SUMMARY MINUTES OF A REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING

OF THE CHAPEL HILL TOWN COUNCIL

MONDAY, APRIL 26, 1999 AT 7:00 P.M.

 

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

 

Council Members present were Flicka Bateman, Joyce Brown, Joe Capowski, Pat Evans, Kevin Foy, Julie McClintock and Edith Wiggins.  Council Member Lee Pavăo was absent, excused.

 

Staff members present were Town Manager Cal Horton, Assistant Town Managers Sonna Loewenthal and Florentine Miller, Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos, Assistant to the Manager Ruffin Hall, Parks and Recreation Director Kathryn Spatz, Parks and Recreation Administrative Analyst Bill Webster, Finance Director Jim Baker, Housing Director Tina Vaughn, Long Range Planning Coordinator Chris Berndt, Long Range Planner Claudia Paine, Community Development Coordinator Loryn Barnes, Police Captain Greg Jarvies, Personnel Director Pat Thomas and Town Clerk Joyce Smith.

 

Item 1 — Ceremonies (none)

 

Item 2 — Public Hearings (none)

 

Item 3 — Petitions by Citizens and Announcements by Council Members

 

a.       Petitions by Citizens

 

(1)     By John Hawkins of the Comprehensive Plan Work Group

Mr. Hawkins reported that the Work Group had completed its goals and objectives phase at a public forum on April 13th and were in the process of finalizing its goals and objectives document.  He pointed out that time spent with the Town’s consultant, Wallace, Roberts and Todd, had been fairly light and infrequent.  Mr. Hawkins said that as they began the most important phase of their work, the Work Group realized that they were running low on consultant resources.  Mr. Hawkins reported that the Work Group had asked the Council for $10,000 which would allow them to have the consultant at each meeting over the next two months. 

 

Council Member Bateman asked how much time the consultant would be able to spend if the Work Group did not receive the extra $10,000.  Mr. Hawkins replied that there would be enough left from previous allocations for one more meeting, adding that it would take three meetings to produce a decent draft for the implementation strategies. 

 

Council Member Bateman asked if the Town would still get a quality product without the additional funding.  Mr. Hawkins replied that the Work Group needed to work with the consultant in order to do the job well. 

 

COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WIGGINS, TO RECEIVE AND REFER THE PETITION TO THE MANAGER. 

 

Council Member McClintock asked the Manager if the agreement with the consultant would allow the Town to cut back in some other area.  Mr. Horton replied that one of the reasons the Work Group was asking for funds was because the Town had scaled funding back by $25,000-30,000 and the consultant already was working within the tight budget that the staff recommended and the Council established.  He pointed out that the Work Group was spending more time than had been anticipated, and added that it would be particularly important to have these services if they were expected to have a draft document by the fall. 

 

Council Member Foy asked how much the Council already had allocated.  Mr. Horton replied that it was $100,000, with another $50,000 in the coming year. 

 

Council Member Foy asked if Mr. Hawkins could think of any reason why the Town might be asked for more money.  Mr. Hawkins replied that he could not, adding that they would take that up with the Council at a meeting on the coming Wednesday.

 

Mayor Waldorf asked if the Work Group felt it was important for the consultant to have at least a couple of meetings with the University’s consultants.  Mr. Hawkins replied that it was important.   

 

Mayor Waldorf suggested making a meeting with the University part of the request for $10,000. 

 

Council Member McClintock said that one in-depth meeting ought to be enough.  Mayor Waldorf agreed.  Mr. Hawkins noted that the University’s schedule was fixed, but said that he would try to schedule a meeting of the consultants. 

 

Council Member Brown asked if meeting with the University would interfere with the Work Group’s schedule.  Mr. Horton said that Consultant Adam Gross had indicated that a few hours would be sufficient.

 

THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

 

(2)          By Habitat for Humanity

Mayor Waldorf explained that the Council had a written petition from Habitat for Humanity. 

 

Mayor pro tem Capowski noted that Habitat for Humanity used volunteers, which meant that the houses needed to be small.  He pointed out that this countered the Council’s desire for clustered housing.  Mayor pro tem Capowski requested that Habitat for Humanity explore how to build attached simple housing. 

 

Mayor Waldorf expressed the same concern. 

 

COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WIGGINS, TO RECEIVE AND REFER THE PETITION TO THE MANAGER.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

 

(3)          By Carol Crumley

Council Member Joyce Brown presented Ms. Crumley’s petition regarding structures on the Green Tract and trees and plants to be identified.  She explained that Ms. Crumley had identified the remains of structures that she thought had been homes, fields and work places of black farm workers, a group which was underrepresented in Orange County history.  Council Member Brown said that Ms. Crumley had petitioned the Council to have an archeologist do some preliminary research in County archives to identify the structures that remain there.  She added that Ms. Crumley had also asked to have a forester or botanist identify the locations of the most sensitive flora and work with site planners to preserve the area.

 

Council Member Brown requested that the Town study the area, biologically, archeologically and botanically.  She said she hoped that the three governing bodies would study the area before parceling it out.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER FOY, TO RECEIVE AND REFER THE PETITION TO THE MANAGER.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

 

(4)          By Chip Sutter from Triangle United Way

Mr. Sutter read a letter explaining that the Board of Trustees of the United Way of Greater Orange County and the Board of Directors of the Orange County Partnership for Young Children were collaborating to conduct a community assessment of Orange County citizens.  He explained that the goal was to identify individual, family, and community assets, needs, service gaps and opportunities in the County.  Mr. Sutter asked for the Council’s endorsement, plus $5,000 from the Town for its share of the $76,121 community assessment.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER FOY MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO RECEIVE AND REFER THE PETITION TO THE MANAGER.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

 

Council Member Foy asked the Manager to also determine whether Wake and Durham Counties had done similar assessments and, if so, what the outcome had been. 

 

(5)          By Don Bolton

Mr. Bolton, on behalf of the School in the Community, requested use of the Hargraves Center until June 4, 1999, from 9:00 a.m. until 1:00 p.m., in order to facilitate completion of graduation requirements for eight students.

 

Council Member Bateman asked where the school was currently operating.  Mr. Bolton replied that they were “homeless.” 

 

Mayor Waldorf clarified that the School was asking for space for four hours a day, five days a week, for eight children. 

 

Council Member Foy recommended giving the Manager the authority to make this possible without coming back to the Council. 

 

COUNCIL MEMBER FOY MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO GRANT THE REQUEST.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

 

b.       Announcements by Council Members

 

(1)     By Council Member Wiggins regarding Littleton, Colorado

COUNCIL MEMBER WIGGINS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER FOY, THAT THE MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL SEND A LETTER OF CONDOLENCE FROM THE CITIZENS OF CHAPEL HILL TO THE CITIZENS OF LITTLETON, COLORADO, REGARDING THE RECENT SCHOOL SHOOTINGS THERE.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

 

(2)          By Council Member McClintock regarding the Cape Fear River Assembly 

Council Member McClintock explained that she had represented the Council at the Cape Fear River Assembly, which was a group of environmentalists, politicians, and business people, who were working together to conserve and protect the Cape Fear Watershed area.

 

(3)          By Council Member Bateman

Council Member Bateman announced that she would leave for another meeting at 8:10 p.m. and would return at approximately 9:10 p.m. 

 

Mayor Waldorf noted that Council Member Bateman would be considered officially excused.  The Council agreed by consensus. 

 

(4)     Regarding Closed Session on April 28th

Council Members discussed meeting with Attorney Michael Brough during a closed session on Wednesday, April 28th, after the budget work session.

 

Mayor pro tem Capowski stated that he would rather wait until the Council had received the court order and had a chance to read and understand it.  Other Council Members agreed.  

 

Item 4 — Consent Agenda

 

COUNCIL MEMBER MCCLINTOCK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 1.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

 


A RESOLUTION ADOPTING VARIOUS RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES

(99-4-26/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:

 

a.

Minutes of March 17, 19 and 24, 1999.

b.

Resolution regarding the disposition of surplus property.  (R-2).

c.

Ordinance amending a project ordinance to accept transit grant funds and to provide Town funds for construction of replacement park/ride facility and the re-paving of the Highway 54 East park/ride facility.  (O-1a & b).

d.

Ordinance establishing a project budget for a transit capital grant for the purchase of up to six buses, including two to four mid-size buses.

(O-2a & b).

e.

Ordinance amending the 1998-99 operating budget to include a transit grant awarded by the N.C. Department of Transportation for technology assistance.  (O-3).

f.

Resolution continuing the public hearing regarding the proposed Development Ordinance Text Amendment to add a fifth finding to regulations. (R-3.1).

 

This the 26th day of April, 1999.

