic and the Council is interested in further traffic management
efforts;
NOW,
THEREFORE, BE IT resolved by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill, that the
Council directs the Town Manager to have traffic diverters installed on a trial
basis on Rogerson Drive and Oakwood Drive at their intersection with N.C. 54.
BE
IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council directs the Manager to report back after
approximately one year regarding the effectiveness of the diverters and whether
or not they should be made permanent installations.
This
the 7th day of December, 1998.
Council Member Bateman said that she was in favor of receiving and referring the communications received from the Parks and Recreation Commission. She wanted to add that she and Council Member McClintock were part of the At-Risk Youths Committee and that they were looking at the services available from the local towns and the county for this particular population of youths. Council Member Bateman said that they are also looking at a mechanism for collaborating with the schools. She asked the staff to wait until the Committee brings their report and then to add it to the Council agenda in January.
COUNCIL MEMBER BATEMAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 13. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
A RESOLUTION REFERRING TWO COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PARKS AND RECREATION
COMMISSION TO THE MANAGER FOR A REPORT WITH RECOMMENDATIONS (98-12-7/R-13)
WHEREAS, the Parks and Recreation Commission has passed communications regarding a memorial for Hank Anderson and the need to address joint field and facility interests of the Town and the Chapel Hill-Carrboro Schools to the Town Council;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council refers two Parks and Recreation Commission communications to the Manager for a report with recommendations.
This the 7th day of December, 1998.
COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER FOY, TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
The meeting stood adjourned at 10:23 p.m.