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.
COUNCIL MEMBER MCCLINTOCK
MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 1. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
(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.
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.
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.
Council Member Brown pulled
5c.
Council Member McClintock
pulled 5b.
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.
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).
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.
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:
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.
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
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.
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 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 minutes of
April 26, 1999 were adopted on the 14th day of June, 1999.
__________________________________________
Joyce A. Smith, CMC