 

 

A RESOLUTION DECLARING 302 ITEMS OF PERSONAL PROPERTY TO BE SURPLUS AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE DISPOSAL OF SAID PROPERTY IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS (99-4-26/R-2)

 

WHEREAS, Article 23 of N. C. General Statute 160A and Section 4.16 of the Charter of the Town of Chapel Hill authorizes the Town to dispose of surplus property; and

 

WHEREAS, the Town desires to dispose of certain items of personal property;

 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the following items of personal property are hereby declared surplus:

 

VEHICLES:

 

QUANTITY                ITEM

 

(1)                                1994 Chevrolet 4S

(1)                                1986 Ford 4S

(1)                                1992 Chevrolet 4S

(3)                                1989 Ford 4S                         

(1)                                1987 Chevrolet 4S

 

EQUIPMENT:

 

Weedeaters

Mowers

John Deere 350 Crawler (No engine)

Chainsaws

 

MISCELLANEOUS

 

(3)  Pallets of Auto Parts

Signal Light Heads

Miscellaneous Concrete Forms

Tamp

(4)  Metal Signs

(1) Pallet of New Miscellaneous Parts

(2)  Pallets of Used Miscellaneous Parts

(2) Torque Wrenches (Broken)

(1)  Battery Charger

 

OFFICE FURNITURE & EQUIPMENT:

 

(2)  Wooden Desks w/drawers

(2) Small Work Desks w/hutch

(1) 2-Drawer File Cabinet

(6)  Upholstered Meeting Room Chairs (Beige)

(1) Swivel Chair (Green and Black)

(1)  Pool Chair

(3) Folding Chairs

(1) Task Chair

(1)  Desk Chair on Wheels

(1) Small Desk w/2 Drawers

(1) Wall Map of Chapel Hill/Orange County

(8)  Phone Equipment Boxes

(1) Bulletin Board

(1)  Combination Safe

(11) Folding Tables

(1)  Selex 2580 Copier Machine

(1) Time Card Holder

(1)  Dry Eraser Board

(1) Floor-Style Ash Tray

(1)  Piece Table Glass (2x2 ˝)

(5) Boxes of Dot Matrix Labels (4x15/16)

(1)  Wooden Safety Concern Box

(2)  Phones

(1) Tin Box (8” Square)

(2)  Clay Flower Pots

Canvas First Aid Stretcher

(2)  Upholstered Chairs (Brown)

(70) Chairs

Desk

Blue Chair

Cash Register

Fan

Typewriter

(2)  Glass Cases   

Office Desk

Recorder

(3)  Old Office Chairs

(2) IBM III Typewriters

IBM II Selectric Typewriter

Panafax Machine

(3)  Burgundy Fabric Arm Chairs

(2) Light Brown Fabric Arm Chairs

(2)  Blue Vinyl Arm Chairs

(3)  Calculators (Ti)

Pallet Obsolete Desk Chairs

(9)  Used Money Bags w/locks (No Keys)

(20) New Money Bags w/locks and keys

Tappon Speedway 1000 Microwave

Miscellaneous Office Supplies

 

COMPUTERS AND ACCESSORIES:

 

PC Innovation Computer/Monitor/Keyboard

Hp Laserjet Series II Printer

Desk Scanner

CD Drive

Printer

AST Monitor

KPC Monitor

Compaq Monitor

Keyboard

Epson MX80 Dot Matrix Printer

Color Plotter w/extra Pens

HP Jet Direct Card

CPU

Compaq CPU

HP External Printer Server

Network Interface Cards (6)

Mouse (2)

Diskette File Boxes, 5 Ľ (3)

Jumbo Diskette File Box w/keys

Assorted Computer Manuals

Fax Machines (2)

HP Deskwriter 520 Printer

Typewriter

Cogni 50k CPU

Cogni 50000 CPU

Okidata OL400 CPU

Image Writer II Printer

PS/1 Monitor, IBM

Computer Keyboard (2)

Image Writer Printer

Wire Rack to Hold Printer (2)

Monitors (13)

AST Bravo Computers (2)

Gateway Computers (5)

Mac Monitors (5)

AMDEK Monitors (3)

Data Display

Packard Bell Monitors (2)

Keyboard (Apple)

Printer (Apple)

Panasonic KXP 2624

Keyboards (5)

Computers (3)

AV Units (3)

 

That the Purchasing Agent of the Town of Chapel Hill shall be and is hereby authorized to dispose of this surplus personal property in accordance with statutory requirements.

 

That the public auction is to take place on Saturday, May 8, 1999, at 10:00 a.m., at the Municipal Operations Facility, 1099 Airport Road.

 

That prior to the public auction the Purchasing Agent is authorized to dispose of any this personal property by sale, lease, exchange, sealed bid, or transfer to other governmental units in conformity with N. C. General Statutes 160A-274.

 

That the terms of sale shall be to the highest bidder for cash or other form of cash equivalent acceptable to the Purchasing Agent.  All sales shall be designated final on the day of the auction.

 


That all items shall be sold on an “as is” and “where is” basis and the Town makes no guarantee of and assumes no responsibility for any of the items.

 

That it shall be condition of sale that all items purchased shall be picked up and removed from the premises of the Municipal Operations Facility by 3:00 p.m. on the day of the auction.  Successful bidders shall bear the sole risk for loss of any items remaining on said premises past  the designated time.

 

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if any surplus property is not sold at the public auction, or sold, leased, exchanged or transferred to governmental agency, the Purchasing Agent is hereby authorized to sell said property by private negotiated sale in conformity with N. C. General Statute 160A-267.

 

This the 26th day April, 1999.

 

 

 

AN ORDINANCE TO ADOPT GRANT PROJECT ORDINANCES FOR TRANSIT PROJECTS (99-4-26/O-1a)

 

BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that, pursuant to Section 13.2 of Chapter 159 of the General Statutes of North Carolina, the following grant project ordinance is hereby adopted:

 

SECTION I

 

The project authorized is a Transit Capital and Planning Grant from FY1998 federal funds from an agreement with the Federal Transit Administration and the North Carolina Department of Transportation.

 

SECTION II

 

The Manager of the Town of Chapel Hill is hereby directed to proceed with the implementation of the project within the terms of the grant agreement executed with the Federal Transit Administration and the North Carolina Department of Transportation within the funds appropriated herein.

 

SECTION III 

 

The following revenue is anticipated to be available to the Town to complete activities as outlined in the project application.

 


Urbanized Area Formula Program

 

Federal Transit Administration (FTA)                $512,000

            NC Department of Transportation (NCDOT)                   64,000

            Town of Chapel Hill (local match)                                     64,000

 

                                                            TOTAL                        $640,000

 

SECTION IV

 

The following amounts are appropriated for the project.

 

            Construction Management Services                               $  70,000

            Lease of Land                                                                250,000

            Capital Improvements                                                     230,000

            Land Improvements                                                          90,000

 

                                                            TOTAL                        $640,000

 

SECTION V

 

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

 

SECTION VI

 

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

 

This the 26th day of April, 1999.

 

 


AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND “THE ORDINANCE CONCERNING APPROPRIATIONS AND THE RAISING OF REVENUE FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JULY 1, 1998 (98-4-26/O-1b)

 

BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Budget Ordinance entitled “An Ordinance Concerning Appropriations and the Raising of Revenue for the Fiscal Year Beginning July 1, 1998” as duly adopted on June 8, 1998 be and the same is hereby amended as follows:

 

ARTICLE I

 

                                                  Current                                                                       Revised

APPROPRIATIONS                  Budget                Increase           Decrease                  Budget

 

TRANSPORTATION

   CAPITAL RESERVE

   FUND

 

            Contribution to

                Grant Fund               188,150                  64,000                                         252,150           

 

 

ARTICLE II

 

                                                  Current                                                                       Revised

REVENUES                               Budget                Increase           Decrease                  Budget

 

TRANSPORTATION

   CAPITAL RESERVE

   FUND

 

            Fund Balance               122,150                 64,000                                           186,150

 

 

This the 26th day of April, 1999.

 

 


AN ORDINANCE TO ADOPT GRANT PROJECT ORDINANCES FOR TRANSIT PROJECTS (99-4-26/O-2a)

 

BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that, pursuant to Section 13.2 of Chapter 159 of the General Statutes of North Carolina, the following grant project ordinance is hereby adopted:

 

SECTION I

 

The Discretionary Program (Formerly Section 3) funds authorized are from 1998 federal funds from an agreement with the Federal Transit Administration and the North Carolina Department of Transportation.

 

SECTION II

 

The Manager of the Town of Chapel Hill is hereby directed to proceed with the implementation of the project within the terms of the grant agreements executed with the Federal Transit Administration and the North Carolina Department of Transportation within the funds appropriated herein.

 

SECTION III

 

The following revenue is anticipated to be available to the Town to complete activities as outlined in the project application.

 

Discretionary Program (Formerly Section 3)

 

            Federal Transit Administration (FTA)                               $977,196

            NC Department of Transportation (NCDOT)                                122,150

            Town of Chapel Hill (local match)                                                  122,150

 

                                                                        TOTAL                        $1,221,495

 

SECTION IV

 

The following amounts are appropriated for the FY1998 Section 5309 project:

 

            Capital Equipment                                                                    $1,209,495

            Meetings and Training                                                          12,000

           

                                                                        TOTAL                        $1,221,495

 

This the 26th day of April, 1999.

 

 

 

AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND “THE ORDINANCE CONCERNING APPROPRIATIONS AND THE RAISING OF REVENUE FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JULY 1, 1998 (99-4-26/O-2b)

 

BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Budget Ordinance entitled “An Ordinance Concerning Appropriations and the Raising of Revenue for the Fiscal Year Beginning July 1, 1998” as duly adopted on June 8, 1998 be and the same is hereby amended as follows:

 

ARTICLE I

 

                                                  Current                                                                       Revised

APPROPRIATIONS                  Budget                Increase           Decrease                  Budget

 

TRANSPORTATION

   CAPITAL RESERVE

   FUND

 

            Contribution to

                Grant Fund                 16,000                122,150                                         188,150           

 

 

ARTICLE II

 

                                                  Current                                                                       Revised

REVENUES                               Budget                Increase           Decrease                  Budget

 

TRANSPORTATION

   CAPITAL RESERVE

   FUND

 

            Fund Balance                           -                 122,150                                         122,150

 

 

This the 26th day of April, 1999.

 

 

 


AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND “THE ORDINANCE CONCERNING APPROPRIATIONS AND THE RAISING OF REVENUE FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JULY 1, 1998” (99-4-26/O-3)

 

BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Budget Ordinance entitled “An Ordinance Concerning Appropriations and the Raising of Revenue for the Fiscal Year Beginning July 1, 1998” as duly adopted on June 8, 1998 be and the same is hereby amended as follows:

 

ARTICLE I

 

 

APPROPRIATIONS

Current

Budget

 

Increase

 

Decrease

Revised

Budget

      Transportation Fund

6,134,097

27,400

 

6,161,497

REVENUES

 

 

 

 

      Transportation Fund

6,134,097

27,400

 

6,161,497

 

 

This the 26th day of April, 1999.

 

 

 

A RESOLUTION CONTINUING THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT PROPOSAL TO ADD A FIFTH FINDING TO THE REGULATIONS (99-4-26/R-3.1)

 

WHEREAS, the Town Council of Chapel Hill opened and continued a Public Hearing on February 15, 1999 to consider a proposal to add a fifth finding to Development Ordinance provisions; and

 

WHEREAS, on February 15, 1999, the Town Council continued the Public Hearing to April 26; and

 

WHEREAS, the Town Manager and Town Attorney have requested additional time to continue researching the questions raised at the February 15 Public Hearing;

 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council continues the Public Hearing, to be reconvened on May 24, 1999.

 

This the 26th day of April, 1999.

 


Item 5 — Information Reports

 

Council Member Brown pulled 5c. 

 

Council Member McClintock pulled 5b.

 

Item 6 — Nominations and Appointments

 

a.        Nominations to:  Orange Water and Sewer Authority, Planning Board, Chapel Hill Public Arts Commission, and Walks and Bikeways Commission 

 

COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MCCLINTOCK, TO PLACE THE NAMES OF THOSE WHO HAD APPLIED FOR ADVISORY BOARDS INTO NOMINATION.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

 

Council Member Bateman noted that one of the names placed into nomination for OWASA did not live within Chapel Hill Town limits. 

 

Mr. Karpinos confirmed that the Procedures Manual prohibited that. 

 

b.       Reappointment of Dan VanderMeer to the OWASA Board for an Additional Year

 

COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER FOY, TO APPOINT DAN VANDERMEER TO THE OWASA BOARD FOR AN ADDITIONAL YEAR.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

 

Mayor Waldorf stated that anyone who was interested in applying to an advisory board should do so because there was a need for more applicants. 

 

Council Members noted that the Greenways Commission, Parks and Recreation Commission, and Board of Adjustment had vacancies.

 

Item 11 — Consideration of a Resolution Authorizing the Manager

to Explore Options for Access to the Merritt Pasture

 

Mr. Horton explained that some options, such as condemning the property, constructing playing fields, paving a large parking lot, installing security lights, and spending $25,000 on a study to determine how to gain access, were not being considered.  He noted that the public had been calling his office all week regarding those kinds of options.

 


Kathryn Spatz, Parks and Recreation Director, explained that the Department had been asked to study options for access to the Merritt Pasture.  She said that Resolution 7.1 would authorize the Manager to continue investigating possibilities for access.  Ms. Spatz said that the Department had looked at safety, neighborhood privacy, traffic, and other issues, and had concluded that there was no simple solution. 

 

Ms. Spatz pointed out that virtually all options for access from the west were compounded by bridge construction that was due for completion next summer.  She said that even if funds were available to build a pedestrian bridge over Morgan Creek, it would not be possible to build a trail to the pasture for two or three years.  Ms. Spatz added that after NC Department of Transportation (NCDOT) builds a bridge over Morgan Creek, pedestrians could walk across it, but added that the staff could not recommend this because other parts of the access would be too dangerous.  She said that the Department could not recommend pursuing an easement from Duke Power either due to safety issues.

 

Ms. Spatz explained that potential short-term options would be to purchase an easement or house and lot along Morgan Creek Road, Winter Road, or Meadow Lane, and provide access through that easement. 

 

Sally Greene, Merritt Pasture neighbor, asked the Council to slow down and think carefully about the pasture, which she described as the only unspoiled entranceway corridor the Town had left. She noted that there was a demand for a real park in the southern part of Town, and urged the Council to begin building Southern Community Park as soon as possible.  Ms. Greene said that the Merritt Pasture neighborhood wanted to be involved in this decision, adding that the issue was worthy of debate.  She argued that if the decision was made that more access was a good idea then it should be provided in such a way that it did minimal disturbance to the vista and ecology.

 

Scott Madry presented a petition signed by 145 residents of the Kings Mill Creek area, which  represents 92 homes in the neighborhood of Merritt Pasture.  He said the petition addressed concerns expressed by the previous speaker and urged Council Members to begin developing Southern Community Park rather than attempting a quick fix.  Mr. Madry said that there was a strong consensus among the neighbors on this, and demonstrated that by asking those in attendance to stand.

 

Council Member Bateman asked if the petition recommended excluding the public from Merritt Pasture.  Mr. Madry replied that if the Town were to grant some form of limited access then there would be serious questions about proper use. 

 

Heidi Chapman, president of the Kings Mill/Morgan Creek Neighborhood Association, reported that the board was unanimously opposed to access from their neighborhood and were requesting that the process be slowed down.  She submitted a substitute resolution that asked the Town to include the Association in the process and recommended including the Merritt Pasture in the Comprehensive Plan and referring the matter to that committee for further discussion. 

 

Ms. Chapman explained that the substitute resolution also requested that the gate to Merritt Pasture be repaired.  She asked the Council to give the Kings Mill/ Morgan Creek neighborhood peace of mind by saying that there would be no access from their neighborhood into Merritt Pasture. 

 

John Sanders reviewed the neighborhood’s attempts over the years to protect its character and traffic safety.  He described the Merritt Pasture as having become “a regional dog park,” which drove out other passive recreation uses, and said that he supported the substitute resolution.

 

Mark Broadwell, Chair of the Greenways Commission, said this was a difficult situation with no easy answer.  He noted that the Commission had always been concerned about affected neighborhoods, and said that in this case events seemed to have gone out of everyone’s control and accelerated into the limelight.  Mr. Broadwell stressed the value of the pasture toward the long-term goal of providing pedestrian connections throughout the Town.  He said the Council needed to clarify proper uses and that the Town and various commissions needed to work with the neighborhood to get back on track and find a good option.

 

Mayor Waldorf thanked those in attendance for coming.  She stated that the Council was not contemplating doing any of the things that the Manager listed as not having been considered.  Mayor Waldorf suggested banning dogs from Merritt Pasture because letting them run free violated the leash law which was difficult to enforce.

 

Council Member Brown pointed out that she had voted for purchase of the land many years ago because it was open space into Chapel Hill. 

 

COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER FOY, TO ADOPT THE SUBSTITUTE RESOLUTION AND TO REFER IT TO THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION AND THE GREENWAYS COMMISSION, TO INCLUDE THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND TO IMMEDIATELY REPAIR THE GATE.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS OFFERED A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO INCLUDE THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WORK GROUP IN THE REFERRAL. 

 

Council Member McClintock suggested that the Council consider whether this area ought to be for active or passive recreation.  She questioned adopting the substitute resolution because it asked for a recommendation on how to make the area active recreation when maybe the Town did not want that.  Council Member McClintock asked the Council to consider that question before referring the petition back to the advisory boards.

 

Mayor pro tem Capowski pointed out that there was a potential access solution involving western access in the Duke Power area.  He noted that would have to wait a year or two until the bridge over Morgan Creek was widened.  Mayor pro tem Capowski argued that access through neighborhoods was not reasonable, and stated that the proper response was to permanently close the gate.  He thanked the neighbors for the constructive suggestion of a substitute resolution, which he said he would support. 

 

Council Member Foy pointed out that the Town had not been able to keep up with the demands of growth.  He said that the Town needed more open space and park land, but did not have the funds to develop that now.  Council Member Foy stressed that opening up the Merritt Pasture and saying that it was a park was not a good solution.  He emphasized the importance of protecting the vista on the east as Meadowmont was developed.  Council Member Foy suggested that the Council explain to citizens that it was not in the Town’s best interest to turn the Merritt Pasture into something it should not be.  He advised waiting for Southern Community Park, which would take millions of dollars of tax money, noting that connecting the Merritt Pasture through the greenways system would be costly.  Council Member Foy recommended keeping the meadow as a passive vista without excessive use, as it currently was.

 

Council Member Foy said that, as the seconder of the motion, he did not accept the amendment to refer the item to the Comprehensive Plan Work Group because they had asked the Council to limit referrals. 

 

Council Member Foy said that Council Member Bateman, who had temporarily left the meeting, had said that she supported the resolution, supported passive recreation for the pasture, and was not in favor of banning dogs because she thought that would also apply to neighbors’ dogs on leashes. 

 

Council Member Brown said that she interpreted “preserving open space” to mean keeping it as it was.  She suggested that perhaps it should be further defined.  

 

Mayor Waldrof suggested having part of the “be it resolved” clause state that the Council favored use for passive recreation only. 

 

Ms. Greene, noting that the national definition of open space would include Central Park and Mt. Rushmore, suggested that the Council come up with its own definition.

 

Mayor Waldorf repeated her suggestion to include “be it further resolved that the Council favors its use for passive recreation,” noting that the resolution would be forwarded to two advisory boards and to citizens who wanted to participate.  She remarked that the Council was trying to keep it from becoming a ball field, a dog park, or a site for an office party.  Mayor Waldorf further suggested changing the wording to say “that this matter be referred to the Manager, the Parks and Recreation Commission, and the Greenways Commission.”

 

Council Member Evans suggested repairing the gate.  She noted that an Internet site advertised the Merritt Pasture as a space for dogs, and recommended following up with enforcement with the leash law.  Council Member Evans also stated that the Town had money to acquire open space but did not have money to develop park land.  She stressed that the Comprehensive Plan Work Group should consider this space along with the other parks and recreation facilities that the Town owned. 

 

Council Member Foy said that he did not mind forwarding it to the Comprehensive Plan Work Group as long as the Council did not expect a response. 

 

Council Member Brown asked to include a fourth bullet requesting that the Commissions involve the neighborhoods and come up with a definition of  “open space” and “passive recreation.” 

 

Mayor Waldorf said that she wanted to go on record that the Council favored its use for passive recreation and open space in order to settle that question.

 

Council Member Foy suggested that the Council publicize the Town-owned property in the southern part of Town that was going to be developed into a park.  He said the public should go ahead and start using this land, which was about 75 acres between Southern Village and Dogwood Acres Drive.  Mr. Karpinos pointed out that the leash law applied there, even though the land was outside Town limits, because it was Town-owned property. 

 

Council Member Foy repeated his suggestion that something be included in the resolution that would encourage people to start using that land. 

 

Council Member McClintock asked if there were any cleared areas on it.  Council Member Foy said he did not know. 

 

Mayor Waldorf said that she did not want to put that in the resolution.  Several other Council Members agreed that the Manager should take up that issue separately.  

 

Mayor Waldorf asked Council Member Brown if she would accept an additional “be it resolved” which would read “public access through neighborhoods is not a favored approach” in order to give the Commissions direction on that.  She suggested putting the petitioners’ minds at ease by eliminating the option of purchasing private property to provide public access, proposing the addition of: “be it resolved that the Council opposes purchase of residential property to create access.”  Council Member Brown accepted the amendment. 

 

Council Member Foy noted that they might have to purchase an easement or some way for people to get access to the greenway.  Mayor Waldorf said that was why she liked the wording, “is not a favored approach.”

 

Ms. Chapman suggested eliminating property with road frontage. 

 

Council Member Foy suggested adding “except for pedestrian access easements.” The Council agreed. 

 

Mayor Waldorf repeated the amendment: “the Council opposes purchase of residential property to create access except for pedestrian access easements.” 

 

Ms. Chapman stated that would be a violation of their restrictive covenants, which prohibited easements through yards from Morgan Creek Lane. 

 

Mayor Waldorf explained that the Council was trying to be responsive to the neighborhood’s concerns.  She pointed out, though, that the Council was not as informed about this as the neighbors appeared to be and wanted to adopt a resolution which would not be too restrictive in the future. 

 

Mayor pro tem Capowski suggested limiting it to the Merritt Pasture rather than Town open space.  He proposed changing the title to read:  “A resolution authorizing the Town Manager to thoroughly evaluate the use of Merritt Pasture” and changing the “be it resolved” clause on Item 1, page two to “refer this matter to the Parks and Recreation Commission and Greenways Commission for thorough evaluation of the uses of the Merritt Pasture for open space and passive recreation.”   Mayor pro tem Capowski explained that this would delete the clause “and the other properties purchased by the Town of Chapel Hill.”

 

Council Member Brown said that this was okay with her as long as they kept the amendment directing the two commissions and the neighbors to begin a dialogue on how to define open space and passive recreation. 

 

Council Member Evans suggested referring the resolution to the Town Attorney before adopting it. 

 

Council Member Foy called the question. 

 

Council Member Evans suggested changing the first whereas to “the region is growing at a rapid rate,” rather than “Chapel Hill is growing....” 

 

Council Member Brown suggested just taking that out.  Mr. Horton made a correction, for the record, that there was no Boardwalk Park.  He noted that Little Creek Park probably was intended.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS OFFERED A SUBSTITUTE MOTION TO REFER THE RESOLUTION TO THE MANAGER AND ATTORNEY.  THE MOTION FAILED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER FOY, TO ADOPT THE SUBSTITUTE RESOLUTION, AS AMENDED, TO BE NUMBERED AS RESOLUTION 7.1.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (7-0).    

 

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE TOWN MANAGER TO THOROUGHLY EVALUATE THE USE OF THE MERRITT PASTURE (9-4-26/R-7.1)

 

WHEREAS, the Town of Chapel Hill purchased Merritt Pasture in 1991 to preserve the vista as a viewshed, an open space and to protect a fragile natural area along Morgan Creek; and

 

WHEREAS, Merritt Pasture is the only remaining viewshed approaching the Town; and


WHEREAS, the Town of Chapel Hill has purchased several other pieces of property for public use, including Southern Park and Little Creek Park; and

 

WHEREAS, in May 1998, the Greenways Commission published a Comprehensive Master Plan, recommending dual access to Merritt Pasture; and

 

WHEREAS, none of those recommendations have been implemented to date; and

 

WHEREAS, in 1999 the Chapel Hill Comprehensive Plan Work Group published its Draft Goals and Objectives, including the goal of protecting Chapel Hill’s beautiful natural environment and aggressively identifying and acquiring parkland, open space, and greenways in accordance with the Town’s existing and proposed parks, greenways, and entranceways plans; and

 

WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan’s goals include identification, protection, and preservation of open spaces, scenic views, and critical natural areas; and

 

WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan specifically targets preservation and enhancement of Chapel Hill’s streams, including Morgan Creek, as multi-use, greenway corridors, integrating functions such as wildlife habitat, natural stormwater management, and recreational usage; and

 

WHEREAS, the Council has determined that the use of Merritt Pasture should be thoroughly evaluated in light of the Comprehensive Plan with input from residents of the adjacent neighborhoods; and

 

WHEREAS, no public access to Merritt Pasture currently exists and people are illegally parking on the access ramp to US 15-501 and Highway 54 to the hazard of pedestrians and drivers;

 

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

 

·           Refer this matter to the Town Manager, the Parks and Recreation Commission and the Greenways Commission for thorough evaluation of the uses of the Merritt Pasture and for open space and passive recreation; and

·           Include residents of the adjacent neighborhoods in the discussions about uses of these properties; and

·           Repair the gate next to the access ramp onto US 15-501 and Highway 54; and

·           Prefer that the Merritt Pasture be used for passive recreation and open space only, and that the Manager, the Parks and Recreation Commission, the Greenways Commission and residents of adjacent neighborhoods define open space and passive recreation; and

·           Does not consider public access through neighborhoods a favored approach;

·           Oppose purchase of residential property to create access to the Merritt Pasture, except for pedestrian access easements.

 

This the 26th day of April, 1999.

 

Council Member Evans said that she opposed banning dogs on the Merritt Pasture because doing so would ban neighbors’ dogs on leashes as well.  Mr. Karpinos repeated that Town ordinances applied to open space and parks whether they were inside or outside Town limits.  He pointed out that this applied to the Merritt Pasture as well, adding that dogs there were required to be on leashes.  Mr. Karpinos explained that the Council could change that policy by changing the ordinance.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER FOY MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MCCLINTOCK, TO ASK THE ATTORNEY TO DRAFT AN ORDINANCE BANNING DOGS FROM THE MERRITT PASTURE.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED (6-1), WITH COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS VOTING NAY.

 

Mr. Horton asked Council Members if “repairing” the gate meant locking it and prohibiting entrance.  

 

Mayor Waldorf suggested asking the Manager for a recommendation.  Mr. Horton said that the staff might also bring back a list of other activities that the Council might consider prohibiting there.  He said that the Town had posted no parking signs and had issued warnings, and would begin issuing citations and towing vehicles if they were parked unsafely.  Mr. Horton also said that people had been parking in neighborhoods, noting that the staff would recommend limiting parking to residents only on some streets.  He asked the Council’s permission to consult the neighbors and perhaps bring back an ordinance.

 

Council Member Foy wondered if the Town might invest $10,000-15,000 and create parking at the Town-owned land near Southern Village.  He noted that would relieve some of the pressure that would increase now that Merritt Pasture had been restricted.  Mr. Horton replied that the Council might need a Special Use Permit to engage in land disturbing activities.  He suggested that the Council be careful about clearing land and noted that there were other places in the vicinity where people could walk dogs.

 

Council Member McClintock said that she supported the idea of finding interim solutions. 

 

Council Member Foy suggested that the staff contact Orange County’s staff about the Council’s resolution sent to the County in August 1999 that asked them to participate with Town staff in developing a plan for Southern Village.  Mr. Horton explained that the County had been waiting for their own study of recreation and park needs before responding to the Council’s inquiry.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER FOY MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN, TO ASK THE STAFF TO LOOK INTO THE FEASIBILITY OF PROVIDING SOME PARKING AT TOWN-OWNED LAND NEAR SOUTHERN VILLAGE.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (7-0).

 


 

Item 9 — Status Report from the Special Work Group to Study

the Highway 54/Hamilton Road Intersection

 

Valerie Broadwell, Chair of the Work Group, reported that the 17-member Work Group had met six times, had reached consensus on what they wanted to achieve through recommendations, had identified the problems at that intersection, and had come up with 41 solutions, which they were consolidating into a package to recommend to the Council in June.

 

Dorothy Verkerk, a member of the Work Group, showed slides, which she shot in October and February, showing pedestrians and bicyclists trying to cross and/or maneuver the seven lanes of traffic at the intersection.

 

Council Member Brown asked if the Work Group had been notified of the recent work by the Town’s Engineering Department and the N.C. Department of Transportation (NCDOT) to set up a process and a mission statement.  David Brown, Traffic Engineer, explained that the Department was not as far along as the Work Group but were looking at problem statements, both general and specific, one of which addressed similar issues as the Work Group.

 

Council Member Brown asked when it would be coming back to the Council and for a public forum.   Neither Mr. Brown nor Mr. Horton could recall the date.

 

Council Member McClintock recalled that someone had come before the Council with a petition    and that the Manager was going to come back to the Council with report on whether any modifications could be made.  She asked the Manager to comment on that.  Mr. Horton replied that he did not recall what Council Member McClintock was referring to.  Ms. Verkerk said that her Committee had asked the Council to reconsider the nine lanes at Meadowmont. 

 

Council Member Foy recalled that Ms. Verkerk had come forward and said that it seemed as though the Town was solving a problem at one end and creating one at the other.  Mr. Horton replied that he would check the record, but added that he did not believe the Council had referred that.

 

Item 7 — Submittal of the Manager’s Recommended Budget

and Capital Improvements Program

 

a.       Presentation of the Manager’s Recommended 1999-2000 Budget  

Mr. Horton gave a brief presentation, noting that the Council had a budget work session as well as a public hearing scheduled on this subject.  He noted that the recommended budget would require a 3.3 cent increase over the present tax rate, which would make the new rate 57.1; the Town would be able to hold steady on the Transportation Fund rate of 4.0 cents, but the General Fund rate would need to increase from 49.8 to 53.1 cents, as it is now proposed. 

 


Mr. Horton said that there were a couple of key costs to explain why the budget must increase for 1999-2000: 

·           additional debt service costs of $318,000; 

·           full year cost next year of the pay increase authorized in 1998-99; and,

·           increased cost of workers’ compensation and group medical insurance totaling about $120,000. 

 

Mr. Horton noted that the budget also included the six-month cost of six new firefighter positions and the purchase of a small attack pumper.  He explained that there were nine-month costs for a stormwater management engineer and a building inspector. 

 

Mr. Horton stated that the budget proposed a number of other service programs at an additional $200,000.  He noted that the new pay system for employees was suggested to become effective November 1st for a total cost of $632,000 in the General Fund, $163,000 in the Transportation Fund, and $83,000 for all other funds. 

 

Mr. Horton proposed service reductions in the General Fund to help pay for additional costs.  He suggested eliminating a $20,000 grant to the Triangle Land Conservancy and reducing the hotel/motel occupancy tax grants by $14,500.  Mr. Horton also suggested holding vacant one recreation position (savings of $36,000), one police officer position (savings of $34,000), and one construction worker position (savings of $30,000).  He said that, in the Transportation Fund, the staff proposed eliminating the cross-Town connector route because of extremely low ridership (savings of $120,000) and eliminating the Blue Line Saturday service after the TTA began its service (savings of $20,000).   Mr. Horton proposed a service increase in the Transportation Fund that would cost $85,000.  He said that this would pay for adding drivers to the EZ-Rider Service provided to those with mobility impairments. 

 

Mr. Horton noted that the staff had proposed no annexations in the coming year or the year after that.  He predicted that annexing Southern Village prior to July 1, 2001 would mean that the cost of providing services required by law would exceed revenues generated.  Mr. Horton said that revenues and costs would eventually balance out as development there continued.

 

Mayor pro tem Capowski asked Mr. Horton to explain at the budget work session on April 28th what was in the fund balance and what would happen if the Town dropped from 10% down to 9%.  

 

Council Member Evans requested information on whether some of the bonds that the Town did not plan to use immediately could be postponed.  She also asked if there were other things in the Capital Improvements Program which the Town might not fund this year and resume funding next year.  Mr. Horton replied that he would comment on that.

 

Mayor pro tem Capowski asked if the Town could drop the Transportation Fund rate.  Mr. Horton replied that the Council could do so but that he would not recommend it. 

 

Council Member Foy asked if funds could be moved between the Transportation Fund and General Fund.  Mr. Horton replied that to a certain extent the Town already did that, adding that there were some limits on the Transportation Funds, which came from agreements with the Town’s partners.  He said that the Fund Balance could be dealt with as the Council chose but stated that he would consider whether the Council would be taking an action in which the partners might have a legitimate interest.

 

Item 8 — Proposed Plans for Use of Community Development,

HOME and Housing Grant Funds

 

Mayor Waldorf read a letter from Michael Pullman, the volunteer Executive Director of Community Cuisine (CC), expressing appreciation for the Council’s support of CC’s program and encouraging the Town to fully fund the request.  She said that Mr. Pullman invited the Council to attend CC’s Culinary Entrepreneurship Program for Youth in Need at a finale banquet on Friday, July 30th, at 7 p.m. at the University United Methodist Church.

 

a.             Submittal of Proposed 1999-2000 Consolidated Plan

Chris Berndt, Long Range Planning Coordinator, explained that this was the application to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for the Community Development and HOME programs.  She said that the staff recommended adopting Resolution 3 authorizing the submission of these applications.

 

b.             Submittal of Proposed Community Development Plan for 1999-2000

Ms. Berndt explained that the Town received an additional $36,000 of program income which enabled them to recommend funds for two additional projects:  $20,000 for the Rosemary Sunset Parking Lot (contingent on the Council’s future discussions) and $16,000 for Community Cuisine.  She stated that Resolution 4 would authorize this program of activities and its submission to HUD. 

 

c.              Submittal of Proposed Plan for 1999-2000 HOME Fund

Ms. Berndt noted that there was an additional $20,000 budgeted in program income for the Meadowmont Townhomes development with Orange Community Housing.  She said that Resolution 5 would approve a list of activities that included rehabilitation, new construction, property acquisition, and rehabilitation, as well as urgent repair and funds for Habitat for Humanity.  Ms. Berndt said that Resolution 5 would authorize its submission through the HOME Consortium.

 

Mr. Horton added that Council Member Bateman (who was still absent from the meeting) had asked the Council to consider the Orange-Person-Chatham Mental Health allocation.  He said that she had no objection to the Council recommending the allocation but had requested that the staff bring a report on questions she had raised about their relationship with HUD and about previous HUD funding before any contract for services was made. 

 


Ms. Berndt summarized that there were three different resolutions before the Council having to do with Community Development: Resolution 3 would authorize the Consolidated Plan;  Resolution 4 would authorize the Community Development Program;  and Resolution 5 would authorize the HOME Program.

 

d.         Submittal of Proposed Plan for 1999-2000 Comprehensive Grant Program for Public Housing Renovation and Resident Services

Tina Vaughn, Housing Director, outlined the proposed plan for spending $549,000 for renovation of the Craig-Gomains public housing neighborhood.  She proposed spending $440,000 on that project, $52,000 for resident activities, and $57,000 for administration, relocation of residents, and professional services.  Ms. Vaughn explained that the plan was due to HUD by June 1, 1999.  She said that approval of Resolution 6 would authorize staff to submit the application.

 

Mayor pro tem Capowski asked if the Town was doing as much as it could for its own public housing before spending money on other groups.  Mr. Horton replied that the Council had a positive posture regarding the Town’s public housing and had met the goal of refurbishing all units on a five-year schedule.  Ms. Vaughn said that considering the balance of needs that the Town had it was spending an appropriate balance. 

 

Council Member Evans asked if adoption of Resolution 4 would include a small sidewalk project that she had previously inquired about.  Ms. Berndt replied that the Town could use neighborhood revitalization funds for public improvements such as sidewalks.

 

Council Member Foy inquired about air conditioning for public housing.  Ms. Vaughn replied that the Town had been working with two consultants and would bring an interim status report to the Council on May 10th and a completed report by the end of May or early June. 

 

Mayor Waldorf asked if $52,000 was the total amount of money the Residents’ Council received for one year.  Ms. Vaughn replied that $52,000 was the only source of funding that she was aware of. 

 

Mayor Waldorf asked if it was tied to the contract for services.  Ms. Vaughn replied that it would require negotiation of a new contract, explaining that the old funding had been for the previous year.

 

Council Member Bateman returned at 9:31 p.m.

 

e.        Summary of Requests for Funding from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) 

Ms. Berndt said that this item included a chart showing all of the possible funding sources, received requests and recommended allocations.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER FOY MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WIGGINS, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 3.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SUBMITTAL OF THE 1999-2000 ANNUAL UPDATE TO THE 1995-2000 CONSOLIDATED PLAN (99-4-26/R-3)

 

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council authorizes the Manager to submit the 1999-2000 Annual Update to the 1995-2000 Consolidated Plan to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development for the 1999-2000 Community Development and HOME Programs, including all understandings, assurances, and certifications required therein, for a program of $566,000 of Community Development Block Grant funds and $555,325 of federal HOME Program funds by May 15, 1999.

 

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Manager is hereby designated as the authorized representative of the Town to act in connection with submittal of a Consolidated Plan to provide such additional information as may be required.

 

This the 26th day of April, 1999.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER FOY, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 4.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

 

A RESOLUTION APPROVING RECOMMENDATION OF THE 1999-2000 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM PLAN (99-4-26/R-4)

 

WHEREAS, the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill held two public hearings to receive ideas from citizens about how Community Development Block Grant Funds could be spent in 1999-2000;

 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that based on the Town’s allocation of $434,000 of Community Development Block Grant Funds and $132,000 of Community Development Program Income, the Town Council approves the following 1999-2000 Community Development Block Grant Program Plan:

 

Public Housing

Renovations (Craig/Gomains)                                                 $150,000

Refurbishing Program                                                             $  80,000

Neighborhood Revitalization

(Pine Knolls or Northside areas)                                            $  50,000

Property Acquisition   (EmPOWERment Inc.)                                    $  75,000

Scarlett Drive Homeownership Program

(Orange Community Housing Corporation)                            $  70,000

Community Services

(YMCA, OC Literacy Council and Comm. Cuisine)               $  51,000

Economic Development (W. Rosemary St. Parking Lot)                     $  20,000

Administration                                                                                   $  70,000

TOTAL                                                                                 $566,000

 

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council authorizes the one-year Community Development Plan to be incorporated into the Consolidated Plan developed with Orange County, Hillsborough and Carrboro for submission to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development on May 15, 1999.

 

This the 26th day of April, 1999.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER FOY MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 5.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

 

A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE ACTIVITIES OF THE 1999-2000 HOME PROGRAM (99-4-26/R-5)

 

WHEREAS, the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill held two public hearings to receive citizens comments and proposals regarding the use of $437,000 of federal HOME funds and $98,325 of local matching funds, and $20,000 of program income for a total of $555,325;

 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council approves the following activities to be carried out by the members of the Orange County HOME Consortium for 1999-2000:

Activity                                                                                              Amount

Comprehensive Rehabilitation                                                            $147,625

Property Acquisition (EmPOWERment Inc.)                                      $100,000

New Construction (Orange Comm. Housing Corp.)                           $  94,000

Property Acquisition & Rehabilitation (OPC Mental Health)               $  60,000

Urgent Repair (Orange Comm. Housing Corp.)                                  $  60,000

Property Acquisition (Habitat for Humanity)                                       $  50,000

Administration                                                                                       43,700

TOTAL                                                                                 $555,325

 

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council authorizes this plan to be incorporated into the Consolidated Plan developed with Orange County, Hillsborough and Carrboro for submission to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development on May 15, 1999. 

 

This the 26th day of April, 1999.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER FOY MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MCCLINTOCK, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 6.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

 

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Item 10 — Consideration of Proposal to Form a Citizens’ Advisory Group

on “Pay As You Throw” Refuse Collection

 

COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER FOY, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 7.

 

Council Member McClintock noted that she had missed the meeting where the Council had asked the Manager to draw up this proposal.  She suggested that the proposal was too tentative and asked if there had been direction given to the citizens to find out how to make this work in the community.  

 

Mayor Waldorf agreed that there was no clear statement that the Council would go ahead with Pay As You Throw, but only that they wanted to consider it and would like feedback from the community.

 

Council Member Bateman stated that she saw this as the next step toward developing a plan, noting that the group was instructed to come back with a work process. 

 

Council Member McClintock said that the advisory group would determine whether Pay As You Throw was acceptable to the community. 

 

Council Member Evans proposed adding “and other college towns around the State and the country” after the 5th bullet of the “be it resolved....” 

 

Council Member Evans also proposed adding “the advisory group include the University of North Carolina but also include a student” on page four under “be it resolved.…” 

 

Council Member Wiggins suggested saying “student renter.”

 

Council Member Bateman recommended saying renters/student and non-student. 

 

Council Member McClintock suggested adding a bullet saying “identify potential obstacles… and how to overcome them.”

 

Mayor pro tem Capowski suggested placing someone on the advisory group who was actually going to do the work, such as a sanitation collector. 

 

Mayor Waldorf recommended Howard Baldwin, a retired Sanitation Division employee. 

 

Mr. Horton noted that as a general rule it was better not to put employees on committees because it could put them in awkward positions.  He added, though, that Mr. Baldwin would be an excellent choice.

 

Mayor pro tem Capowski suggested adding “a former sanitation worker” to the list.

 

Mayor Waldorf objected to prohibiting the advisory group from considering curbside refuse collection in its deliberations.  She argued that the Committee should not be prevented from learning anything they wanted to know. 

 

Mayor pro tem Capowski explained that he had not wanted the advisory group to get bogged down in a debate between curbside and backyard pick-up.  He and Mayor Waldorf suggested changing the wording to “be it further resolved that the advisory group is asked to consider Pay As You Throw issues regardless of whether collection is curbside or backyard.”  Council Members Brown and Foy accepted the amendments. 

 

Council Member Evans repeated her position that this was premature. 

 

COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER FOY, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 7.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

 

A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING AN ADVISORY GROUP TO WORK ON COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT IN THE STUDY OF AND POSSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION OF “PAY AS YOU THROW” REFUSE COLLECTION

(99-4-26/R-7)

 

WHEREAS, the Council has adopted a solid waste management plan which calls for finding ways to reduce the amount of solid waste which is sent to landfills or other disposal sites; and,

 

WHEREAS, the solid waste management plan includes “Pay As You Throw (PAYT)” as one waste diversion strategy; and

 

WHEREAS, “pay as you throw” has been shown elsewhere to be an effective waste diversion method; and

 

WHEREAS, the Council desires to solicit as much feedback from the public as possible in determining the best course of action with respect to changing solid waste collection systems; and

 

WHEREAS, citizen groups provide a means of acquiring the desired feedback to the Council and can be an effective method of disseminating information to the community at large;

 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council establishes an advisory group with the following charge:

 

·        involve the community in a conversation about “pay as you throw”, with the goals of determining community attitudes about “pay as you throw” and providing the community with information about “pay as you throw”;

·        identify potential obstacles in developing and implementing a “pay as you throw”  program, and how to overcome them;

·        identify possible strategies to begin a “pay as you throw” system if that outcome is acceptable to the community;

·        take into account the countywide solid waste management planning process and other initiatives in the county which could affect refuse collection, hauling and disposal in Chapel Hill;

·        consider the experience of other communities and other college towns around the State and the country who have tried “pay as you throw”, whether their experience was positive or negative;

·        develop a detailed scope of work for the conduct of the work of the group; and

·        provide an interim report to the Council with a suggested work process and work schedule and a final report to the Council when the work is completed.

 

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the advisory group consider “pay as you throw” issues regardless of whether it is backyard or curbside pick-up.

 

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Council will appoint an advisory group that will consist of one or more representatives of the following groups:

 

·        homeowners

·        renters/student and non-student

·        multifamily development management

·        neighborhood groups

·        the University of North Carolina

·        an individual with utility management experience

·        business owners/operators

·        Council designee(s)

·        environmental groups

·        former sanitation worker

 

This the 26th day of April, 1999.

 

 

Council Member Brown suggested limiting the group to 15.  There was consensus by the Council.

 

Item 12 — Consideration of Response to the University Regarding

the Proposed Mixed Use Zoning District (MX-150)

 

Mayor Waldorf, referring to the memorandum, asked whether 16.1b8 on Energy Conservation set forth a mandate or articulated a goal.  Mr. Karpinos explained that it was not a mandate. 

 

Council Member Evans asked Council Member Brown what it meant to have a road that provided energy conservation.  Council Member Brown explained that having roads primarily run east and west so that buildings could be sited north and south facilitated the use of renewable energy. 

 

COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER FOY, TO AMEND PAGE 3 OF THE MEMORANDUM BY ADDING AN “S” TO THE WORD “BUILDING” IN THE SECOND TO LAST LINE OF SECTION 7 AND ON PAGE 6 UNDER THE SECTION ENTITLED “CHANGE PROPOSED BY UNC” BY DELETING “THE MOST” AND ADDING “PRESERVING A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF THE SITE.”  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

 

Council Member McClintock asked for clarification of the language in the response letter to the University.  Mr. Horton said that the essence would be that the total traffic to be generated by the University’s proposal would be estimated at the beginning of the process.  He explained that this number would then become the University’s “trip budget.”  Mr. Horton added that others who did work in the same area would have to consider that trip budget as they made plans and presentations to the Council.

 

Council Member McClintock asked what Mayor Waldorf’s and Mayor pro tem Capowski’s     reactions were to the compromise that was offered.  Mayor pro tem Capowski replied that this was a large amount of work for the University, and, since it was voluntary, there should be some payoff at the end.  He stated that the wording was acceptable.  Mayor Waldorf replied that the compromise was positive and an important step toward keeping negotiations moving. 

 

Council Member Foy said that if the Council understood the University’s analysis on page 11 of the memorandum to be the University’s interpretation of what the Town’s words meant then the Town’s words meant that the University could not develop anything.  He suggested changing “such that the most environmentally sensitive areas of the site are preserved,” in the Purpose and Intent area on page 6, to “such that environmentally sensitive areas of this site are preserved, preserving a significant portion of the site,” thereby eliminating two words (“the most”).  He also suggested deleting “in an undisturbed state.”

 

Council Member Foy recommended having a conversation about this when the General Development Plan (GDP) comes before the Council rather than making a blanket statement. 

 

Council Member McClintock suggested referring to the map of environmentally sensitive areas. 

 

Mayor pro tem Capowski noted that the Council was only dealing with the Chapel Hill portion of the site.  He pointed out that the most environmentally sensitive areas were in Carrboro.

 

Council Member Foy suggested that the University might interpret the conflicting words to mean that the Town was trying to be more restrictive than it was.     

 

COUNCIL MEMBER WIGGINS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN, TO AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO FORWARD THE LETTER TO UNC, INCLUDING THE TABLE, WITH THE CHANGES PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0). 

 

Council Member McClintock asked for clarification of information which the University had put forward “seeking the ability to attract potential partners through enabling authority for financing and development of the property.”  Aaron Nelson, a University representative, replied that the University was asking for the same authority the Centennial Campus had, that was, funding and financing flexibility.  He added that this would not impact MX-150.

 

Mayor pro tem Capowski asked Mr. Nelson for assurance that this related only to funding flexibility.  Mr. Nelson replied that his understanding was that the first clause enabled the University to do extended leases with people in order to make it attractive, and the second clause enabled the Board of Governors to issue bonds for funding. 

 

Mayor Waldorf pointed out that extended leases would be good for the Town because it meant that properties did not have to be owned by the State, but could be owned by private entities and therefore be taxable. 

 

Item 13 — Consideration of Resolution Regarding Carolina Power and Light

and Nuclear Safety in Central North Carolina

 

COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WIGGINS, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 8.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY  (8-0).

 

A RESOLUTION ON NUCLEAR SAFETY IN CENTRAL NORTH CAROLINA

(99-4-26/R-8)

 

WHEREAS, Carolina Power & Light seeks a federal license amendment to double its High-Level nuclear waste storage at the Shearon Harris nuclear plant in central North Carolina, and admits the plant would become the nation’s largest approved storage site for highly irradiated used nuclear fuel rods or High-Level waste; and,

 

WHEREAS, used nuclear fuel is one of the deadliest materials on earth and therefore, under federal law, must be kept out of our environment for 10,000 years, and whereas problems with storage of High-Level waste in cooling pools can lead to meltdowns, fires and other accidents causing radiation releases into the atmosphere; and,

 

WHEREAS, nuclear generating and waste storage facilities rely on highly complex systems which are susceptible to technical and human error, as evidenced by the 3 accidental shutdowns of the Harris reactor during a six-week period ending mid-March 1999; and,

 

WHEREAS, even the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) – an agency with a well-known history of bias toward the industry – acknowledged in a 1997 study that the probability of High-Level waste pool accidents is higher than previously believed and could result in tens of thousands of cancer deaths within 50 miles around a plant, and where Nuclear Regulatory Commission information indicates the cumulative probability of one type of severe accident is 1 in 125; and,

 

WHEREAS, two of the world’s top nuclear safety experts, Gordon Thompson and David Lochbaum, have raised numerous specific concerns with Carolina Power & Light’s proposal, including its unprecedented plan to eliminate the separate cooling and primary and emergency electrical systems originally designed for the new pools, in order to minimize costs, where such alteration places an additional burden on safety systems for the reactor; and,

 

WHEREAS, Thompson and Lochbaum agree – nor can the company deny – that there are a number of initiating factors including earthquakes, equipment failures or loss of electrical power due to weather or other reasons, which could lead to full or partial loss of cooling water resulting in spontaneous combustion of High-Level waste or even meltdown-type accidents; and,

 

WHEREAS, Cesium 137 is a powerful gamma-emitter and the most damaging substance released from the 1986 accident at Chernobyl, and whereas Thompson and Lochbaum conclude that an accident at Harris could release into the atmosphere ten times – or more – Cesium 137 than released at Chernobyl; and,

 

WHEREAS, Carolina Power & Light’s pool expansion would cause at least a doubling of crane loading and handling of multi-ton fuel rod assemblies and waste casks, therefore at least doubling the probability of handling accidents; and,

 

WHEREAS, due to ongoing uncertainty as to whether a permanent disposal option for High-Level waste will be approved in the foreseeable future, there is a likelihood that High-Level waste would be stored at Harris for a number of decades, or possibly longer, in cooling pools intended only for short-term use, therefore increasing the risk of accidents; and,

 

WHEREAS, terrorism is increasingly seen as a legitimate threat in the U.S. and nuclear facilities are regarded as potential targets by the U.S. government; and,

 

WHEREAS, Carolina Power & Light has rejected numerous requests to justify its proposal to the public or to address safety concerns identified by Thompson and Lochbaum, and additionally, Carolina Power & Light has even moved legally to prevent a public hearing sought by Orange County to air some of these issues with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission; and,

 

WHEREAS, the current evacuation plan for the Harris facility was controversial when first developed in 1986, and has not been updated to account for the tremendous growth this region has experienced since that time, and thus cannot assure the safe removal of residents during potential accidents; and,

 

WHEREAS, communities near Harris – and the greater region – already bear an undeniable and significant risk from the existing reactor and waste storage, handling and transport systems, and whereas the expansion is sought to accommodate waste from Carolina Power & Light’s reactors in other areas; and,

 


 

WHEREAS, dry cask storage at the generating reactors is a safer storage option, as acknowledged by Thompson and Lochbaum, and is even deemed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to be less prone to failure than cooling pools; and whereas Carolina Power & Light states that dry casks are equally safe as pool storage and that its expansion is based on cost savings; and,

 

WHEREAS, dry storage at the generating reactors would cost Carolina Power & Light only an estimated $31 million over a 15 year period, which is a small fraction of Carolina Power & Light’s net profit of $339 million for 1998 alone, or even its budget for public relations, image advertising, and lobbying of elected officials (totaling many millions each year); and,

 

WHEREAS, all citizens at risk of exposure to radiation from accidental releases have a genuine voice in such an important matter.  And whereas Carolina Power & Light, by refusing and/or blocking efforts to justify its plan to local governments, has chosen an adversarial stance toward the public, despite the calls from nine local governments, citizen organization North Carolina Waste Awareness & Reduction Network, editorial boards from various regional media, and members of the public nearest the facility and throughout the region encouraging Carolina Power & Light to engage in an open examination of the safety issues surrounding its proposal;

 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill calls on Carolina Power & Light to meet its responsibilities as a corporate citizen by:

 

1)      Withdrawing its application to license waste pools C and D for expanded storage at the Harris plant.

 

2)      Immediately begin to phase-out the import of High-Level waste to Harris so as to minimize additional risks placed on the public by storage in high-density pools, and to revert to the safer option of dry-cask storage at the generating reactors.

 

This the 26th day of April, 1999.

 

 

Item 15 — Items Pulled from Information Reports

 

5c.     Noise Committee Report

Police Captain Gregg Jarvies reported that recommendations presented by the Committee on January 25th represented potential changes to the noise control ordinance which were significant enough that the Police Department did not have the expertise to evaluate the impact on the community and the ordinance as it existed today.  He recommend that he report to the Council again in June after consulting with Dr. Stewart, an acoustical engineer, on these and other issues not covered under the initial Committee report. 

 


Dr. Heath, a member of the Noise Study Committee, stated that the Committee supported Council Member Brown on this issue.  He said there were two substantive recommendations in the report:  (1) reduce the decibel level by five decibels for HVAC systems and similar mechanical systems at commercial, industrial and institutional locations; and (2) make that reduction retroactive on a schedule. 

 

Dr. Heath explained that the Committee recommended purchasing more sensitive sound metering equipment and creating a protocol for enforcement that would give clear signals to everyone.  He said that the Committee’s recommendations were simple and straightforward, and urged the Council to vote rather than put this off for a year to wait for a consultant’s report.  Dr. Heath commented that a consultant could help the Council evaluate these recommendations and perhaps do an impact study, but said that taking a year may mean starting over again. 

 

Council Member Brown requested that the Committee’s report be referred to the Manager to bring back resolutions on five of the recommended items:  establishing a new committee to look at neighborhood noises; lowering the decibel level to 55 and 45 decibels; enhancing training of police officers; recommending purchase of a new sensitive meter with price options; and explaining the relationship between decibel levels and the level of audible sounds.

 

Council Member Evans asked if these recommendations would have budgetary ramifications.  Mr. Horton replied that it would depend on how one approached it, adding that eliminating the consultant obviously would save money.  He pointed out, though, that botching the job would cost the Town money, and stressed that there was no one on the staff who was technically competent to revise the noise ordinance.  Mr. Horton asked for the opportunity to bring back a proposal on how to address some issues immediately and others in the long term.  He added that the staff did not think the issues were as clear cut as the Committee thought they were. 

 

COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED THE RECOMMENDATIONS.  COUNCIL MEMBER FOY SECONDED THE MOTION. 

 

Mayor pro tem Capowski agreed with Council Member Brown, noting that new buildings at the University would make a substantial impact.  He also agreed with the Manager that the Town needed a consultant to help re-write the ordinance. 

 

Mr. Horton explained that he was merely asking for an opportunity to come back in 30 days with a more explicit proposal which would tell how much it would cost for a consultant to respond on all of these issues and to identify areas of concern that merited further attention.

 

Council Member Brown encouraged the Council to go ahead and establish the new committee.  She pointed out that the Town already had consulted with Dr. Stewart when they made the decision to lower the decibel levels.  Council Member Brown said that some of the issues were clear enough that they could move forward. 

 

Council Member Evans asked if it was reasonable to wait 30 days for the Manager’s report.

 

Mayor Waldorf asked the Manager if it was reasonable to go ahead and establish the committee and also proceed with his suggestion.  Mr. Horton replied that the new committee would need a consultant, stressing that the Council should think about that cost before beginning work.  He suggested starting the process of advertising for the committee. 

 

Council Member McClintock said that she supported moving ahead with the committee. 

 

Council Member Brown said that she did not understand what a consultant would add at this point.  Mr. Horton said that he would like to know how to re-write the ordinance in order to accomplish what had been specified, such as having a clear and succinct explanation of the relationship between decibel levels and the level of audible sound, and what kind of training and equipment was needed.  He pointed out that the staff had only the Committee’s opinion on this.  Mr. Horton repeated that there was no one on the staff who could form an independent opinion, which he believed the Council wanted.  He pointed out that it was his duty to tell the Council that he thought there were issues that had not been fully addressed by the Committee.

 

Council Member Foy asked how the current decibel levels had been determined.  Mr. Horton said they had been determined by the Council following another Committee’s recommendation a number of years ago.  He added that everything in the ordinance relating to decibel measurement was out of date.

 

Mayor pro tem Capowski noted that the first committee was formed to address the issues of party noises and rock and roll bands, and, subsequently, the regulations established were not applicable to noises from power plants and large buildings.  He said the second committee was formed to address these issues.

 

Council Member Brown said that the Committee had suggested the new more sensitive sound meter because Dr. Stewart had recommended it as something the Town could afford.  She argued that putting it off would mean repeating that. 

 

Council Member Bateman pointed out that if the consultant had given the Town all the information it needed he would say that.  She supported moving ahead with the Committee’s recommendations as well as the staff’s request for a consultant. 

 

COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN CHANGED HER MOTION TO GOING AHEAD WITH THE FORMATION OF A NEW NOISE COMMITTEE, AS DESCRIBED IN THE FIRST BULLET, AND ASKING THE MANAGER TO COME BACK IN 30 DAYS WITH RECOMMENDATIONS, KEEPING IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMITTEE’S RECOMMENDATIONS AS A PRIORITY.

 

Council Member Foy, the seconder, agreed to the change.

 

Council Member Evans suggested the Council amend the noise ordinance before proceeding.  Mr. Horton said that staff could not do that without the help of a consultant.

 

Mr. Horton said that the staff probably would only have recommendations as to process.  He also said that he thought hiring a consultant would cost about $15,000.

 

Council Member Wiggins said that she supported the direction of Council Member Brown’s motion but also wanted to support the staff’s opinion of the assistance they needed.

 

Council Member Brown offered to add to her motion “which includes seeking expertise as the Manager so determines.”  Council Member Wiggins said she would like this added.  Council Member Foy, the seconder, agreed.

 

THE MOTION TO ESTABLISH A NEW NOISE COMMITTEE TO LOOK AT NEIGHBORHOOD NOISES AND TO REFER THIS TO THE MANAGER TO COME BACK WITHIN 30 DAYS WITH A REPORT (WHICH INCLUDES SEEKING EXPERTISE AS THE MANAGER SO DETERMINES) ON PROGRESS AND ON IMPLEMENTATION OF THE OLD NOISE COMMITTEE’S RECOMMENDATIONS WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

 

5b.     Ethics Guidelines

Council Member McClintock asked that this item be placed on a future agenda.

 

Item 14 — Petitions

 

a.             Petitions by Council Members

Council Member McClintock petitioned the Manager to reply to a letter regarding Highway 15/501 from Maureen St. John-Breen, Vice President of the Culbreth Park Homeowners’ Association. 

 

Mayor Waldorf explained that she had already given a copy of that letter to the Manager, and the staff was looking into it.

 

The meeting was adjourned at 10:41 p.m.

 

 

The minutes of April 26, 1999 were adopted on the 14th day of June, 1999.

 

 

 

                                                                        __________________________________________

Joyce A. Smith, CMC

                                                                        Town Clerk